Merging on a Highway

[amylevan]

Engineer here - please, for the love of god, zipper merge.

It’s how that construction taper is DESIGNED to work. The merge point is not some random location, it’s designed. The merge ahead sign 1/2 mile ahead is to inform you that you are going to merge “ahead” so that you aren’t cluelessly barreling into a lane closure at 70 mph. It does not mean you must merge now.

It has nothing to do with being polite or someone else being an a$$. To put it in Disney-speak - use all the available space!

 

[gmi3804]

The zipper situation when a lane ends or construction. When the sign a half mile back tells you to merge due to lane closures, those that follow the rules tend to do so. So, when they are waiting in that line and watching others who don't merge right away and they get ahead of them, they get irritated. If they want you to zipper up ahead, why have the signs a mile back telling you to merge to the left? And yes, they have the signs telling you to move over about a mile back. You are taking your chances here as a lot of people will not let you in if they've been waiting a long time.

The signs don't tell you to MERGE NOW. They tell you a lane is going to be closed up ahead, so you have notice that you might have to slow down. The rule is to zipper; it's not a debate. So the ones who line up are the ones who are NOT following the rules AND they're the ones getting mad when others do.

Engineer here - please, for the love of god, zipper merge.

It’s how that construction taper is DESIGNED to work. The merge point is not some random location, it’s designed. The merge ahead sign 1/2 mile ahead is to inform you that you are going to merge “ahead” so that you aren’t cluelessly barreling into a lane closure at 70 mph. It does not mean you must merge now.

It has nothing to do with being polite or someone else being an a$$. To put it in Disney-speak - use all the available space!

Exactly.

 

[sam_gordon]

A mile at 70 mph is 51 seconds.

I am not so sure that there is time to safely merge twice in 51 seconds in most traffic situations.

Good lord, how long does it take you change lanes? Driving home last night, thinking about this thread, I tried it. Less than 5 seconds to move from one lane into another.

If I was the OP in the situation as described, assuming the lane to the left of me is clear, I see a car entering the highway and will at least be close to wanting to merge as I'm getting to the same spot. I check the left lane, turn on my blinker, and move over.

The other car merges onto the right lane. Are they going faster then me? If so, when they've gotten far enough ahead that it's safe, I put on my blinker, check traffic, and move back to the right lane. Are they going slower than me? If so, when I've gone past them enough, I put on my blinker, check traffic, and move back to the right lane. I can adjust my speed to either get in front of them or behind them safely in probably ~1/4 mile.

 

[kdonnel]

Good lord, how long does it take you change lanes? Driving home last night, thinking about this thread, I tried it. Less than 5 seconds to move from one lane into another.

If I was the OP in the situation as described, assuming the lane to the left of me is clear, I see a car entering the highway and will at least be close to wanting to merge as I'm getting to the same spot. I check the left lane, turn on my blinker, and move over.

The other car merges onto the right lane. Are they going faster then me? If so, when they've gotten far enough ahead that it's safe, I put on my blinker, check traffic, and move back to the right lane. Are they going slower than me? If so, when I've gone past them enough, I put on my blinker, check traffic, and move back to the right lane. I can adjust my speed to either get in front of them or behind them safely in probably ~1/4 mile.

That 51 seconds is probably close or past the limit for a less aggressive driver.

Around here the HOT lanes have local exits a minimum of one mile prior to the exits. Generally when having to cross 3 lanes of traffic to exit, the traffic is either nearly stopped or going 80+ MPH. In the cases where traffic is stopped there is never a problem. In the cases where traffic is moving 80+ MPH it can be challenging to merge two or three times and make the exit.

 

[sam_gordon]

That 51 seconds is probably close or past the limit for a less aggressive driver.

Around here the HOT lanes have local exits a minimum of one mile prior to the exits. Generally when having to cross 3 lanes of traffic to exit, the traffic is either nearly stopped or going 80+ MPH. In the cases where traffic is stopped there is never a problem. In the cases where traffic is moving 80+ MPH it can be challenging to merge two or three times and make the exit.

But now you're talking about crossing THREE lanes of traffic. You're changing the scenario. Yes, if I was in a HOT/HOV and had to cross three lanes of traffic to get to an exit, I'd want at least a mile to do so (unless travelling in the middle of the night with limited to no other traffic in the other lanes, which would mean I wouldn't need to be in the HOV lane to begin with).

If you're in the right hand lane, let's say doing 80MPH. You come upon a car in the same lane doing 70MPH. You're a mile from your exit, and there is no traffic in the left lane, and no one in front of the slower car. Do you slow down to the speed of that car and wait for your exit to come up or do you pass them?

Assuming little to no traffic, I would think only the most cautious of drivers would slow down and wait.

 

[DLgal]

Technically you had the right of way.

That said, it is the duty of ALL drivers on the road to drive in a way that avoids collisions. That is the #1 thing hammered over and over in (at least) the California driver's handbook. I have a new driver, so what I taught him is the same thing I practice on freeways: if you are in the right lane, YOU have to pay attention to the people trying to merge and adjust your speed accordingly (speed up or slow down to create a gap), especially AT the merge point. While it is the other driver's responsibility to merge "safely", many on ramps have metered lights which essentially force cars onto the ramp, even during heavy traffic. In those instances, the drivers already on the freeway have to slow down and allow the zipper merge pattern to happen.

It is a case where there is no true right of way, but rather both parties have a responsibility to make the merge happen safely. I often have to slow down to let people merge when I am in the right lane. It happens a lot.

 

[goofyernmost]

So you think I should turn the wrong way (not the way I need to be going), and go the incorrect direction until the traffic thins out and the line headed opposite to me is starting to form, then turn around so I can get in the line at the beginning of it's formation in the direction I need to be going? That's not how anyone drives. Whether it's a road or a highway, there are entry and exit points all over the place, and you aren't expected to turn around and head the wrong way so you can 'get in line.'

Listen I don't give a damn if you drive over the top of the other cars. I am trying to prevent people from being in an accident that can be both costly in money and costly in life. Having the right of way does not protect you from having someone in your family getting the settlement shortly after your funeral. So if you want to stay in that lane because you have the right of way and you are going to exit shortly anyway, than by all means do so. I never said that there weren't times when you had to stay in the lane and I offered a suggestion of possible things one can do to protect their life and property. You be you and also read what I said not what you think I said.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

Listen I don't give a damn if you drive over the top of the other cars. I am trying to prevent people from being in an accident that can be both costly in money and costly in life. Having the right of way does not protect you from having someone in your family getting the settlement shortly after your funeral. So if you want to stay in that lane because you have the right of way and you are going to exit shortly anyway, than be all means do so. I never said that there weren't times when you had to stay in the lane and I offered a suggestion of possible things one can do to protect their life and property. You be you and also read what I said not what you think I said.

In the scenario I presented, you said I should just get in at the back of the line.

In the situation I described, I was turning right onto a road where a long line had already formed - left lane is fully blocked, right lane has intermittent gaps I can pull into, however, I know the right lane will end in a couple of miles. The line went well south of where I was already located, and I was turning to head north. I don't know of any driver in that case who would head in the opposite direction of where they needed to go in order to find the back of the line and then turn around at that point to join the line at its formation in order to head in their desired direction. If that's what you do, then I'm sorry, but you are wasting a lot of extra time and only adding to the traffic problem.

 

[goofyernmost]

I mean, it seems kind of strange to be offended by people that follow recommended traffic patterns - and which are set to become the legally required method. But, I think we have had threads about how people are so much more easily offended these days, so I guess it's not surprising. For me, that would raise my blood pressure too much to get upset by people driving as recommended.

Just because it isn't illegal does not mean it is the most efficient way of doing things.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

Just because it isn't illegal does not mean it is the most efficient way of doing things.

Not only is zipper merging not illegal, it's written into the law in several states, it's being discussed to become law in others, taught in many driver handbooks and classes, and traffic engineers that study these things for a living conclude that not only is it the most efficient method, but it's also the safest.


So if you really do want to prevent accidents ...

I am trying to prevent people from being in an accident that can be both costly in money and costly in life.

... you would zipper merge and would advocate for it as well.

 

[goofyernmost]

In the scenario I presented, you said I should just get in at the back of the line.

In the situation I described, I was turning right onto a road where a long line had already formed. The line went well south of where I was already located, and I was turning to head north. I don't know of any driver in that case who would head in the opposite direction of where they needed to go in order to find the back of the line and then turn around at that point to join the line at its formation in order to head in their desired direction. If that's what you do, then I'm sorry, but you are wasting a lot of extra time and only adding to the traffic problem.

Come on use common sense. I wouldn't advocate going backward if I thought that was what you were saying. I was talking in general about the proper etiquette when driving, It is code of proper social conduct that makes for happy outcomes for everyone. How many times have you seen the arrows and signs asking people to merge left or right and then watched a bunch of "I'm smarter than you" drivers zooming past to get up to where they have to merge and force their way in front of countless people? Zipper merger does not mean got to the top of the zipper and aggressively force others to let you in. It is common sense and common curtesy to be a team player and not a "I'm more important a person then everyone else on the highway".

 

[sam_gordon]

Come on use common sense. I wouldn't advocate going backward if I thought that was what you were saying. I was talking in general about the proper etiquette when driving, It is code of proper social conduct that makes for happy outcomes for everyone. How many times have you seen the arrows and signs asking people to merge left or right and then watched a bunch of "I'm smarter than you" drivers zooming past to get up to where they have to merge and force their way in front of countless people? Zipper merger does not mean got to the top of the zipper and aggressively force others to let you in. It is common sense and common curtesy to be a team player and not a "I'm more important a person then everyone else on the highway".

If *EVERYONE* properly did the zipper merge, there would be no need to "aggressively force others to let you in". The folks causing the problem with zipper merging are those "BLOCKING" others from taking a turn into the lane.

While I'm not against zipper merging, it's THOSE folks (the ones blocking the zipper) that I think doesn't make it flow as smooth as the studies would indicate.

 

[gmi3804]

Just because it isn't illegal does not mean it is the most efficient way of doing things.

True, but in this case it’s both legal AND the more efficient way of doing things.

 

[gmi3804]

How many times have you seen the arrows and signs asking people to merge left or right and then watched a bunch of "I'm smarter than you" drivers zooming past to get up to where they have to merge and force their way in front of countless people?

It’s not always the case, despite what you’ve heard about me, but in this case I am smarter than you, because I know the rule.

Well, OK, it is always the case.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

Come on use common sense. I wouldn't advocate going backward if I thought that was what you were saying.

I did think possibly it could have been a misunderstanding. It is hard to describe & envision specific traffic scenarios involving several lanes, but I wasn't really sure.

So in my case, agreeing I should turn right and not backtrack, knowing that the right lane is going to end in 2 miles and the left lane is fully blocked, is it best to:

A) Wait to turn much longer than I need to, hoping to find a gap where I can turn directly into the left lane where I know I need to be in 2 miles. This has the drawback that anyone sitting behind me who actually wants to turn into the right lane because they'll have another right turn between there and the merge point gets stuck while I wait for an opening.

B) Turn into the right lane once there is an opening, and then block the flow of right lane while I try and wedge myself into the left lane that's bumper to bumper crawling.

C) Turn into the right lane once there is an opening, and then proceed until the merge point where then I zipper merge in the recommended manner.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

Oooh, I just noticed even insurance companies recommend using zipper merging! And they've certainly made calculations about what is going to be the safest option.


https://www.statefarm.com/simple-in...make-your-traffic-merging-safer-on-busy-roads

"Road work or accidents may require lane closures. When you encounter lane closures, you may need to get into a new lane or allow others to get into your lane. Zipper merging is considered to be a best practice by the Federal Highway Administration and a safe way to handle lane closures. Zipper merging is when drivers use both lanes of traffic until they reach the defined merge area and then alternate into the open lane in a zipper fashion. A zipper merge reduces unexpected and dangerous lane switching as well as traffic backup."

 

[TwoMisfits]

I think what the OP did was perfectly acceptable, and what most people do. Having said that ...

There is actually some nuance here. In many states/provinces, the Highway Act/Code will state that the vehicle already on the highway has a "duty" to facilitate merging - meaning, for the most part, if you are in the right lane and see a car on the merge ramp you are supposed to, if safe, move out of that lane to allow the other car into that lane.

Of course there are circumstances where you are in the right lane on an empty highway but your exit is coming up so close that moving over doesn't make sense. Which is one of the reasons exit ramps ideally come before the on-ramp.

But I will say, in those circumstances, if someone is coming in quickly and I see we'll "meet" at some point, as I am exiting soon anyway I usually slow down to let them in.

This, 100%.

On a highway when folks are flying, taking the safest approach is always taking the right approach.

You lose nothing slowing down since you are already in a lane and no one is behind you. So, in this case, you always allow merging cars in b/c it's the safest approach. They have only so much room and time to get in.

 

[goofyernmost]

Oooh, I just noticed even insurance companies recommend using zipper merging! And they've certainly made calculations about what is going to be the safest option.


https://www.statefarm.com/simple-in...make-your-traffic-merging-safer-on-busy-roads

"Road work or accidents may require lane closures. When you encounter lane closures, you may need to get into a new lane or allow others to get into your lane. Zipper merging is considered to be a best practice by the Federal Highway Administration and a safe way to handle lane closures. Zipper merging is when drivers use both lanes of traffic until they reach the defined merge area and then alternate into the open lane in a zipper fashion. A zipper merge reduces unexpected and dangerous lane switching as well as traffic backup."

The problem is the zipper merging is not what you think it is. A zipper doesn't come together in one place. It is a continuous action from bottom to top. That is why they warn you more then a few miles back. A zipper that only connects at the top leaves everything not connected the rest of the way down and nothing can move. The defined merge area is from the first warning that one of the lanes will be closed up ahead.

If it is anything other than smooth transition than whoever made that recommendation never drove a vehicle. There will always be a few legit instantses when it can't be helped, however, to shoot up two miles of opportunities to merge to get ahead of everyone only to force traffic to stop so your ego can shine, is not how it is defined or intended.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

The problem is the zipper merging is not what you think it is. A zipper doesn't come together in one place. It is a continuous action from bottom to top. That is why they warn you more then a few miles back. A zipper that only connects at the top leaves everything not connected the rest of the way down and nothing can move. The defined merge area is from the first warning that one of the lanes will be closed up ahead.

If it is anything other than smooth transition than whoever made that recommendation never drove a vehicle. There will always be a few legit instantses when it can't be helped, however, to shoot up two miles of opportunities to merge to get ahead of everyone only to force traffic to stop so your ego can shine, is not how it is defined or intended.

I think you're being a bit more literal on the zipper part. The zipper is just meant to illustrate how cars should work on merging where each person takes turns on merging but the zipper part of the name doesn't mean to start from bottom and work to top. They don't want you to merge early and that would not be what a zipper merge is. You start the zipper merge at the merge point and the merge point isn't all the way back.

Respectfully you've got the zipper merge backwards and are describing the old way.

Here's how my state's DOT shows it





I know it's hard, I was a really long resister of it and can still find myself doing it just based on my past from time to time but if you actually had 2 miles of warning for a lane closure and you're told to use the zipper merge you should wait and NOT merge early

 

[SirDuff]

The problem is the zipper merging is not what you think it is. A zipper doesn't come together in one place. It is a continuous action from bottom to top. That is why they warn you more then a few miles back. A zipper that only connects at the top leaves everything not connected the rest of the way down and nothing can move. The defined merge area is from the first warning that one of the lanes will be closed up ahead.

If it is anything other than smooth transition than whoever made that recommendation never drove a vehicle. There will always be a few legit instantses when it can't be helped, however, to shoot up two miles of opportunities to merge to get ahead of everyone only to force traffic to stop so your ego can shine, is not how it is defined or intended.

But a zipper comes together at only one place at a specific time. To keep using your literal example, you'd be trying to join teeth at the top of the zipper before the teeth at the bottom are joined.

I mean, you can argue all you want and tell us how your actions are saving everyone from accidents, but you're just wrong. The zipper is the correct and legal way to merge when a lane is closing.