Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

I used to be a crankier driver (or maybe just a crank) on this subject, but I've reached the conclusion that if you really want me out of that left lane, then I'll go willingly. Beats dying.

Posted by Karl Hallowell at May 15, 2007 04:20 PM

I've often wondered at the raging anger of people on this issue.

It is indeed a passing lane, for passing people who are doing less than the speed limit and I never cruise there. But, I don't speed, either.

Those white rectangular signs that say XXmph there on the side of the road? That's the law, not a suggestion.

Posted by Fuloydo at May 15, 2007 05:10 PM

It is indeed a passing lane, for passing people who are doing less than the speed limit...

No, it is a passing lane. Period.

Any other interpretation leads to not only frustration and loss of productivity, but accidents. It is not your responsibility to enforce stupid speed limits. If you're not passing someone, get the hell out of the way.

Posted by Rand Simberg at May 15, 2007 05:52 PM

yeah, come to Houston. Everyone believes it's their God-given right to go directly from the freeway on-ramp to the pasing lane; camped there, usually 10 mph below the speed limit, they willfully ignore any and all attempts to get them the hell out of there while they chat happily away on their cell phones.

Posted by Andy at May 15, 2007 06:05 PM

If you're not passing someone, get the hell out of the way
I belive that's what I said. I don't cruise there.

But it's not your god given right to barrel down the highway at five, ten, or fifteen miles per hour above the posted speed limit, either and getting pissed off at people for obeying the law is somewhat counter productive.

Posted by Fuloydo at May 15, 2007 06:09 PM

I belive that's what I said. I don't cruise there.

Misspelling aside, that's all we ask.

Not believing in God, I'm not sure how to interpret this. All I know is that people who hog the left lane obstruct traffic, and cause accidents, regardless of the (idiotic) legality of the situation.

Posted by Rand Simberg at May 15, 2007 06:14 PM

Forgive my spelling, I didn't know that was the point.

Also forgive my reference to god, notice it was lower case, I was channeling the post just before mine.

I'll even agree with you about the idiocy of the legality. But that IS what it is.

I set my cruise control to the maximum the law allows, maybe one or two over, and that's where I leave it. If I come up on someone in the right lane, usually a semi, that is going slower I carefully check to see that no one is coming up on my left then I signal and ease out around them. I do check if anyone is overtaking me and if there is I brake and wait for them to go by. (Admitteldy cursing them for making me break my cruise) The people that wind up on my bumper are the ones who are doing ten to fifteen over the limit and thus were so far back they didn't register. They can blow me.

I once heard a woman say on a local call in radio show that it was OK for her to speed because she was a NASCAR fan and watched the races every weekend. By that logic I should be playing quarterback for the Kansas City Chiefs.

I also don't really understand all the need for speed. You're an engineer Rand. How much time does one really save by doing, say, 75 in a 70? You get an extra five miles, call it four minutes, in an HOUR. Is it really worth it? Considering the penalties, especially if there is a wreck, I think everyone would be much better off to slow down and pay a little more attention to those white signs.

Posted by Fuloydo at May 15, 2007 06:29 PM

The guy who drives the speed limit, or let's be generous, a few mph over the speed limit shouldn't have to move over simply because there is someone behind him who wants to drive much faster.

The reason for the accidents isn't the guy driving the speed limit in the left lane. It's the guy who doesn't like the guy driving the speed limit in the left lane.

I would have to believe that someone, somewhere has made a careful calculation to figure out the appropriate speed for a particular segment of road.

If the law is stupid, work to change the law. I agree that the speed limit can or should be raised on many freeways.

Of course if they are driving below the speed limit, that's another story.

Posted by Toast_n_Tea at May 15, 2007 06:35 PM

The guy who drives the speed limit, or let's be generous, a few mph over the speed limit shouldn't have to move over simply because there is someone behind him who wants to drive much faster.

No. The left lane is not for cruising, at any speed. It is for passing. If you're not passing you shouldn't be there. Period. If everyone understood this, traffic would flow much more smoothly, and there would be many fewer accidents.

And in one enlightened state, Florida, that is in fact the law, not merely a good idea.

Posted by Rand SImberg at May 15, 2007 06:38 PM

Hadn't seen Fuloydo's last post..Fully agree that the time saving is hardly worth the effort and the attendant risk to self and others.

I think it's more a psychological thing which can be addressed better with a high adrenalin sport.

Posted by Toast_n_Tea at May 15, 2007 06:41 PM

OK Rand, Say its for passing, and then of course the Passer could be going 100mph in an ideal world where the traffic density was so low that all law abiding traffic would self confine to the non-passing lanes, watching in wonder as the Passer shoots by.

Unfortunately, we have too many people on the roads to make this a reality. Maybe your argument would make sense in Montana.

The passing lane can be strictly only a passing lane only if the traffic density is so low that all traffic can be accomodated safely in the non-passing lanes. The reality is that traffic will disperse over all lanes whenever it is non-trivially small, obeying what must be some mathematical solution that we drivers unconsciously implement, to the problem of moving X cars D distance over N lanes within a speed limit V.

Posted by Toast_n_Tea at May 15, 2007 06:56 PM

The signs around here say "Keep right except to pass". What part of that do some people have such a hard time understanding?

If there's an empty lane to your right, that's the lane you should be in, irrespective of your speed, or anyone else's speed. If you want to drive at the same speed as someone else, do it behind them, not beside them.

As for speed limits, I'm about to do some driving across Montana, and wish they still had "reasonable and prudent" daytime speed limits. For one thing, the self-selected left lane "speed enforcers" wouldn't have some magic number to justify their "imprudent" driving. In my experience, people who didn't keep right ususally had plates from east of Mississippi River (or Arizona...)

(Why'd they get rid of it? Some idiot Libertarian objected that it gave cops too much discretion in determining what was not "reasonable and prudent", and the courts agreed. Dumb, selfish[expletive deleted] couldn't have just paid the ticket, but instead had to get a lesson in the Law of Unintended Consequences.)

Posted by Raoul Ortega at May 15, 2007 07:05 PM

If someone is intent on tying up the left lane and increasing driving hazards, I call the State Police and report them for erratic driving and give their plate number.

"Officer, they are driving erratically and creating a safety hazard, they may even be drunk!(they might be)!"

Feel free to do the same.

Posted by Mike Puckett at May 15, 2007 07:20 PM

Then you come upon highway designers who put an exit on the left side of the road, like they did on the Beltway 'round D.C.

Posted by Rich at May 15, 2007 07:48 PM

Then you come upon highway designers who put an exit on the left side of the road, like they did on the Beltway 'round D.C.

Oh, you find that all over the place in Kansas City. Don't watch what lane you're in and you can find yourself sailing off on some exit to god (oops, sorry Rand) knows where.

Once, a long long time ago, I was on a date which took us into the city. Coming home I found the lane I was in (the left most lane as I was anticipating an exit farther up the freeway) suddenly took off on a journey of its own and left me, a teenage driver of little experience (especially city driving, I'm a country boy), driving down a side road with no idea how to get back to where I wanted to be. Trusting common sense (if I keep going this way I HAVE to cross 71 Highway eventually) I just kept going and, yes, I did intersect the north/south highway I was looking for.

Still, not an experience I would reccomend to a new driver. It scared the hell out of me. :)

Posted by Fuloydo at May 15, 2007 07:59 PM

Every multi-lane highway I drive has "slower traffic keep right" signs. I will drive fast in the left lane to avoid the packs of cars, all going the same speed on each others bumpers. Drive through Dallas and see how quickly you move to the left lane and go faster. I drive long distances where that 5-6 mph actually saves time. It adds up on my 12 hour drive which would be 13 if I didn't.

Posted by Bill Maron at May 15, 2007 08:02 PM

Every multi-lane highway I drive has "slower traffic keep right" signs.

Those are abominations, that if I were King I'd have removed. Few people think they're "slower traffic." They only exacerbate the problem.

The sign should read, "LEFT LANE FOR PASSING ONLY."

Posted by Rand Simberg at May 15, 2007 08:05 PM

I don't think most people get upset about the occasional person who is in the fast lane as they are passing someone who is driving slower. The problem is that there is a large percentage of drivers that think the left lane of 3 (4, 5 or more) highway is where they should drive because big trucks are not allowed in that lane and nobody has to deal with merging traffic.

It's about common courtesy. If someone choses to drive faster than you, you should make all reasonable attempts to allow them to proceed by not being in the fast lane. When drivers are forced to weave in and out of traffic lanes because that is the only way to make progress that is a much more dangerous form of driving than someone doing a lot more than the speed limit.

Posted by Joe Schmoe at May 15, 2007 08:11 PM

I often times cruise in the left lane, but then I am also usually one of the faster drivers on any given road at any given time. It is simpler for me to stay in the left lane rather than constantly changing lanes to pass ever quarter mile or so. With that said, if I am cruising in the left lane and someone approaches from the rear obviously wanting to go faster than I am, I move over and let them go. And that is a lot more than I can say for most people on the road who occupy the left lane and stay there regardless of how many are stacked up behind them.

Posted by Cecil Trotter at May 15, 2007 08:21 PM

Uh, Rand: Do you honestly think a "Move Over" windshield decal will have the net effect of DECREASING road rage?

Posted by David Bush at May 15, 2007 08:29 PM

I am so glad I live out in the middle of nowhere, at a place where this discussion is academic.

Posted by Trudy W. Schuett at May 15, 2007 09:15 PM

"That's the law, not a suggestion"
Posted by Fuloydo at May 15, 2007 05:10 PM

Hmmm, I know that in fact it is a common defense in traffic court that someone can go faster then the posted speed limits as long as it is reasonable and prudent - 70 in a 60 during sunny clear weather and no traffic. Cops will freely admit they give people about a 10mph free pass over the speed limit. I've even blow past state troopers on my way to Austin going 90 in a 75.

The opposite can even be true as well. A cop can give you a speeding ticket for a speed much lower then the posted speed limit if you are going faster then what he/she feels is appropriate for the given conditions - 50 mph in a 60 during a hurricane.

I just recently got a taste of what it is like when a section of road that outlaws 18-wheelers in the left lane just north of Austin. Talk about smooth as silk compared to many of the roads in and around Dallas.

Posted by Josh Reiter at May 15, 2007 10:24 PM

My commute is long everyday, and I noticed little effect in time by driving faster. So I get in one of the two middle lanes and cruise.

I agree with Rand that the left lane should be for passing only. The corollary is if the left lane is empty, then what to do about the idiots who pass on the right?

I like Trudy's life, but in lew of that life, I just listen to a good book and usually ignore the petty slights on the road. My car has nothing to prove, and I leave in plenty of time to get where I'm going.

Posted by Leland at May 16, 2007 04:40 AM

Rand - you have my sympathy, but my humble if unsolicited advice would be for you to chill. Highway "speed" is an illusion everywhere except the intensive care ward. "Those people" aren't eating away precious minutes of your life. "Those people" aren't making you late for anything. "Those people" can only drive you nuts if you let them.

BTW, turning left lanes into "passing only" lanes would not only create congestion of Biblical proportions, it would cause most urban interstates to fail catastrophically. Call your local MPO (metropolitan planning orgaization), speak to a modeler and ask him/her if you don't believe me.

Posted by Gunga at May 16, 2007 06:42 AM

I would have to believe that someone, somewhere has made a careful calculation to figure out the appropriate speed for a particular segment of road.

No doubt you also put milk out for the brownies and save extracted incisors for the Tooth Fairy.

Not far from where I live is one of the many, many examples of a two-lane secondary road. It winds around curves and goes up and down hills, passing farmers' driveways and country businesses, and it's common to encounter tractors towing trailer-loads of hay at 10 MPH. The speed limit is the default for Texas roads: 70. At one point it crosses I20 on a two-lane bridge with no shoulder space. At that point I20 is two lanes in each direction, roughly ten miles from the nearest city limit sign, with sixteen-foot paved shoulders on both sides, fifty feet of separation between roadways, and 150 feet of right of way on either side, and accommodates perhaps two vehicles a minute. Speed limit on the Interstate? 65.

Speed limits as they exist today are arbitrary values established primarily for revenue; important secondary considerations are security kabuki and giving the cops excuses for further intrusions. To the extent that they have any scientific basis whatever, they refer back to experiments done by the Texas Highway Department before WWII using a Ford Model A to establish cornering and braking values -- you can look it up. They are riddled with stupidities like lower limits for trucks, which sound sensible until you realize that what they actually do is establish obstructions faster traffic has to go around; sane cops don't enforce those, even in control-freak jurisdictions like Virginia, because doing so would literally kill people.

Experienced drivers use the "safe and reasonable" standard, taking into account road and weather conditions and the behavior of other drivers, and simply accept that this means that once in a while they have to make some JP's house payment. The numbers on the signs are sometimes useful advisories, but more often they're just some bureaucrat's notion of how to suck the most cash out of passersby.

Regards,
Ric

Posted by Ric Locke at May 16, 2007 07:47 AM

I remember being in the safe driving class I had to take to get a license and being told at length how little benefit speeding really was. Driving 70 in a 65 zone only saves you a few minutes per hour. All true. But the lesson I took away from it? The longer your trip the more sense it makes to speed.

As for speed limits being carefully calculated according to the road, remember that the 55 mph national speed limit in the 70s was a figure based on fuel economy. It had nothing to do with what speed was safe to drive.

Posted by KeithK at May 16, 2007 10:05 AM

I use the left lane for passing, but I often run into situations where there is a pretty long run of cars to be passed. In those cases, I'll stay in the left lane until I'm past the bunch and have a safe and clear space to move into, no matter how much it riles the Type As who feel like I ought to change lanes back into the first opening that will fit my car.

If the Type A immediately behind me disagrees with my decision and starts to snuggle up close, I may slow down a little bit so that he has time to meditate -- repeat as required and/or deserved.

I can't see why people have problems with left exits, since "standard" interstate exit signs identify them clearly (the exit number "signlet" on top should be on the left side rather than the right). If you find one that isn't marked that way, let the local DOT know and they'll fix it (in due time, of course).

Posted by snellenr at May 16, 2007 12:08 PM

Rand has hit one of my “buttons,” these left lane “hogs” drive me nuts. Anyway, I am always amused by those who say, a strong “keep right” law will not work, too many cars on the road, or some such argument. Having driven in Europe somewhat, I never saw congestion problems like I see here. There, in many cases, you’ll get pulled over and ticketed – big fine, if you stay in the passing lane too long,

I have to drive I95 between Washington and Richmond VA frequently. This is one of the more heavily traveled sections of I95. It scares me to do it, because it is dangerous, but I can often go down the right lane for miles passing almost everything on that three lane highway. I can do that because everyone else is ‘cruising” along in the left or middle lane. This is true even when I come up on an on-merge lane, since much of the time the driver will go right to the middle or left lane from the merge. Basically these folks turn a three lane highway into two lanes because they will not get over on the right.

Posted by GAD at May 16, 2007 12:47 PM

Rand,
The funny part of this discussion is the self-righteous folks who say things like "The speed limit isn't a suggestion, it's the law".

In many states, it is ALSO the law that slower drivers need to stay right (as well as the left lane is ONLY for passing).

I ask those folks the same thing: Why do you feel you can pick and choose which laws you obey and which ones you don't? It usually comes down to them wanting to enforce their own driving tendencies on others.

Posted by Tom W. at May 16, 2007 01:08 PM

Everyone's a highway engineer...

Posted by Gunga at May 16, 2007 02:05 PM

getting pissed off at people for obeying the law is somewhat counter productive.

My ex-wife camped in the passing lane. She didn't do it to obey the law, she did it because she had no reason not to and she enjoyed making people go around her.

I'm not guessing, that's what she said. Please note the 'ex'.

Posted by Brian Dunbar at May 17, 2007 09:39 AM

Post a comment