Motoring Middle Lane Hogging

[chrisp65]

whilst they're at, fines for people attempting to change lanes in a traffic jam because they perceive the other lane has made 2.36 metres more progress in the last 20 minutes 

[legov]

 

 

Scenario 2:

 

Same deal, same average speeds, except that the inside lane is much busier, with very few gaps. The middle lane traffic however is well spaced out. You overtake the first 55 mph car, but you realise that if you drop back to the left now, you'll just be behind another 55-er, and you'll have to do the manoeuvre again almost immediately. So you continue at 70 mph in the middle lane, effectively in a "continuous overtake" of possibly dozens of cars. (At this point, are you lane hogging?) Then somebody comes up behind you at 75 mph (or above) and has to slow down a little. All you can do is wait for a gap in the left lane, and move back as soon as it's safe - or let him overtake in the third lane if possible. Theoretically it isn't anyway, as you are both at the speed limit - he would have to exceed 70 mph to overtake. Who is legally at fault here? I'd say the tailgater.

 

In practice, you often find that the inside lane is very busy, but relatively slow, and the outside lane is almost equally busy, but with people speeding. In these cases, 70 mph in the middle lane is often the safest and most sensible tactic.

 

Pretty much what I was saying.

[Stevo985]

 

One of the prob

You should be driving (in this country) in the left hand lane at all times unless you have to overtake, you overtake and come back in as you would on a none motorway road.

Even if you have to go into the 3rd or 4th lane its still just for overtaking and should be getting back into the left lane as soon as possible.

Do they even teach this to people passing there test anymore, older people i'm sure dont get that and think the middle lane is for cars and the left lane is for lorries. They would be in shock if you told them the other two lanes are meant to be for overtaking only.

 

"Older" people? I'd say it's younger people who don't get that.

 

But here's the rub: At what point are you not overtaking?

 

Scenario 1:

 

Inside lane traffic is well spaced out, and moving at an average speed of 55 mph. Center lane is similarly spaced, averaging 70 mph. You're in the inside lane doing 65-70 mph. You come up behind one of the 55 mph cars, and want to overtake. You check mirror, wait for a gap in the centre lane, signal, and overtake. As soon as you have done so, you signal and move back in to the left lane. You carry on at 65-70 mph until you reach the next 55-er, and repeat the manoeuvre. All well and good.

 

Scenario 2:

 

Same deal, same average speeds, except that the inside lane is much busier, with very few gaps. The middle lane traffic however is well spaced out. You overtake the first 55 mph car, but you realise that if you drop back to the left now, you'll just be behind another 55-er, and you'll have to do the manoeuvre again almost immediately. So you continue at 70 mph in the middle lane, effectively in a "continuous overtake" of possibly dozens of cars. (At this point, are you lane hogging?) Then somebody comes up behind you at 75 mph (or above) and has to slow down a little. All you can do is wait for a gap in the left lane, and move back as soon as it's safe - or let him overtake in the third lane if possible. Theoretically it isn't anyway, as you are both at the speed limit - he would have to exceed 70 mph to overtake. Who is legally at fault here? I'd say the tailgater.

 

In practice, you often find that the inside lane is very busy, but relatively slow, and the outside lane is almost equally busy, but with people speeding. In these cases, 70 mph in the middle lane is often the safest and most sensible tactic.

 

Speed has nothing to do with it.

 

If you're overtaking cars, then you're fine.

Scenario 2 is fine as long as you're overtaking the cars inside you. You could be doing 20mph for all I care, if the cars inside are doing 15 then you're fine. The fact that cars behind you have to slow down is neither here nor there (well, it might be given the extreme example, but it's a totally different issue) as long as you're passing vehicles. If there's a huge gap on the inside lane and you're choosing to persist in the middle when you could quite easily pull back in THEN you're lane hogging

 

If I come up behind someone doing 60 in the outside lane and they're overtaking, then it might frustrate me, but that person isn't doing anything wrong.

If that person though isn't overtaking anyone, then they're at fault.

 

You can lane hog driving at 15mph or you can lane hog driving at 130mph. Speed is irrelevant, it's all relative.

Edited June 6, 2013 by Stevo985

[StefanAVFC]

whilst they're at, fines for people attempting to change lanes in a traffic jam because they perceive the other lane has made 2.36 metres more progress in the last 20 minutes 

 

This

 

There was bad traffic on the M42 today and I was sticking to my guns in the middle lane and my dad was like 'the outside lane is moving, get in it'. When they were still there and I was moving, I was felt good. I used to do it as a naive 17 year old but now, there's really no point.

[bickster]

Oh and the worst thing is when there's a lane closure and you're queuing to get through. And arseholes drive down the empty lanes and cut in. I just don't let them in. ****.

That's what you're supposed to do otherwise the traffic tails back even farther. I'll agree that it offends our sense of fairness but they aren't doing anything wrong

[Stevo985]

Just drove to and back from Bristol. The middle lane trucks and tailgaters are more of a problem than middle lane hoggers. Regarding using the middle lane, when it's so clogged with lorries, it's pointless to ever go into it. Especially if you're doing 70+ in the middle lane. Can't be dealing with people doing 100+ though.

I've noticed that on the variable speed limit areas (like the M42 for example) a LOT of lorries seem to automatically drive in the middle lane, regardless of speed.

 

I'm genuinely puzzled as to why they do this.

[StefanAVFC]

Yeah today on that very motorway, there was a tanker who was in the middle lane who was trying to overtake a horse-truck. It just couldn't pull past the horses but it wouldn't give up so I was stuck for ages at 50 MPH.

Edited June 6, 2013 by StefanAVFC

[legov]

 

 

One of the prob

You should be driving (in this country) in the left hand lane at all times unless you have to overtake, you overtake and come back in as you would on a none motorway road.

Even if you have to go into the 3rd or 4th lane its still just for overtaking and should be getting back into the left lane as soon as possible.

Do they even teach this to people passing there test anymore, older people i'm sure dont get that and think the middle lane is for cars and the left lane is for lorries. They would be in shock if you told them the other two lanes are meant to be for overtaking only.

 

"Older" people? I'd say it's younger people who don't get that.

 

But here's the rub: At what point are you not overtaking?

 

Scenario 1:

 

Inside lane traffic is well spaced out, and moving at an average speed of 55 mph. Center lane is similarly spaced, averaging 70 mph. You're in the inside lane doing 65-70 mph. You come up behind one of the 55 mph cars, and want to overtake. You check mirror, wait for a gap in the centre lane, signal, and overtake. As soon as you have done so, you signal and move back in to the left lane. You carry on at 65-70 mph until you reach the next 55-er, and repeat the manoeuvre. All well and good.

 

Scenario 2:

 

Same deal, same average speeds, except that the inside lane is much busier, with very few gaps. The middle lane traffic however is well spaced out. You overtake the first 55 mph car, but you realise that if you drop back to the left now, you'll just be behind another 55-er, and you'll have to do the manoeuvre again almost immediately. So you continue at 70 mph in the middle lane, effectively in a "continuous overtake" of possibly dozens of cars. (At this point, are you lane hogging?) Then somebody comes up behind you at 75 mph (or above) and has to slow down a little. All you can do is wait for a gap in the left lane, and move back as soon as it's safe - or let him overtake in the third lane if possible. Theoretically it isn't anyway, as you are both at the speed limit - he would have to exceed 70 mph to overtake. Who is legally at fault here? I'd say the tailgater.

 

In practice, you often find that the inside lane is very busy, but relatively slow, and the outside lane is almost equally busy, but with people speeding. In these cases, 70 mph in the middle lane is often the safest and most sensible tactic.

 

Speed has nothing to do with it.

 

 

I think it does. Ideally, you want roads to be safe, but also efficient at the same time. So if the car in front of you is going at 70mph it's all good, because it means you get to go to work on time, and ditto for the hundreds of cars behind you. But if the car in front is going at 20mph, but the vehicles in the left lane are going even more slowly, then you might be better off walking. The frustration you get, not to mention the efficiency of the roads, has little to do with whether cars are overtaking.

 17 year old

 

 

Factoid: You have to be at least 18 years old to get a driving license in Singapore.

[mjmooney]

I deliberately made those example cut-and-dried.

 

Obviously if the inside lane is completely empty, you shouldn't be in the middle.

 

But somewhere between "completely empty" and "very busy", there are infinite gradations of traffic density. You have to use judgement as to whether to move back or not. And everybody judges things slightly differently. One person's "sensibly cautious" is another person's "frustatingly overcautious" is another's "get out of my f***ing way, you irritating slow old gimmer, woman, etc."

 

When it comes to punishable offences, I would prefer the law to cover quantifiable things like speed, illegal parking, uninsured car, etc., rather than somebody's opinion.

[Stevo985]

 

 

 

One of the prob

You should be driving (in this country) in the left hand lane at all times unless you have to overtake, you overtake and come back in as you would on a none motorway road.

Even if you have to go into the 3rd or 4th lane its still just for overtaking and should be getting back into the left lane as soon as possible.

Do they even teach this to people passing there test anymore, older people i'm sure dont get that and think the middle lane is for cars and the left lane is for lorries. They would be in shock if you told them the other two lanes are meant to be for overtaking only.

 

"Older" people? I'd say it's younger people who don't get that.

 

But here's the rub: At what point are you not overtaking?

 

Scenario 1:

 

Inside lane traffic is well spaced out, and moving at an average speed of 55 mph. Center lane is similarly spaced, averaging 70 mph. You're in the inside lane doing 65-70 mph. You come up behind one of the 55 mph cars, and want to overtake. You check mirror, wait for a gap in the centre lane, signal, and overtake. As soon as you have done so, you signal and move back in to the left lane. You carry on at 65-70 mph until you reach the next 55-er, and repeat the manoeuvre. All well and good.

 

Scenario 2:

 

Same deal, same average speeds, except that the inside lane is much busier, with very few gaps. The middle lane traffic however is well spaced out. You overtake the first 55 mph car, but you realise that if you drop back to the left now, you'll just be behind another 55-er, and you'll have to do the manoeuvre again almost immediately. So you continue at 70 mph in the middle lane, effectively in a "continuous overtake" of possibly dozens of cars. (At this point, are you lane hogging?) Then somebody comes up behind you at 75 mph (or above) and has to slow down a little. All you can do is wait for a gap in the left lane, and move back as soon as it's safe - or let him overtake in the third lane if possible. Theoretically it isn't anyway, as you are both at the speed limit - he would have to exceed 70 mph to overtake. Who is legally at fault here? I'd say the tailgater.

 

In practice, you often find that the inside lane is very busy, but relatively slow, and the outside lane is almost equally busy, but with people speeding. In these cases, 70 mph in the middle lane is often the safest and most sensible tactic.

 

Speed has nothing to do with it.

 

 

I think it does. Ideally, you want roads to be safe, but also efficient at the same time. So if the car in front of you is going at 70mph it's all good, because it means you get to go to work on time, and ditto for the hundreds of cars behind you. But if the car in front is going at 20mph, but the vehicles in the left lane are going even more slowly, then you might be better off walking. The frustration you get, not to mention the efficiency of the roads, has little to do with whether cars are overtaking.

 

 

As I said, that's a totally different issue to the one in question.

[mjmooney]

Anyway, what about middle lane dogging?

[Stevo985]

I deliberately made those example cut-and-dried.

 

Obviously if the inside lane is completely empty, you shouldn't be in the middle.

 

But somewhere between "completely empty" and "very busy", there are infinite gradations of traffic density. You have to use judgement as to whether to move back or not. And everybody judges things slightly differently. One person's "sensibly cautious" is another person's "frustatingly overcautious" is another's "get out of my f***ing way, you irritating slow old gimmer, woman, etc."

 

When it comes to punishable offences, I would prefer the law to cover quantifiable things like speed, illegal parking, uninsured car, etc., rather than somebody's opinion.

I can see your point, but I think the grey are you mention would be a pretty small area.

[StefanAVFC]

 

Oh and the worst thing is when there's a lane closure and you're queuing to get through. And arseholes drive down the empty lanes and cut in. I just don't let them in. ****.

That's what you're supposed to do otherwise the traffic tails back even farther. I'll agree that it offends our sense of fairness but they aren't doing anything wrong

 

 

Regardless, you're given loads of warning, it's just arse behaviour to leave it so late.

[legov]

You can lane hog driving at 15mph or you can lane hog driving at 130mph. Speed is irrelevant, it's all relative.

 

 

Technically, yes.

 

But I don't see a problem with the latter, as long as the speed limit is also 130mph.

[BOF]

You can lane hog driving at 15mph or you can lane hog driving at 130mph. Speed is irrelevant, it's all relative.

 

Technically, yes.

 

But I don't see a problem with the latter, as long as the speed limit is also 130mph.

The problem is that if you can do exactly what you are currently doing but in a lane that is inside you, then by the rules of the road you are driving in the wrong lane.

[legov]

 

 

You can lane hog driving at 15mph or you can lane hog driving at 130mph. Speed is irrelevant, it's all relative.

 

Technically, yes.

 

But I don't see a problem with the latter, as long as the speed limit is also 130mph.

 

The problem is that if you can do exactly what you are currently doing but in a lane that is inside you, then by the rules of the road you are driving in the wrong lane.

 

True.

 

Still, I don't see anything wrong with that. It isn't particularly unsafe, and while you're technically "road-hogging", you're not causing any inconvenience.

Edited June 6, 2013 by legov

[BOF]

Because it is technically illegal to undertake someone, you are effectively using up 2 lanes of a motorway. You are causing an inconvenience if someone behind you wants to get bye. You've given them 1 lane at their disposal instead of 2. And there is other traffic on the road too which then has no lane instead of 1.

[legov]

Because it is technically illegal to undertake someone, you are effectively using up 2 lanes of a motorway. You are causing an inconvenience if someone behind you wants to get bye. You've given them 1 lane at their disposal instead of 2. And there is other traffic on the road too which then has no lane instead of 1.

 

Fair enough...but only if the car in question is travelling below the speed limit.

 

If the car is travelling at the limit, you shouldn't even be overtaking.

 

I get your point though, and I agree.

[BOF]

Because it is technically illegal to undertake someone, you are effectively using up 2 lanes of a motorway. You are causing an inconvenience if someone behind you wants to get bye. You've given them 1 lane at their disposal instead of 2. And there is other traffic on the road too which then has no lane instead of 1.

 

Fair enough...but only if the car in question is travelling below the speed limit.

 

If the car is travelling at the limit, you shouldn't even be overtaking.

 

I get your point though, and I agree.

Obviously yes. But even in the case of you doing the speed limit, it's not your job to police other people. It's to do with traffic flow. If everyone went by the rules, it'd all work a lot better

[Stevo985]

 

You can lane hog driving at 15mph or you can lane hog driving at 130mph. Speed is irrelevant, it's all relative.

 

 

Technically, yes.

 

But I don't see a problem with the latter, as long as the speed limit is also 130mph.

 

Drivers on the road with this attitude are a big part of the problem

 

(not picking on you, just saying that opinion of "I'm doing the speed limit so it doesn't matter" doesn't hold up)