Seems great in theory, but what if the other drive isn't willing to let you in - or - vise versa?
Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
41–50 of 209 posts
Re: Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
#42Late merging works fine in Seattle, and in my experience the lane that's closed moves substantially faster than the open lane because Seattle drivers will actually let you merge in. That's not how I recalled it working when I lived in Texas though. In Texas if you got caught in the closed lane you were pretty much stuck there for a while, while the guys in the open lane whizzed by too fast for anybody in the slower (…
If the person merging late had to stop, then it means they went too far without getting a space (because they didn't take the chance they were given or no one gave them space). This is the problem with zipper merging: if everyone gets it right it's beautiful but the failure mode is near catastrophic (effectively stopping one lane) and easy to get into. One or two bad actors can ruin it.
Re: Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
#43I thought the zipper merge was the standard way to merge? You stay in your lane till the merge section(end of your lane) and its every other car. Maybe its a California thing.
I've rarely seen people in (northern) California do proper zipper merges. CA has some of the most clueless and inattentive driving I've ever seen.
Disagree. I used to reverse-commute through the Golden Gate Bridge and the Caldecott Tunnel, where the freeway went from 4 lanes to 2 in both places. 99% of drivers manage to zipper-merge properly. Likewise, almost everyone zippers at the South 101 Central Freeway merge.
California drivers may or may not be bad, but they're much better than the ones in Minnesota.
Re: Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
#44On most military bases, and therefore in military heavy towns like San Antonio, the zipper merge is used to great effect. I've even seen it used at T-intersections (where the perpendicular road must stop) - on almost every military base, when traffic is backed up, you'll see drivers immediately implement the zipper - one car from right of way, one from the intersecting road.
Re: Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
#45Perhaps instead of merging one lane into another, the animosity toward late mergers can be alleviated by making all lanes move.
If no one feels like they are in the free lane, they'll be forced to cooperate.
So, on a two-lane highway, make one center lane and have both lanes funnel into it. then you can move that free-flowing lane wherever you need.
Re: Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
#46Re: Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
#47Perhaps instead of merging one lane into another, the animosity toward late mergers can be alleviated by making all lanes move. If no one feels like they are in the free lane, they'll be forced to cooperate. So, on a two-lane highway, make one center lane and have both lanes funnel into it. then you can move that free-flowing lane wherever you need.
malandrew types faster than me. And has better ASCII art.
Re: Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
#48That video explanation made no sense to me. Basically the "interface" presented to the drivers has not changed, so why would drivers deviate from how they currently merge? Because the government said so? I don't see this working. However there are two solutions that could promote zipper merging: (1) Force both lanes to the center before moving that center lane to the side that is available ahead: ____________________…
Option 2 physically walls off the Late Mergers in addition to mentally (in the minds of the Free Laners), making them easier to ignore.
I like option 1 because it forces everyone to move.
Re: Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
#49Want faster and safer traffic merging? > Part of DMV road test should cover highway and emergency (road block) situations. > Utilize responsive testing (how fast person reacts to something). Could be an in-house application. > Older drivers should have extra testing once they hit certain age. > Re-test drivers every 10 years. > Driving and doing your make up? Reading a book/iPad? Eating chipotle? License suspension.…
> In general every situation where I had to steer out of the way was caused by an older person who should NOT be driving. Do you have any statistics about driving accidents? Because all the stats I've seen show that older drivers are safer better drivers than young people, and this is especially true when comparing to young males under the age of 26.
It's been awhile since I've looked into it, but I seem to remember it being more or less that the young, and very old are both less safe than the middle.
Re: Washington, Minnesota officially endorse a “safer, faster” traffic merge
#50I thought the zipper merge was the standard way to merge? You stay in your lane till the merge section(end of your lane) and its every other car. Maybe its a California thing.
I've rarely seen people in (northern) California do proper zipper merges. CA has some of the most clueless and inattentive driving I've ever seen.
I rarely have seen issues in California with zipper merge, when the lanes are actually merging. Most of the time the issue I've seen is when people are cutting over from a turn only lane to try and force their way to go straight.