What to do when two freeway lanes become one?

What would you normally do?

  • Get into the final lane early.

    Votes: 7 77.8%

  • Jump all the way to the head of the line.

    Votes: 2 22.2%
  • Total voters
    9
Z

zanket

Human
Valued Senior Member
In my city there is an interesting dilemma. One freeway merges into another with two lanes about a mile long, that reduce to one lane before joining the other freeway. What happens is that most people get into the final lane early, leaving the other lane free for anyone who wants to jump all the way to the head of the line. But there are so many people jumping ahead that getting into the final lane early can mean a ten minute delay. It'll be stop-and-go for a mile, while a constrant stream of cars zooms past in the other lane to jump ahead. Usually it's the line jumpers who are causing all of the delay in the final lane; once the lanes merge it's clear sailing.

So what would you normally do? Getting into the final lane at the anywhere but at the ends of it isn't practical, because in between the lane is bumper-to-bumper.
 
I would get into the final lane early, but not allow line jumpers to merge in front of me. They can try, but I am willing to let them hit me rather than give way, then let them know that the fender bender is their fault for being unscrupulous and .... OW! My Neck! You GAVE ME WHIPLASH!!. (I'll make an exception for motorcycles.) :D

Then again, I have also been known to drive the speed limit, even in passing lanes, because the term "speed limit" does not mean "the maximum speed you may drive in the normal lane, but feel free to exceed it in the passing lane."
 
Pandaemoni said:
You GAVE ME WHIPLASH!!.
Click to expand...
:)

Then again, I have also been known to drive the speed limit, even in passing lanes, because the term "speed limit" does not mean "the maximum speed you may drive in the normal lane, but feel free to exceed it in the passing lane."
Click to expand...
Same here, for the same reason! I started a thread about that a while back, and man was I ever the scoundrel. The consensus here was that the passing lane should be the exclusive domain of criminals. I will drive at the speed of the general traffic, which is usually over the limit (and legal). Fortunately so many other people share my viewpoint that the "passing" lane is misnamed. I only do this in the city though, when we can use all the lanes.
 
Usually it's the line jumpers who are causing all of the delay in the final lane; once the lanes merge it's clear sailing.
Click to expand...

But the volume would be the same because the delay remains in front of the merging cars.:)
 
The merging cars would just go on the end but the traffic is still slow beyond the merging point into the single lane so the backup would be further. This would counter any gains caused by merging.

It would seem.
 
Like I said in the OP, once the lanes merge it's usually clear sailing. It's the line jumpers who are usually causing all of the delay in the final lane. If no one jumped the line then the delay in the final lane would probably be shorter, even if the line in the final lane was then longer.
 
If cars were operated by emotionless robots, all of the traffic would merge into the open lane out of the closed one well before the point at which they would be forced to merge. The robots drivers already in the open lane would leave plenty of room for traffic to merge, and there would be no perceptible drop in speed. None of the robots would go down the now empty but soon to end lane and try to force their way in at the last because it would be so illogical that it would indicate a grave error in their circuitry, and they would auto shut down.

Unfortunately, humans are more concerned about asserting their dominance than they are about everyone getting where they are going as quickly and safely as possible.
 
Logically speaking the reason for the slow down is because the volume of traffic is constant but the space available is halved. If everyone merged into your lane earlier then surely the 'slow point' as it were where everyone merges would merely be in a different place and nothing would really change.
In conclusion I'd imagine it really doesn't matter but what would the point be in wasting space?
 
Pandaemoni said:
Then again, I have also been known to drive the speed limit, even in passing lanes, because the term "speed limit" does not mean "the maximum speed you may drive in the normal lane, but feel free to exceed it in the passing lane."
Click to expand...
Don't try that vigilante crap in California. The cops will write you a ticket for impeding traffic and tell you to do your own job and let them do theirs.
 
Get a 4x4 and take own path offroad... hehe just kidding. Just merge early, have good music on and not worry so much.
 
Fraggle Rocker said:
Don't try that vigilante crap in California. The cops will write you a ticket for impeding traffic and tell you to do your own job and let them do theirs.
Click to expand...


I would happily fight that ticket in court. I would argue that unless an officer specifically instructs you to violate the law (which he likely can't do in this case), he can't fine you for refusing to violate the law, and I'm quite sure I'd beat the ticket. That I am in the passing lane driving at the speed *limit*, and others behind me are trying to violate the law but can't because I'm in the way, still leaves THEM as the would-be law breakers, not me. That the police are looking at me, and not them, is a sign that the police are bad at their jobs or possibly just stupid.

Police might as well start arresting people who physically take the keys away from drunk friends to prevent them from driving. After all, that's theft and therefore a more clear violation of the law than driving at the speed limit in the passing lane. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Pandaemoni said:
I would happily fight that ticket in court. I would argue that unless an officer specifically instructs you to violate the law (which he likely can't do in this case), he can't fine you for refusing to violate the law, and I'm quite sure I'd beat the ticket. That I am in the passing lane driving at the speed *limit*, and others behind me are trying to violate the law but can't because I'm in the way, still leaves THEM as the would-be law breakers, not me. That the police are looking at me, and not them, is a sign that the police are bad at their jobs or possibly just stupid.

Police might as well start arresting people who physically take the keys away from drunk friends to prevent them from driving. After all, that's theft and therefore a more clear violation of the law than driving at the speed limit in the passing lane. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Speaking as the son of a retired C.H.P. dispatcher, they think people who do this sort of thing are jackass troublemakers.
 
Repo Man said:
Speaking as the son of a retired C.H.P. dispatcher, they think people who do this sort of thing are jackass troublemakers.
Click to expand...

I wonder if that's because, in my experience, most police think traffic laws don't apply to them in the first place. I've known many cops, all of whom though the speed limit was optional (especially since, if they got pulled over, no fellow cop would ever ticket them).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top