Use both lanes until merge point

[stevew]

...why is this so hard to grasp?

Got to love the vigilante truck drivers who insist on doing the direct opposite of this.

[AlexB]

Drives me nuts too. It’s the most effective, sensible way of queuing, takes up the least amount of space, and avoids one empty lane and one lane with a mile tailback.

Hallelujah brother!

[Ksyrup]

I think the main issue with this is that people in the other lane get pissed when they consider the people in the merging lane to be taking advantage of the situation and passing people who are waiting. I usually look for a reasonable place to insert myself in the other line if I am able. I rarely drive another couple tenths of a mile and pass dozens of waiting cars to get in their line - even though that's the way it's supposed to work. You sometimes feel like you're driving on the shoulder and passing people.

I also think for the trucks, it's a PITA and they just want to get over and sit in line rather than keep going and try to push in at the end of the line.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I think the main issue with this is that people in the other lane get pissed when they consider the people in the merging lane to be taking advantage of the situation and passing people who are waiting. I usually look for a reasonable place to insert myself in the other line if I am able. I rarely drive another couple tenths of a mile and pass dozens of waiting cars to get in their line - even though that's the way it's supposed to work. You sometimes feel like you're driving on the shoulder and passing people.

I also think for the trucks, it's a PITA and they just want to get over and sit in line rather than keep going and try to push in at the end of the line.

Yeah, I used to be this way. But then I kept reading about how it's inefficient and the best way to reduce backup is for vehicles to use both lanes for as long as possible.

Where it gets tough is when someone merges early. If you've had a nice zipper going at the merge point and then someone merges early and lets multiple cars in the other lane go ahead, it can make you seem like a jerk if you pass and move up to where you should have been in the merge queue. But I've gotten over it and do it now.

[stevew]

I've had cars dart out halfway into the "empty" lane attempting to block traffic and it's terrifying.

[CU Tiger]

To heck with merging. I'm just begging to get people to understand to stay out of the left lane unless they are passing. Nothing incites road rage more in me than a packed interstate and some imbecile doing the speed limit or 3 over in the left lane obliviously talking on their phone. If it was a just world PIT maneuvering them into a fiery ending would be legal.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

To heck with merging. I'm just begging to get people to understand to stay out of the left lane unless they are passing. Nothing incites road rage more in me than a packed interstate and some imbecile doing the speed limit or 3 over in the left lane obliviously talking on their phone. If it was a just world PIT maneuvering them into a fiery ending would be legal.

Occasionally they run enforcement of this on the Texas interstates. Needs to be a lot more prevalent.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

To heck with merging. I'm just begging to get people to understand to stay out of the left lane unless they are passing. Nothing incites road rage more in me than a packed interstate and some imbecile doing the speed limit or 3 over in the left lane obliviously talking on their phone. If it was a just world PIT maneuvering them into a fiery ending would be legal.

Truest thing ever spoken on this board. Mix the general selfishness and obliviousness of the average person with the douchebaggery of LA in general and the number of people in POS cars who can't physically go over 65 and it's worse than anywhere else I've driven in the country.

I wonder what percentage of serious or fatal crashes can be traced back to people going at or below the speed limit in the fast lane.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Truest thing ever spoken on this board. Mix the general selfishness and obliviousness of the average person with the douchebaggery of LA in general and the number of people in POS cars who can't physically go over 65 and it's worse than anywhere else I've driven in the country.

I really doubt any region can compare with the PNW when it comes to folks dawdling along in the fast lane. We are the kings of gumming that up.

[Ksyrup]

Absolutely agree. Driving in the left lane is the reason for most road rage incidents, IMO.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by stevew

...why is this so hard to grasp?

Got to love the vigilante truck drivers who insist on doing the direct opposite of this.

It really only works if everyone does it, and does it the same. Otherwise it's not really any better.

[digamma]

My biggest frustration with Minnesota (other than the winter and lack of sushi) is driving. People refuse to "zipper merge" as it is called here. Out of state drivers like me are called "zippers" with a negative connotation. The nice Minnesotans will wait for quarter upon quarter of a mile while I zip in close to the exit. No way I feel bad about that. And I'm winning. The Minnesota DoT has launched a "Do the Zipper Merge" media campaign this summer because people are clogging up some key exit arteries unnecessarily.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Absolutely agree. Driving in the left lane is the reason for most road rage incidents, IMO.

And passing on the right the cause of numerous wrecks, as you are in the driver's blind spot for a long time. In Germany is it verboten to pass on the right.

[nilodor]

As long as it's not happening in weave zones or exit lanes then I'm all for it.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by digamma

My biggest frustration with Minnesota (other than the winter and lack of sushi) is driving. People refuse to "zipper merge" as it is called here. Out of state drivers like me are called "zippers" with a negative connotation. The nice Minnesotans will wait for quarter upon quarter of a mile while I zip in close to the exit. No way I feel bad about that. And I'm winning. The Minnesota DoT has launched a "Do the Zipper Merge" media campaign this summer because people are clogging up some key exit arteries unnecessarily.

This is exactly what I'm referring to. It's like waiting in line at Disney and someone cuts in line with a friend near the front of the line. Everyone behind is pissed.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I really doubt any region can compare with the PNW when it comes to folks dawdling along in the fast lane. We are the kings of gumming that up.

Was coming here to post this. I've lived in Texas, California, and all over the east coast. California is bad, but the combination of California drivers, Oregon drivers, and Canadians seem to make Washington far worse than anything I can imagine for this.

During my commutes to and from work plus all over the state for my son's baseball games I might see 2-3 people per week that get over for faster traffic. If you want around faster traffic here you generally have to wait for an opening on the right or use the HOV. It's also largely why i5 is the worst highway I've driven on. Gee really speaking it's a parking lot between Seattle and Tacoma.

[miami_fan]

Indiana State Trooper Praised for Pulling Over Slow Driver | Time

This guy became a patron saint for driver sanity for about 15 minutes.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by cartman

And passing on the right the cause of numerous wrecks, as you are in the driver's blind spot for a long time. In Germany is it verboten to pass on the right.

A must!

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

This is exactly what I'm referring to. It's like waiting in line at Disney and someone cuts in line with a friend near the front of the line. Everyone behind is pissed.

An apples and oranges comparison really.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

This is exactly what I'm referring to. It's like waiting in line at Disney and someone cuts in line with a friend near the front of the line. Everyone behind is pissed.

Right, you're doing it wrong. Traffic moves better in both lanes if you zipper merge close to the merge point.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Was coming here to post this. I've lived in Texas, California, and all over the east coast. California is bad, but the combination of California drivers, Oregon drivers, and Canadians seem to make Washington far worse than anything I can imagine for this.

During my commutes to and from work plus all over the state for my son's baseball games I might see 2-3 people per week that get over for faster traffic. If you want around faster traffic here you generally have to wait for an opening on the right or use the HOV. It's also largely why i5 is the worst highway I've driven on. Gee really speaking it's a parking lot between Seattle and Tacoma.

I will third this.

People in the PNW have zero sense of urgency. 5 years in Seattle and 3 years in Portland, they are both terrible. I'm happy to be back in Jersey.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by digamma

Right, you're doing it wrong. Traffic moves better in both lanes if you zipper merge close to the merge point.

I wouldn't think that's true at an exit with a traffic signal. If traffic is backed up because of the light, merging into that line wouldn't make things faster.

[molson]

Originally Posted by digamma

Right, you're doing it wrong. Traffic moves better in both lanes if you zipper merge close to the merge point.

But doesn't that only work if everybody is on board with doing it that way? I actually watched one of those Minnesota DOT PSA videos (I have an odd affection for those kinds of things), but I've never actually seen zipper merging work as cleanly as displayed in their animations. More often, if you're in the ending lane, all it takes is one person not to play ball and you're sitting here, trying to make eye contact with other drivers, nudging ahead, etc. I can appreciate trying to fight the good fight but if I'm coming home from work or something I'm just getting in the continuing lane ASAP so I don't have to fight with anyone.

[bhlloy]

Even in LA most people are on board, and even if you get the occasional asshole who doesn't want to let you in, you just go behind the next person.

Surely that is massively preferable to getting over as soon as you can (and probably blocking a bunch of people while you are trying to work your way in, making the chances of death by road rage infinitely higher) and then spending at least twice as long in a massive line while all the people who were behind you and who did it properly now merge ahead of you? I'm really shocked this isn't obvious to everyone, but I may be missing something.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by digamma

Right, you're doing it wrong. Traffic moves better in both lanes if you zipper merge close to the merge point.

No, I understand. But what I'm referring to is the way you are treated for doing it.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by molson

But doesn't that only work if everybody is on board with doing it that way? I actually watched one of those Minnesota DOT PSA videos (I have an odd affection for those kinds of things), but I've never actually seen zipper merging work as cleanly as displayed in their animations. More often, if you're in the ending lane, all it takes is one person not to play ball and you're sitting here, trying to make eye contact with other drivers, nudging ahead, etc. I can appreciate trying to fight the good fight but if I'm coming home from work or something I'm just getting in the continuing lane ASAP so I don't have to fight with anyone.

Exactly. I often give up and get in line and wait rather than fight. Most of the time people refuse to allow the people who drove all the way up to merge in because they're perceived as having passed everyone else who is waiting in line, so it becomes a fight more than a lane merge. I've even seen people pull half way into both lanes to try to block anyone behind them from going any further.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

This is exactly what I'm referring to. It's like waiting in line at Disney and someone cuts in line with a friend near the front of the line. Everyone behind is pissed.

It's not anything like that though. It's like there being two marked lines at Disney and for some reason everyone is in one line, and you use the empty line to merge into the full line nearer to the front. Lanes are supposed to be driven in - I don't think anyone here is advocating driving on the hard shoulder to get ahead of a bunch of traffic.

By not zipping you are just causing a dangerous tailback for miles, especially if you are doing it on an exit and forcing people to have to merge over suddenly from another lane into that tailback.

[molson]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Even in LA most people are on board, and even if you get the occasional asshole who doesn't want to let you in, you just go behind the next person.

Surely that is massively preferable to getting over as soon as you can (and probably blocking a bunch of people while you are trying to work your way in, making the chances of death by road rage infinitely higher) and then spending at least twice as long in a massive line while all the people who were behind you and who did it properly now merge ahead of you? I'm really shocked this isn't obvious to everyone, but I may be missing something.

I guess it depends on how much stretch of road you have to merge and how fast the traffic moves on that particular road. In the areas I'm thinking of, where two lanes merge into one, you have three choices: (1)-get over to the left WAY before any signage tells you of the merging up ahead, that way, you don't have to "work your way in" at all and only have to let others in. (2) try to merge after the signage, where cars are bumper to bumper and it's completely unpredictable who is going to let you in and who isn't, and if you try to gauge spaces and make eye contact, and then, if you're not able to get in in time: (3) you're sitting stationary at the end trying to nudge into moving traffic.

Edit: Could be that I live in a place where there's only bad traffic when there's construction. There was a situation recently where the signage for a highway merge was so inadequate and late before the merge that someone called 911 to report it - later that night there was a huge crash there that involved multiple fatalities and the destruction of a highway overpass from the fires. Somewhat different situation, but, I wonder if there's just no merge culture here, and thus no predictability of drivers in merge situations.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by molson

I guess it depends on how much stretch of road you have to merge and how fast the traffic moves on that particular road. In the areas I'm thinking of, where two lanes merge into one, you have three choices: (1)-get over to the left WAY before any signage tells you of the merging up ahead, that way, you don't have to "work your way in" at all and only have to let others in. (2) try to merge after the signage, where cars are bumper to bumper and it's completely unpredictable who is going to let you in and who isn't, and if you try to gauge spaces and make eye contact, and then, if you're not able to get in in time: (3) you're sitting stationary at the end trying to nudge into moving traffic.

I guess I'm just not seeing 2 as remotely difficult, so I don't really end up in 3 a lot or ever. And 1 is completely unpalatable to me unless I have a reason I need to be killing time as it's at minimum doubling the time I need to be in this line of traffic.

I guess it's different city by city or even situation by situation?

[Lathum]

You know what else pisses me off?

When there are 3 lanes- leftmost 2 lanes for traffic, right lane an exit lane, and douches stay in the right lane as long as possible, passing the backed up left lanes. Then stop in the exit lane and wait to force their way in, thus causing the exit lane to back up which should be free flowing.

[nilodor]

Originally Posted by Lathum

You know what else pisses me off?

When there are 3 lanes- leftmost 2 lanes for traffic, right lane an exit lane, and douches stay in the right lane as long as possible, passing the backed up left lanes. Then stop in the exit lane and wait to force their way in, thus causing the exit lane to back up which should be free flowing.

This times 1000

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

It's not anything like that though. It's like there being two marked lines at Disney and for some reason everyone is in one line, and you use the empty line to merge into the full line nearer to the front. Lanes are supposed to be driven in - I don't think anyone here is advocating driving on the hard shoulder to get ahead of a bunch of traffic.

By not zipping you are just causing a dangerous tailback for miles, especially if you are doing it on an exit and forcing people to have to merge over suddenly from another lane into that tailback.

I'm talking about how the people passing are perceived by those waiting in line. I realize the two situations are not the same, but the people passing are assholes to a good portion of the people in line sitting still in traffic while those other cars get ahead of them in line even though they were behind them when traffic was moving freely.

No matter how much sense zipping makes, you're never going to overcome the psychology of the situation that makes it impossible for zipping to be accepted by everyone.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

You know what else pisses me off?

When there are 3 lanes- leftmost 2 lanes for traffic, right lane an exit lane, and douches stay in the right lane as long as possible, passing the backed up left lanes. Then stop in the exit lane and wait to force their way in, thus causing the exit lane to back up which should be free flowing.

Yeah, this one sucks. Happens all the time on westbound 520 where it meets I-405.

[dawgfan]

Here's a scenario for you all, curious what you all think:

- Arterial with two lanes each direction but street parking allowed in the curb lane. You get to a signal-controlled intersection and both lanes are open. Beyond the signal there are more cars parked in the curb lane, so anyone going straight in the curb lane is going to have to merge right away. You live in a municipality where right hand turns (after stopping) are allowed at a red light. You are going straight and not turning at the intersection.

Do you stay in the left hand lane, or do you pull over into the curb lane and hope to jack-rabbit your way ahead of several cars in the left lane, while also blocking the opportunity for anyone behind you that might want to turn right during the red light from doing so?

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

It really only works if everyone does it, and does it the same. Otherwise it's not really any better.

+1

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Even in LA most people are on board, and even if you get the occasional asshole who doesn't want to let you in, you just go behind the next person.

Surely that is massively preferable to getting over as soon as you can (and probably blocking a bunch of people while you are trying to work your way in, making the chances of death by road rage infinitely higher) and then spending at least twice as long in a massive line while all the people who were behind you and who did it properly now merge ahead of you? I'm really shocked this isn't obvious to everyone, but I may be missing something.

Isn't deciding where the zipper merge should happen just an extension of the theory that everyone driving slower than you on the highway is a coward, and everyone driving faster than you is a reckless idiot? I'm more aggressive than the average driver, but I pay attention to upcoming problems & will make sure I can get over without forcing cars in the merged lane to slam on their brakes, or ending up in that position where you're half in a moving lane of traffic and half in the stopped one. (Though I also think the rules are different when it's road work and condensing down to one lane vs a backup for a highway off ramp where there also could be/should be free flowing traffic lanes past it.) Let's say in the first example I decide to merge like 100 feet before the lane I'm in actually closes because there's an opening in the lane we're merging into, and someone initially behind me decides to drive up to 10 feet before the lane closes and post up with a blinker on trying to force his way in. Should I feel obligated to let them in? Are they really helping traffic flow faster? I say no, and that the theory that later merging is ideal is only true for off ramp like situations, not where traffic comes to a complete halt as it is condensed through a choke point.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Here's a scenario for you all, curious what you all think:

- Arterial with two lanes each direction but street parking allowed in the curb lane. You get to a signal-controlled intersection and both lanes are open. Beyond the signal there are more cars parked in the curb lane, so anyone going straight in the curb lane is going to have to merge right away. You live in a municipality where right hand turns (after stopping) are allowed at a red light. You are going straight and not turning at the intersection.

Do you stay in the left hand lane, or do you pull over into the curb lane and hope to jack-rabbit your way ahead of several cars in the left lane, while also blocking the opportunity for anyone behind you that might want to turn right during the red light from doing so?

I stay in the left lane. And when it turns green I stay close enough to the car ahead of me anyone trying that maneuver can't cut in front of me (and ideally work in concert with the car behind me so they can't cut in back of me either.)

But I always scored super high on Power-Competitive at driving school (before I moved to a state where they don't pull you over merely for driving fast on highways), so ymmv.

[Mota]

Originally Posted by Lathum

You know what else pisses me off?

When there are 3 lanes- leftmost 2 lanes for traffic, right lane an exit lane, and douches stay in the right lane as long as possible, passing the backed up left lanes. Then stop in the exit lane and wait to force their way in, thus causing the exit lane to back up which should be free flowing.

Yes. I see that over and over again on my daily commute. In particular a 10 minute left turn. It's all trucks because we are close to the airport and a million container depots. So on the advance, 2 trucks get through. Not unusual to wait 5-6 sets of lights before you can get through.

Of course there are douchebags that drive all the way up, and jam their way in right at the front of the line. To me, THAT is exactly like some guy walking to the front of the line at the amusement park and cutting in.

Of course, they are protected by a giant metal box, but if they did that in front of you, they would get punched in the face.

[Mota]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Here's a scenario for you all, curious what you all think:

- Arterial with two lanes each direction but street parking allowed in the curb lane. You get to a signal-controlled intersection and both lanes are open. Beyond the signal there are more cars parked in the curb lane, so anyone going straight in the curb lane is going to have to merge right away. You live in a municipality where right hand turns (after stopping) are allowed at a red light. You are going straight and not turning at the intersection.

Do you stay in the left hand lane, or do you pull over into the curb lane and hope to jack-rabbit your way ahead of several cars in the left lane, while also blocking the opportunity for anyone behind you that might want to turn right during the red light from doing so?

That is a douche bag move. There is a spot close to my place like that. The street goes from 4 lanes to 2 lanes with parking lanes on both sides. It always backs up there. Sometimes there's a 2-3 car length gap in the parking lane, and some guy scoots over in the little gap, passes two guys, and then expects you to let him back in. NO.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Oddly enough, one north Georgia police department commented on this very thing today as part of their "Traffic Law Tuesday" social media.

And they pretty clearly seem to be pointing out that using the ending lane / failing to move over ASAP is probably a bad idea in practice

There seems to be a ton of confusion about what these signs mean. Especially since there has been some push by some Departments of Transportation to promote what they are calling "zipper merging".
The reality is that if you are traveling in a lane that ends, you must move from that lane into another lane - AND vehicles which occupy the lane that you are moving into have the right of way because they currently occupy that lane. IF a sign says "Lane Ends" and you are in that lane, it's a good idea to move to a portion of the roadway where you will actually have a lane to travel. IF the sign says "Merge Left" and you are in the right lane - then you are the vehicle that is merging and should move from the right to the left lane prior to your lane ending. IF you come to the end of your lane and have no room to move to the other lane - you're out of lane and out of luck.

Yes, vehicles in lanes which are receiving merging traffic should create spaces for merging traffic to enter into. That is courteous driving. But remember, if a vehicle occupies a lane that is receiving merging traffic, that vehicle has the right of way.

Part of being safe upon the roadway means planning ahead. It means moving with plenty of time and safety gaps and zones.

edit to add: There's another point in their post that may have some relevance to the different situations

Signs are normally placed so that drivers have 500 to 300 feet of warning prior to a change of conditions.

I think that's probably something that's pretty variable. I certainly perceive the Lane Ends signage to be considerably earlier than that on interstates / major highways around here, though the quoted figure is probably about right for rural / exurban areas, secondary roads, etc.

[stevew]

Original post was referring to a miles ahead lane closure on the interstate. In PA they post multiple signs about using both lanes until the merge point and then add "take your turn" at the merge point and people still don't know what the hell to do. Or they deliberately block the ending lane and dart in front of "line cutters" even though these evil people are following the signs as posted.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by stevew

Original post was referring to a miles ahead lane closure on the interstate. In PA they post multiple signs about using both lanes until the merge point and then add "take your turn" at the merge point and people still don't know what the hell to do. Or they deliberately block the ending lane and dart in front of "line cutters" even though these evil people are following the signs as posted.

Reading between the lines a bit (since that PD I quoted is about a half hour north of where I grew up, so 90 mins north of ATL) ... I suspect that the generic stuff about "zipper merging" that comes & goes on the 'net has created confusion for drivers where that really isn't "a thing".

And, honestly, that's the sort of thing that can lead to some serious incidents where I come from.

[Edward64]

I'm guilty of merging as soon as I can especially in heavy Atlanta suburbia traffic. I don't mean barge in but there are often gaps that you can comfortably slide in.

I think its because I get anxious when I get closer to the end of the merge. I do think most drivers are courteous that that really shouldn't be my rationale. I'll try do better in the future.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Here's a scenario for you all, curious what you all think:

- Arterial with two lanes each direction but street parking allowed in the curb lane. You get to a signal-controlled intersection and both lanes are open. Beyond the signal there are more cars parked in the curb lane, so anyone going straight in the curb lane is going to have to merge right away. You live in a municipality where right hand turns (after stopping) are allowed at a red light. You are going straight and not turning at the intersection.

Do you stay in the left hand lane, or do you pull over into the curb lane and hope to jack-rabbit your way ahead of several cars in the left lane, while also blocking the opportunity for anyone behind you that might want to turn right during the red light from doing so?

Stay in the left lane. You are a colossal douche if you are the first car in the right lane preventing people from going right unless you can't help it.

[Butter]

This happened yesterday. There was an accident that caused 2 lanes of a 3 lane highway to be blocked. Trucks ahead of me were swerving way out into the left lane to try to keep people from going around them. Even though there was a good half mile until the accident.

Was carpooling with my wife, and she was annoyed that I didn't get over right away. My point was, if they didn't want you to drive on this section of the highway, then they should close it earlier. The whole point is to try to keep the traffic flowing right up until it isn't possible anymore. Not "let's all merge into a single lane over a mile before it is necessary".

There are a couple of 4 lane to 3 changes on my interstate drive from Dayton to Cincinnati and back every day, and I don't wait until the last possible second to get over, but I sure don't get over a mile in advance. As long as traffic is moving and you're not literally cutting in inches in front of another car, take your time. The whole point is to keep traffic flowing, not to have a useless 4th lane for over a mile.

[Lathum]

Yes, vehicles in lanes which are receiving merging traffic should create spaces for merging traffic to enter into. That is courteous driving. But remember, if a vehicle occupies a lane that is receiving merging traffic, that vehicle has the right of way.

I don't work in insurance anymore, but I can't tell you how many people do not understand this concept.

Countless times I would have a claim where someone blasted another car either while merging or coming out of a yield sign. Virtually every time they would try to justify it by claiming the person wouldn't let them in. When you informed them the person who already has the lane established has the right of way they would argue with you about it.

[TCY Junkie]

Twice yesterday there was a cop about a mile from merge points, fun drive. First time I've ever seen no cars trying to merge at merge point. Did not see one car get in open lane and traffic moved swiftly. Long long back up but 15 minutes instead of 45 minutes if cops wouldn't have been there. I love truckers, oppose 45 minute waits.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Oddly enough, one north Georgia police department commented on this very thing today as part of their "Traffic Law Tuesday" social media.

And they pretty clearly seem to be pointing out that using the ending lane / failing to move over ASAP is probably a bad idea in practice



edit to add: There's another point in their post that may have some relevance to the different situations


I think that's probably something that's pretty variable. I certainly perceive the Lane Ends signage to be considerably earlier than that on interstates / major highways around here, though the quoted figure is probably about right for rural / exurban areas, secondary roads, etc.

So is this the counter-point to the concept of zipping? It's up to you to get out of the lane that's going to end; we don't want or encourage you to stay in your lane and merge every-other-car at the point where you no longer have a lane to travel in.

Although I've heard of zipping, I've never actually seen it publicly called out or encouraged where I live or have driven. And we have several interstates in KY where the lanes go from 2 to 3 back to 2 (sometimes a 4th lane for trucks) - there's one really bad area on 75 in southern KY where it goes from 4 to 2. Personally, I've always approached this as if it's my responsibility to get over in enough time to avoid running out of lane. I've never seen signage encouraging people to stay in their lane and merge at the point where the lane ends.

[digamma]

I honestly think it is part cultural here, as I have seen nothing Minnesotans like more than waiting in lines. You get these huge back ups, because, LOOK IT'S A LINE!!!!

This is the latest update from MNDoT.

https://www.dot.state.mn.us/zippermerge/

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

So is this the counter-point to the concept of zipping? It's up to you to get out of the lane that's going to end; we don't want or encourage you to stay in your lane and merge every-other-car at the point where you no longer have a lane to travel in.

If you hung yourself on the line, be prepared to dry. I think that's pretty solid wisdom.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by stevew

Original post was referring to a miles ahead lane closure on the interstate. In PA they post multiple signs about using both lanes until the merge point and then add "take your turn" at the merge point and people still don't know what the hell to do. Or they deliberately block the ending lane and dart in front of "line cutters" even though these evil people are following the signs as posted.

But there are only a certain number of cars who can go through the construction zone.

Suppose you’re on a 2-lane (each way) highway and one lane is closed up ahead due to construction. Now the flow rate of your lane is cut in half (or there are twice as many cars in line in front of you, depending on how you want to look at it). Road signs commonly ask you to use both lanes up to the point of the bottleneck. That’s reasonable advice, but it’s not going to get everyone home faster. Remember only so many cars are going to clear the bottleneck per second, no matter what happens upstream. The only thing this does is shorten the length of the backup on the highway — it’s a 2 mile backup instead of a 4 mile backup. This is good because it is less likely to affect other traffic by spilling out onto onramps and surface roads. Also maybe there’s someone on the highway who’s planning to exit 3 miles before the bottleneck. If the backup is 2 miles instead of 4 miles, that person doesn’t have to wait in traffic.

So the real key to reducing congestion there is people merging in at the speed traffic starts going through the one lane road work area, and never coming to a complete stop in the merging lane, or forcing people to brake in the lane being merged into. So yes I agree that people should not block the merging lane if there is an exit or other release point for the congestion before reaching the merge since cars will likely be getting off there, but no I don't think trucks blocking both lanes and forcing an early merge actually increases the time at all for people who have to go through the bottleneck, and no I don't think driving as far as possible before merging over actually helps reduce overall commuting time (though it does help yours!).