IMHO the zipper merge is appropriate when there is an actual merger of lanes, i.e. two lanes going to the same destination that merge to become one lane. It’s not appropriate when there are two lanes that split, each going to a different destination - in that situation you’re usually being an ass if you rush up to the splitting point and then force your way in.
In the special case the OP presents, though, it sounds like they’re doing the best they can in that situation.
I’m usually waiting in lane E.
I’m voting for option 3 (use another exit), which is what I do when I’m in lane C or D.
I understand the zipper model, but I don’t believe that the people who have been cutting me off for 20 years were doing it because they knew it would be enshrined as an optimal solution in 2014.
Around here, zipper merges are standard practice and you don’t get people cutting to the front, because both lanes fill up equally.
The problem with the OP’s option 2 is that people in lane E are just starting to speed up, and they have to brake again because someone is cutting in. That seems riskier to me. But if people won’t let him in earlier, then that is their own fault. I would expect to be able to drive slowly in lane D with an indicator on and someone would let me in.
I don’t have that exact situation here to compare with, but I do have something similar, and here, Lane E will let you cut in at the point of merger. Down the road a bit, they are more likely to box me out, because they think I’m just trying to cut in front.
In your exact situation, what I would do is (1) try to merge into E at the point of merger, (2) drive down lane D at full speed, looking for an entry point, (3) try to cut in at the last moment if possible, and (4) go on to the next exit with good grace.
I would feel guilty about (3), but I’d do it anyway. What I wouldn’t do is drive down lane D slowly. I’ve had an unreasonable dislike to blocking traffic since I was a young man: I just hate doing it. I hate hate hate having cars line up behind me. It makes me feel like a failure as a person.
Of course, after I’d tried it a few times, I’d probably change to doing the same as whatever everyone else did.
I suppose the option that will result in less middle-finger wagging and other confrontational behavior is taking another exit, but I sympathize with anyone stuck in this situation due to bad highway design.
We have an city multilane loop “interstate” where many of the exit lanes cross merge lanes onto the highway, so you have to keep an eagle eye out for cars entering at speed, at the same time as you’re trying to exit.
The person(s) who devised this system to save money should be drawn and quartered, then admonished severely.
That sounds terrible, I hate situations like that. OP, sounds like even if you look like a dick you are causing the least traffic disruption.
Makes me really appreciate commuting on a rural 2-lane road.
Like I said, option 3 adds about half an hour to my commute. That seems like an unreasonable solution
As one of the lane E drivers that you’re regularly upsetting (general “you”) I really needed to read this. I can easily say the worst part of my day is the last 1/2 mile of my morning drive when the cars are all backed up in the far right lane waiting to get into our office park and inevitably a stream of cars comes cruising up with their turn signals on trying to cut in. I never considered the people that might have been on the main road before the end lane starts. I think I’ll *try *to be a little more charitable, if only to relieve my own stress, not to mention my clutch.
Never heard of this “zip merging” that some of you have been mentioning but I don’t believe for a minute that anyone does it with any other intention but to cut ahead.
If the roads hadn’t joined, and lanes A - E went in parallel for miles, then someone choosing not to wait in E and trying to cut in deserves to go to the next exit. But you couldn’t get to the end of the E line no matter what you did. If I were in E I’d let you in.
[Duplicate post.]
For everyone complaining that zipper mergers are really just doing it to cut in line and not because it is the most efficient, I have two points. One, I avoid zipper merging because it pisses people off, but it’s been obvious to me since I started driving that it would be more efficient than early merging. It just makes sense that you want to use both lanes as far as possible. Two, what different does it make what their motivation is, as long as they’re making the whole system move more quickly? Do you really want them to slow everyone down just to ensure they don’t get somewhere before you? It’s the opposite of people who slow down to let on-ramps merge, or who wave people ahead at four-way stops: their motivation is pure, but they end up making things more dangerous and less efficient for everybody.