The idea of looking before you proceed is very sound. The implication that you should wait until the light turns green to start looking is very bad. You should be alert to the state of traffic and of the light well in advance of it changing, so when it does you know whether or not it’s safe to immediately move.
That’s how merging is supposed to work anyway. The car you’ve been driving alongside for the past mile…you get in front of him. He shouldn’t have to let anybody else get in front of him and once you’ve changed lanes, you should have to let anybody get in front of you. It should work like a zipper.
Unfortunately, people want to slow down when the gap between cars gets shorter (because of the merge), so you still end up with stopped bumper to bumper traffic anyway.
I do like the idea of neither lane ends though. It works that way coming out of the tolls on the Greater New Orleans Bridge, and there’s no problem with it.
Weird. I had to do the thing where you go to “driver school” when you get a ticket, and the Sheriff teaching the class told us several things people commonly believe about traffic rules, which are not actually laws. This was in California (Irvine, to be exact) and one of the myths he mentioned was the changing lanes thing. He told us, in no uncertain terms, that changing lanes in an intersection is just fine.
So I’ve been doing it ever since! Uh oh!
Other things he told us: It’s okay to drive without shoes, it’s okay to cut through a parking lot, it’s okay to walk across in the middle of the street as long as there aren’t traffic signals on both sides of the segment you’re walking across, and there were a couple of others that have slipped my mind. Now I’m worried!
IME, if you’re pulled over for speeding, look the officer in the face, say, “I’m sorry; I was late for XXXX and I should probably be more careful.” I’ve tried all sorts of reactions, and this one is the only one that’s resulted in not getting a ticket. The “I’m sorry” seriously lowers the energy level, the “late for XXXX” means you were just impatient, not reckless or drunk, and saying “probably” gives him a chance to correct you. Note that this method involves telling a police officer that you’ve just broken the law, and I am not a lawyer. But it’s worked three times out of four for me.
YMMV. (Note: Not hot, not a woman, not blonde)
According to a traffic reporter that I once spoke to, you are absolutely correct. He, in turn, got his information from some traffic engineers.
It’s not hard to see why you’re correct. If you let traffic back up needlessly, then it can speed into previous intersections, thereby aggravating traffic conditions elsewhere. In contrast, I’ve seen how well the traffic can flow when people occupy both lanes up until near the merge point. It’s a thing of beauty, I tell ya.
From a review of a book I read last year:
http://www.peterfeddo.com/content/are-you-early-merger-or-late-merger-review-book-traffic
(Interior bolding mine)
This tip and the other one like it really bothers me…
I’d never think of shifting into neutral, it doesn’t make you stop faster…leaving the car in gear (foot off the gas!) makes you stop faster. It’s called engine braking (the closed throttle plate in an idling gas engine works great for this, and no, I don’t mean a semi type Jake brake, any gas engine will do this).
It is especially useful in snow/ice…where if you’re too hard on the brakes the wheels can lock up and you’ll skid with no control (no ABS of course). Letting the engine/pumping drag slow you down is sometimes the best way.
I also know that pulling a heavy load down hill…and popping it into neutral would be a good way to overload/overheat brakes and get KILLED.
As noted above, when signs specifically call for this procedure, drivers seem to have little trouble implementing it.
I think it would make a difference if you’re in an automatic in drive or in a standard. In drive, when you let off the gas (normally, on a flat), you don’t decelerate very fast - at least, not like you would if you down shifted in a standard. Saying that, I don’t get how saying that leaving it in drive in an automatic will help slow you down when it’s not decelerating you at a quick rate.
I do see the value in downshifting in a standard, and I do do this on dry roads.
And also, I don’t see myself having the presence of mind in an emergency to put the vehicle in neutral. My husband does it in bad weather (snow/ice) coming to a regular stop though.
Here you go. The lane markings are basically nonexistent, but you can see the turn arrows above the street.
Would you do me a favor and please go read my follow-up post in its entirety? Most of the people who are supposedly “disagreeing” with me don’t seem to grok what I am saying. I am not advocating that everyone merge early and leave an empty lane for 2 miles.
I am advocating that IF you use the eliminated lane, you do not use it to speed around the cars in the continuing lane. You match your speed to the people in the continuing lane and merge, taking turns. all it takes, really, is a few people (spaced out through the traffic) to do this, since it effectively enforces it on everyone, and traffic smooths out.
If you see someone doing this (especially if it’s me) don’t try to cut around me on the shoulder, because I’m likely to move over further, forcing you into the pylons, the grass, or – in my ultimate fantasy – off a cliff plummeting to your death.
Again, as I responded to that link, the actual LAW doesn’t not preclude changing lanes in an intersection. That doesn’t mean it’s necessarily safe to do, but it’s not illegal in and of itself.
The problem probably started when you objected to me. The problem with doing as you suggest is that here, 90+% of drivers are early mergers, and don’t understand how a zipper merge works. I am doing the responsible thing and driving at a reasonable speed past all these early mergers until one of them gets all cranky about it and decides to cut me off. And it sounds like you’d do that, too.
Indeed I would. If 90% of the people are early mergers, it’s best for the other 10% to go with the accepted solution rather than try to force the optimal solution on them.
It may be slightly irrational, but people think of a freeway bottleneck where a line has formed in much the same way they think of the drive-thru at McDonald’s. By going around everyone, you give the impression that you’re better than them and don’t have to wait in the line that everyone else formed. In essence, proclaiming yourself Emperor of the World.
Is this where the old bit about your all your friends jumping off a cliff fits in?
Crazyjoe, it’s this type of thinking that causes the problems. The early-mergers think that the late-mergers are trying to cheat the system, and the late-mergers think that the early-mergers are idiots who jam up the roads and fail to optimally use the lane that’s ending.
I actually just finished reading the book Traffic that was referenced earlier, and this topic is discussed extensively.
The problem with the early mergers is that instead of everyone consistently merging at one location, you have lots of early mergers moving over out of the lane that’s ending at random points, forcing the people in the adjacent lane to repeatedly brake.
For traffic that is moving relatively slowly (<25 mph), it is far more efficient for everyone and the whole flow of traffic if everyone consistently merged at the same point. Signs that say “USE BOTH LANES TO MERGE POINT” AND “MERGE HERE” accomplish this. If people cooperate, you alternate cars at the merge point and get a nice zipper effect. Note that this speeds up traffic flow for both lanes.
However, once the morning rush hour ends and the traffic speeds back to highway speeds, it is dangerous to have people merging over right as their lane ends at highway speeds (>50 mph). At that point, you’d prefer that people move over much earlier. So what you actually need are electronic signs that change the message depending on traffic flow and the speed of traffic.
Back to rush hour. If 90% of the drivers are merging early, way before the merge point, then the 90% of drivers are doing it wrong. They are actively slowing down the whole flow of traffic. The solution is to educate the public.
Personally, I feel the same way about early mergers as I do by the folks that block up the left lane of the highway when they are not actively passing anybody. I think they are the same self-righteous people, too:
Left-Lane Driver: “I’m going the speed limit, and nobody’s going to make me move.” :rolleyes:
Early-Merger: “The sign says that my lane is ending in two miles, so I’d better get over RIGHT NOW.” :rolleyes:
In reality, though, both left-lane drivers and early mergers dramatically slow down traffic and help create traffic jams.
I downshift in my manual transmission car to bleed speed all the time. I’ve been driving a stick for quite some time now, and my husband taught me something I hadn’t thought of just this winter - starting out on slippery conditions in second gear instead of first, so you have less torque and are less likely to spin your tires.
ETA: Forgot to say that engine braking to lose speed in slippery conditions works very nicely. Braking with tires is almost always slipperier than engine braking.
Robby, nothing you have said is news to me. I have repeatedly said the exact same shit no less than three times in this thread. The problem is that no one who zooms around the line is doing favors for anyone other than themselves, and, in fact, are actively harming the rest of the line.
Yes, if you have proper signage, things work much better, but if you don’t, it’s much better to go with the consensus on the road.
It’s exactly the opposite of the Left-Lane driver scenario you describe. In that case, the left lane driver is the anomaly, and is causing traffic disruption, while technically obeying the law. In the case of early-merging, the line-cutter is the anomaly, actively making traffic worse.
I was taught to downshift all the time, too. However…
Constant downshifting is harder on your clutch, as it starting up from second gear. Also, brake pad replacements are cheaper than clutch replacements.
Also, downshifting in very slippery (i.e. icy) conditions can put you into a spin, if you drive a rear-wheel drive car without a limited-slip differential. (Ask me how I know this. :eek:)