4 ms·

To get people to respect the passing lane, I propose: Left-most lane on controlled access highways should be rear car, by default, has the right-of-way.

MuffinFlavored 7y ago
In my experience, this really only encourages "king of the road, get out of my way" behavior. Source: South Floridian driver who does felonious speeds in the left lane (typically in a speeding convoy, with everybody else doing the same speeds, if not higher)
- beerandt 7y ago
  It's never been tested, to my knowledge. To be clear, I'm not suggesting people tailgate and drive aggressively in the left lane. I'm literally suggesting cars in the left lane have to legally yield to overtaking traffic from behind, just as passing on a two lane highway requires yielding to oncoming traffic. And I would expect behavior improvement, if nothing else, on the fact that ambiguity is removed and time of conflict is reduced. >king of the road, get out of my way" behavior. I get that's not something people might want to "encourage" , but a certain amount of conflict and congestion is resolved by allowing the people who think they're king, be king in the left lane. If you don't want to go faster than the car behind you, you can be king in the right (or any other) lane. It might not feel right based on principle, but in a practical sense it solves a lot.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ldoughty 7y ago
If I'm passing at 5 over the limit, I'm still passing. I waited my turn. Not my fault I don't want to go 20+ over. I'll move back when the passed car is in my rear view. Oh, you really to ride my rear, and pay me on the right? Will Joe we have a problem because I'm happy merged into the right line and you're on my as, and now you're 3 feet from both me and the car were passing. That's what I got from this comment... Just forget encourages already aggressive driving. Of course, some people do not pass, and that is frustrating.
- gjs278 7y ago
  if you don’t want to go 20 over don’t even go in that lane
- scarejunba 7y ago
  Surely it's only polite to allow the faster guys past before you do your thing. It doesn't really matter to me generally because few things on the highway annoy me, but it's sort of habit for me to not be in the way. So even if I'm doing 10 over and there's a chap coming up doing 20 over, I let him go before I go. You don't have to do that, and I won't judge you for it. It just seems like a harmlessly nice thing to do for your fellow driver. And it's rare to be in a situation where it's reasonable for you to overtake at 5 mph more than the other car while there are +20s whizzing by so it doesn't seem like it's really something that needs defending.
- beerandt 7y ago
  It's not necessarily about who's turn it is, or what's "just". It's about driving rules that are crystal clear, that will end up maximizing traffic flow, clarifying r-o-w order, and minimizing time of conflict. >Not my fault I don't want to go 20+ over. No, but I think that people see it this way is part of the problem. It becomes a sort of moral game of chicken, with one side thinking one rule is more important, and vice versa. It shouldn't be debatable. Both sides should automatically know who has r-o-w without thinking, even if the rule is arbitrary. The entire system operates around this premise. And because speed is always going to be a personal sliding scale (maybe 5 over is ok but 20 isn't), the simplest, most practical, consistent resolution (whether "fair" or not) is to yield the lane to the passer behind you. Look at it this way: You wouldn't worry about momentary speed to pass someone on a two lane road, if you needed to. You'd focus on getting past and getting over before the oncoming traffic gets to you. It should be the same way on multi-lane highways, even if the traffic is overtaking instead of oncoming. That's why it's called the passing lane.
- sershe 7y ago
  There should be a very simple rule - if there's a car behind you in the left lane, no car ahead of you, and this situation persists for a bit, merge right. Make the /right/ choice - the pedal, or the lane ;)
imtringued 7y ago
When I see someone behind me I will switch to the right but sometimes I am too slow (=they are significantly above the speed limit) and the speeding idiots try to pass me on the right side even if it is illegal. When someone is going 200km/h on a 130km/h road you don't want to block their path by suddenly switching at the last moment. This type of regressive behavior is disgusting. When someone tries to pass I now have to be extra careful about switching lanes because they may pass me on the right. This leads to even slower switching which fuels even more passing on the right. Just follow the damn rules.
- beerandt 7y ago
  Not sure where you are, but in the US, the rule is to stay right in the first place. Not get over once someone is coming. This avoids all the problems you mention. It's just that people don't do it, and have little incentive to. Part of what I'm suggesting is that you should have to be ultra cautious anytime you're in the passing lane. Which is an incentive to quickly get out of it.

MuffinFlavored 7y ago

In my experience, this really only encourages "king of the road, get out of my way" behavior. Source: South Floridian driver who does felonious speeds in the left lane (typically in a speeding convoy, with everybody else doing the same speeds, if not higher)

beerandt 7y ago
It's never been tested, to my knowledge. To be clear, I'm not suggesting people tailgate and drive aggressively in the left lane. I'm literally suggesting cars in the left lane have to legally yield to overtaking traffic from behind, just as passing on a two lane highway requires yielding to oncoming traffic. And I would expect behavior improvement, if nothing else, on the fact that ambiguity is removed and time of conflict is reduced. >king of the road, get out of my way" behavior. I get that's not something people might want to "encourage" , but a certain amount of conflict and congestion is resolved by allowing the people who think they're king, be king in the left lane. If you don't want to go faster than the car behind you, you can be king in the right (or any other) lane. It might not feel right based on principle, but in a practical sense it solves a lot.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

ldoughty 7y ago

If I'm passing at 5 over the limit, I'm still passing. I waited my turn. Not my fault I don't want to go 20+ over. I'll move back when the passed car is in my rear view. Oh, you really to ride my rear, and pay me on the right? Will Joe we have a problem because I'm happy merged into the right line and you're on my as, and now you're 3 feet from both me and the car were passing. That's what I got from this comment... Just forget encourages already aggressive driving. Of course, some people do not pass, and that is frustrating.

gjs278 7y ago
if you don’t want to go 20 over don’t even go in that lane
scarejunba 7y ago
Surely it's only polite to allow the faster guys past before you do your thing. It doesn't really matter to me generally because few things on the highway annoy me, but it's sort of habit for me to not be in the way. So even if I'm doing 10 over and there's a chap coming up doing 20 over, I let him go before I go. You don't have to do that, and I won't judge you for it. It just seems like a harmlessly nice thing to do for your fellow driver. And it's rare to be in a situation where it's reasonable for you to overtake at 5 mph more than the other car while there are +20s whizzing by so it doesn't seem like it's really something that needs defending.
beerandt 7y ago
It's not necessarily about who's turn it is, or what's "just". It's about driving rules that are crystal clear, that will end up maximizing traffic flow, clarifying r-o-w order, and minimizing time of conflict. >Not my fault I don't want to go 20+ over. No, but I think that people see it this way is part of the problem. It becomes a sort of moral game of chicken, with one side thinking one rule is more important, and vice versa. It shouldn't be debatable. Both sides should automatically know who has r-o-w without thinking, even if the rule is arbitrary. The entire system operates around this premise. And because speed is always going to be a personal sliding scale (maybe 5 over is ok but 20 isn't), the simplest, most practical, consistent resolution (whether "fair" or not) is to yield the lane to the passer behind you. Look at it this way: You wouldn't worry about momentary speed to pass someone on a two lane road, if you needed to. You'd focus on getting past and getting over before the oncoming traffic gets to you. It should be the same way on multi-lane highways, even if the traffic is overtaking instead of oncoming. That's why it's called the passing lane.
sershe 7y ago
There should be a very simple rule - if there's a car behind you in the left lane, no car ahead of you, and this situation persists for a bit, merge right. Make the /right/ choice - the pedal, or the lane ;)

imtringued 7y ago

When I see someone behind me I will switch to the right but sometimes I am too slow (=they are significantly above the speed limit) and the speeding idiots try to pass me on the right side even if it is illegal. When someone is going 200km/h on a 130km/h road you don't want to block their path by suddenly switching at the last moment. This type of regressive behavior is disgusting. When someone tries to pass I now have to be extra careful about switching lanes because they may pass me on the right. This leads to even slower switching which fuels even more passing on the right. Just follow the damn rules.

beerandt 7y ago
Not sure where you are, but in the US, the rule is to stay right in the first place. Not get over once someone is coming. This avoids all the problems you mention. It's just that people don't do it, and have little incentive to. Part of what I'm suggesting is that you should have to be ultra cautious anytime you're in the passing lane. Which is an incentive to quickly get out of it.