You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Anyone know if there's a legal difference (UK) between a brake check (illegal I believe) and tapping the middle pedal with your left foot to flash the brake lights, but maintaining speed? Had a psycho van 3 feet from my rear bumper last night.
Both are **** moves - just let them pass if they are bothering you.
I just get slower and slower if they are so close it’s unsafe. They then have the choice of overtaking or backing off.
Had a psycho van
So..... doing something antagonistic achieves what exactly? Why add fuel to the fire?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scots-gangster-paul-lyons-admits-1052242
Don't antagonise already thick/frustrated/uncaring drivers.
Yep, just slow down to a speed that suits the stopping distance
Both are **** moves – just let them pass if they are bothering you.
Sorry, this is a plonker response. There are a fair few drivers with really shite driving standards around here. Driving on the A96 if you know it you often get drivers right up against your bumper. And despite there being many many opportunities to overtake they choose not to. It's just a dribbler unthinking mindset - they don't want to overtake you, they don't even want to try and hurry you up, they just have no idea of sensible separation distance and are driving along in a poorly educated, unthinking, lack of awareness autopilot.
So brake checking helps that situation then!?
So brake checking helps that situation then!?
No, the suggestion to 'just let them pass', like you were actively attempting not to, is ignorant bordering on victim blaming.
@convert - and how does a brake check help the situation with these windowlickers?
like you were actively attempting not to, is ignorant bordering on victim blaming.
The choice is let them pass or carry on with them up your arse and ignore them - what other actions are there?
Where did I say he was deliberately not letting them pass? Don’t accuse me of victim blaming you plozzer.
I’ve even pulled over before if someone is right up my arse.
We were on the M6, wife driving, over taking a lorry before Junction 36, wife driving at 65, a Range Rover gets right up the back of the car. Wife pulls into lane 1 after manoeuvre, Range Rover driver was gesticulating wildly at her and then proceeded to do the same to the next car in front. We were just laughing at the sad individual.
It's a shame there are not enough traffic cops out there, because people like that need taking off the roads.
@convert – and how does a brake check help the situation with these windowlickers?
Again, I'm not suggesting brake checking* - I just object to the tone that the driver being tail gated is possibly at fault.
*Well, there was that video that did the rounds of the driver being aggressively tail gated that opened the sun roof and ejected a handful of copper coins into the air stream. Dangerous and obviously not to be recommended, but must have been very satisfying in the moment!
If there's a double white line (UK) or white line Europe I slow down a little but keep going until there's a safe place to overtake then pull right over and back right off. Most then race past. However on a several occasions people have slowed down with me nearly to a stop only overtaking when I indicate, they clearly aren't concentrating and always drive like that. A mate does it, Madame refuses to get in a car with him. Not aggressive, just a lousy driver.
Brake checking (or fake brake-checking) is for ****s. Slow down/increase the gap to vehicle in front so you allow for the tailgater's lack of thinking/braking time.
If the driver behind is enough of a moron to tailgate aggressively, they're probably enough of a moron to want to fight you over a brake-check.
If there’s a double white line (UK) or white line Europe I slow down a little but keep going until there’s a safe place to overtake then pull right over and back right off.
Hopefully the proliferation of dash-cams will put an end to tailgating before too long. I've submitted two videos to the police recently and was told that both had resulted in fixed penalty notices for driving without due care and attention. Once was for an HGV sitting inches off the bumper while flashing his lights in a 50 limit in roadworks, and another was a car tailgating on an A-road with me already doing 60.
It takes about 15 minutes to make a submission via their portal but it's worth it in the long run if it gets dangerous drivers to either think about their driving or off the road completely.
I just object to the tone that the driver being tail gated is possibly at fault.
I don't think that's what was being suggested, just that it can be the least stressful option as it guarantees they're off your bumper and off to crash into the next car up the road instead.
I don’t think that’s what was being suggested, just that it can be the least stressful option as it’s the only way to guarantee they’re off your bumper and free to crash into the next car up the road instead.
Tone is everything online. If that's what you mean write something like...."you need to get the dangerous driver ahead of you where they can do less harm. Find an opportunity to persuade them to get ahead of you". Not "Just let them pass" which is both ignorant because often they have no interest in passing (you are going to engineer it for your benefit) and has a smell of the the tailgated driver being at fault for being in the way.
Situation, you're in the fast lane of a dual carriageway with slower traffic on the inside lane, behind a car doing not much more than the speed limit. You're a reasonable distance from the car in front. A van accelerates up to your rear bumper, tailgating you and putting you at risk.
Decelerating as advised above could cause a collision. Surely a flash of red is reasonable, there's nothing else you can do in the situation.
I'm not asking if you think something is a d**k move in your opinion , I'm asking what the law would say. Theoretically, being behind another car, you'd be perfectly within your rights to brake in order to maintain stopping distance with the car in front. Tapping to turn the lights on briefly or maintaining stopping distance - obviously there's barely any difference between the two, and intent would be impossible to prove. You see brake lights going on all the time at night, cars just randomly slowing, or coming up behind another.
What does the law say?
I accelerate whilst left foot braking. Seems to have the desired effect. By speeding up a tiny bit it opens up a gap .the tailgating vehicle is unsure if you are going to stand on the brakes or not so will invariably lift off.
Sometimes takes a couple of goes to get the message across. If they are persistent I just indicate right and if there is no oncoming traffic for a good 100mtrs , just pull over to the other carriage way and let them go about bullying someone else.
I think that alot of these drivers want to race , or are totally incompetent behind the wheel all they can do is follow. Not having the required skills to complete a safe overtake.
Oor they want you to go fast so , in the unlikely event there is a speed trap , you will get zapped and as they are so close z they won't.
Or , they are so thick that they think they will get to their destination quicker by driving 1mtr from the car in front. Which is technically correct , what they do with the extra seconds is anybody's guess .
Or , they enjoy the smell of cold sulphur diesel first thing in the morning and want to suck it into their cabin air intake.
I have front and rear dash cams by the way.
In the dark and rain a tap on the brake light will illuminate their front plate and could be the difference between identification or not.
Won't have a chance to view the footage until end of this weekend.
Accelerated away from the problem once the car in front was gone, but later in traffic the psycho caught up and tried an even worse move, undertaking and sitting on the bumper of the car in the slow lane.
Complete your overtake and pull to the inside lane. Do you really think flashing your brake lights, possibly causing hard reaction braking behind you, is a safer option?
Perhaps buy one of these and use it to tell people off?
I have front and rear dash cams by the way.
That will be useful to help any claim go 50/50 when the footage shows you tapping the brake at 70mph with a plumber's van 3ft off your bumper.
There's always footage on these dashcam compilations on Youtube which makes you wonder what the submitter did in the minute before the clip starts to enrage the road-rager so much!
Situation, you’re in the fast lane of a dual carriageway with slower traffic on the inside lane, behind a car doing not much more than the speed limit. You’re a reasonable distance from the car in front. A van accelerates up to your rear bumper, tailgating you and putting you at risk
Honest answer that’ll probably get me flamed. If I was genuinely concerned about the vehicle behind?
I’d accelerate a bit over the speed limit if that will allow me to pass the car on my left and pull in and slow back down.
I’d indicate nice and early so throbber behind knows I’m getting out of the way and the cars on my left may possibly make me a gap.
In the dark and rain a tap on the brake light
You're just trolling now!
Both are **** moves – just let them pass if they are bothering you.
Yeah but if they're younger than me I'm likely to die first.
A completely different scenario granted, but I was taught to actively show a brake light in some circumstances on an advanced motorcycle course. This is because motorbikes can slow quite significantly due to engine braking just from rolling off the throttle. This can catch inattentive following traffic out because they don't see a brake light. A typical scenario would be entering a 40 or 30 from a national speed limit where I would tap the brake to show a light if there was a car behind me, even though I can slow adequately without applying the brakes.
I actually stopped on Thursday night because of a tail gater. Blizzard conditions, car i front of me very erratic, blowing snow. Idiot Uner driver right up my bumper, id already slowed right down through engine braking as the road was covered in snow. Eventually i just stopped and he went around me. He then went on to tailgate someone else. Glad i stopped as it was really bad around the corner, drifting snow, vehicles coming up sliding across the carriage way. I wanted space all around me.
Accelerated away from the problem once the car in front was gone, but later in traffic the psycho caught up and tried an even worse move, undertaking and sitting on the bumper of the car in the slow lane.
So do you think it helped? Was the situation made calmer and safer by you flashing your brake lights?
Had both a tailgater and an undertaker weaving in and out of traffic on the M6 yesterday.
I moved aside and let the tailgater past me as soon as it was practicable to do so. I may have slowed down a bit before I did it.
The undertaker undertook me before I had chance to move over after overtaking slower traffic. I stick to the left hand lane as much as possible.
I don't think that advising people to let them past is victim blaming.
Brake light checking is a nob move IMO.
In the situation described you should slow down gradually until you have at least a four second gap to the vehicle ahead of you. That's your stopping distance, plus the stopping distance of the nobber behind you.
For bonus points, if its daylight put the fog lights on, then switch the headlights on as you tap the brakes.
All the red lights at once.🙂
It’s funny how in the work van, with no rear window, I can completely ignore a tailgater, yet in a car it’s more stressful. Despite the fact that a van full of tools is probably an uncomfortable place to be in a serious smash. Especially if I have compressed gas on board
Actually having witnessed a few bumps involving tailgaters, every one has been minor.
The bad ones were vehicles trying to exist in the same road space changing lanes, or not noticing stopped traffic.
brake check (illegal I believe)
Is it? It's utterly stupid unless you're actively looking to cause an insurance claim, but don't think it's illegal in itself. It might well fall under Driving Without Due Care or one of the other catch-alls. They teach emergency stops when you're learning for your test.
Where practical I'd let them past, pulling over if necessary. I've no desire for someone like that to be close to me, behind or ahead. Failing that I'd just ease up on the throttle for a few seconds before going back up to the limit, I'm reasonably sure that even my 1 litre Seat can out-accelerate a wazzock in a van. Rinse and repeat, they'll soon work it out.
When I used to drive to Portsmouth regularly down the A3 and there was this builders diesel crew cab van was driven by an absolute roaster. Quite a few times I managed to get in front and then alongside an HGV going up Buster - I’d just ease off the throttle as the truck slowed down - he’d lose all his momentum and be forced to pull in behind the HGV and he’d crawl up Butser at 30mph. Not big, not clever but so, so satisfying 🤪
A completely different scenario granted, but I was taught to actively show a brake light in some circumstances on an advanced motorcycle course. This is because motorbikes can slow quite significantly due to engine braking just from rolling off the throttle. This can catch inattentive following traffic out because they don’t see a brake light. A typical scenario would be entering a 40 or 30 from a national speed limit where I would tap the brake to show a light if there was a car behind me, even though I can slow adequately without applying the brakes.
Yes, I was also advised of this. I usually dab the rear brake a little, although I can slow down sufficiently with engine braking alone. I saw an advert somewhere for a product which plumbs into the throttle position sensor (I think) so it automatically activates the brake light in such scenarios.
There's a real Surfmat vibe in this thread.
With the increase in vehicles with regenerative braking systems out in the road, the car will do the same as the OP is suggesting automatically when you do what a lot of posters and the defensive driving courses advise.
If, in an EV, you adjust your speed to suit to total following distance in front and behind, using acceleration sense and not applying the brakes, there's a good chance that the regen system will illuminate the brake lights for you regardless, not because you are applying the brakes but because vehicle speed is being retarded.
It wouldn't suprise me if some of the smarter vehicles could combine that with rear facing sensors and he more likely to illuminate the brakes the closer the vehicle behind is.
The old Scottish country road /singletrack trick when somebody was very clearly closing (which very few people seem to understand nowadays) was to get to a straight/layby, lift off and left indicate (or wave forward with right arm out of window) the milk tanker drivers/lorries were by in a flash, usually with. A few toots, , I now end up with cars pulling up behind me.
Honest answer that’ll probably get me flamed. If I was genuinely concerned about the vehicle behind?
I’d accelerate a bit over the speed limit if that will allow me to pass the car on my left and pull in and slow back down.
I’d indicate nice and early so throbber behind knows I’m getting out of the way and the cars on my left may possibly make me a gap.
this is the most sensible response in my view. Don't antagonise and get out of the way as soon as is safe.
Also bear in mind that many cars now have adaptive cruise control so can sit quite close behind you and still be safe.
Also bear in mind that many cars now have adaptive cruise control so can sit quite close behind you and still be safe.
Ah, I forgot that adaptive cruise control bends physics! Response times might be better than a human...but no. That's bollox.
edit - or was that written with irony that I've missed 😉
Also bear in mind that many cars now have adaptive cruise control so can sit quite close behind you and still be safe.
Ah yes, the Audi setting.
Just do lots of windscreen wash cleans (will obviosly spray the car behind too) and a couple of Rear fog switch checks
"Also bear in mind that many cars now have adaptive cruise control so can sit quite close behind you and still be safe."
Must vary according to cars then. None of the cruise control settings on my car are anywhere near tailgating distance.
I did once come to complete stop on an quiet road in the highlands before the driver behind me would go past. Maybe with today's traffic conditions many newish drivers just don't overtake on single carriageway roads.
Response times
might beare better than a human
Fixed it for you, and seeing as response times make up a lot of the gap that we leave between cars, automatic systems are safer at closer distances.
Fixed it for you, and seeing as response times make up a lot of the gap that we leave between cars, automatic systems are safer at closer distances.
Actually thinking/response time is about a quarter of stopping distance at 60mph on a dry road and about a ten on a wet road. So 'a lot' is stretching it.
Still a smelly pile of shite. Are you telling me a car that is tailgating but with ACC is safe? Or are you hanging on to the 'er' in safer deliberately? But as already said, I'd be amazed if any system would allow a car using ACC to run so close to another that it would constitute tailgating- even on an Audi 😉
If you want to police other drivers, then join the police force.
Must vary according to cars then. None of the cruise control settings on my car are anywhere near tailgating distance.
Mine gets pissed off and starts illuminating warnings on the dash if I get in the same county as the car in front. I very much doubt it would allow me to sit two foot off the bumper.
It might be true that reaction time is better, but most drivers can imagine a scenario where you don't just have to match the minimum braking time of the car in front, but actually do better. eg Car pulls out of side road, driver in front can't avoid hitting it. If you're too close to all that, no automatic system is going to keep you from joining in the fun.
It might be true that reaction time is better, but most drivers can imagine a scenario where you don’t just have to match the minimum braking time of the car in front, but actually do better. eg Car pulls out of side road, driver in front can’t avoid hitting it. If you’re too close to all that, no automatic system is going to keep you from joining in the fun.
Exactly. And that's exactly the sort of scenario why I care that I'm being tailgated, much to Jimmy's chagrin that that makes me a wannabe diy cop. My concern is less for me but for less experienced drivers intimated and put in extra danger by the knuckle draggers.
It wouldn’t suprise me if some of the smarter vehicles could combine that with rear facing sensors and he more likely to illuminate the brakes the closer the vehicle behind is.
I think my car (MG4) flashes red lights if a car is too close behind. Not had chance to find out yet, fortunately. It also has adaptive cruise control, which I set to the biggest gap - I'm not quite ready to completely hand over my life to a buggy car software.
too many people work on the basis that as long as you can hit the brakes in the time it takes to close the gap then you'll be OK. If all cars had the same braking capability that would be ok and you'd only need reaction time as a gap because you'd both effectively be braking then from the same point on the road. You'd end up with mm between you and them, but.....
And my reaction time is way better than 2s
Trouble is that we don't have the same braking capability - different cars, tyres, weights, etc. A top end sports car with track ready brakes will stop dead in comparison to a 20 year old MPV with 5 people in and shit tyres.
Or, the car in front hasn't left enough braking space and consequently nor have you. Or they hit a car coming out of a side road, or a moose, or.......
By that process, the 'safe' gap is really to be able to stop in the distance to the car in front, not just react in that time. But then we'd never get anywhere 'cos if you leave that gap to the car in front on any UK road you'll have four other cars pulling into that gap!
Actually thinking/response time is about a quarter of stopping distance at 60mph on a dry road and about a ten on a wet road.
The key word you've used is stopping distance. But the space between cars isn't for that, it's so if the car in front of you slows suddenly, you don't go into the back of it. In that case your reaction time (or pretty much immediate if it's on adaptive cruise control) makes up a far greater proportion of the distance needed.
It might be true that reaction time is better, but most drivers can imagine a scenario where you don’t just have to match the minimum braking time of the car in front, but actually do better. eg Car pulls out of side road, driver in front can’t avoid hitting it. If you’re too close to all that, no automatic system is going to keep you from joining in the fun.
Fair point, but unless you're leaving massive amounts of distance in front, then I think if something like that happens, you're hitting it anyway.
The key word you’ve used is stopping distance. But the space between cars isn’t for that, it’s so if the car in front of you slows suddenly, you don’t go into the back of it. In that case your reaction time (or pretty much immediate if it’s on adaptive cruise control) makes up a far greater proportion of the distance needed.
No it's not. It's for reacting and responding including a change of direction as per the section you quoted. You are way oversimplify to suit your argument. Which is wrong. Yes, we are never going to driving at complete stopping distances between vehicles but there is a reason why sane and sensible people made the recommended distances greater than just reaction time.
but unless you’re leaving massive amounts of distance in front, then I think if something like that happens, you’re hitting it anyway.
which is where the generally held rule of 'if you hit the car in front you were too close' sort of breaks down - I could easily have stopped if he'd just braked to a halt but he didn't, he stopped dead when he hit the lorry that came out of the side road without looking.
But as I said - leave that much gap and it won't be a gap for long.....
Fixed it for you, and seeing as response times make up a lot of the gap that we leave between cars, automatic systems are safer at closer distances.
And what about braking differentials between vehicles even the state of tyre wear, winters Vs summers.
Tailgating is a dick move
Brake checking rarely achieves anything and slowing down is no better than 50/50 although slowing down to very slow last night while being (I'm convinced unthinkingly) very closely tailgated (lost sight of headlights below my rear window) at 40 in a 40 did seem to get the message across and more importantly stop them driving erratically and very close.
When they eventually overtook they scorched off up the road at about 60.
The most disconcerting bit is someone who lacks the ultra basic skill to follow at a 2 seconds gap is then going up the road at 150% of the speed limit. 😬😬😬
I'm wondering what I'm doing wrong cos I've literally never had a problem with a tailgater that persisted beyond me slowing down until they overtook or backed off. I've been driving nearly 40 years, not a massive mileage but plenty enough if it was as common as some people seem to find.
And I'm not an extremely fast aggressive driver who tailgates other people either! I find the adaptive cruise control on my new car to be acceptable only when set for the longest gap, any closer I'm not comfortable with.
I’m wondering what I’m doing wrong cos I’ve literally never had a problem with a tailgater that persisted beyond me slowing down until they overtook or backed off. I’ve been driving nearly 40 years, not a massive mileage but plenty enough if it was as common as some people seem to find.
I think it might depend where you live. We used to live in Hampshire and beyond a few impatient twunts on motorways it wasn't an issue elsewhere. But now we live in the Highlands and we're shocked by the driving standards. Not on the minor single-track roads but the larger trunk roads (well Highland style trunk roads). Again, it's mostly not aggressive impatient drivers, although they do exist, it's the dullards who are just shite drivers. Maybe its because if you grew up in the area and never left it much you've not been blooded on more tricky driving and their skills have remained at barely beyond learner.
@Kramer perhaps, but then, I'd rather hit an immovable object at 15mph than 40. The trade off between distance and consequences is still worth it. Also, if you hang back a bit, you tend to spot this stuff earlier rather than just seeing what's on the parcel shelf of the car in front.
Computers might be able to react faster than humans, and with abs , stop the car before rear ending the car on front . However , there's another variable. Rubbish tyres . Don't matter how fast the computer is . If the car is equipped with the finest Chinese tyres from the likes of Triangle , Landsail , Woosung , or Aptny it's just not going to stop well.
Add in the zero maintenance aspect of 'as long as it's not flat at the bottom it will be at the correct pressure ' and the same across the axle , to ensure straight line braking.
So no , although acc is a newish thing , putting crap tyres on a diminishes the safety features.
Some interesting understandings of how adaptive cruise works.
No wonder so many people crash using driver aids
Anyone know if there’s a legal difference (UK) between a brake check (illegal I believe) and tapping the middle pedal with your left foot to flash the brake lights, but maintaining speed?
There's a simple way to get a definitive verdict from the finest judges in the land. Cheaper to just let it go though.
But now we live in the Highlands and we’re shocked by the driving standards. Not on the minor single-track roads but the larger trunk roads (well Highland style trunk roads). Again, it’s mostly not aggressive impatient drivers, although they do exist, it’s the dullards who are just shite drivers. Maybe its because if you grew up in the area and never left it much you’ve not been blooded on more tricky driving and their skills have remained at barely beyond learner.
Very true! Many a Shetlander is too scared to drive off island and can't seem to manage simple roundabout logistics, god help them with complex traffic light controlled junctions with boxes 🤣
Back to the OP. I tend to just drive as I need to and leave them to pass when they can. I'm not a particularly slow or hesitant driver so really there's no need to be tailgating me to get past, but still they do. I think some people just don't like to be behind anyone.
Think I'll upload the footage to the fuzz, I think the van also did a dangerous last second exit off the motorway onto the slip lane I was on, which is the point I had it on my bumper. So that's dangerous exit off motorway, tailgating, aggressive undertaking and more tailgating. Got to watch the footage first though..
I’m not asking if you think something is a d**k move in your opinion , I’m asking what the law would say.
On the basis that someone I worked with went to court & received a 12 month ban for causing an accident by brake checking someone, I'd be quite happy to conclude that the law wouldn't be on your side.
My son got brake cheked from 70 to about 10 mph, all because he beeped at a Jag driver who was cutting other drivers up as well has him. Basic dash cam footage submitted to cops by son, driver got points.
I find it very hard not to react to tailgaters, I usually just give them a what are you doing gesture and for them to pass, if they're close enough they get it, I know I should just ignore them but I can't but help to let them know I think what they're doing is dangerous.
Has anyone that submitted dash cam footage had to also give oral evidence or is just the footage that is used. I “think” I read on a portal for this that there was also a written agreement and submission of footage was conditional on the owner of the footage also happy/prepared to give evidence in person.
I’d imagine that this might put people off, if they have to face the opposing driver. Snitches get stitches etc etc.
So glad I drive a van with no rear window and a tow bar fitted. Get as close as you like.
Fair point, but unless you’re leaving massive amounts of distance in front, then I think if something like that happens, you’re hitting it anyway.
I drove past a 4 car pileup today. Someone getting CPR on lane 1 of the M4.
From what I could tell, car 4 (a SUV) had smashed into the back of car 3 ( a Kia piccanto ) and crushed it entirely. It looked safe to say that car 4's failure to leave a decent gap might be something that haunts him for the rest of his life.
You might be 'hitting it anyway' but at least you might not kill someone in the process
It looked safe to say that car 4’s failure to leave a decent gap might be something that haunts him for the rest of his life
Or likely not paying attention to have the kind of speed difference to flatten a car.
In my son's case, the footage was blatently obvious about the driver's behavious - the overtaking of other drivers on inside lanes was picked up by the cheap dashcam - driver was in front of my son, but then he cut my lad up. The driver brake checked really hard from 70 - Jag vs a little 12 year old Aygo - fortunately not much weight in an Aygo. My son wasn't in his track prepared car that is running massive brakes and a decent bit of poke (3 x the Aygo). Just submitted footage, email back a few weeks later, driver procecuted just on video evidence.
If I've been tailgaed, it's usually someone that want's past the whole line of traffic that's in the outside lane overtaking other vehicles. I usually give them a few free screen washes (berry flavor - far too nice TBH) then pull over whilst I watch them tailgate the car that was in front of me.
I’d imagine that this might put people off, if they have to face the opposing driver. Snitches get stitches etc etc.
I'd imagine a similarly immature view point would be .. pricks get prosecuted.
I do the slow down job and maybe flick the fogs. Usually wakes them up. Or shov the hazards on as you slow as I was told to do. Got a hill on the way to work. Bloody lorries insist on having a run up despite the dangers can,t overtake anything though. They don't tail gate for long
How close does the person have to be to be classified as tail gating? I find it quite distracting (especially in the dark with dazzling LED lights) if the car behind is getting close enough to be looming in the rear view mirror, but that doesn't need to be I would guess tail-gating close.
I used to be an ass about it but it just doubles how potentially stressful the situation gets. Sometimes do a comedy overly-enthusiastic wave as if they're my best friends I haven't seen in a long time.
How close does the person have to be to be classified as tail gating?
Anything less than two seconds?
Anything less than 2 seconds but if I've lost sight of your plate you're almost in my boot.
Tone is everything online.
Ironic as online you can't tell what the intended tone is.
Also bear in mind that many cars now have adaptive cruise control so can sit quite close behind you [s]and still be safe.[/]
FTFY.
Cars are not self driving and stupid adaptive cruise settings aren't a get out for driving too close.
Must vary according to cars then. None of the cruise control settings on my car are anywhere near tailgating distance.
Only car I've driven with it (Mazda CX5) required the distance cranking right out to max for a 2 second gap. As above, it's not self driving and it's still on the driver to react to any change in conditions.
Some interesting understandings of how adaptive cruise works.
No wonder so many people crash using driver aids
Quite.
I got somewhat very shirty with my SIL as she'd bought a new Yaris Cross for £30k plus - the top one. She was going on about the driver assist (not that her previous car had any tech) and said it was OK driving if 'tired' as it will do stuff for you. I said, if tired you need to stop and pull over as a computer won't do the driving.
This is what some/many people think about cars now. All this driver tech is madness as we need to tackle poor driving.
Brake checking seems odd to me. You're being followed by someone who's clearly a shit driver, so you want to test their reflexes?