"Do the zipper merge" (Minnetonka, Edina: kindergarten, congested, metro)

[Kayekaye]

Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus

Wait, you went into an exit lane just to "merge" back into traffic near the end? I hope not -- that's certainly not the intent of the zipper merge!

There was no exit from the exit lane, the exit itself was closed but not the lane. Yup went into the exit lane and many followed me. If the DOT had intended no one use the exit lane it too would have been coned off.

The problem is that on 694 EB there is no sign telling you that 61 is closed until it is too late. There should be advanced warning that it is closed and we could have exited before, on 35E.

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

It's cheating and you know it.....you know the lane is an exit-only, so why can't you wait like everybody else? I explained to you what the zipper merge's intentions are and you're just making this up to justify cheating. It's no skin off my back personally but if you tried to cut in front of ME and I saw you dart into the exit lane and try to come back in front of me I'd be reluctant to "merge" with you.....and I think most people would! Nobody can control what you do on the road but just don't be surprised if people don't understand your logic for cutting in front of them. Just think, if everybody did that nobody would ever get anywhere -- they'd just be leapfrogging in front of one-another.

What you are doing is exiting the very lane you need to merge back into, and the zipper merge is intended to "zip" two lanes of traffic into one by allowing the blocked lane to merge in with the un-blocked lane.....assuming you are not already in that unblocked lane. But the key with the Zipper is that you don't have to merge WAY ahead of time because it actually slows down that process.

To me, it's the same thing as getting off a slow-moving freeway at a diamond-style ramp just to hop back on again on the other side of the street.....and that's not cool either.

[Kayekaye]

However that exit lane is also the entry lane for NB 61 so people are used to merges from that lane anyhow. Have you driven it? I don't think it was wrong at all. It's one of those duo lanes for exit and entry and merging. There is just no sense in waiting in a single lane from 35E to 61 when there is a lane open and not coned off. DOT would have coned it off it we were not to use it.

[northsub]

Originally Posted by Kayekaye

However that exit lane is also the entry lane for NB 61 so people are used to merges from that lane anyhow. Have you driven it? I don't think it was wrong at all. It's one of those duo lanes for exit and entry and merging. There is just no sense in waiting in a single lane from 35E to 61 when there is a lane open and not coned off. DOT would have coned it off it we were not to use it.

I have driven that merge and I think you are totally in the right here. I do think there's a problem with the zipper merge in that there are some cars that cut in early and lanes still alternate at the merge. The net effect of this is that the through lane goes slower than the merging lane. Every time a car merges early it is effectively letting 2 cars in a row go from the merging lane.

[Beenhere4ever]

The tricky part is the "cooperate" part. Zipper merge only works if Minnesota Nice prevails. Cars in the lane receiving the mergers have to make spaces for the other lane to merge. There's no law compelling that, and some people just aren't Minnesota Nice.

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

Originally Posted by Beenhere4ever

The tricky part is the "cooperate" part. Zipper merge only works if Minnesota Nice prevails. Cars in the lane receiving the mergers have to make spaces for the other lane to merge. There's no law compelling that, and some people just aren't Minnesota Nice.

I always let one person in if they aren't purposely cheating, and that would depend on my perspective. If I saw somebody pull out of the backed-up lane into a suredly closed lane just to "do the zipper merge", I wouldn't let them in most likely, and there would be an uncomfortable stare down. If there were two lanes of moving traffic that were both full of cars, and I was in the lane that was not being closed down, I'd let one person merge in front of me.....at the very end of the 2 open lanes.

It all comes down to the situation and the law, and also the interpretation of each.

[Ghengis]

Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus

I always let one person in if they aren't purposely cheating, and that would depend on my perspective. If I saw somebody pull out of the backed-up lane into a suredly closed lane just to "do the zipper merge", I wouldn't let them in most likely, and there would be an uncomfortable stare down. If there were two lanes of moving traffic that were both full of cars, and I was in the lane that was not being closed down, I'd let one person merge in front of me.....at the very end of the 2 open lanes.

It all comes down to the situation and the law, and also the interpretation of each.

funny! why would you choose to block someone who chose not to wait in the slow moving lane behind you and make a completely legal move into the faster moving lane and yet let someone from miles behind come up and do the same thing?

[Min-Chi-Cbus]

Originally Posted by Ghengis

funny! why would you choose to block someone who chose not to wait in the slow moving lane behind you and make a completely legal move into the faster moving lane and yet let someone from miles behind come up and do the same thing?

Because I wouldn't if the move was illegal/immoral, but would if it were. Did you read what I wrote or just jump to conclusions? If I see somebody "jump in line" when they shouldn't be I wouldn't let them in, not without some resistance.

It has to be a legal "Zipper merge".

[Ghengis]

Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus

Because I wouldn't if the move was illegal/immoral, but would if it were. Did you read what I wrote or just jump to conclusions? If I see somebody "jump in line" when they shouldn't be I wouldn't let them in, not without some resistance.

It has to be a legal "Zipper merge".

not illegal, just immoral...I get it.

[3700]

Immoral or just not "nice"?