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.
What really annoys me is when signs are posted that one lane will be closed ahead. Usually starts at 1 mile ahead, 1000 ft ahead, 500 ft ahead, etc.
People start merging over right at 1 mile ahead while there is still 1 mile of real estate left for them to safely proceed. It would ease congestion if everyone in the merging lane would just keep in their lane until their lane actually ends and then they can start merging alternating between cars in the other lane.
What really annoys me is when signs are posted that one lane will be closed ahead. Usually starts at 1 mile ahead, 1000 ft ahead, 500 ft ahead, etc.
People start merging over right at 1 mile ahead while there is still 1 mile of real estate left for them to safely proceed. It would ease congestion if everyone in the merging lane would just keep in their lane until their lane actually ends and then they can start merging alternating between cars in the other lane.
You can do it either way, but keep in mind that if you wait until the last moment there are a lot of people who won't let you in, hence the congestion. If you merge early, then you just go with the flow of traffic. I let in one person, but I don't feel the need to keep letting in people, since they chose to stay in their lane despite warning signs.
You can do it either way, but keep in mind that if you wait until the last moment there are a lot of people who won't let you in, hence the congestion. If you merge early, then you just go with the flow of traffic. I let in one person, but I don't feel the need to keep letting in people, since they chose to stay in their lane despite warning signs.
Yes, people merge early for fear of wrath from others in the non-merging lanes. It's like you took their first born. But it would help traffic flow if they waited until the end and alternated merges.
That's actually false. If you drive on a highway, you'll notice that signs demarcate that a merging on-ramp is upcoming and all ramps are landscaped so that people can clearly see that cars are oncoming and how fast they are going. The only reason you're having so much trouble with it is because you're too self-absorbed and self-righteous to care.
Many ramps are also coming off of cloverleafs, where you can't be going 70 mph and many ramps specifically say that you should be going 35 mph. Keep trying, though. I'm definitely gaining respect for you.
I can name, off the top of my head, at least a dozen on-ramps in the San Francisco Bay Area that are not straight enough, for long enough, to support merges over about 35 mph. It is dangerous.. and yet hundreds of thousands of people a day cope with them without incident.
Yes, people merge early for fear of wrath from others in the non-merging lanes. It's like you took their first born. But it would help traffic flow if they waited until the end and alternated merges.
I don't know if it would or not, since everyone has to pass through that choke point regardless. But I also know that expecting to be let in is a hit or miss thing. When people merge, I let in one person, but it's not going to be the situation where car after car whizzes up and I have to stay still and keep letting them in. That's not fair to me OR the people behind me. Realistically, the reason they stayed in their lane is because it was going faster, but the reason it's going faster is because everyone else got out of that lane in anticipation. So I don't really buy the "it's the people who don't let me in" argument in that case. It's quite different from a merging on-ramp on a highway.
I can name, off the top of my head, at least a dozen on-ramps in the San Francisco Bay Area that are not straight enough, for long enough, to support merges over about 35 mph. It is dangerous.. and yet hundreds of thousands of people a day cope with them without incident.
Yeah, I'm not sure what the huge terror is of merging onto a highway at 60 mph is. I mean, if that strikes terror into your heart, maybe you should drive on local roads or something. I don't think I've ever merged onto a highway at 70 mph. I routinely merge onto highways at 45 mph and somehow I've never caused or been a part of a flaming pileup. I think the OP is either a) an aggressive driver who thinks everyone needs to get out of his way or b) an overly timid driver, but that's unlikely if he feels he needs to be going at 70 mph.
Almost every freeway interchange in the Twin Cities is a cloverleaf, and it is not difficult to get up to highway speed.
Yes you have to get from 30 mph to 60 mph, but most people don't take advantage of the merge lane for some odd reason. they just jump right into traffic.
Almost every freeway interchange in the Twin Cities is a cloverleaf, and it is not difficult to get up to highway speed.
Yes you have to get from 30 mph to 60 mph, but most people don't take advantage of the merge lane for some odd reason. they just jump right into traffic.
60?? Don't you know you're endangering peoples' lives??!?!
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.
