Having just got back from a three-hour cross-country journey, I was musing whether there really is more aggression on Britain's roads compared with, say, twenty years ago.
Maybe it's just me sinking into middle-age looking back through a rose-tinted rearview mirror to a time that really wasn't that different to today.
However...... it does seem that courtesy has all but disappeared in favour of a 'me first' attitude - common to both genders of driver. Car adverts and reviews routinely emphasise 'aggressive styling' - even tyres can have (apparently) an 'aggressive tread pattern' :-(
Am I alone in such thinking? Should i just slip on those comfy tartan slippers and get a mug of cocoa?
|
Don?t boil the kettle just yet
I agree that its getting very aggressive driving lately, I don?t remember it been like it is now ? however maybe my driving style has got more aggressive
That couple with the fact, that people don?t seem to use indicators on roundabouts. Speed round them so fast you haven?t got time do make your manoeuvre without seamlessly pulling out in front of them and then they have the cheek to sound off at you for getting in their way.
Amongst a whole list of other things.
|
|
|
No, you are spot-on OS. I've just come back from 3000 miles driving in Germany and Blegium and didn't see one instance of road rage during the whole trip.
One reason I enjoy my trips abroad and hate driving any distance in this country... even my eldest daughter commented that standards and aggression we much higher in the UK, she'd driven for the first time over there and was pleasently suprised by other drivers' more forgiving reactions to her driving more cautiously on the "wrong" side!
Trouble is that over here its all to do with having to be at your destination before you've even set off and heaven help you if you actually plan ahead and don't need to break any limits, just look at threads in this and other motoring forums on any attempts to restrict motorist's speeds for evidence of people's attitudes... stuff any other road users, we are more important....
Edited by b308 on 15/07/2009 at 14:18
|
Being on crowded roads has a lot to do with it.
When queing on the M25 at the bridge crossing last week numerous people were constantly changing lanes in an attempt to get just one cars length ahead of the slower lanes. I then saw a black Range Rover with darkened windows all round (totally illegal) tailgating a black X5. He too undertook numerous times ahead of me and I ended up passing him at the toll booths. Made me smile because he probably burnt £30 worth of fuel in the process!
Aggressiveness in driving is also a reflection of society as a whole with the me first, binge drinking, no respect for the law or anyone else attitude of selfish state benefit reliant misfits that inhabit our gold paved shores.
(no disrespect was intended to any genuine benefit claimants)
rant over
|
I beg to differ.
I find, here in Sunderland and the North East in general, that there's less aggression now than in the past few years.
Drivers are sticking to speed limits much more carefully and in general are a bit slower, probably to save fuel.
There are noticeably fewer trucks than before the recession started.
Signalling remains poor but often you can anticipate what someone intends to do so that's not a huge problem.
There seem to be fewer lads in modified cars, I suspect that insurance costs have driven them into sensible small cars which they must then be driving, well, a bit more sensibly.
|
|
Aggression seems to increase in proportion to congestion. I live in Scotland and the further south I drive the worse it gets, and I am not anti south, dont forget that I am a Londoner.
|
Yep, I'd agree with that, it was noticable that when we had fewer drivers out there when fuel was £1.30 a litre that driving was more pleasent, though I noticed that even on crowded German autobahns there wasn't the aggression we seem to get over here...
Something in the genes perhaps?
|
...even on crowded German autobahns there wasn't the aggression we seem to get over here... Something in the genes perhaps?
Germans are taught that a car is a lethal weapon. Use it in an aggressive manner and you will be fined a not inconsiderable amount and given a motoring vacation.
Your choice.
|
> Germans are taught that a car is a lethal weapon. Use it in an aggressivemanner and you will be fined a not inconsiderable amount and given a motoring vacation.
Indeed. Making rude gestures at other motorists, shouting abuse and insults, or even mouthing such are illegal also and will lead to a heavy fine. Ordnung is most important.
|
|
|
|
I am a Londoner.
Might you not have gone native to some extent ON? Become partial to a pint of heavy and a small bowl of peas and vinegar?
There are aggressive drivers, yes, but then there always were. I don't think there are any more proportionately than there used to be though. Actually I have the opposite impression: that depressed mimsing is becoming the norm and even those irritated by it have lost heart and go with the flow. Silly low limits, silly propaganda about speed, high traffic densities and a steady decline in driving ability seem to be to blame. On the way to Sussex last weekend I followed for some distance a fifties open sports car on crossplies with drum brakes at a fairly brisk clip in the rain. But first I had to follow a line of cars through the Mickleham bends on the A24, once a two-lane dual carriageway but now a 50-limited single lane stretch southbound, at 35mph. The front car was a Focus, driven by a man. After the bends the road opens out into two lanes and becomes NSL. At that point the Focus accelerated up to about 70 but seemed reluctant to leave the outside lane.
One wonders what in the name of all that's unholy drivers like that think they are doing. There are a lot of them though, and it only takes one to screw everything up for miles.
|
Might you not have gone native to some extent ON? Become partial to a pint of heavy and a small bowl of peas and vinegar?
Only porridge, with sugar, which would horrify die hard locals. Beats jellied eels any day.
Havent quite got the accent sussed, only lived here for 45 years, which is longer than many of the indigenous population.
|
Beats jellied eels any day.
(shudder) Doesn't everything short of actual poison beat jellied eels?
:o{
|
|
I'm with you lud, I'm a big kilt wearing northern bloke, who is not afraid to try gastronomic experiments, yes, porridge with sugar is horrible, but last year got a jar of jellied eels to try out, help ma boab (translation "my goodness that was horrid",) and i like sea food as well, but never again.
|
|
|
|
At that point the Focus accelerated up to about 70 but seemed reluctant to leave the outside lane.
I don't agree with hogging the outside lane, but isn't 70 fast enough on a NSL road, Lud?
|
>> isn't 70 fast enough on a NSL road ?
Not in the outside lane when someone is breathing down your neck, no. Either you go so fast that no one is waiting to pass, or you get the PFD out of the way. The road or speedometer speed has nothing whatsoever to do with this matter.
|
|
|
|
|
I am not anti south dont forget that I am a Londoner.
Most of the people driving in London are not Londoners.
|
Most of the people driving in London are not Londoners.
Yes it has certainly changed since I was a youngster, often unusual to hear english spoken, must be a lot of tourists there these days!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Simply answer for you
TOP GEAR - BBC TV
Look at the loutish antics of the presenters, aimed at the younger viewers IMHO ,
They have taken the worst elements of the lads mags scenarios and mixed them with motoring.
|
Really? When has it ever shown then driving stupidly when not on a track?
It's not particularly sexist, it can be pretty silly but it doesn't objectify women and encourage acquisitive behaviour any more than most programs. And they are not that loutish except when messing around as a group. And it's highly entertaining. Leave it alone!
EDIT: sorry, really must stop biting today.
Edited by Gordon M on 15/07/2009 at 16:11
|
Really? When has it ever shown then driving stupidly when not on a track?
That isn't the point. The whole tone of the program is "laddish". It makes laddishness cool.
Laddishness in cars becomes aggressive, selfish and dangerous driving.
......it doesn't objectify women and encourage acquisitive behaviour any more than most programs.
It does encourage acquisitive behaviour. It encourages people to yearn for things that they cannot afford. It features so many cars that are way, way beyond the pocket of the vast majority of the population, and use the BBC license fee enjoying themselves driving them. It features relatively few "affordable" cars.
And they are not that loutish except when messing around as a group.
They shouldn't be loutish at all in my view. No excuses.
And it's highly entertaining. Leave it alone!
Maybe it is - maybe it isn't. You are dead right on one thing though. It is an "entertainment" these days, rather than a genuine motoring program.
|
...It is an "entertainment" these days, rather than a genuine motoring program....
Top Gear does nothing to promote road safety and everything to promote driving like an idiot.
Top Gear is no more than a long jerk-off for the presenters.
The fact they can get away with using public money to do it, does not make it right.
The BBC has only one true rival when it comes to wasting money - and we elect the members of that particular body.
|
Were not supposed to burn rubber tyes on a bonfire so why is J. C. and co allowed to burn them when fitted to a £100k motor car and proudly show it to viewers?
Ive not heard of terrorists being prosecuted for this either!
Top Gear does nothing to promote road safety and everything to promote driving like an idiot.
|
|
|
|
>>When has it ever shown then driving stupidly when not on a track?<<
Numerous times, but that's besides the point in this thread.
I think driving is no more aggressive these days, with the notable exception of car parks especially retail car parks where the driving is little more than feral.
|
|
|
|
Undoubtedly. I 'pootled' up the M1/M45 to Rugby mid-morning at speeds of between 65?80 whilst watching (from a safe distance) the antics of the 'under/over-taking brigade' spread across the whole width of the road, motorcyclists undertaking in Lane 1 at 90+, Merc Sprinter's and the like tailgating at 85 in Lane 3, etc!
I guess they were all on a commercial mission to get somewhere, by a certain time, a time which may well have been imposed upon them by certain somebody else, whereas I was on a personal mission to get somewhere, for something that I wanted, but within a fairly open-ended time framework!
Vive le difference!...
|
I don't think much has changed in the near 17 years I've been driving. My one and only serious road rage incident occurred 17 years ago. People are miserable, angry, discourteous and self obsessed behind the wheel, because that's generally how many British people are in life in general in my opinion. I don't think they've been any different in my lifetime.
You can either get upset about it, or shrug, accept it and move on. There are far bigger things to worry about in life.
Cheers
DP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well perhaps we should all try to set a good example and be courteous to a fault....dosen't half surprise some people! Of the two physical assaults I have seen one was in Miami when a bloke stopped at lights was thumped through his open window and one in london where a coach driver got out of his vehicle and thumped the guy in front through his open window. Apart from that I don't think there has been much change. Wonder how many horse and cart drivers used to rant at at each other and they had whips!
|
I have been driving in London quite a bit in the past two or three weeks. Not somewhere I have driven much for quite a while. I had forgotten how well the average Londoner deals with traffic. Busy, naturally, but flows when it can. You musn't hesitate of course but if you signal your intentions clearly and just get on with no one seems to mind.
Conversely, if you try that malarky here oop north it usually results horn blowing and rude gestures for having had the audacity to want to change lanes.
|
try that malarky here oop north it usually results horn blowing
Thank you for putting in a good word for the usually fairly good-natured and fairly competent metropolitan traffic HB. We appreciate it.
I had forgotten of course - who would want to remember such a thing - that spiky, self-righteous provincial flaunting of the right to mimse and be obstructive. In fact the right to be obstructive seems to be very important to a lot of drivers, some of whom don't hesitate to boast here about the way they exercise it ...
|
try that malarky here oop north it usually results horn blowing
Couldn't agree more with the 2 previous posters on this. London can be quite cut'n'thrust - but safer for it - everyone seems to know the score (or very quickly learns to..) & adjusts their driving & 'tolerance' levels accordingly.
I rode a despatch bike in London for several years & rarely felt in danger - people are just that much more aware & forgiving of motorcyclists' indescretions generally.
As HB says, try any quick nipping-in or 'economical' manoeuvres in the outer reaches of empire & Mr & Mrs WellManicuredLawn would go purple & sprout broccolli.
The lower level of driving skill in the 'country' (in my jaundiced anyway..) contributes generously to accident rates & high blood pressure - I often wonder how the small minded bumpkins I regularly encounter, would cope with Picallily Circus or Hyde Karp corner - wouldn't go well I think.
|
I often wonder how the small minded bumpkins I regularly encounter would cope with Picallily Circus or Hyde Karp corner
Couldn't agree more with you in return WB. I passed my test in Edinburgh but learned to drive in the proper sense shortly afterwards when we lived in Florence/Rome. Now there's a place where you learn not to be indecisive !
|
Its the numpties that cause it. Classic example.
I was hauling down to devon last week. The m5 was busyish, but i was making adequate progress along the 3rd lane (adequate enough that there was no-one behind me).
200 metres in front in lane 2 is a beemer and 200 metres in front of the beemer is a row of moving cars. As I approached the beemer it pulled out into lane 3 with still fully 180 metres to go before it needed to overtake the cars in lane 2
I had sufficient space and time to pull smoothly into lane 2, undertake the beemer and smoothly back into lane 3 to over take the line of cars the beemer planned to over take some time in the next half millenium.
He was cross - horn and lights and waving fist. I was seriously 600 metres down the road before he overtook the cars he was planning to.
Numpty
|
I had sufficient space and time to pull smoothly into lane 2, undertake the beemer and smoothly back into lane 3 to over take the line of cars the beemer planned to over take some time in the next half millenium.
Two Numpties
|
|
|
I know the ones you mean AE. You're doing a relaxed speedo 80 with ample time to get past without baulking anyone, and these people see you coming (I'm convinced) and stick their rumps in your face for a minute and a half just because they can. They are asserting their right to be obstructive.
When you or I are stuck in the middle lane at 67 with an 85mph train in the outside lane, when we finally spot that gap coming in the o/s mirror we damn well floor it and hold no one up, right?
Not these carphounds though.
I admire you for your HJ-on-speed swoop down the inside. But I'm inhibited against that one and would only do it if truly pressed for time (or in one of those slightly over the top press-on moods with no passengers). 90 or 100 (or more) on a suitable single carriageway seems all right to me, but in my day undertaking was verboten, and I've never got into it as a habit.
Addendum: I see CGN is of my vintage more or less, but doesn't accept new stuff he can't do easily...
Edited by Lud on 15/07/2009 at 22:32
|
|
|
|
Oh dear! Gone over to "have a go at the country brigade" again I see!
I think that description of London driving applies to most large cities, I've driven in most of them in England and Scotland and they are all similar - you have to be positive, but Londoners are just as bad at gesturing and hooting as anywhere else... or are you saying that those who do that in that fair city aren't locals! ;-)
Out in the country (excluding certain holiday hot spots) I've always found the drivers more courteous, in fact that really applies to anywhere outside urban areas... also far nicer places to drive... if you like the cut and thrust driving so much please stay in London, as I'd rather it not spread to the countryside, thanks! :-)
Edited by b308 on 15/07/2009 at 20:15
|
Yep! I live in London and agree that the driving here is surprisingly good, since most people have their wits about them, and adopt a more give-and-take attitude.
But (and this is a big "but"), I much prefer my weekend jaunts into the countryside.
I actually get smiled at when I give way to other drivers! A rarity in North London these days, where even an acknowledgement is only given about half the time.
|
|
|
Oh dear! Gone over to "have a go at the country brigade" again I see!
Not quite my intention anyway. "Small town brigade" though certainly. Country folk are used to having to rub along with others. It would be a pretty lonely existance without some cooperative spirit. Likewise, a city dweller needs a degree of tolerance to survive. Small towns contrarily breed a particular form of narrow mindedness which is hard to stomach if one is unused to it. This is often revealed and exemplified in their attitude to driving and other road users.
|
In general, I don't think agression has got much worse since I started driving in 1972. However, I have a subjective impression that agression does come and go. During the 80's, in the 'Loadsamoney' era, I think there was more agression.
I did notice that in 1997, after the Tories were ousted and Labour came in, for a short time drivers seemed noticeably more tolerant, but it didn't last.
I can see driving becoming more agressive in the months and years ahead as the economy deteriorates further and people become more and more angry at being told things are getting better when they are not.
Edited by Sofa Spud on 15/07/2009 at 21:45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oi, Oi, Hector's back!
I think it really does depend on what one classifies as 'aggressive' driving. An aggressive driver could be one who is actively hostile to other motorists or just one who is assertive and isn't afraid to use moderate force in urban traffic in order to make satisfactory progress. I think that the former is really quite common these days, displaying a general lack of courtesy and manners which makes life just that little bit more unpleasant for other road users. This may or may not have some reflection on society as a whole, I haven't been around long enough to notice a difference.
Interesting point the OP makes about aggressive car styling though, most cars these days do seem to have rather angry faces, by which I mean the styling of the headlamps and grille. It seems that as innovation in car design has declined, the practice of slapping an angry face on a car to give the marketing men something to work with has become a superficial substitute for technical merit. Gone are the days when cars looked the way they did for a reason e.g. Issigonis mini.
Edited by Hector Brocklebank on 15/07/2009 at 21:43
|
The Golf Mark 6 has a happy looking 'face', and the new Polo and other VW are going to have a similar look. Perhaps that's part of a new trend.
Quote:...."""Gone are the days when cars looked the way they did for a reason e.g. Issigonis mini.""" But Issigonis lifted the Mini's styling straight from a larger, earlier rear-wheel-drive BMC prototype, the XC9001!
See: www.aronline.co.uk/images/ado17dev_03.jpg
The XC9001 actually gives a sort of provenance to BMW's New Mini as well!
Edited by Sofa Spud on 15/07/2009 at 21:51
|
Did this contemporary of the original Mini look like it did for a reason??
www.carandclassic.co.uk/uploads/new/590897.jpg
This was the car that one journalist descibed as looking as though it had been involved in an accident before it had left the showroom!
I think this pic is a of a facelifted version with slightly tided-up sides.
Edited by Sofa Spud on 15/07/2009 at 21:58
|
Aye, fair game SS, fair game. You have revealed me to be spouting rubbish as usual!
I think the point I was trying to make is that many modern cars hide their bland engineering under an aggressive mask which is then passed off as 'design' when it is actually nothing of the sort. True 'design' is about depth of engineering rather than just a superficial angry face slapped on a 1.2 shopping trolley. It is this repect that the original mini was the exact opposite.
|
|
|
|
Not sure quite what you mean about the connection between driving and car styling with 'angry faces', Hector, but your point about what people classify as aggressive driving is a very good one.
I'm not an aggressive driver, I'm a polite and canny one, but I don't hesitate unduly. I'm London-trained and a crazed enthusiast to boot.
No proper driver would be likely to react badly to the way I drive on the road, although of course road driving is an infinitely variable situation where strange events and extremes occur regularly. But from time to time some ignorant fool gets indignant over nothing and waves his or her pathetic little red fist, or resorts to lights and horn. But I am usually well down the road by then.
It's the same problem as the one in today's education system. You train people to do something in a silly basic by-numbers way, and the little prats think they know all about it immediately. What's more, a lot of them don't want to learn better and aren't capable of it.
These human hazards are multiplying like flies, and politicians (who helped create them) suck up to them. Watch out chaps.
Edited by Lud on 15/07/2009 at 22:12
|
I was just being a bit contrary but I see what you mean, Hector, about the original Mini's form following its function.
Re driving styles. Really, the idea is to get everyone to drive in more or less the same style, in accordance with best practice.
|
|
|
|
Most cars these days do seem to have rather angry faces
And (let's have another go at them) many 4x4's are aggressively obese and suggest an overbearing stance towards 'normal' cars. Some of the latest ones, including the planned new Landy, look particularly pugilistic. It may be totally subjective, but I think just a little may rub off on the their drivers. Why would they buy them otherwise?
|
.. look particularly pugilistic. It may be totally subjective but I think just a little may rub off on the their drivers. Why would they buy them otherwise?
To go with their gold sovereign rings and pit-bull terrorisers?
|
|
Strange that because I find the Chav mobiles particularly aggressive with their loud exhuasts and blaring speakers.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm inclined to agree with Andrew on the 4x4 issue.
Let me make it clear, I'm no eco-hippy and I do not believe for one moment the propaganda that they feed us, usually via the government, but I do share a dislike of these 'status-symbol' SUV's albiet for different reasons. I think some owners are attracted to them for their sheer road presence and intimidation factor, as well as to impress the neighbours. Why else would a civilised person choose a RR-sport over a nice luxo-barge if not for the above reasons?
If I were in a position to be able to own such an expensive car, I'd have a VW Phaeton. Restrained, gentlemanly and unpretentious, just like its hypothetical driver!! :-)
|
I'm inclined to agree with Andrew on the 4x4 issue.
If you drive a vehicle called a 'Warrior' are you likely keep to the speed limit in the inner lane at respectful distance from the vehicle in front?
|
If you drive a vehicle called a 'Warrior' ...
Funny they haven't revived the Avenger marque ...
|
Funny they haven't revived the Avenger marque ...
Now you're talking! Very aggressive company, the old Rootes Group - Minxes, Imps, Hunters, Avengers, Tigers, Hawks, Snipes.......
|
What's aggressive about a poor little snipe? All they do is zigzag about at head level causing sportsmen out shooting to shoot each other from time to time. I call that sporting myself.
I have always thought of minxes as girls who were naughty in a cuddly but risky sort of way as well... often a fairly welcome form of aggression.
|
I have always thought of minxes as girls who were naughty in a cuddly but risky sort of way as well... often a fairly welcome form of aggression.
In October 1955 the Minx De-Luxe, Convertible and Californian were made available with new two-tone colour schemes as a factory option, along with a full-length chrome strip along the sides as a division between the colours. This was designated the 'Gay Look'. You could have had a 'Gay Look Minx'. Mr J. Clarkson, who has landed himself in a bit of controversy over applying this description to cars, may not be aware that it was once actually offered as a factory option!
|
In October 1955 the Minx De-Luxe Convertible and Californian were made available with new two-tone colour schemes as a factory option along with a full-length chrome strip along the sides as a division between the colours. This was designated the 'Gay Look'. You could have had a 'Gay Look Minx'.
If you're using the word "gay" to mean homosexual or lesbian, then I don't think that meaning had been given to "gay" in 1955. I think you'll find that in 1955 (and for many years afterwards) "gay" still only had it's traditional meaning of happy. "Gay" wasn't highjacked by the homosexual and lesbian community until long after 1955.
|
the word "gay" to mean homosexual or lesbian then I don't think that meaning had been given to "gay" in 1955.
Quite, and according to one online dictionary it still means "happy", amongst others. I still tend to think of it as that rather than homosexual...
|
homosexual or lesbian then I don't think that meaning had been given to "gay" in 1955.
From late 16th century to late 19th century the word gay was used, often euphemistically, outside its original sense of cheerful or colourful, to describe individuals given over to pleasure and 'of immoral life'. Seems to have been applied more to women but certainly covered both sexes.
In its modern sense meaning homosexual (usually male) individuals, it seems to date from the mid to late sixties. I knew a group of homosexual men around 1960 and they never used the word gay in this sense. There seems a fairly obvious connection with the earlier slang sense. Like others, I felt at the time that a useful word had been hijacked, but I can't say I still do. It has become a useful word with a slightly different meaning. It is agreeably short and most people understand what it means.
|
|
I meant to add that calling a make or model of car 'gay' is preposterous, and obviously meant to be. I have a very nice model of a Porsche 911 2.7 RSR that looks stunning in dark shocking pink.
|
|
L'escargot, not that I'm old enough to remember the 50s, but was "gay" not originally a term of abuse used by bigots, and the "gay" community then used it as a way of showing people they didn't care what was thought of them by using it themselves?
Hardly highjacking (hi-jacking?).
Why the rancour?
|
|
|
"Gay"
It's also fairly commonly being used now to mean something that's no good, or useless - e.g. "My flippin' cars broken down, the flippin' gay flippin' thing!" (etc).
|
|
|
If you're using the word "gay" to mean homosexual or lesbian then I don't think that meaning had been given to "gay" in 1955. I think you'll find that in 1955 (and for many years afterwards) "gay" still only had it's traditional meaning of happy. "Gay" wasn't highjacked by the homosexual and lesbian community until long after 1955.
I well remember 1955 (and subsequently). Evidently the term 'gay' applied to homosexuals stems from it being a handy acronym from 'Good As You' - a slogan originating on the American West Coast. I think that were a car manufacturer to offer a 'gay look' option nowadays it might be misunderstood (unless, of course, it was a specific marketing exercise).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's yet one more sign of the times of declining moral standards. Since moral standards are largely instilled into children by their parents we must all be to blame. Moral standards go up and down in cycles. Unfortunately the cycle time is many decades. I don't expect to see a change for the better in my remaining lifetime.
|
|
|
I wonder if there is any correlation between agressive driving styles and the much improved passive safety of modern motor-cars. I learned to drive in the era of 5* NCAP ratings and multiple airbags but I wonder if somebody who learned to drive before seatbelts became mandatory would inherently have a much more defensive driving style? I'm pretty sure that there must be a fundamental difference in attitude amongst the older generation who had to accept the fact that an accident at any meaningful speed would likely result in serious injury or worse.
Just a thought...
|
|
Can only speak for myself, but when I was a teenager in the 70s I didn't really think about the outcome of an accident (probably just like topdays teenagers?), but one thing I did do was always wear a seatbelt if one was fitted (not all cars had them)... so I suppose I must have though a little bit on reducing risks...
|
b308 do you remember also how many of the seats in cars in those days didn't even have a headrest? My first car, a Ford, didn't have them.
I was always worried about being in even a minor accident, since nasty whiplash injuries were common.
|
b308 do you remember also how many of the seats in cars in those days didn't even have a headrest?
I'm now trying to remember which was the first car I owned that did have one... the 2200 HLS Princess in the mid 80s is favourite, I think, must have been about the 15th car I owned! Even then a lot of the "headrests" were more for show than any use!! My 1979 Maxi doesn't have them btw... Do you also remember those "headrests" you could buy that slipped over the back of the seat and dug into your back?
|
Do you also remember those "headrests" you could buy that slipped over the back of the seat and dug into your back?
LOL! :-)
Yes, I do now you come to mention it. There was a lot of tat around in the old days, when you come to think of it. In some ways we have never had it so good.
|
My new nine-year-old car, which has everything, came with a central rear headrest, a proper one. But it obstructed the rear view mirror so badly that I took it off and chucked it in the boot. The ones on either side are a bit of a nuisance too. But infected by the generalised safety wonkery I have left them in place.
Anyway rear vision can afford to be obstructed, as the car emits frantic squeaks at shortening intervals when it is reversed close to an obstruction. I have succeeded in getting the frequency down to a continuous squeak, but haven't checked how far from the car behind that means I am.
|
|
Roughly 1ft if mine is anything to go by, Lud... I thought it was a bit of a gimmick initially, but quite like it now!
|
These audible parking sensors are OK for me, but they must be useless for deaf people. The visual display of LED lights on a Mercedes are the best of the basic parking sensor systems IMHO. (Of course the flash ones with cameras and everything are really cool!)
The rear headrests on my car fold nearly flat. This is good. I do like to see what is behind me in the rear view mirror. At the speed that I travel, usually lots of angry drivers because I am keeping to the speed limit!
Edited by LikedDrivingOnce on 17/07/2009 at 23:23
|
Tried a Citroen C4 diesel demonstrator once that had an angled video looking down through the rear window with a display on the satnav screen, right in the middle.
Must say I thought it a bit much for a smallish compact car with quite good visibility.
|
Must say I thought it a bit much for a smallish compact car with quite good visibility.
You're right. Mind you, I wouldn't say no to any help that I can get in parking. I am not just being modest, but I am a carp parker!
|
|
Roughly 1ft if mine is anything to go by
More or less spot on b308. I checked yesterday.
Typical nanny-state overprotection, what?
|
|
|
|
|
Just a thought...
>>
Its called common sense, it usually increases with age.
|
Scania styled their latest range of heavy lorries, which has been around for a good many years now, to look non-agressive. Certainly they look more cuddly than the previous angular cab design, with all the full-width horizontal bars. But the smiley update of the current Scanias somewhat spoiled their look, I think.
|
More aggression on the roads nowadays? >>
I have noticed that headlight flashing from the impatient brigade has declined markedly inthe last few years.
|
I have noticed that headlight flashing from the impatient brigade has declined markedly inthe last few years.
it uses more fuel....:-)
|
>> I have noticed that headlight flashing from the impatient brigade has declined markedly inthe last few years.
When I try to flash my headlights at anyone I usually end up giving them a screenwasher squirt then burst out laughing at myself.
|
|
|
|
I have noticed that headlight flashing from the impatient brigade has declined markedly inthe last few years.
Interesting you should mention that, jbif, as I'd thought the same too.
Possibly due to an increasing fear of 'road rage' reprisals?
|
More aggression? Definitely, simply because driving standards have slipped markedly.
|
I sometimes try to drive with the upmost courtesy and respect for other road users, and guess what? No road rage.
|
|
Same here, perleman. A wave and a smile costs nothing. Don't have much of a problem with tailgaters either. Mind you, the Il gi sticker on the back window might have something to do with that ;-)
|
|
|
|
>> More aggression on the roads nowadays? >> I have noticed that headlight flashing from the impatient brigade has declined markedly inthe last few years.
Now they have auto headlights they don't know where the switch is!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have noticed a new breed of agressive driver recently, which breaks the mould of the typical 18-30 year old white male norm.
Since my daughter has started secondary school, I have noticed many, (dare I say it) lower middle class mothers in a variety of cars from the humble Megane right up to the Range Rover who drive very fast and aggressively around some of the local housing estates.
I am astounded by what I have seen frankly, as I am no stranger to speed on A roads and Mways. These women drive like under pressure sales reps trying to fit in their last 3 appointments with only 2 hours left in the day !
These women never give way or let people out of side roads, I have not seen this phenomenon before, have I been living in a cocoon perhaps ?
|
lower middle class mothers in a variety of cars from the humble Megane right up to the Range Rover who drive very fast and aggressively around some of the local housing estates.
How do you know the driver of a vehicle is lower middle class (which is exactly?). And what part of society do you come from Roly?
|
|
|
|
