I had posted my comments as an E-mail, directly to Tom & Rae. Sorry.
My friend was riding on the lane, trying to prevent folks from using the soon to be closed left lane and was ginen a citation by a Cop, stating that BOTH lane are to be used ALL the way to the merging point, and then use the zipper effect to merge.
Lane Merging - 9/5/09 Car Talk
September 5, 2009
To: Car Talk
Re: 9/5/09 Lane merge discussion
Click and Clack seemed to feel that drivers
who proceed as far as possible in the open
lane are immoral, inconsiderate - probably
cheaters. Isn?t there another way of looking
at this? I think so, and reach a different
moral judgment.
In the assumed situation there is a clearly
defined merge point, beyond which cars in
the heretofore open lane may not proceed.
The open lane itself constitutes storage
space for cars awaiting merge: The longer
the open lane the less likelihood of backup
onto the feeding highway. This is especially
useful in rush hour situations - and safer.
The highway engineers have done all they
can - and in these situations, have done it
well.
They have given clear indication to MERGE
HERE, not half a mile back.
Drivers who attempt to merge before the
merge point are the cheaters.
They create confusing backups and unsafe
situations, as does Click (or was it Clack?)
who moves within a millimeter of the car
ahead in his petty attempt to block the
injudicious driver on the right.
I offer this analogy. On the city and
country roads of my state and elsewhere,
there is a logical and civil convention:
first car into the intersection or the car
on the right is given right of way. I did
not say ?takes?. There is no contention. In
the vast majority of situations courteous
and safety-minded civility prevails.
In the case of highway merging that same
sensible civility usually occurs at
designated merge points.
Realizing that the designated merge point is
best for merging reveals wisdom and maturity.
Attempting to block a merge before or at the
merge point creates tension and betrays
incivility and immaturity.
Attempting to merge before the merge point
creates tension and betrays thoughtlessness,
ignorance and/or personal insecurity.
Attempting to block a car behind from
proceeding to the merge point creates
tension and is truly
petty._______________________________________
_
Final food for thought:
People walk in a crowd or the supermarket
the way they drive on the road.
Think about it.
To merge is not a one sided action. It takes two to tangle. If the trafic designers, in all their wisdom, designated TWO lanes AT the stop light/stop sign, then their intention was to have them merge AFTER that point. For drivers to take the left lane WAY before the merge point is showing they CAN’T merge the correct way, WON’T merge the correct way, or are AFRAID of the whole merging process. There are a lot of drivers that take the left lane WHEN THEY LEAVE HOME, and only use the right to swerve across to their exit at the last minute.
Anyway, who says the left lane is the through lane. If I stay to the right, the driver behind me changes lanes to the left to end up BACK IN THE LANE I STAYED IN. SHEESH!!!
I usually do use the two-lane system for merging because it makes good sense. I also make it a habit of NEVER looking at the faces of other drivers (too many wackos out there). However if everyone else seems to be merging in early, I will ‘follow the herd’. While following the herd is not necessarily a good life strategy, on the highway it is a good safe strategy.
What about on-ramps in heavy traffic? Typically it’s best to use the on-ramp as an acceleration lane, but if traffic on the highway is at a crawl then sometimes you have to slow down to match speed. Here again comes the problem of those that speed by on the right in order to get as far forward as possible before merging complicated by the fact sometimes this same entrance lane is ALSO an exit lane for the next local interchange. Worse, some interchanges allow traffic to exit onto a feeder road and then re-merge inviting drivers to use the feeder road as a passing lane (which adds to the danger of those who are already on the feeder road because they have to watch out for people who are “cutting” in line and who are accelerating when everyone else is slowing down to match speed). So in this case you have traffic entering the freeway, exiting the freeway, some doing both (using the feeder as a passing lane), and some just staying in their lane and trying to get where they’re going without cutting in line. Here in Texas it is illegal to pass on the right and/or to use an acceleration lane for passing, however this is rarely enforced and frequently violated. In these cases I wish that there were gates to control the frequency of vehicles entering the freeway so courteous drivers didn’t have to work so hard to look out for discourteous drivers (who look out for no one but themselves).
I don’t know what is right but if you think about it when they go up front then one must start the process of alternately merging which slows the process down in my opinion. It takes longer in my opinion than if one would just get inline and continue to drive through the squeeze
I was very disappointed to hear support for “early merge” on Car Talk. When I took driver’s ed, driving to the point of merge and then alternating was presented as the correct procedure, so I assumed Click and Clack would support going by the book, especially since all the research, as well as common sense, supports it. But I’m very heartened to see that the vast majority of those who contributed to this discussion are late merge proponents.
Filling up all the available road space clearly makes the most sense from an efficiency standpoint. Plus, when everyone stays in their lane until the point of merge, there is no appearance of “cheating,” and therefore only one merge delay. When people start merging early, that creates one delay before the merge point and a second at the merge point, the latter made worse by the righteous indignation of the early mergers, who now feel they own title to the thru lane. This bogs down the whole system, making it less efficient for everyone.
The central point is that it is the would-be do-gooders who are the problem here because it is they who create the open space that allows other drivers to appear to be “cheating” when in fact they’re simply following the correct procedure. As with free markets, the system works most efficiently for all when everyone follows their own self-interest. Without early mergers, there’s no stress: there’s no empty lane to attract “cheaters,” thus no decision whether to be “good” or “evil,” no indignation at the merge point, so no road rage. Everyone simply drives straight ahead and alternates when they can’t anymore. It’s simple, efficient, fair, and relaxed, and everyone gets where they’re going faster and with less stress. Those who seem to be more polite in fact are screwing it up for everyone.
Perhaps highway departments could reduce this problem by not announcing which lane will be closed until nearer to the merge point. Of course, the problem is that when traffic isn’t backed up, it’s safer and more efficient to merge immediately–when you’re moving at 60 mph, it’s not a good idea to wait to merge until your lane ends in 20 feet–but people don’t seem to understand that proper merge techniques differ depending on the circumstance. What works best at 50 mph doesn’t work well at 5 mph, and vice versa.
Perhaps highway departments could use electronic signs that would adjust the warnings based on the speed through the merge and the length of the backup, if any. When traffic is moving freely, the signs could give advance warning of which lane is ending and instruct an immediate merge, but when traffic is backed up, they could warn of a backup but not mention which lane is ending until after the traffic has come to a halt. They could then instruct people to wait to merge and alternate at the merge point. This might prevent early mergers from opening up the lane space that creates the problem.
I am a late merger not because I’m trying to take advantage of others but because I’m doing what I learned is correct and because it just makes sense. I would actually prefer if everyone followed the correct procedure because then I wouldn’t have to look like a selfish jerk and the whole system would work better. But until then, to those who insist on merging early and then look askance at me, I say, it’s not my fault that you weren’t paying attention in driver’s ed the day they explained proper merge technique. And if you try the don’t-give-an-inch tactic at the correct merge point, you BETTER hope I’m not in the lane next to you.
Didn’t read all the replies, so don’t crucify me if I repeat something. Merging should be done zipper style, especially in a traffic jam, if everyone does this, it’s much faster.
If both the on-ramp and the next off-ramp meet, people getting off should pull behind a car coming onto the highway Zipper-style. They should not gun to get ahead of the entering traffic and then hit their brakes hard to make the off-ramp.
The left-hand lane is for passing, the middle lane(s) for travel, the right for slow traffic or entering/exiting traffic. This all goes to hell if one has to drive on Interstate 84 in CT since there are lefthand on-and-off-ramps. The only blessing is that the designer of I-84 was killed in an automobile accident on I-84. That should tell you how bad the design is. Mostly the lefthand lane is used for passing, then you should move to the center/right if a left-hand entry occurs.
When exiting, you should move out of the far lane to the center lane by no less a half mile away and to the exit lane by no less than a quarter mile away. Many stupid accidents happen from people doing multi-lane crosses.
Question: Are there any other highways with both lefthand and righthand on-ramps/exits?
If my rear view mirror reveals some BMW
barreling down the empty lane to get to the front I simply
pull out ahead of him ( I say “him” since such
transgressional behavior is usually male) and stop dead.
Considering that you have to yield right-of-way when entering a lane of traffic to vehciles ALREADY in that lane, you realize you would be at fault in a collision? What if the next LAW-ABIDING car you try this with has children in it?
Curious what you do for a encore: run down jaywalkers?
If you want to travel at the same speed as the left-lane traffic, get into the left lane; otherwise continue in the open lane at a safe speed. Don’t be the cause of additional road rage.
The concept of delaying a merge when two lanes are funneled into one, as often happens during road repair work, caught on with traffic engineers after studies showed that traffic flow speeded up as much 15 percent over the old ?merge early and politely? philosophy. The driver you shake your fist at while he speeds by in the lane to be closed is actually making your trip shorter. What happens is that all that early merging creates an underused lane ? everybody crammed into one lane while there are still two useable ones. Merging when necessary, in zipper fashion, is the better way to go.
Thank you, thank you, thank you! I’m glad to see someone with proper highway etiquette, even if it’s only on a forum. If more people followed this, we wouldn’t have to deal with others driving improperly. I know that if I’m in a rush, and some fool is puttering along in the left lane, I will pass them on the right. Wrong, I know, but so is driving slowly in the left lane.
Merging should happen exactly as Mountainbike described it.
Kudos to you, sir
Yesterday, we were approaching a merge point in a local construction zone. The merge was some 500’ after a traffic signal. Despite the big orange signs saying right lake closed, idiots incessantly line up in the right lane at the traffic signal and race to the merge point to beat the traffic lined up in the left lane.
The guy in the right lane next to us not only decided to race the traffic, he assumed it was his right to move over into the left lane even though we were in that lane. Push traffic out of your way if you need access to the left lane. That must have been what that flashing MERGE sign meant to him. He nearly caused an accident.
Here’s what I propose. A large, padded boxing-glove attached to the front bumper so that if someone does this again, you can punch his quarter panel so that he thinks he’s been hit and moves back into his lane. If nothing else, it’s a satisfying thought experiment.
To all the Moron’s who believe “MERGE EARLY” is correct… thank you. KEEP UP THE STUPIDITY you make my commute just that much faster!!!
Oh and for those who don’t like when people merge in front of you… and fight for that lane in traffic YOU ARE AN IDIOT only “if you have the smaller vehicle”. HAHA
That vehicle taking your position may be wrong (probably not)… but at least you avoided an accident and not the victim of a monster truck rally.
What’s the proper way to ask the question so everyone’s on the same page? I feel like I got on my horse and rode off in all directions.
Here in Germany, it’s illegal to languish in the passing lane. Wish that were true in the States. Or is it? Are there any state laws that prohibit this?
When I was in Drivers Ed. in high school they taught the proper way to merge was to accelerate down the ramp to match traffic speed. Use your turn signal and enter when able. We were told that if you can’t get into traffic right away, to continue down the shoulder until you could merge, and NEVER STOP on the ramp or freeway!
If you see a car wanting to merge, signal and move over into the next lane if possible, but if not continue on in the same lane.
Traveling with the traffic into the two merging lanes is a simple matter of moving forward at a pace that does not impact on the oncoming vehicles. I am not sure why the question was raised in this forum as it is not a challenge when you have confidence and take your driving seriously and with an alert awareness of the oncoming traffic.
Regards,
Joe Ginsberg
Car and Truck Rental