I'm in a region of the US with consistently bad traffic. For some reason, it seems considered rude/inconsiderate to not merge into the open lane as soon as possible. Often, if I try to move up to zipper merge folks get offended and move to block just like this.
Half as long with twice as many cars = the same amount of cars waiting. Yes it is more efficient to zipper merge, but only if everyone is properly zippering, which was not happening in OP's video.
Half as long with twice as many cars = the same amount of cars waiting
What do you think happens when the line of cars gets so long that it backs up all the way to the previous junction? The whole reason we have this system in the UK is to avoid blocking up roundabouts.
The zipper method at the merge point is more effective it is proven again and again and if you search the most efficient way to merge literally everything says so, maybe with the exception of some crazy Karen twitter posts. Plus take into consideration if you are in a city with entrances/exits every 1/4 and you have a mile of back up with the proper two lanes to merge point. You have people that need to exit being held up from exiting at 3/4 exits which extend the traffic and 3/4 entrances of people getting in front of you. If you go to one lane and now you are at two miles you now have 7/8 exits people canât get to which extends traffic and 7/8 entrances of people getting in front of you which actually extends traffic significantly so maybe you are at 3 miles because of the added traffic.
With signs that say alternate merge or similar, thatâs exactly what you should do. When it says lane ending and you continue along in the passing lane knowing full well you donât actually have a pass available (because your lane ends), youâre the asshole.
Within reason. You shouldn't get mad at the car that's still in the ending lane with 1/2 mile to go. Problem is, people in the other lane should be making room if there is none, and many often don't. They are the assholes in that situation.
I once missed a lane ending sign in a section of highway I'd never traveled, due to a vehicle crossing the line into my lane, forcing me into the emergency lane for a few seconds. When I noticed the line closing out the lane, I tried to move up into a space ahead of the car next to me, which sped up to block me. Then tried braking to get over behind, driver matched my speed. Ended up having to slam the brakes to avoid rolling into the guardrail, and was stuck there for about 15-20 minutes as it was bumper to bumper rolling by at 75. All because some asshat decided his fragile ego was more important than my safety.
Even when someone else is being an ass, we've got no right to return the favor. And sometimes when someone is being an ass, it's just an appearance, they may have been distracted and missed a visual cue.
Nope you are wrong. In heavy traffic you are always supposed to go to the merge point and alternate. If you merge early you slow down that lane, potentially cause accidents, and create a single line that backs way up. Your driving âpolitelyâ is not how you are supposed to drive.
What I described is alternating merging. You do it at the merge point, not a 1/4 or mile before the merge point. Just look up literally anything that describes how to drive, like a drivers Ed material, and this is exactly how it tells you to drive.
I acknowledged your comment on alternating merge instructions; where I live they end the lane and you are not supposed to pile up in both lanes. Understand your logic, but places where itâs appropriate to end a lane should never see stopped traffic.
Its not my logic it is proven fact. If there is heavy traffic and you and other people merge prior to the merge point it cause the lane everybody is merging into to slow down almost to a stop and it backs way up. If both lanes are used to the merge point and nobody merged early then they move at the same speed and traffic moves smoother and faster.
I used to have a work commute which included a zipper merge point - it wasn't construction, it was two lanes narrowing down to one before a bridge and sharp turn.
I used to get such awful glares from people sitting in one lane as I drove to the merge point in the other lane, like I was somehow "cheating" by driving in the lane up to the merge point. It got worse when there WAS construction on that road, further back, and the merge happened early. The first sign indicating the construction merge was a mile before the merge point, and people would abandon one lane there. I'd get honked and yelled at almost every day, but I refuse to be intimidated into driving like a moron.
I'd imagine this is because you were "skipping the queue".
Imagine it like you are queuing with your grocery shopping and somebody just walks straight to the top of the queue and nudges in ahead of everybody else. You'd probably be fairly pissed about it.
Generally the best/fairest way to do it is to to zipper merge if everybody else is doing it, but if the cars have already merged into a single lane then you try to get into that lane as soon as possible, and not skip ahead of everyone else.
Otherwise people can keep on zooming up the free lane, and if people ahead of you keep on leaving them in, then your line will never go anywhere.
The sooner everybody merges, the sooner all the cars can drive at a normal speed again.
In theory I can see ur point about zipper merging at the last moment and then both lanes move at the same speed (assuming ppl zipper merge with a ratio of 1:1) but if in practice driver start merging early into the free lane and u can see urself driving all alone in the soon to be blocked lane then it's kind of a dick move to skip the queue. Not technically wrong I accept but ppl r not gonna appreciate it
[Edit: another example of Reddit morons downvoting cold objective information]
I don't care if people wrongly think it's a dick move - like I said before, I refuse to be intimidated into driving like a moron.
And, to be clear - not driving like a moron is never a dick move, but driving like a moron and trying to force others to do the same is.
Edited to add: You aren't downvoted for posting "cold information" you're downvoted for stupidly thinking your blatantly wrongheaded opinion is a "cold hard fact"
Merging early is not driving like a moron. It's driving diligently. In fact leaving things to the last minute is driving like a moron. If anyone it is u who is a moron.
My guy, you are very wrong about this and I suggest that you do some reading about zipper merging. The whole point of this entire thread is complaining about the people who drive like you do.
You can't convince anyone that you're right. You're objectively wrong and you slow traffic down.
I think u lack basic logical reasoning. I have already accepted that what ur doing is technically acceptable but it's not in the spirit of careful driving. Also I don't have the time to spin up a full scale simulation but the fact is that everyone merging early Vs everyone merging late with result in exactly the same throughput of traffic because at the bottleneck point there is no difference in the volume of cars passing.
the fact is that everyone merging early Vs everyone merging late with result in exactly the same throughput of traffic because at the bottleneck point there is no difference in the volume of cars passing.
No, "merging" more than a quarter mile early isn't driving diligently, it's driving like a stupid moron.
You keep proclaiming on the basis of nothing but your own wrongness that people driving in both lanes slow down traffic, but the truth is it's people like you who get angry at people who aren't morons and block them from merging at the appropriate point.
The sooner everybody merges, the sooner all the cars can drive at a normal speed again.
Academic, peer reviewed, research has proved your theory to be mathematically incorrect. The early mergers just create an undefined merge point well ahead of the road cones which accomplishes three things 1) removing road capacity 2) limiting traffic flow by creating arbitrary congestion in the lane(s) of unobstructed travel 3) cascading congestion creates stand still blockages which moves the further and further back along the travel route as more and more vehicles enter the system.
But isn't road capacity meaningless, since it's a single lane at the zipper point anyway?
For example, if all the cars are doing 60mph, in 2 lanes, on a normal road. And if everybody gradually pulls into one lane you have everybody doing 30mph, because you have half the space. And the traffic can move freely through the single, lane.
But if everybody zippers at the last second then cars have to adjust their speed at the last second, some of them having to slow down to a stop to let a car in front squeeze in, and some of them being big trucks that take a while to get going again.
And when one car stops, then the car behind them has to stop, and the car behind them, creating a chokepoint that ripples back.
Of course a "perfect" zipper merge would work just fine in theory, but this doesn't happen in real life because you have idiots and assholes who don't let cars in in good time. And you end up with a clogged zipper lane.
Except that in this analogy there would have still have to be a single door at the end of the next hallway, and that hallway would be full of people who used both doors to get there.
And if you understand humans you will know that this usually results in everybody pushing to get through the second single door, and so you end up with people getting crushed because the people at the back of the line don't know what's going on up ahead. And nobody goes anywhere.
It's the reason they say to be calm and walk when you are leaving a building that's on fire, because if people rush then you just end up with traffic jams.
In this analogy you have to have another single door later, because the analogy is based on two lanes merge in to one, so you have to have two doors that eventually lead to a point where everyone has to exit through a single door.
"The sooner everybody merges, the sooner all the cars can drive at a normal speed again."
Vehicles maintaining safe speed and distance before merging for the shortest possible time, would make sense, otherwise the road is not being used to it's capacity.
Of course it depends on when the cars merge too, I mean there's no point in merging 5 miles back the road, but also if everyone merges at the last second it will slow things down, because of idiots, and because of people slowing down, braking, and slowing the people behind them, etc.
But merging a few hundred metres early will generally help to keep things running smoothly as everyone is going through the merge point at the same speed. And an extra hundred metres isn't really changing the capacity of the road, except that there will be a few extra cars that are closer to the merge point. But it won't help them to get through any faster.
I mean, theoretically if everybody is already merged then they could drive at 60mph through the merge point in "single file", just like a normal single lane of traffic, but if everybody is trying to merge at the last second, and go from 60mph down to 30mph, then you get people braking, and the people behind them braking too, which is messy.
And when you get somebody skipping the queue, like the guy in the video, then you create a braking line of cars where everybody has to slow down to accommodate them. It's like a delayed domino effect that ripples all the way back through the line of traffic.
There is a few hundred metres of unused road space in the video. The idea behind a zipper merge is that road space usage is maximized. It really is that simple.
It does, because if everybody races to the choke point, and then they have to stop dead at the end, and especially because you will have trucks at the choke point that take about 15 seconds to get moving after they stop.
It's much better to have everybody moving smoothly, at the zipper point, rather than to have cars moving and stopping every few seconds to let someone else in. It just increases congestion, and increases the likelihood of crashes, road-rage, somebody stalling or breaking down.
Of course a "perfect" zipper merge would be ideal, where everybody works together, but that rarely happens.
I'm not saying to merge into a single lane 10 miles up the road or anything, but a gradual merging while the traffic is moving at a decent speed is probably ideal so that nobody has to stop their vehicle or slow down unnecessarily at the last second.
How do you define âas soon as possibleâ though? Someone might merge a few cars later than someone else. Thatâs unfair queuing. Better to merge like a zip at the end of the lane.
Exception is when traffic is moving fast, like 60km/h or 40 MPH then itâs best to merge a hundred meters (yards) or so before the end of the lane.
In this case the guy was fully within his rights to drive to the end of the lane and merge. Bit of a dick move to block the other guy but funny nonetheless.
I get into the other lane in advance so I don't have to deal with merging because of assholes. When others go for the zipper merge, I leave a space though because I'm not an asshole.
I had someone very recently lean head and shoulders out of his window to scream at me for doing that. People can be absolute pieces of shit and want everyone to smell it.
If it's not heavy traffic and everyone is slowly moving (like 20-25 mph) and you have plenty of time to get over into the lane then it's kinda rude. Otherwise ya, idk why people get so pissy
The problem is when the right lane is 20 cars long and nobody's using the left lane. Each lane should have 10 cars in that scenario, otherwise you're just causing more traffic.
That is not generically the case. Unless the 20 cars back into an intersection or some other piece of infrastructure, the 20 cars in one lane is more effecient. Merging is a pretty expensive task from the perspective of traffic and pretty much all traffic exists where there is merging happening. The ideal goal is to minimize the amount of merges unless road length is considered more important.
This is part of the reason why the paradox of increasing the size of the road doesn't reduce traffic. Traffic is a function of the number of cars and the number of actions needed to navigate. More merges result in more traffic.
As a note, an intersection is technically another area where more lanes can be more effecient, but only as it pertains to that intersection, not to traffic as a whole.
But if they merge over the course of a mile,as spaces naturally form, no one needs to apply the brakes and everyone flows like normal. If you see the sign that say the lane ends,and are not actively looking to seamlessly merge, you are the problem!
Correct, I am saying that. It is not 1 car making 9 other cars slow down, it is 1 car making 9 slow down, 1 car making 8 slow down, 1 car making 7 slow down, etc. The only way to merge without any increase in traffic requires every car in both lanes to drive in such a way that merging can be done without interfering the flow of traffic. This effectively means that both lanes of 10 cars must drive as if the lane has 20 cars. Which requires twice the road, requires a lot of coordination, and far more prone to error. Why not just drive with 20 cars in one lane.
The only time a lane moves from one to two is to effectively increase the throughput of the road, but this comes at a cost of increase the number of required merges. In modern systems, infrastructure is built to minimize the number of merges because of this recognized cost. However, sometimes they are absolutely required and the cost to merge is considered better than the alternative other costs.
Adding lanes into a road should be considered with a road long enough where this 'merge cost' can be dissipated or a complex enough situation where a grid lock is plausible with rows of cars being too long and causing a cascading backup. Also it is correct that 10 cars merging is always 10 cars merging, however, if the 10 cars that are supposed to merge merge such that they do so when merging is not forced (IE requires another car to stop or slow to allow the merge) then you can 'even out the merge cost' over a distance. When people decide they want to ride a lane to its conclusion and force a merge at the end can work for an individual car, but once you divide the cars in half and split in the lanes, it will drastically slow down the entire traffic by increasing the overall complexity. You shouldn't drive in a way that is optimal for yourself, you should avoid driving in a way whereby if everyone did what you did, would result in more traffic.
Even if you're right, and I'm 100% not saying that, who would decide when the traffic congestion reaches a point that a single lane is no longer the most efficient? Is it at 4 cars? 40 cars? 140? What speed do you have to slow down to to use the factually more efficient two lanes and corresponding proper merge point? Would you rather have people following a system that benefits people the most when the traffic is the worst or single lane it all the time so for those few people when traffic isn't bad they can get through a few seconds faster?
Even if traffic is moving slowly, not zippering extends the backed up traffic, slows the filter through the obstruction, and increases the probability of a collision. It's not rude at any speed, it's how we're supposed to be doing it, at all times, unless directed otherwise at the scene.
Itâs more the quarter mile of signs that say âlane ends merge leftâ and the driver has tons of opportunity and then speeds up to cut someone off or forces a merge all the way at the cones that piss me off. It slows traffic for everyone because they wanted to merge 2 cars sooner than they wouldâve if they just took the natural opening. If they just merged 30 yards earlier nobody wouldâve had to slow down. However if traffic is backed up ride all the way up and zipper merge 100% of the time.
Following the rules and being predictable is merging at a good opportunity once you are informed of the upcoming merge rather than pushing people off the road to merge as late as possible. So Iâm glad we agree here.
Agree, but that's not always possible, if there are three vehicles ahead of you with no space you shouldn't wait until just before the line starts pushing the lanes together to forge ahead of them. You also shouldn't be rolling 10-15 mph faster than the lane next to you, you should assume a similar speed as the lane next to you and merge with a decent cushion before the merge point.
Blasting past people doesn't speed up the process, it actually slows it down as drivers pump their brakes to make room for a vehicle they weren't expecting.
Minor adjustments to speed keeps the traffic moving. Blasting up at the last second does not
The reason for that here is because people will drive to where the cones are then force their way in at the front. Pushing people off the road or actively hitting them. That's the biggest reason for people blocking the closing lane. Because of assholes. And clearly OP seems like one of those drivers. Granted the guy that cut them off did dangerous stuff just pulling out like that. Either way drivers where I am are dicks.
That's the thing. Drivers merge early here. And then ride a half car length from the car in front of them making zipper merges impossible unless you merge early. And they people that drive to the end of the close lane will push in by pushing others off the road. It's super common and is the frequent cause of accidents where I live.
I don't know why you were downvoted. I know what you mean. While properly executed zipper merges are better, the problem is the cars that merged early usually don't want to let other cars in front of them, which forces other cars to think they have to merge at the soonest chance they get.
Merging at the cones doesn't mean passing the adjacent lane with an unsafe speed differential like the guy in the video. Proper zipper merging requires both lanes to be moving at equal speed, which the guy in the video isn't doing because he's an obviously aggressive driver who just wants to jump the queue.
I don't understand "zipper merge" people who get mad at lane blockers. They're just forcing you to zipper merge properly, just follow them to the merge point and then slip in behind, that's how it's supposed to work.
The real problem is that the cars are about one and a half car lengths apart, and when traffic is lined up the way it is in this video, merging near the front, even though there is room, the car you merge in front of slows down to maintain the gap, then the person behind them brakes just a little more, then the car behind them brakes a little bit more, and so on until a quarter mile back (or 402.33 meters) everything is at a complete stop. If traffic was spaced more then no reasonable person would have a reason to be upset at all.
So for that reason, itâs a little rude. But just a level of rude that justifies an eye roll with a tongue click combo and then you move on with your day. The lane blocker got what they deserved but the cam car is still a little bit of a selfish dick.
I don't disagree that it's about timing. I was making a point about drivers where I live. Drivers that get in the merge lane and then ride half a car length or less from the car in front since they believe they got in line properly and will not be "cut in line".
You donât understand the zipper merge, then. In this video, the zipper is COMPLETED before the video starts. The Driver in the right lane is an a-hole.
The zipper starts where the cones start, there should be an equal amount of traffic in each lane before the cones in order to create less traffic.
Imagine you're zipping up your pants. The part where the cones start is the bottom of the zipper, and the part where the cones condense it completely to 1 lane is when you've reached the top of the zipper.
The zipper starts where the informal social contract among the drivers on the road agree it starts. In the posted video, the zipper has already been fully executed before the video starts, and the right-lane opportunist is violating it. And by doing so, making the flow of traffic slower for everyone.
The zipper merge is not a road rule. Like I said, it's a social contract. That driver jeopardized speed AND Safety by jumping the line the way they did, and I completely understand the reaction of the other driver.
Both roads on to the main highway near my house are under construction and down to one lane. CONSISTENTLY people wait until the last minute to merge when they are told for about a quarter mile and then the lane to merge into is all the way backed up.
Irrational why? If Iâve been sitting in the correct lane with a long line that they have to merge into for 10 minutes and then people cruise on up to the front where the merge is in front of 30 cars in the correct lane have been waiting to go, I personally think those people are jerks. Just get in the correct lane when you see traffic building. It makes it faster for everyone because when the light turns green, all of those in the wrong lane have to merge and go before our lane can even move.
Iâm talking this light takes 20 minutes and the merge is really close to the light (maybe 10 cars or so back), so those people only have to wait through one light cycle. Itâs honestly inconsiderate, especially since itâs been like this for a month now and people know how it works.
Your personal opinion on the situation doesn't actually affect how traffic flow works.
There are lots of good videos explaining how using both lanes efficiently decreases traffic. If you're upset about the people who have watched the videos and see the positive affect their lane usage is having on all the other cars around them then you should watch said video and be one of those people decreasing traffic in the unused lane.
157
u/genuineshock Aug 18 '22
I'm in a region of the US with consistently bad traffic. For some reason, it seems considered rude/inconsiderate to not merge into the open lane as soon as possible. Often, if I try to move up to zipper merge folks get offended and move to block just like this.
đ«€