Is that really a requirement though? That people must attempt to drive at the maximum speed?
So, if someone chooses to travel at 60mph on a dual carriageway because they want to save petrol, are in no particular hurry, they are guilty of something that would have led them to fail their test? 
The post I replied to was complaining about someone driving at 50mph on a national speed limit road. National speed limit in a car for a single carriageway is 60mph, if it was a dual track national speed limit would be 70mph. Either way I don't think it is that big a deal and if people are getting wound up over such little things while they are out on the road then perhaps they need to seriously re-think whether they should be driving? I mean really? 10mph below the speed limit would hold you up for what, all of a couple of minutes? 5 minutes maybe?
no it's not a requirement. From the highway code:
125
The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when
the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bendssharing the road with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, particularly children, and motorcyclistsweather conditions make it safer to do sodriving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users
Well i suppose we could all just do what we liked then ,lets say i get held up in traffic for 2hrs a day 7 days a week thats 14 hrs ,over a year that costs me over £2000 a yr and it happens all the time ,its like that chuck berry song
(no particular place to go ).As far as i am aware we are supposed to keep up with the flow of traffic and reach the assigned limit conditons permiting .
No, there is no requirement to drive at the maximum speed permitted.
But anyone 'pootling along' significantly under the limit is not only chancing the wrath of fellow road users, but is chancing being pulled over.
If anyone wants to be viewed as an ignorant/arrogant ******, deliberately holding other people up because they're in no hurry, then their suitability for holding a licence should be called into question.
A licence is a privilege, not a right.
Anyone wishing to drive slowly and force their will on others deserves the wrath of the law, just as much as anyone speeding.
Slow drivers are often the type that say "I've never been involved in an accident"
Maybe not, but there's every chance they've caused a few....
But your earlier linksaid maximum when safe to do so, and that is what I was questioning.
Why must, and it is a requirement that, people should drive at the maximum when safe to? That link you gave implied you would fail your test for not doing so.
But what's so wrong about doing 60 on a dual carriageway? Why must I do 70?
Where's that driving instructor member gone ,he'll know the current guidelines .
I was always taught to keep upto the limit , road conditions permiting ,anyway if you were on a 60 mph road and drove at 40 in perfect conditons you would recieve a fault mark .
AFAIK, you will not fail your test for failing to drive at the max permitted speed.
But the examiner can fail you if he thinks you're failing to get anywhere near it.
You simply cannot be allowed to drive everywhere at 40mph, when the limit is 60mph/70mph.
These types of drivers are clearly unfit to hold a licence, simple as that.
Maybe the national speed limit signs should be replaced by signs that actually state the speed. I think some people are just confused about what the legal maximum speed for any particular road actually is.
I think its me who posted the link ,i dunno i'm not a driving examiner ,its probably to do with not slowing traffic and basically getting on other roads users tits .