Shame, envy drive our road habits: study

[SEZ213]

Originally Posted by prydey

you should never make assumptions. if everyone treated others how they themselves would like to be treated, the world would be a happier place.

I got a feeling...that the 'me-ism' is everywhere...

And I've got another feeling, that once again, I agree with you completely.

My observation...the one's who tend to push their way to the front of the queue (particularly on the Warrego-Ipswich merge)...

Hyundai Excel
Mazda 3
Mazda 6
Nissan X-Trail
Old beat up Holden Rodeos
Pantec trucks
Delivery men
Council vehicles
Queensland Government vehicles


I think in my entire time travelling that section of road, day in day out, my memory falls to very few Luxury Cars behaving like idiots. Or perhaps I'm just not jealous of their cars...and I want the old ones that continually do it.

The comments indicated here are actually proving the point of the study...you call them 'social types' etc. I just call them other cars.

[brendo83]

Originally Posted by prydey

you should never make assumptions. if everyone treated others how they themselves would like to be treated, the world would be a happier place.

how do you know?? That wouldn't be an assumption now would it?

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by brendo83

As soon as you see a merge sign, you should attempt to merge as soon as you can do so safely, merging early gives you a chance to match speed with the other lane and execute the merge safely with minimal disruption to the traffic flow of the continuing lane. Thats why the put the signs where they do.
By trying to 'use both lanes for as long as possible' people inevitbly misjudge how much distance it will take to merge and end up having to stop and wait for someone in the right lane to stop and let them in, this screws up the flow of the right lane.

While its not difficult to let people in, its also not difficult to merge early and take your place like nearly everyone else does.

When I've come up to a lane closure and merged into a lane of stopped traffic, then crawled along for 5 minutes to get past the roadworks why shouldn't the smartarse that zipped up the empty left lane because it was quicker have to wait just like everyone else??

Bottom line, if you are legitimately trying to merge, I'll let you in no problems, but if you're blatantly jumping the queue expect to be blocked. Why do I get the feeling you fall into the latter category.

Exactly my sentiments Brendo, I think in all honesty Prydey didnt think it through, I suspect his thought processes are better than that and was just trying to take the opportunity to have a go at me.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by prydey

if your schedule is so tight that 5min makes a difference, then you need to plan better. .

No my schedule isnt tight that isnt the point, but Id rather take 45 mins for a trip half way across melbourne than an 1 hour + due to the formentioned knuckle heads making it appear one is sometimes moving backwards . Roads coming to standstills when merging has to occur due to people driving down the lane that merges until they can go no further and then dragging everything to a halt while they push into the stream again. Nor do I appreciate my time being given away by people in front of me letting every vehicle in that is waiting at a side street etc.

[JC]

Originally Posted by barra265t

Anyone here find themselves letting other fellow Ford/FPV drivers through, but blocking out the annoying P-plater Commodore or Toyota Fridge?

Guilty as charged! though I do let Commodore drivers in too, if they are courteous (ie indicator on, and waiting, rather than just trying to push in).

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by sudszy

No my schedule isnt tight that isnt the point, but Id rather take 45 mins for a trip half way across melbourne than an 1 hour + due to the formentioned knuckle heads making it appear one is sometimes moving backwards . Roads coming to standstills when merging has to occur due to people driving down the lane that merges until they can go no further and then dragging everything to a halt while they push into the stream again. Nor do I appreciate my time being given away by people in front of me letting every vehicle in that is waiting at a side street etc.

Id rather take a 45 min freeway trip speeding at 2am then then a 1 hour trip obeying the low speed limits

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by brendo83

As soon as you see a merge sign, you should attempt to merge as soon as you can do so safely, merging early gives you a chance to match speed with the other lane and execute the merge safely with minimal disruption to the traffic flow of the continuing lane. Thats why the put the signs where they do.
By trying to 'use both lanes for as long as possible' people inevitbly misjudge how much distance it will take to merge and end up having to stop and wait for someone in the right lane to stop and let them in, this screws up the flow of the right lane.

While its not difficult to let people in, its also not difficult to merge early and take your place like nearly everyone else does.

When I've come up to a lane closure and merged into a lane of stopped traffic, then crawled along for 5 minutes to get past the roadworks why shouldn't the smartarse that zipped up the empty left lane because it was quicker have to wait just like everyone else??

Bottom line, if you are legitimately trying to merge, I'll let you in no problems, but if you're blatantly jumping the queue expect to be blocked. Why do I get the feeling you fall into the latter category.

Actually, if everyone merged as soon as they could after seeing the sign the traffic flow would be significantly slower.

In an ideal world, all lanes should be used for as long as possible, and cars left in the terminating lanes should be allowed to merge without obstruction as close to the actual termination as possible. This way the more of the roads capacity is being used and traffic will flow much faster - for everyone.

Its the self-righteous driver who's been stupidly and unnecessarily crawling in the slowest lane for a while and wont let cars merge that slow everything up.

Just let everyone merge, at anytime, because after all, lane jumpers are doing you a favor!

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Just let everyone merge, at anytime, because after all, lane jumpers are doing you a favor!

Obviously you haven't studied the traffic flows over many years, as I have concluded quite the opposite whilst spending quite a bit of time observing causes of traffic holdups while waiting patiently. If there were no queue jumpers there would be far less unnecessary merging back into the lane, and traffic would then flow much better. In the extreme case if there was no merging at all, like if the extra lane didnt exist, the traffic would be much more free flowing.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Exactly my sentiments Brendo, I think in all honesty Prydey didnt think it through, I suspect his thought processes are better than that and was just trying to take the opportunity to have a go at me.

sorry sudszy, i'm not one to harbour grudges, esp on internet forums. i don't agree on the subject of speed camera tolerances, and now it seems we also don't agree on how to behave on the road.

the thing with black text on a pc screen is its a lot harder to portray the scenario you may have in your head. i live in adelaide, so our road system isn't anywhere near what the eastern states are, so many of my comments may seem out of place. i stand by my comments though, if both lanes are used for as long as possible and everyone just lets everyone merge (zipper style), then more cars will get through the bottleneck in a given time.

as a side note, its one of the big differences i notice when i holiday in brissie (which i currently am), most people let you in when you stick the blinker on.

[my_gxl]

Originally Posted by prydey

sorry sudszy, i'm not one to harbour grudges, esp on internet forums. i don't agree on the subject of speed camera tolerances, and now it seems we also don't agree on how to behave on the road.

the thing with black text on a pc screen is its a lot harder to portray the scenario you may have in your head. i live in adelaide, so our road system isn't anywhere near what the eastern states are, so many of my comments may seem out of place. i stand by my comments though, if both lanes are used for as long as possible and everyone just lets everyone merge (zipper style), then more cars will get through the bottleneck in a given time.

as a side note, its one of the big differences i notice when i holiday in brissie (which i currently am), most people let you in when you stick the blinker on.

I live in brisbane too. Blinkers are hardly ever used. You must have scared the other driver when you put it on.

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Obviously you haven't studied the traffic flows over many years, as I have concluded quite the opposite whilst spending quite a bit of time observing causes of traffic holdups while waiting patiently. If there were no queue jumpers there would be far less unnecessary merging back into the lane, and traffic would then flow much better. In the extreme case if there was no merging at all, like if the extra lane didnt exist, the traffic would be much more free flowing.

Are you forgetting that every car needs to merge into the remaining lane at some point?

Your extreme case requires there to be only one lane - so would all freeways flow better with one lane instead of four?

Think of a road like an hour glass. All the contents must pass through a thin section/bottleneck. Its impossible for one or two lane closures on a multi lane road to not cause congestion.

Its a simple fact - the more road capacity used, the faster traffic will flow. But in the real world drivers incorrectly believe lane jumpers are holding them up, so make their merging difficult, which results in them get stuck at the end of their lane. This is what causes traffic to slow as they force their way back in.

Check out this page and book if your keen to know more; (as your own observations seem to be giving you incorrect conclusions)

http://www.howwedrive.com/

[SEZ213]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Are you forgetting that every car needs to merge into the remaining lane at some point?

Your extreme case requires there to be only one lane - so would all freeways flow better with one lane instead of four?

Think of a road like an hour glass. All the contents must pass through a thin section/bottleneck. Its impossible for one or two lane closures on a multi lane road to not cause congestion.

Its a simple fact - the more road capacity used, the faster traffic will flow. But in the real world drivers incorrectly believe lane jumpers are holding them up, so make their merging difficult, which results in them get stuck at the end of their lane. This is what causes traffic to slow as they force their way back in.

Check out this page and book if your keen to know more; (as your own observations seem to be giving you incorrect conclusions)

http://www.howwedrive.com/

Spot on, also helps if everyone is doing a similar speed...not speeding up to block someone out, and then jamming your foot on the brakes to avoid rear-ending the car in front that is going nowhere near as fast as you...

[brendo83]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Are you forgetting that every car needs to merge into the remaining lane at some point?

Your extreme case requires there to be only one lane - so would all freeways flow better with one lane instead of four?

Think of a road like an hour glass. All the contents must pass through a thin section/bottleneck. Its impossible for one or two lane closures on a multi lane road to not cause congestion.

Its a simple fact - the more road capacity used, the faster traffic will flow. But in the real world drivers incorrectly believe lane jumpers are holding them up, so make their merging difficult, which results in them get stuck at the end of their lane. This is what causes traffic to slow as they force their way back in.

Check out this page and book if your keen to know more; (as your own observations seem to be giving you incorrect conclusions)

http://www.howwedrive.com/

You don't really seem to understand your own hourglass reference. Unless you increase the capacity at the restriction how does increasing capacity either side of it help the flow?

So you're at the supermarket fifth in line and theres another five people beside you in line at the next checkout, one of the checkout chicks shuts their checkouts. Everyone is nice and courteous, the first person in line at the still open checkout lets the first person in line at the closed checkout in behind them, and so on down the line, its not much inconvienience for each person to let one person in, but the person who was fifth in line at the still open checkout is now ninth in line and has to wait almost twice as long to get served. This is all not too bad though, its no ones fault the second register was closed and everyone is more or less being served in order of how long they had been waiting.

So now someone else has finished their shopping and looks at the long line at register one, looks at the closed sign on register two and decides he doesn't really want to wait in line so he waltzes up the line of the closed register past all the folks waiting patiently in line and asks the person in front it he could just squeeze in. Sound fair enough to you?

[brendo83]

Originally Posted by Sezzy

Spot on, also helps if everyone is doing a similar speed...not speeding up to block someone out, and then jamming your foot on the brakes to avoid rear-ending the car in front that is going nowhere near as fast as you...

If both lanes are travelling at similar speeds, then I agree, everyone should be courteous and let one another in.

What I'm talking about is when the continuing lane has slowed significantly because most people have already merged and people use the terminating lane to get way ahead before merging. the only person that benfits from doing this is you.

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by brendo83

As soon as you see a merge sign, you should attempt to merge as soon as you can do so safely, merging early gives you a chance to match speed with the other lane and execute the merge safely with minimal disruption to the traffic flow of the continuing lane. Thats why the put the signs where they do.

Unfortunately, some see this as the point where they should floor it and attempt to pass another 3 cars before flying past and then cutting off a car as the lane they were in becomes the emergency lane. I do agree that once the merge sign is passed that you should be looking to merge amongst the cars you are currently driving near. By pushing further up it means that the cars in the continuing lane have to slow down further to allow for the 5 cars that have just gone past in those few hundred metres since the merge sign. So now you're doing 60 in a 100 zone in a queue of cars and even more cars are still doing 100 on your left and then looking to cut in front as they reach the end of their lane. By the time the speed gets back up, you come across the next one and it is rinse and repeat.

[You Yangs]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Actually, if everyone merged as soon as they could after seeing the sign the traffic flow would be significantly slower.

In an ideal world, all lanes should be used for as long as possible, and cars left in the terminating lanes should be allowed to merge without obstruction as close to the actual termination as possible. This way the more of the roads capacity is being used and traffic will flow much faster - for everyone.

Its the self-righteous driver who's been stupidly and unnecessarily crawling in the slowest lane for a while and wont let cars merge that slow everything up.

Just let everyone merge, at anytime, because after all, lane jumpers are doing you a favor!

I'm with you on this 100%.
A lane is a lane and I will use it right till the end put my blinker on and merge with the traffic.
I don't think I am being selfish in doing this as I am using something that can be shared, it is just some people choose not to. I won't wave a thank you to a driver that created space for me to merge into because I have used a space of road that I am entitled to and they must let a car that is in front of them in.

[SteveJH]

I don't care what car they are driving, if the road is merging from two lanes to one, i'll let one person in front of me between myself and the car in front. The next person who wants to merge can merge behind me. (Zipper effect?)

And to the idiots who I see in my mirror jump from merged lane into the merging lane to try jump ahead of the queue, well i'm definately not letting them in.

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by brendo83

You don't really seem to understand your own hourglass reference. Unless you increase the capacity at the restriction how does increasing capacity either side of it help the flow?

So you're at the supermarket fifth in line and theres another five people beside you in line at the next checkout, one of the checkout chicks shuts their checkouts. Everyone is nice and courteous, the first person in line at the still open checkout lets the first person in line at the closed checkout in behind them, and so on down the line, its not much inconvienience for each person to let one person in, but the person who was fifth in line at the still open checkout is now ninth in line and has to wait almost twice as long to get served. This is all not too bad though, its no ones fault the second register was closed and everyone is more or less being served in order of how long they had been waiting.

So now someone else has finished their shopping and looks at the long line at register one, looks at the closed sign on register two and decides he doesn't really want to wait in line so he waltzes up the line of the closed register past all the folks waiting patiently in line and asks the person in front it he could just squeeze in. Sound fair enough to you?

No no, you are the one who has misunderstood my hour glass reference. I mentioned it because some on this thread seem to think that two or more lanes merging into one needn't cause congestion if everyone followed a particular routine. Obviously this isn't the case - the bottleneck will always slow things down. My point is if the roads entire capacity is used at all times, traffic will flow faster.

As for your supermarket analogy, its not quite the same. If everyone merges immediately leaving a few lanes empty leading upto their termination, thats just like every shopper lining up in the one checkout line, leaving one or two staffed checkouts empty because they're going to close in 5 minutes.

I realise this concept is different to what most think, but that book in the link I posted earlier explained it all a lot better than I'm attempting to.

[SteveJH]

The volume of traffic will move the same speed no matter what method of merging is used. However if everyone does the same thing, it will take the same amount of time for everyone, rather then some people skipping the queue and making the others wait just a bit longer.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

No no, you are the one who has misunderstood my hour glass reference. I mentioned it because some on this thread seem to think that two or more lanes merging into one needn't cause congestion if everyone followed a particular routine. Obviously this isn't the case - the bottleneck will always slow things down. My point is if the roads entire capacity is used at all times, traffic will flow faster. .

As I mentioned before, if we have 3 packed lanes of traffic moving at 60km/h all maintaining a suitable gap, then the same amount of traffic shifted into two lanes would need to move at 2/3 of the speed, a theoretical 40km/h.

In practice we dont see this happening, not because its impossible to do or that the lanes aren't being used right up to the where the merging lane ends, but because of the queue jumping merging behaviour, where many go right to the end of the merging lane and are forced to slow way below the 40km/h and then force their way ahead of the cars they have just passed at near crawling speed.

While some may describe what I sometimes do as vigilante, positioning my car in both lanes, please note, I would only be doing this after traffic has ground to a crawl, anyone passing in the lane that should be merging here is only going to be adding to the bottleneck. Dont know about others but when Im standing in a queue and others just waltz on buy and try joing the queue ahead of me they can expect some curry from me!

If people maintained their position in the lane that is merging and indicated to merge when they should such an approach wouldnt be needed, but alas there are those on the road that dont believe in waiting their turn etc, I really dont see how anyone can justify that type of behaviour.

I also see the same behaviour at intersections, near crowded shopping centres etc. There is no parking within whatever distance of the intersection, but the parked cars resume soon after, blocking the passage of the cars on the left lane. If you intend on going straight through the intersection, then people understand that you need to keep out of the left lane, the left lane typically being left empty for those that need to turn left etc. So what happens, idiots that what to go straight ahead, see the left lane is relatively empty, pull up in that, then create a merging blockage on the other side of the intersection, antisocial queue jumping behaviour at work again.

I admit, I may sometimes pull up in the left lane myself if Im the only car and I see the vehicle in the right lane looks like it will take off slowly and I can easily "drag" it off and merge well in front of it, but obviously that approach is only going to create a bottleneck once we have more than one car there.

[prydey]

tranquilized - i'm with you as well. if both lanes are used, or all lanes are used, the bottleneck in whatever form, remains the same length. if we stop using one or more lanes, theoretically we are extending the length of the bottleneck.

no wonder there is so much carnage when so many people think that it is up to them to police others behaviour.

[MAD]

I often use the left lane at an intersection to get around traffic. If it doesnt impede anyone elses travels, does it really matter?
I have faked a breakdown to block someone trying to use an emergency lane to get to an offramp quicker. (they ended up going around me on the grass)
I will match my speed to the traffic when merging.
Depending on the circumstance I will also match my speed to others merging.
I will move right, where possible, to allow more room for merging.
I will slow down to create a gap when I see someone indicating to change lanes.
I get frustrated on the roads sometimes and sometimes I just cruise without a care.
I dont often need to use my indicator to ask someone to make space for me... I will take advantage of an earlier gap that will put me in the lane I need to be in prior to the last second.
There are certain locations where I have learned how the traffic behaves and will use it to my advantage without being forceful or cutting people off.
I make it a point to give a wave to anyone that does anything courteous for me on the road, and I expect the same in return.

I dont see shame or envy in any of those examples.
Cant wait to see the reactions to this.

[The Outsider]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Id rather take a 45 min freeway trip speeding at 2am then then a 1 hour trip obeying the low speed limits

i see what you did there

[The Outsider]

Originally Posted by sudszy

I admit, I may sometimes pull up in the left lane myself if Im the only car and I see the vehicle in the right lane looks like it will take off slowly and I can easily "drag" it off and merge well in front of it, but obviously that approach is only going to create a bottleneck once we have more than one car there.

its interesting what comes out once you start discussing things that are not speed camera related.

it now looks like your just an average guy trying to get somewhere just like the rest of us in as little amount of time as possible.

[Ben73]

I thought this thread was about letting people out of side streets in heavy traffic, not merging.

Anyway, Some people have no idea how to merge onto a freeway. They go slow to merge because they are brainwashed into think slow= safe all the time.
But in a 110 zone some idiot attempting to merge at 70 or 80 is not safe.
They either finally merge at 70 in front of someone doing 110 then cause the cars barreling down on them to hit the brakes hard or try to change lanes.
Or they getting to the end of the merging lane, then are forced to come to a complete stop and then try to merge from 0 into a 110 zone.

People like that are far more dangerous then someone doing 120 down the same bit of freeway in light traffic.

[brendo83]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

No no, you are the one who has misunderstood my hour glass reference. I mentioned it because some on this thread seem to think that two or more lanes merging into one needn't cause congestion if everyone followed a particular routine. Obviously this isn't the case - the bottleneck will always slow things down. My point is if the roads entire capacity is used at all times, traffic will flow faster.

As for your supermarket analogy, its not quite the same. If everyone merges immediately leaving a few lanes empty leading upto their termination, thats just like every shopper lining up in the one checkout line, leaving one or two staffed checkouts empty because they're going to close in 5 minutes.

I realise this concept is different to what most think, but that book in the link I posted earlier explained it all a lot better than I'm attempting to.

The part of your hourglass example that you still do not understand is that regardless of the efficiency of the road leading up to the restriction, the restriction can only process so many cars. It doesn't matter how quickly you get cars up to the restriction point, if the open lane is at maximum capacity it cannot be made to flow any faster.

Where you can get efficiency gains is if the continuing lane is not running at full capacity and has large gaps, filling these gaps with cars from the terminating lane will improve overall efficiency. However when traffic in the continuing lane is crawling bumper to bumper there are no gaps thus no efficiency gains to be had so there is zero benefit to overall traffic flow by late merging. In this scenario anyone who zips up the terminating lane then merges in is simply helping themselves and no-one else.

You've misunderstood the checkout scenario. The checkout represents the point at which the road terminates, the line leading up to the closed checkout represents the lane leading up to the point where it terminates.
The closed checkout can process 0 customers, so the line leading up to it can likewise process 0 customers. By saying the checkout is still open for another 5 mins, is the same as saying the lane has not closed yet, but will close in five minutes. This is not correct, the lane is always closed at that point. Don't confuse time and distance here, just because the lane is still accessible for another 1km, and that 1km takes you 5 mins, doesn't mean the entire lane is still open, its aways closed at its termination point and can never flow cars.

[SteveJH]

It also doesnt matter (on the 'in' side of the bottleneck) if the restriction is 1km long or 10km long, because in both cases the traffic will be travelling at the same speed.

Oh, and 3 lanes --> 2 lanes. To maintain the same rate of traffic flow, traffic would need to travel at 3/2 times the speed. For example 150km/h instead of 100km/h. But since the restriction is normally a small town with a 50km/h or 60km/h speed limit.......

[geckoGT]

This lane merging scenario is one that I used to see daily on my trip to work and it is one that annoys the crap out of me. That was when I started work at 7 am so traffic was starting to get fairly heavy, luckily I now start work at 6 am so I am through before it gets heavy. To give you an idea, as a result of 3 merge areas and the general increase in traffic, the 35 minute trip for a 6 am start takes just over an hour for a 7 am start.

The worst section for this is on the Logan Motorway, westbound near the Gateway Motorway merge point. On the approach the Logan motorway is 3 lanes and traffic flows well at about 100 km/h (it is a 100 zone). The left lane then becomes the exit lane for the Gateway motorway (north bound) on ramp, the middle lane splits to the Gateway and also continues along the Logan. The Logan continues in a 2 lane section for about 300m and then the left lane merges into the right as you come up to the Gateway (south bound) on ramp onto the Logan continuing westbound. It is a crap design road, there is never enough traffic off the Gateway to warrant 2 lanes onto the Logan and every time I have been along the Logan (west bound), the traffic off the Gateway (south bound) is a comparative trickle compared to what is on the Logan through the merge point at any given time.

Now what happens on this section of road is every morning traffic banks up as everyone has to move to 1 lane to get through that bottle neck, as you expect it would. The annoying part is everyone knows it slows down there and everyone knows that only the right lane continues through. The courteous drivers know the merge point is ahead and start merging to the right lane as early as possible while traffic is still flowing, allowing for a easy coordination of speed and seamless merge. The rude and obnoxious drivers are those that are fully aware of the merge, stay in the left lane and drive past other cars at an increased speed to get ahead. Then when they get to the end of the terminating lane they have to virtually (often actually) stop and push their way into traffic, forcing all those that did the right thing to stop and let them in. Yes that person got ahead, often on this stretch of road by 300-400 m, but they have just made 300 cars wait 10 seconds more doing it. Once 50 cars have done the same leap to the front, the courteous drivers now have huge amounts of time added to their trip and the right lane is crawling along at walking pace.

I often sit there, crawling along at slower than walking pace, meanwhile watching the impatient ones flying down the left lane at 60 km/h+ and then watch them expect others to stop and let them in, therefore forcing the whole right lane to stop, yet again. It is a simple question of mathematics, if the posted speed limit is 100 km/h, the road is 2 lanes and it drops down to 1 lane, it takes twice as long to get the same volume of traffic through the bottle neck. That means the average speed of traffic that can flow through that bottle neck is 50 km/h. If people used consideration for all other road users and merged early all cars would be in the correct lane early and traveling at 50 km/h through the bottle neck. Each selfish prat that thinks their life is so important and travels down the left lane at 60 km/h and then pushes into the right lane at the last moment, slows the right lane by 10 km/h. If there are 2 selfish prats, that is a 20 km/h slowing, 3 prats equals 30 km/h and so forth.

So why does it not work that both lanes can keep flowing at 100 km/h and then merge in the last 50m and flow through at 50 km/h? In theory it should but is it doesn't because it is more difficult to merge at a lower speed, the lower the speed the longer it takes. That and the fact that there is always some selfish prat that will pass a car on the left to get one car length ahead, forcing the right lane to stop and let them in.

If everyone used some common sense, courtesy and fore thought and merged to the continuing lane as early as possible, yes you will still go through the bottle neck at a reduced 50 km/h but all the traffic will go through at the same speed. That is better than what we have now where those selfish prats get through with an average speed of 60 km/h but they make everyone else that has done the right thing wait for them. Simple mathematics, the faster they go past in the left lane, the more advantage they get, the more they slow everyone else down.

Personally, I am sick and tired of watching cars drive down the left lane, knowing the lane ends and actually drive past perfectly good gaps in the right lane that they could have merged into. Just so they can get to the end of the terminating lane and force everyone else to stop and let them in. If they had of taken that earlier opportunity to merge, we would have all had the pleasure to keep rolling along but no, because they are so important I now have to sit and wait.

Before anyone says that not everyone knows the lane terminates, that is true a minority would not and I am prepared to cut them some slack but I am sure they can read the merge sign 300 m before the merge. Also why is it that after sitting through this bottleneck so many days a week over the last 5 years, I have noticed it is often the same cars that do the leap to the front of the line, do they have the memory retention of a gold fish and forget that the left lane ends?

As you may have guessed, I have had many hours to sit in the right lane and think about this. Why do I not just do as others do and take the advantage of the left lane? Because I believe in treating others in a manner I would appreciate being treated, therefore I merge early and try to keep traffic flowing. Perhaps one day all the planets will align, gold will be found at the end of rainbows, the world will fall into a state of peace and courtesy will end up contagious. Until then, I will just sit in the right lane, waiting for the motoring dignitaries that consider themselves too important to wait and have to pass on the left, at the disadvantage to us poor motoring commoners.

Do I let these motoring dignitaries in? Mostly yes I do, unless I have sat in stop start traffic for 30 mins and am right near the left lane end, having watched said dignitary speed past 50 cars in my left mirror. If that is the case, he can wait a bit as far as I am concerned, everyone else has (particularly if said dignitary is a B Double).

For all you that consider it ok to drive past all that slow right lane traffic to the end of the lane and then merge in, 300 m after the merge right sign, consider it for what that act really is, overtaking on the left. A few of the same people that have said it is ok to do it, I have also seen them get upset about people overtaking in left lanes in other discussions. Passing on the left is considered poor driving all over the world (or right depending on what side of the road you drive on). What makes this situation any different?

[buddha]

Originally Posted by MAD

I often use the left lane at an intersection to get around traffic. If it doesnt impede anyone elses travels, does it really matter?
I have faked a breakdown to block someone trying to use an emergency lane to get to an offramp quicker. (they ended up going around me on the grass)
I will match my speed to the traffic when merging.
Depending on the circumstance I will also match my speed to others merging.
I will move right, where possible, to allow more room for merging.
I will slow down to create a gap when I see someone indicating to change lanes.
I get frustrated on the roads sometimes and sometimes I just cruise without a care.
I dont often need to use my indicator to ask someone to make space for me... I will take advantage of an earlier gap that will put me in the lane I need to be in prior to the last second.
There are certain locations where I have learned how the traffic behaves and will use it to my advantage without being forceful or cutting people off.
I make it a point to give a wave to anyone that does anything courteous for me on the road, and I expect the same in return.

I dont see shame or envy in any of those examples.
Cant wait to see the reactions to this.

I have to give a big thumbs up to this post ... it covers most attitudes that we like to see on the road.

Personally, I think all road users need to work as a team, so we call get to our destinations happy and safe.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by MAD

I often use the left lane at an intersection to get around traffic. If it doesnt impede anyone elses travels, does it really matter?
I have faked a breakdown to block someone trying to use an emergency lane to get to an offramp quicker. (they ended up going around me on the grass)
I will match my speed to the traffic when merging.
Depending on the circumstance I will also match my speed to others merging.
I will move right, where possible, to allow more room for merging.
I will slow down to create a gap when I see someone indicating to change lanes.
I get frustrated on the roads sometimes and sometimes I just cruise without a care.
I dont often need to use my indicator to ask someone to make space for me... I will take advantage of an earlier gap that will put me in the lane I need to be in prior to the last second.
There are certain locations where I have learned how the traffic behaves and will use it to my advantage without being forceful or cutting people off.
I make it a point to give a wave to anyone that does anything courteous for me on the road, and I expect the same in return.
I dont see shame or envy in any of those examples.
Cant wait to see the reactions to this.

MAD. Terrific post on all counts/points. I do / have done all the above, with the exception of the fake breakdown!