Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting. Are there laws on the books regarding this?
No. That is how the autobahn works which was part of the video in the OP. Most statutes do say keep right except to pass. Which if followed means if you aren't passing someone stay to the right. Not the second most left lane, not the middle lane, but the right lane.
No. That is how the autobahn works which was part of the video in the OP. Most statutes do say keep right except to pass. Which if followed means if you aren't passing someone stay to the right. Not the second most left lane, not the middle lane, but the right lane.
I wonder what the stats are on accidents in the right-most lane on multi-lane freeways with traffic constantly merging in. I know I try to avoid that lane just for that reason, as it seems much more unsafe than the next lane over.
I wonder what the stats are on accidents in the right-most lane on multi-lane freeways with traffic constantly merging in. I know I try to avoid that lane just for that reason, as it seems much more unsafe than the next lane over.
It may seem that way for you, individually, but as a whole, it is safest that the slowest cars stay in the right lane. Speed differentials are responsible for a lot of accidents. Leave the right lane wide open, and instead of people having to merge at 50 to 60 to get on the highway, they're going to have to merge with the people going 80 who didn't want to bother to go all the way to the left.
Something is off though. From their own example: Vehicle 1 was heading eastbound on a three lane highway, in lane 1. Vehicle 2, a bus, was parked in lane 1 further east, stopped after a previous collision. Vehicle 1 failed to reduce speed and struck Vehicle 2.
Maybe it is a locality issue, but what three lane highway doesn't have a shoulder? I am sure there are lots of accidents that happen due to vehicles being in the shoulder, and not properly, which is suspect is what the example above is about. The bus was in the shoulder which they called lane 1 and then got hit.
I drive in the right hand lane fairly often, but we have nice long merging lanes so it isn't an issue, especially because besides driving slower, most people in the right hand lane don't tailgate making it easier to merge with incoming vehicles.
Something is off though. From their own example: Vehicle 1 was heading eastbound on a three lane highway, in lane 1. Vehicle 2, a bus, was parked in lane 1 further east, stopped after a previous collision. Vehicle 1 failed to reduce speed and struck Vehicle 2.
Maybe it is a locality issue, but what three lane highway doesn't have a shoulder? I am sure there are lots of accidents that happen due to vehicles being in the shoulder, and not properly, which is suspect is what the example above is about. The bus was in the shoulder which they called lane 1 and then got hit.
I drive in the right hand lane fairly often, but we have nice long merging lanes so it isn't an issue, especially because besides driving slower, most people in the right hand lane don't tailgate making it easier to merge with incoming vehicles.
As far as I know, Lane 1 is the lane closest to the median. On a five lane highway, lane 1 is the left lane, lane 5 is the right lane, and lanes 2, 3, & 4 are the middle ones.
I wonder what the stats are on accidents in the right-most lane on multi-lane freeways with traffic constantly merging in. I know I try to avoid that lane just for that reason, as it seems much more unsafe than the next lane over.
I've always wondered this too! When driving the highway through a Metro area it seems like the far right is basically a "merge on/merge off" lane. If I am on the highway as "thru-traffic" I try to stay in the 2nd-most right hand lane.
I was taught (a bizillion years ago) that if someone is trying to merge onto the highway that you signal, look, change lanes as a courtesey to let the merging driver on. Since the right lane is my "comfort-zone" I typically would move back to it.
But on a 10+ lane freeway, the second I do that I see a sign saying "Right lane MUST exit ..." And then I have to change lanes again. That feels unsafe to me; I don't like feeling like I'm in a video game!
I've always wondered this too! When driving the highway through a Metro area it seems like the far right is basically a "merge on/merge off" lane. If I am on the highway as "thru-traffic" I try to stay in the 2nd-most right hand lane.
I was taught (a bizillion years ago) that if someone is trying to merge onto the highway that you signal, look, change lanes as a courtesey to let the merging driver on. Since the right lane is my "comfort-zone" I typically would move back to it.
But on a 10+ lane freeway, the second I do that I see a sign saying "Right lane MUST exit ..." And then I have to change lanes again. That feels unsafe to me; I don't like feeling like I'm in a video game!
That is interesting because I recently sat in on a drivers Ed class at my school and the kids were getting the "insurance" talk and the agent who was speaking said you should not move over for vehicles merging as it actually causes more accidents. I wish I had asked him how exactly as I don't really see how it would.
That is interesting because I recently sat in on a drivers Ed class at my school and the kids were getting the "insurance" talk and the agent who was speaking said you should not move over for vehicles merging as it actually causes more accidents. I wish I had asked him how exactly as I don't really see how it would.
It only causes accidents when people fail to give way to the people already in the other lane! Those can be avoided by looking and making sure it is safe before you change lanes.
Here in Maine, they make it obvious who has the right-of-way when merging by posting yield signs on all the on-ramps, and people still cut you off if you're in the right lane (usually trying to enter a 70 mile an hour highway at 30), so I would think it safer to move over if you can do so safely.
The video and research show that yours is the attitude that is killing people. You can ignore the video and research if you want, but I've yet to see you refute them with anything solid; you've just tried to justify your own lawlessness in not treating the passing lane as the passing lane.
I not one of those retort with facts people, i just state how i feel. And how i feel is that if im driving down the road and someone wants to pass me they can get in the right lane and pass me, because the speed limit is the same in both lanes.
The slower traffic sign is for people who can't attain the posted speed limit, not those who do not drive as fast as you want them to. People hauling stuff, driving on spares, cars with transmission or engine problems....thats what was traditionally meant by slower traffic and that is what i adhere to.
For me, the speed limit trumps everything else. Speed limit 65 or 70, keep right except to pass, but do not drive above the speed limit. I'll get over if i can but if i cant youll just have to cry and deal.
Obeying the law isnt a choice or at least it shouldnt be. Maybe if you didnt know thats one thing but to blatantly defy it then thats something else.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
