Dealing with Road Rage: Coasting Up to Red Lights

[xxChrisxx]

Why on Earth would you cruise in an overtaking lane when not overtaking anyway? There is no logical reason for it, apart from being deliberately awkward. Just pull over one lane, you are still going the speed you want to go, but are allowing others the opportunity to pass you.

Your 'sucks to be you' attitude towards other road users is probably the worst attidude you can have. It shows a lack of respect towards other road users. Deliberately and KNOWINGLY sitting in an overtaking lane (where people are inevitably going over the speed limit) going slower than the traffic in that lane, is as obnoxious as the white van man (dont know if you have them over in the US) sitting right up your arse.

On a positive note I'm with you on the coasting red light thing though. There is absolutely nothing wrong with slowing down in a light is on red in the distance. You don't gain or lose time, and you are driving in a more economic fasion.

 

[mgb_phys]

Why on Earth would you cruise in an overtaking lane when not overtaking anyway?

It's a little different in the US, you can overtake on the inside(right) so there is no rule to move into the right lane after overtaking. There are rules (or at least recommendations) not to make unnecessary lane changes.
Also the right most lane generally goes off at each junction and rejoins as the on-ramp, so you need to keep out of it (US road signage is a mess) and generally you want to keep out of the lane immediately to the left of it as well in heavy traffic.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

On my way to work is I-295 which has three lanes in each direction. Once I get on the highway and up to speed, I turn on the cruise control. I don't like to turn it off if I don't have to. I get in the middle lane and cruise to work. Apparently, no one else uses cruise control. The right lane is not suitable for cruise control because there are cars getting on and off. The left lane is not suitable for me because I am not speeding and I prefer to stay out of the speeders' lane. When traffic builds up and slows down in the middle lane, I do move over to the left lane in order to pass. That's when the guy who had been ahead of me realizes that I am passing him and he speeds up. Now I am stranded in the left lane. I can't legally speed up to pass the guy and I can't slow down unless I get out of cruise control. So I just ride the left lane neck and neck with the newly awakened driver to my right who is edging ahead of me. I won't get back in the middle lane until I can do so without tailgating him. Now the driver behind me moves into the middle lane meaning that I can't get back in the middle lane until both cars clear me. More and more cars move out of the left lane into the middle lane which has now become the fast lane and I am trapped for hours and hours. Meaning a few minutes, it just feels like hours. It doesn't really matter, but it makes me nervous to be passed on the right.

 

[xxChrisxx]

It's a little different in the US, you can overtake on the inside(right) so there is no rule to move into the right lane after overtaking. There are rules (or at least recommendations) not to make unnecessary lane changes.
Also the right most lane generally goes off at each junction and rejoins as the on-ramp, so you need to keep out of it (US road signage is a mess) and generally you want to keep out of the lane immediately to the left of it as well in heavy traffic.

I see, well that makes a bit more sense then as by sitting on the outside lane you aren't blocking everything up. Sounds like a bloody complicated way of doing it though. I can see you having to be much more alert if you've got cars overtaking both ways. Like the example above.

 

[lisab]

I see, well that makes a bit more sense then as by sitting on the outside lane you aren't blocking everything up. Sounds like a bloody complicated way of doing it though. I can see you having to be much more alert if you've got cars overtaking both ways. Like the example above.

I don't think passing on either side is inherently more dangerous than only passing on the left (or right, for UK-style systems), *as long as it's customary*. One key to safe driving is to not do things that other drivers on the road aren't expecting.

I learned to drive in a "pass in any lane" place, so I'm well used to it, and know to scan all mirrors every few seconds when I'm on a multi-lane road (and always check blind spots on both sides when changing lanes).

I can imagine for a driver not used to it, it would seem hazardous.

 

[TurtleMeister]

On my way to work is I-295 which has three lanes in each direction. Once I get on the highway and up to speed, I turn on the cruise control. I don't like to turn it off if I don't have to. I get in the middle lane and cruise to work. Apparently, no one else uses cruise control. The right lane is not suitable for cruise control because there are cars getting on and off. The left lane is not suitable for me because I am not speeding and I prefer to stay out of the speeders' lane. When traffic builds up and slows down in the middle lane, I do move over to the left lane in order to pass. That's when the guy who had been ahead of me realizes that I am passing him and he speeds up. Now I am stranded in the left lane. I can't legally speed up to pass the guy and I can't slow down unless I get out of cruise control. So I just ride the left lane neck and neck with the newly awakened driver to my right who is edging ahead of me. I won't get back in the middle lane until I can do so without tailgating him. Now the driver behind me moves into the middle lane meaning that I can't get back in the middle lane until both cars clear me. More and more cars move out of the left lane into the middle lane which has now become the fast lane and I am trapped for hours and hours. Meaning a few minutes, it just feels like hours. It doesn't really matter, but it makes me nervous to be passed on the right.

I frequently drive I-95 along the east coast (including I-295) and what you describe is very common for me also. What makes it even more frustrating is when you're stuck in the left lane and Mr. Speedster comes up behind you and rides your bumper. After a while I will just give in and speed up, well over the speed limit, just to get back in the center lane. It really irks me when people drive on these roads without cruise control.

 

[mgb_phys]

I can see you having to be much more alert if you've got cars overtaking both ways.

Yes, but at least you expect it and it means the little old lady doing 50 in the middle lane doesn't block the entire motorway.

The main danger is people randomly changing lanes in traffic to get 1 car ahead or swooping across 4 lanes to get to an exit. If only they had indicators it would help.

 

[BobG]

I see, well that makes a bit more sense then as by sitting on the outside lane you aren't blocking everything up. Sounds like a bloody complicated way of doing it though. I can see you having to be much more alert if you've got cars overtaking both ways. Like the example above.

That's okay. Americans learn just about every aspect of driving.

For example: How to Vomit While Driving

 

[edward]

That's okay. Americans learn just about every aspect of driving.

For example: How to Vomit While Driving

WHAT! no video

 

[sportsstar469]

Why on Earth would you cruise in an overtaking lane when not overtaking anyway? There is no logical reason for it, apart from being deliberately awkward. Just pull over one lane, you are still going the speed you want to go, but are allowing others the opportunity to pass you.

Your 'sucks to be you' attitude towards other road users is probably the worst attidude you can have. It shows a lack of respect towards other road users. Deliberately and KNOWINGLY sitting in an overtaking lane (where people are inevitably going over the speed limit) going slower than the traffic in that lane, is as obnoxious as the white van man (dont know if you have them over in the US) sitting right up your arse.

On a positive note I'm with you on the coasting red light thing though. There is absolutely nothing wrong with slowing down in a light is on red in the distance. You don't gain or lose time, and you are driving in a more economic fasion.

idk if youre replying to me, but if so, how is going speed limit deliberately pissing anybody off?

on the topic of driving, mny dad was driving on a highway, and a deer jumped in front of his car causing the hood to fly off, and he almost died. I HATE DEERS. my dad just put a new 2000 engine in the car too...

 

[xxChrisxx]

idk if youre replying to me, but if so, how is going speed limit deliberately pissing anybody off?

on the topic of driving, mny dad was driving on a highway, and a deer jumped in front of his car causing the hood to fly off, and he almost died. I HATE DEERS. my dad just put a new 2000 engine in the car too...

was responding to leroy.

 

[DaveC426913]

idk if youre replying to me, but if so, how is going speed limit deliberately pissing anybody off?

on the topic of driving, mny dad was driving on a highway, and a deer jumped in front of his car causing the hood to fly off, and he almost died. I HATE DEERS. my dad just put a new 2000 engine in the car too...

I don't think s/he was replying to you.

As s/he said:

Why on Earth would you cruise in an overtaking lane when not overtaking anyway?

 

[OmCheeto]

Where the hell is Leroy. I'm tellin' ya, this new 'lectric web space drivin' thing is cool:

With this(OmCheeto's) car, this trip will cost: $0.96
With an electric car, this trip will cost: $0.16
By using an electric car, you save: $0.80, a savings of 83%!

And they only showed me breaking the law about http://chargecar.org/data/do_graph?meta_data_id=333&data_type=gps_datas&graph_type=speed_over_time&file_name[name .

"But please occifer, I was passin' some'un'. 'ats why I was goin' so fast"



IMHO, there are people who will, and those who will not, fit into the new EV mode of driving.

As PC also said; "If going without is not an option, go efficient"

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

That's okay. Americans learn just about every aspect of driving.

For example: How to Vomit While Driving

That happened to me once. I was at a point where there was a bend in the street and nearly side swiped someone as I vomited all over my passenger seat. No accident fortunately.

 

[leroyjenkens]

Why?

I mean, why be a jerk?

Is that what Jesus would do?

Part of one's character is what one does regardless of provocation.

I try to be as nice as possible when I drive. In every other situation, I give people lots of room to merge, I don't get right up on them when they're going slow. But when I'm going 5 MPH over the speed limit and that's too slow for the people behind me, that's too bad. If they want to break the law by more than 5 MPH, then they're not going to make me an accomplice.

Are you a cusser? If we got into an argument and I started cussing at you, could
I provoke you into responding in kind? If on the road, could I get you to flip me the bird?

I'm a very calm debater. If you started getting belligerent, I'd most likely just end the conversation.

Why on Earth would you cruise in an overtaking lane when not overtaking anyway? There is no logical reason for it, apart from being deliberately awkward.

Because I want to go at least the speed limit. The right lane is where the people drive who don't want to go the maximum. I don't want to get stuck behind someone going the minimum. Plus it's annoying having to slow down or change lanes for non-yielders who are merging. They'd rather risk a fiery inferno than to slow down until there's an opening.

Your 'sucks to be you' attitude towards other road users is probably the worst attidude you can have. It shows a lack of respect towards other road users. Deliberately and KNOWINGLY sitting in an overtaking lane (where people are inevitably going over the speed limit) going slower than the traffic in that lane, is as obnoxious as the white van man (dont know if you have them over in the US) sitting right up your arse.

It doesn't suck to be you when I save you a speeding ticket.
That's not my attitude. I'll give them the speed limit, but I won't be an accomplice by facilitating their law breaking.

because I am not speeding and I prefer to stay out of the speeders' lane.

This is what people actually believe. That's the "fast lane". Wait a minute. Since when have we given people special lanes to speed in? That's like giving thieves special stores that they can steal from. Or giving murderers special people that they're allowed to kill.

I see, well that makes a bit more sense then as by sitting on the outside lane you aren't blocking everything up. Sounds like a bloody complicated way of doing it though. I can see you having to be much more alert if you've got cars overtaking both ways. Like the example above.

I don't see the point of clogging up the right lane for people who want to merge JUST so we can have a nice clear lane for the speeding law breakers.

I frequently drive I-95 along the east coast (including I-295) and what you describe is very common for me also.

On my way to work I drive down I-95 and get on I-295. What happened to the rest of them? 95 then to 295? There's 200 missing.

 

[DaveC426913]

Since when have we given people special lanes to speed in?

It is not a speeding lane. It is a passing lane. And we have people people special lanes to pass in.

Look, there's nothing wrong with merely doing 5mph over the limit when you're passing other cars. Yes, even if there are cars piled up behind you. (i.e. You are not obliged to speed just because you are in the passing lane.)

Just pull into the right lane when you're done passing. Not because of speed. Because you're done passing.

 

[Sorry!]

It is not a speeding lane. It is a passing lane. And we have people people special lanes to pass in.

Look, there's nothing wrong with merely doing 5mph over the limit when you're passing other cars. Yes, even if there are cars piled up behind you. (i.e. You are not obliged to speed just because you are in the passing lane.)

Just pull into the right lane when you're done passing. Not because of speed. Because you're done passing.

Hey dave did you hear about that older lady who was doing 50 over passing a truck on the highway and is fighting her charges haha. She says the laws don't apply to her because she isn't stunt racing. (That new 50 over law that came out awhile ago.) I'm not sure of the outcome of the case but I thought it was pretty funny haha.

 

[DaveC426913]

Hey dave did you hear about that older lady who was doing 50 over passing a truck on the highway and is fighting her charges haha. She says the laws don't apply to her because she isn't stunt racing. (That new 50 over law that came out awhile ago.) I'm not sure of the outcome of the case but I thought it was pretty funny haha.

Yeah, I remember that.

Not sure which way that should fall, really.

While the law is aimed at combating stunt-racing, it is not "the stunt-racing law". 50 over is 50 over.

 

[xxChrisxx]

I try to be as nice as possible when I drive. In every other situation, I give people lots of room to merge, I don't get right up on them when they're going slow. But when I'm going 5 MPH over the speed limit and that's too slow for the people behind me, that's too bad. If they want to break the law by more than 5 MPH, then they're not going to make me an accomplice.

Yet you don't mind breaking the law by going 5 over which is still breaking the law isn't it? Or braking the accepted guidelines (I don't know if it law in the US) that the lane is for OVERTAKING.

So basically it can't be that you want to uphold the law by stopping people speeding as you are doing it yourself.

It doesn't suck to be you when I save you a speeding ticket.
That's not my attitude. I'll give them the speed limit, but I won't be an accomplice by facilitating their law breaking.

Do you realize how much of a pompous arse you sound. Save me a speeding ticket. How noble and just of you. And you saved me a speeding ticket by ONLY breaking the law yourself by 5mph. Well done, you should get a community medal.

You do realize that you moving out of an overtaking lane ISNT being an accomplice. You acutally can't be an accomplice to a speeding charge, you aren't assisting them in any way. Doing nothing to stop them is NOT the same as actively helping them.

I'd rather you stuck to the rules of the road and got out of an overtaking lane when you are done overtaking.
You really do sound like a hypocrite and a jerk behind the wheel. Not to mention a moaner.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

On my way to work I drive down I-95 and get on I-295. What happened to the rest of them? 95 then to 295? There's 200 missing.

If you've ever experienced the merge between R-30 and I-295, you know how complex the highway number system can get.

 

[xxChrisxx]

On my way to work I drive down I-95 and get on I-295. What happened to the rest of them? 95 then to 295? There's 200 missing.

Is this a serious question, or was it like a jocular rhetorical question?

 

[mgb_phys]

It's almost logical (at least as close as federal, government and logical get)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Numbering_system

 

[turbo]

Is this a serious question, or was it like a jocular rhetorical question?

Song: 95 is the route you are on. It's not the speed limit sign.

 

[rootX]

I am really interested in knowing how this woman would drive on the road.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8347164.stm

 

[leroyjenkens]

Look, there's nothing wrong with merely doing 5mph over the limit when you're passing other cars. Yes, even if there are cars piled up behind you. (i.e. You are not obliged to speed just because you are in the passing lane.)

If I'm going the speed limit in the passing lane, why do I need to get back over? For people going faster than the speed limit?

And how do you know there's nothing wrong with going 5 over if you want to pass?
What about 10 over? When is the line drawn? Because the speed limit is at a certain set number, so if you're going to have allowances above it, they need to be defined by the law, not by conjecture.

Yet you don't mind breaking the law by going 5 over which is still breaking the law isn't it? Or braking the accepted guidelines (I don't know if it law in the US) that the lane is for OVERTAKING.

I'll go 5 over. That's a small amount. You couldn't even recognize I was speeding unless you have a radar gun.

So basically it can't be that you want to uphold the law by stopping people speeding as you are doing it yourself.

There's a difference between 5 MPH over and 20 MPH over. Hence why there's different fines for different speeds.
But I'm not trying to uphold the law. That's not my job. I just don't feel it necessary to go out of my way to allow people to go any faster than I'm going, which is probably over the limit already.
And I don't expect people to do the same for me. If I'm going 60 in a 55 and I come up on someone going 55 in the left lane, I slow down and don't get on their butt expecting them to accommodate me. They only owe me the limit, no more.

Do you realize how much of a pompous arse you sound. Save me a speeding ticket. How noble and just of you. And you saved me a speeding ticket by ONLY breaking the law yourself by 5mph.

I go 5 over maximum in the left lane. That's so I don't go below the maximum, since I'm in the left lane and that's what they're entitled to.
Going 5 over isn't the same as going 200 over, despite you wanting it to be so it supports your argument.

You do realize that you moving out of an overtaking lane ISNT being an accomplice. You acutally can't be an accomplice to a speeding charge, you aren't assisting them in any way. Doing nothing to stop them is NOT the same as actively helping them.

Moving out of their way IS actively helping them. Moving is an action and the result is them being able to break the law. Me not moving, which is what I do, is not assisting them in any way.

I'd rather you stuck to the rules of the road and got out of an overtaking lane when you are done overtaking.

Show me the rule I'm breaking. I've yet to see it.

You really do sound like a hypocrite and a jerk behind the wheel. Not to mention a moaner.

I sound like all that from breaking non-existant laws? Ignore every other nice thing I do on the road. Those acts are all negated simply by me not moving. I love how it's always one extreme or the other. You're either the best, nicest driver, or you're the worst driver and a huge hypocritical, moaning, jerk who eats babies.

Is this a serious question, or was it like a jocular rhetorical question?

A serious question asked in a jocular way. I honestly don't know the answer, but it's a question I can ask in a funny way because other people may feel the same way.

 

[xxChrisxx]

I'll go 5 over. That's a small amount. You couldn't even recognize I was speeding unless you have a radar gun.

There's a difference between 5 MPH over and 20 MPH over. Hence why there's different fines for different speeds.

The law is black and white and the limit is technically a hard limit. 5mph over or 20mph doesn't matter, speeding is speeding. The fact that the speed over the limit determines the level of punishment makes no odds, even 1mph over is still breaking the law.In the end it really does't matter, as you should drive how you feel comfortable driving and not let anyone bully you into doing something you don't want.

It may or may not be illegal but I believe it's courteous not to block a passing lane when you could easily drive in the centre lanes. Obviously if the centre lane is all blocked up and there is no opportunity to merge back in, then fair enough.

The reason I would be more annoyed about this is that in the UK you can't undertake. So if you've got someone going in the overtaking lane at 70mph they effectively block the motorway even if there are no cars in the centre lane (as although the technical speed limit is 70 everyone goes 80+ when not in the left (slow) lane). Technically not against the law but from a practical point of view its irritating.

A serious question asked in a jocular way. I honestly don't know the answer, but it's a question I can ask in a funny way because other people may feel the same way.

The acutal numbering convention has been posted earlier I think.

It's similar to the system used in the UK. Here we have the main motorways M1, M2, M3 that correspond to areas of the country.

The main motorway near me is the M6 that runs down the west of the country. Motorways that branch off this are then given a designation of M6x.

In the US I think they put the split off before the main interstate. So I-x95 would be a branch off the main I-95.

 

[leroyjenkens]

The law is black and white and the limit is technically a hard limit. 5mph over or 20mph doesn't matter, speeding is speeding. The fact that the speed over the limit determines the level of punishment makes no odds, even 1mph over is still breaking the law.

So 1 MPH is the same as 100 MPH. As far as breaking the law, yeah. But if you go down a small hill while going the limit, you won't gain 100 extra MPH. I know 1 MPH over is still breaking the law. I'll go up to 5 MPH over. The fact that I'm breaking the law also is of no relevance, since I'm not chiding other people for breaking the law (The only people I hate are the ones who drive recklessly, risking other people's lives.) It's just my point of view that it's not my responsibility to allow people to speed by getting out of their way. If they want to speed, they need to find their own opening.
I said it before, but if I wanted to go 5 over and I was stuck behind someone in the left lane who is only going the speed limit, then that's too bad for me and I won't hold it against that person if they stay in the left lane. I'll just either have to find my own opening or I'll just have to suffer the excruciating agony of having to go 5 MPH slower.

The reason I would be more annoyed about this is that in the UK you can't undertake. So if you've got someone going in the overtaking lane at 70mph they effectively block the motorway even if there are no cars in the centre lane (as although the technical speed limit is 70 everyone goes 80+ when not in the left (slow) lane).

So in the UK you can't get in that empty lane and pass him? That's ridiculous. How could you even enforce that? So all the traffic on the road is forced to go as slow as the slowest car in the overtaking lane, simply because "undertaking" him is illegal?

 

[xxChrisxx]

So 1 MPH is the same as 100 MPH. As far as breaking the law, yeah. But if you go down a small hill while going the limit, you won't gain 100 extra MPH. I know 1 MPH over is still breaking the law. I'll go up to 5 MPH over. The fact that I'm breaking the law also is of no relevance, since I'm not chiding other people for breaking the law (The only people I hate are the ones who drive recklessly, risking other people's lives.) It's just my point of view that it's not my responsibility to allow people to speed by getting out of their way. If they want to speed, they need to find their own opening.
I said it before, but if I wanted to go 5 over and I was stuck behind someone in the left lane who is only going the speed limit, then that's too bad for me and I won't hold it against that person if they stay in the left lane. I'll just either have to find my own opening or I'll just have to suffer the excruciating agony of having to go 5 MPH slower.

It's encouraing aggressive driving though. Somone who wants to fly down the motorway will find a way to do it. By leaving a 'fast' lane blocked up they then have to weave through traffic in slower lanes to get back into a faster lane. 'they need to find their own opening'.

The act of changing lanes is probably the most dangerous thing there is to do on a motorway after merging with traffic. Essentially forcing people to do it more often increases risk for everyone concerned. Especially if they want to pedal.

So in the UK you can't get in that empty lane and pass him? That's ridiculous. How could you even enforce that? So all the traffic on the road is forced to go as slow as the slowest car in the overtaking lane, simply because "undertaking" him is illegal?

Pretty much, it's technically not allowed and is technically illegal. It's only designed to stop people weaving about through lanes trying to get up the road a little quicker. If you have a tool driving slowly in the fastest lane the coppers will ignore undertaking.

So although 'by the book' it's agaisnt the law, the police don't bother enforcing it.

 

[DaveC426913]

It's just my point of view that it's not my responsibility to allow people to speed by getting out of their way.

Once again, you need to divorce yourself of the rationalization that this has anything whatsoever to do with speed.

It has absolutely nothing to do with speed. This is a straw man that you keep using to defend your actions. It is invalid.

It has everything to do with passing. It is a passing lane. If you are not in the process of passing a car, you do not belong in the passing lane. Period.

Address that.

 

[leroyjenkens]

It's encouraing aggressive driving though. Somone who wants to fly down the motorway will find a way to do it. By leaving a 'fast' lane blocked up they then have to weave through traffic in slower lanes to get back into a faster lane. 'they need to find their own opening'.

Your argument is that criminals will be criminals regardless of any obstacles in their way, so it's our responsibility to mitigate the consequences of what they do. My argument is that it's not our responsibility.

The act of changing lanes is probably the most dangerous thing there is to do on a motorway after merging with traffic. Essentially forcing people to do it more often increases risk for everyone concerned. Especially if they want to pedal.

But I'm not FORCING them to do it. That's like saying raising taxes is FORCING people to steal. Or if I don't give a robber my money, I'm FORCING him to shoot me. Somehow it becomes my fault that he shot me?

Once again, you need to divorce yourself of the rationalization that this has anything whatsoever to do with speed.

It has absolutely nothing to do with speed. This is a straw man that you keep using to defend your actions. It is invalid.

It has everything to do with passing. It is a passing lane. If you are not in the process of passing a car, you do not belong in the passing lane. Period.

Address that.

I have addressed that. Just because the passing lane is for passing, doesn't mean you can't cruise in it. Why is it mutually exclusive?

The reason I keep bringing up the thing you say is irrelevant is because I was asked why I don't move. That's why.