Does Overtaking Save Time?

[Artie Fufkin]

I thought I'd do some calculations instead of relying on people's opinions

I make a regular 16 mile [one way] trip on a 60mph two lane A road.

Let's say I'm stuck behind someone doing 50mph for the whole 16 miles - time taken would be 19 mins.

Now let's say I overtook him and did 60mph all the way - time 16 min, saving 3 min.

Of course on the nice A road we'd overtake and probably be doing 70mph wouldn't we? So time taken is 13.5min, saving around 5.5 mins on the 50mph average. Five and a half minutes...not bad but not really much to shout about.

But, of course it's highly unlikely that I'd get the chance to overtake at the very start of my journey and even if I did, the chance of being able to complete the trip without being slowed by other vehicles is almost nil.

So lets say that I do half the trip at 50mph [time 9m 36s] and half at 70mph [6m 48s]. Total time taken is 16.5min, saving just over 2.5 min on the 50mph average. Not a lot.

...and this brings me to a story ...

I knew a guy who had this very trip as his commute many years ago and he always hammered it home after work, hated being stuck in "slow" traffic. He wanted to get back to his wife and kids.

So yes...he crashed it into a ditch while swerving out the way of an oncoming car during an overtake and died at the scene.

I still ask myself what was that man planning on doing with the saved two and a half minutes? What was so important?

Having said all this, there is the big, big difference between one of us petrolheads hooning it for pleasure and one of those guys on the road who just wants to be somewhere else asap.

...it's all just my head rambling away tonight anyway.

[sassthathoopie]

I see what you're getting at but it isn't always that simple once you've factored in time of day, traffic light signals etc. Imagine you decide not to overtake that truck and stay behind, then a tractor pulls out in front of the artic. Vis and TED mean you have to stay stuck behind for ages.

I know these aren't measurable occurances but surely the longer you spend on the road in a given year the more likely you are to be affected.

3 minutes saved on a commute, each way equates to an entire day of the year when you could be doing something more fun/productive than looking at the back of an artic.

[mmertens]

Of course your calculations are right, but this is not the point. Do the stretch at 80 mph, it will take 12 minutes whilst still avoiding losing licenses and such if caught. A stretch of 50 miles will triplicate all the differences you point out. Is that becoming worthwhile for you to take more risk?

What I want to say is, a purely mathematical approach completely disregards much more important psychological factors. 50 feels like you're standing still (especially looking at a lorries' backside), 70 is making decent progress. Open road in front of you. The slight pang of superiority when you pass another car. The man's game of shaving more and more off the time taken for a certain stretch. The slightly raised adrenalin level at higher speed, especially when travelling above legal limits. That's what makes it worth the risk.

Of course your example is horrible and we all know cases like that... but once you start thinking about how often you could get killed each day by other people's stupidity you might as well stop driving at all, as zero speed = zero risk.

Your "mathematical" approach is only applicable to those who get not the teeniest thrill out of driving. Well good luck to them, as long as they get out of my way.

Maarten

[vonhosen]

mmertens said:

Your "mathematical" approach is only applicable to those who get not the teeniest thrill out of driving. Well good luck to them, as long as they get out of my way.

Maarten

You say that as if the only way to derive enjoyment in driving is through speed.

[Martin A]

Hi All

sassthathoopie said:

I see what you're getting at but it isn't always that simple once you've factored in time of day, traffic light signals etc. Imagine you decide not to overtake that truck and stay behind, then a tractor pulls out in front of the artic. Vis and TED mean you have to stay stuck behind for ages.

I know these aren't measurable occurances but surely the longer you spend on the road in a given year the more likely you are to be affected.

3 minutes saved on a commute, each way equates to an entire day of the year when you could be doing something more fun/productive than looking at the back of an artic.

TED is probably less overtaking artic and tractor at 20 mph than just artic at 40 mph. It's certainly the scenario I prefer.

Hope this helps

Best regards

Martin A

[lardo]

Artie Fufkin said:

I thought I'd do some calculations instead of relying on people's opinions

I make a regular 16 mile [one way] trip on a 60mph two lane A road.

Let's say I'm stuck behind someone doing 50mph for the whole 16 miles - time taken would be 19 mins.

Now let's say I overtook him and did 60mph all the way - time 16 min, saving 3 min.

Of course on the nice A road we'd overtake and probably be doing 70mph wouldn't we? So time taken is 13.5min, saving around 5.5 mins on the 50mph average. Five and a half minutes...not bad but not really much to shout about.

But, of course it's highly unlikely that I'd get the chance to overtake at the very start of my journey and even if I did, the chance of being able to complete the trip without being slowed by other vehicles is almost nil.

So lets say that I do half the trip at 50mph [time 9m 36s] and half at 70mph [6m 48s]. Total time taken is 16.5min, saving just over 2.5 min on the 50mph average. Not a lot.

...and this brings me to a story ...

I knew a guy who had this very trip as his commute many years ago and he always hammered it home after work, hated being stuck in "slow" traffic. He wanted to get back to his wife and kids.

So yes...he crashed it into a ditch while swerving out the way of an oncoming car during an overtake and died at the scene.

I still ask myself what was that man planning on doing with the saved two and a half minutes? What was so important?

Having said all this, there is the big, big difference between one of us petrolheads hooning it for pleasure and one of those guys on the road who just wants to be somewhere else asap.

...it's all just my head rambling away tonight anyway.

Ypu've got far too much time on your hands!

[p1esk]

vonhosen said:

mmertens said:

Your "mathematical" approach is only applicable to those who get not the teeniest thrill out of driving. Well good luck to them, as long as they get out of my way.

Maarten

You say that as if the only way to derive enjoyment in driving is through speed.

Some people may find their enjoyment of driving seriously diminished (not eliminated) if they were to lose the freedom to choose their own speed.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[This Side Down]

I overtake cars if they are going slower than myself, and if it is safe and possible to do so.

If a car is traveling close to the speed limit, I will often match their speed and follow at 4-5 car lengths behind - I plan my journeys so I don't have to speed to get where I need to go; further to that, I don't have to drive fast like a looney to get any enjoyment from driving.

For me, driving enjoyment comes from being away from the hustle and bustle of work/home life, being man-and-machine on the roads. Would you guys believe me when I say I never get stressed when I drive - whether I am zipping past traffic and making good progress; or whether I choose to enjoy good fuel economy by cruising at 40-50 MPH behind a few cars (obviously leaving suitable gap to be overtaken if someone wants to), chilling out to a few tunes and the lovely Wiltshire countryside.

That being said, I do enjoy overtaking. I see myself as a panther; stalking my prey, following my prey. Shadowing their every move. When my time is right... I *POUNCE* and *BANG*, I'm past and away. Hit and run baby, they don't know what happened! Is it considered sad if I am sitting in the car making the 'big cat' sounds (i.e. growls)?

Edited by This Side Down on Wednesday 20th May 09:06

[Don]

Of course overtaking saves time.

It saves your time because you got past.
If the guy behind takes the opportunity to get past afterwards YOUR overtake saved HIS time, too! Add this to the ten people who get the oppo because you took yours and you get man-hours and man-hours saved.

Pay those man-hours at average wage and in the UK along overtaking saves billions of pounds.

[cs02rm0]

5 1/2 minutes. Twice a day is 11 minutes. 5 times a week is, say, an hour. 2 days a year? That's 10% of annual leave for most people.

And that's just with a 16 mile commute.

[turbobloke]

Apart from any androids, cyborgs and aliens that might be posting on this thread, other things that derive from overtaking with due care will be driving enjoyment and health. As p1esk said, choosing your own safe speed is part of the freedom in mobility that makes car drivers more healthy than public transport users (even after correction for social factors). Obviously emotionless robots and vulcan pretenders with or without pointy ears won't benefit in that way. Yes time will be saved too, even for computers on two legs.

[patmahe]

When on my commute to work (driving the daily stter) on an NSL I rarely bother to overtake unless someone is going frustratingly slowly, although the traffic travels quite well on my commute, not many heading the same direction.

In the elise however where overtaking is much easier, more fun, less dangerous etc... I will overtake just for the fun of it but I do reckon it saves feck all time unless you're planning on hitting licence losing speeeds thereafter. Plus if you are constantly looking to overtake and getting wound up about it when you can't you'd never enjoy driving. Sit back relax and take the opportunity when it comes.

Edited by patmahe on Wednesday 20th May 09:42

[dugt]

my problem is that if you over take the first car, you feel compelled to over take the next one that you come up to and then the next one ...

but if some oen was doing 40 in a 60, id probably over tak, (if safe of course) even if i wasnt in a hurry, because the person behind may be, but might not want to over take 2 cars in one go

doug

[Don]

I will overtake - always. If it is safe and legal to do so. If it wouldn't be legal because I'd need to exceed the speed limit - that's cause for careful consideration as to whether or not I need to make the pass.

Sometimes when I'd travel down the road at 80mph and a car is doing just 55mph I still might overtake - but this would be carefully considered - as you need quite a lot of room to overtake a car at those speeds and the one thing I would NEVER compromise for any reason is safety...even if I do decide to break the speed limit.

[Kozy]

I always anticipate being questioned at the next set of traffic lights about my overtakes when I clearly haven't saved any time. If I cannot simply answer, 'because I wanted to' having not put anyone in danger (in their eyes, not mine) then I will not go for it.

[Don]

I have found that the attitude of a great many people is that overtaking is somehow "not allowed" or "illegal", and certainly a dangerous thing they would never do personally. Therefore if you overtake them they go apest absolutely regardless of whether or not the pass was safe and legal and regardless of how far below the speed limit they were driving.

Given that I am expecting a poor reaction to a pass I always take into account "what if the overtakee is a " to my list of considerations in my driving plan.

It's nice to be pleasantly surprised when people assist in the overtake by moving over a little and keeping their speed constant as the Highway Code dictates. But my driving plan never requires it.

[mmertens]

vonhosen said:

mmertens said:

Your "mathematical" approach is only applicable to those who get not the teeniest thrill out of driving. Well good luck to them, as long as they get out of my way.

Maarten

You say that as if the only way to derive enjoyment in driving is through speed.

Well without speed you'd not be getting anywhere very fast.... But seriously, of course there is pleasure to be gained from skillfully negotiating some challenging bends, by cruising top-down in a cabriolet, by moving through beautiful scenery. However, in my daily 120km commute, I do derive most pleasure from making progress, so indeed from speed. Under bad traffic or weather conditions I will default to listening to some music or some interesting program and taking it somewhat easier, but given space and favourable weather, I still find it exciting to make progress in luxury at as high a speed I find safe (and financially bearable should one of your colleagues catch me on film or in person).

[turbobloke]

mmertens said:

vonhosen said:

mmertens said:

Your "mathematical" approach is only applicable to those who get not the teeniest thrill out of driving. Well good luck to them, as long as they get out of my way.

Maarten

You say that as if the only way to derive enjoyment in driving is through speed.

Well without speed you'd not be getting anywhere very fast.... But seriously, of course there is pleasure to be gained from skillfully negotiating some challenging bends, by cruising top-down in a cabriolet, by moving through beautiful scenery. However, in my daily 120km commute, I do derive most pleasure from making progress, so indeed from speed.

Speed indeed

Having undertaken some advanced driving instruction (= common sense driving instruction) previously, I was tempted to do more when a speaker - from a RoSPA group as it happens - started their talk to a group of performance car enthusiasts by commenting that their aim for any of the assembled drivers would be to ensure we could all corner even faster than now. And of course there was the rider 'safer' in there as well. It wasn't rocket science to those of us who had been there and done that, but that's not the point, it was the approach and attitude that was so refreshing.

It's not universal though. I've since given talks myself on transport and road safety issues, including to a RoSPA group where every individual was infected with a nasty strain of the virus velocitas deadlius such that every goddam one of them was perfectly happy denying data from police and government sources because it challenged their blind faith in baseless dogma.

[dreamer75]

As someone aluded to earlier - you haven't factored in the other reason for overtaking - it's fun? As in, it's far more enjoyable driving on an open road with nothing in front of you, than it is driving behind someone... ignore the speed element (although I prefer driving faster than slower if it is safe etc. etc.), but just the wagon train element.

[p1esk]

patmahe said:

When on my commute to work (driving the daily stter) on an NSL I rarely bother to overtake unless someone is going frustratingly slowly, although the traffic travels quite well on my commute, not many heading the same direction.

In the elise however where overtaking is much easier, more fun, less dangerous etc... I will overtake just for the fun of it but I do reckon it saves feck all time unless you're planning on hitting licence losing speeeds thereafter. Plus if you are constantly looking to overtake and getting wound up about it when you can't you'd never enjoy driving. Sit back relax and take the opportunity when it comes.

Edited by patmahe on Wednesday 20th May 09:42

We can all do the worked examples to calculate how much time is saved on a particular journey, and show how this adds up to a few days per year etc., but as I see it many of those little bits of time get squandered in a variety of ways as fast as they are created, so they may not achieve anything very useful on a day to day basis.

Most of my overtaking happens naturally, and for the sake of enjoying practising that element of driving, rather than because I'm in a hurry and feeling the need to save time. I would prefer not to be rushing to save time, as that amounts to driving under pressure, and I think that's best left to those who are trained for it.

Best wishes all,
Dave.