Transporting bikes to Cornwall

fenix

I hate driving behind lorries - I don't trust what I can't see. At least behind a car you can see further ahead. How people are happy to drive blind 20 feet behind a lorry is beyond me. Bring on the robot cars !

mamba80

thomasmorris wrote:

Got my maths wrong. Two second rule at 60 mph is 176 ft, not 88. So only leaving 50-100 ft to get the benefit is closer than i thought.

Still, not many people actually leave that distance. So if you're going to drive closer than 176 ft, you might as well do it behind a lorry which won't be able to out brake you.

a big flaw in your reasoning is that though it is true you ll out brake the lorry in front, you ll be crushed by the lorry traveling 10m behind you.

fenix

As he edits his MP3 playlist...

thomasmorris

mamba80 wrote:

a big flaw in your reasoning is that though it is true you ll out brake the lorry in front, you ll be crushed by the lorry traveling 10m behind you.

a big flaw in your reasoning is though it is true a lorry may hit you from behind, this is totally independent from the gap you leave in front of you and unrelated from any of my 'reasoning'.

Anyway, the fuel penalty for putting your bike on the roof isn't more than the cost of hiring a decent bike for a couple of day, so it makes sense to take your own. You can limit the fuel penalty to almost zero by getting a low rear mounted rack. It might be nicer for the bikes is they travel inside the car, space allowing.

pblakeney

mamba80 wrote:

No i havent i manage to drive 20 to 30k per year without ever going nr them or DCs like the A30 or A38 either! not.... and have done so for many years, say since 1989.

tailgating lorries (or anything else) is moronic, you cant see anything ahead an are totally reliant on the lorry drivers reactions or not of any evolving traffic conditions, the lorry driver isnt going to know you r tucked up behind him either... and what if its raining? you ll not see a thing.

almost all accidents on M/ways are made far worse by the drivers who plough into the original collision or who cause secondary accidents by hitting those who have stopped.

but you carry on saving fuel.....

I am not arguing the case for the logic, simply pointing out the practicalities.
Fuel consumption is not something that I concern myself with but people cutting in front does bother me.

mouth

thomasmorris wrote:

Got my maths wrong. Two second rule at 60 mph is 176 ft, not 88. So only leaving 50-100 ft to get the benefit is closer than i thought.

Still, not many people actually leave that distance. So if you're going to drive closer than 176 ft, you might as well do it behind a lorry which won't be able to out brake you.

****checks highway code*****

Nope, expected braking distances are the same for all vehicle categories. Add to this that the vastly more experienced (and intuituive) coach/lorry driver already has a better view by being up high and will be on the brakes a long, long time before you ever will. If the HGV is empty, admittedly a rarity in the days of back loads and crunched mileage revenue, or travelling a half load or whatever you'd be shocked at how quickly one can close 60mph down.

Either way, you'll save fuel by having a better view, forward planning, maintaining a constant engine speed (use cruise control if ya got it) and stay off the brakes as much as. I'd rather spend a few extra pence on fuel than be decapitated by a tail lift.

mouth

HaydenM wrote:

Mouth wrote:

My father in law wanted to get one of these kinda things for his X5. The £3500 quote to fit a tow bar was plenty enough to put him off.

Rather amusing that it doesn't have a towbar fitted as standard being a 4x4, and that it costs anything like £3500 to have one fitted! Great racks though, after using strapped rear ones for years they are a welcome relief.

Let's be honest, it's a bit of a soft roader - perfectly capable, but will only really ever drive across a muddy car park to the stables. Anyone with desires of towing either a caravan or horse box bought a Discovery anyway.

I laughed my ass off at the quote, but when the explanation was made, it kind of made sense. They have to make an extensive modification to the gearbox and gearbox cooling system, as well as tuning the ECU and settings to adapt to being loaded, plus all the electrical work for indicators/lighting etc they have to put in. About 1.5 days work at a main dealer. Given that the car was still in warranty (moved it on for a Disco') and would have been re-sold into a main dealer network there was no value in getting it done 'cheap' at an independent garage, even if such a conversion exists. I can only assume that the cost far outweighed the benefit when Bayerische decided to not install the gear 'as standard' to the model range.