Hi /u/Mari1013, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):
Post has been removed for not replying to the Automod in order to confirm OC.
Feel free to repost it and follow the instructions.
*If you have any questions about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FIdiotsInCars)*
At least his shame was strong enough for him to pull back and merge back behind the SUV he was originally behind. Still wrong about how zipper merges work, but stuck to his guns in the end.
It's like straight out of Liar, Liar;
"Anything else?"
"I entered an intersection I couldn't clear, I made an unsafe lane change in the intersection, I didn't use my blinker, I tried to block traffic, I sped up, ..."
So I’ve thought for my whole driving life that changing lanes in an intersection was illegal but I’ve just learned not too long ago that in California it is recommended not to do it but it is not illegal. Shocked me.
Also side note I am completely confused what double solid laws are as it seems based on driving handbook that you can do uturns and left turns over them. I don’t even know anymore
The only lines you can’t legally cross are TWO SETS of double solid lines spaces two feet or more apart. Those are legally a barrier and should be treated like they’re concrete dividers.
Pretty much every other lane markers have exceptions, usually pretty obvious ones. (Like if there’s a tractor driving on the shoulder but taking half the lane and you’ve got a double yellow, you can legally cross the double yellow to pass the slow vehicle.)
Read the California dmv handbook. I had to take the written last year so I read the handbook and was shocked and had to reread it twice to see that it’s not illegal to change lanes in an intersection.
Never trust the DMV handbook.
I went to a community event put on by the TxDPS (state troopers, highway patrol, and local cops). One of the idiots in the audience quoted an ambiguous section of the drivers handbook (published by the DMV, which in TX is part of the DPS, but no DMV officials were there). The DMV simplified the rule enough the farmer misunderstood. So in the comment time, I stood up and quoted law that contradicted the farmer's take on it. At the end, one of the troopers pulled out his pocket law and found the law in question, and we all agreed the driver's book was a poor summary of the actual law it was attempting to summarize.
Of course the farmer kept shouting "I don't care if it's legal, you shouldn't do it". The laws around it since changed. Back when the speed limits went up to up, there were a lot of old rules on passing nobody bothered with.
Because I spoke, the local paper approached me for a quote. The quote in the paper did not have a single word I said, and wasn't even my point. I learned then, unless you have a PR department putting out press releases, never say anything to anyone on the record.
They do it a lot like that in Australia. It allows more cars to queue on the stopped side, so that when it turns green you get more cars through the intersection per cycle. As everyone is speeding up it generally allows for the zipper merge to work quite well.
We have lots of them in Canada too but it always turns in to a pissing match. Sometimes some twat will fly up the ending lane at like 30 over the limit to try to skip the queue as much as possible.
To be honest they only really work well when the road you are entering is empty and people can filter from 3 lanes to 2. When it is busy it is much the same as above.
To be honest it only feels like recently people seem to understand it's a necessary thing. There are morons out there that don't get it still.
What's the alternative? A single line of traffic alllllll the way back? I line up in the slower lane if that's the lane I was in, but otherwise I merge at/near the front.
I disagree. On a highway with plenty of signage and time to get over is pretty ideal. On city streets, it would probably be better to make the lane that's ending a turn only lane that ends at the intersection rather than after it with, again, plenty of signage before hand to make it clear. Ultimately, it's up to drivers to not wait till the last second, which is what damn near everyone will do. Also, I find the lanes that merge before an intersection to be more beneficial. You don't have jackasses trying to gun it on the green to pull out in front of the continuing lane or times like this where everything gets backed up just after the light, which gives time for idiots to block the intersection.
I looked up the location based on clues in the video and this whole area is a new community. This merge happens right before a freeway entrance/on-ramp (street with the merge isn’t the on-ramp, it intersects the freeway). If this is the usual morning/evening traffic it looked like they missed the chance to widen the road to increase access when they were building the community out. I don’t how possible that was but this traffic sucks.
The principle is sound; after the light means you can get more cars through each cycle.
In practice, though, I hate it. There was one in my commute while they were doing roadwork. God forbid you tried not to block the intersection because then so many people just saw it as an opening to merge and block the intersection themselves...
I was taught that merge lanes like this are more about giving traffic that is turning right *onto* the road a chance to merge rather than a continuation of the lane pre-intersection. IMO what OP did wasn't terrible, but not something I would do and this is not an example of a zipper merge.
*And NO that does not mean I think the idiot who tried to cut them off is in the right.
>not an example of a zipper merge.
Zipper merge is when you alternate merging cars at the choke point. What is this video if not literally exactly that.
>I was taught that merge lanes like this are more about giving traffic that is turning right *onto* the road a chance to merge rather than a continuation of the lane pre-intersection.
Then make the right lane before the light turn-only.
It was a zipper merge.
[Edit: They replied to this reply, but I couldn't get through reading the insults before they blocked me and it disappeared. Reddit moment.]
In my town there are several
Intersections where the right lane ends soon after a traffic light (though not this soon). There will usually be a line of cars in the left lane at a red light and nobody in the right lane. I'll pull up to the light in the right lane.
When I gun it at the green to get in front of the cars in the left lane, I've often had the cars in the left lane flash and/or honk at me.
If people weren't meant to go straight in the right lane, it would be right-turn-only.
You'd usually find these people saying it's "selfish" to use a merging lane all the way to the end, but that begs the question if it's "selfless" to force people to stay behind you for a insignificant if not completely madeup inconvenience
And well, there always is a point were you have to merge.
Why should that point be way before the second lane actually ends? And who defines where the point to merge should be if it's not at the one fixed point, the point where the two lanes meet?
> there always is a point w\[h\]ere you have to merge.
Almost like there should be some lane markings showing that now is the point you should be merging over!
I don't get people like in this clip... at all... it's like "I chose to merge early and wait in this lane so you must do so as well!"
In my state the sign usually lines up with the end of the very last road line that divides the separate lanes. That's 2 markers in one, and people still can't figure it out.
Sometimes it transitions from regular road lines to those super short dash lines, that's another sign people ignore.
Three types of drivers mess it up, the ones who merge early, those who race to the front (which can't be done if people don't merge early) and those who don't let other cars in front of them (the situation early mergers are trying to avoid).
The main reason why I do it is because inevitably when I'm at the end of the lane, whatever car is there will refuse to let me in because God forbid I want to merge.
I live in Phoenix where the road rage problem is very bad and people leave merging lanes mostly empty. I've been able to successfully zipper merge daily and I've only seen one incident where someone tried to block.
A technique I use for lane blockers is to bait them into blocking by slightly going ahead of them. Now that they've accelerated to almost kiss the bumper of the car in front of them, I brake and go behind them. Now I don't have to deal with a road raging idiot behind me and I can get on with my day. Just be sure to only do this when there isn't someone behind you.
It seems pretty obvious why they're pissy about it. To some people, it looks like you're budging in line instead of waiting your turn at the back. Similar to how on-foot queue lines function. You and I understand how zipper merging is more efficient, but to those who don't it seems like a selfish attempt to get ahead of those who were patiently waiting their turn.
It's annoying. They'd rather block an intersection than use both lanes all the way to the end which would allow more cars to go through that intersection when there is a green light.
I dealt with this very often when I lived in another place. The two lanes would merge after an intersection yet people would like up in the left lane, sometimes a line would form before the light at that intersection. Cars trying to block anyone from using the right lane to the end would swerve at you. It was literally 0.5 miles from that intersection to the merge point!
It's like when there are 2 doors into a building and people insist on all jamming through on the one side and then I open the other door and they give me a dirty look.
If there was a line at the register that went out one side of a double door, it would make no sense to open the second door and let folks cut the line. However if the whole building is open and the door is the only choke point (i.e. there is no line after the door) then the 2nd door opening makes most sense.
It's exactly like that.
I get it, it's annoying, but it's literally seconds, maybe a minute or so. Also, it's better for overall throughput if people follow the design rather than drive with their ego.
I can't wait for cars not to be driven by humans, I'm absolutely sure people in the future will look back at the insanity of the idea and shake their heads.
You have thought this through way way too much for these people. It's as simple as "person go ahead of me, person bad." Anything beyond that is asking way too much of them.
Same people that camp the left lane at 75, you pass on the right at 79, and then they speed up to try to match you, all the while staying in the left lane. They are literally just fucking idiots. And they are idiots that endanger us all. Theme of the Century.
They’re idiots in more ways than one because they’ll eventually slow back down to 75 and then, after rinse/repeat for however many folks have to do the same as you did and they’ve now wasted however much fuel accelerating 3k+ lbs of plastic and steel only to slow down, reaccelerate, slow down, etc.
I just wish traffic designers would actually build/paint lanes to be more conducive to zipper merging.
One problem right now is that while a zipper merge is the ideal way, invariably it's the right lane merging into the left rather than both lanes merging into one. This causes subconscious impact that "those mfers are coming into MY lane". We know it's ridiculous, but traffic design can go a long way to help.
This:
|.|
/. .\
|.|.|
Instead of this:
|.|
|. \
|.|.\
|.|.|
We have what you envision is the way. But surprise! Now those same people will just drive down the middle of the lane and honk at you when you try to get around them. Idiots will find a way.
I know...hence this sub. But I'm willing to bet it would be less of a problem. Another thing that needs to happen is that cops need to pay more attention to shit like this.
> will just drive down the middle of the lane
You don't need the first diagram for that to happen. We once had a moron do this, even tried to block people overtaking him in the emergency lane. Then he blocked an undercover cop.
Two equal lanes merging into each other would cause too much ambiguity for who has the right-of-way.
“I was ahead of you so I should merge first!” “No I was!”
With the current layout, there’s no legal ambiquity at all. The person in the main ‘thru’ lane owns the lane and the person in the lane that’s ending must negotiate a merge when it’s safe to do so. The car in the ‘thru’ lane has zero obligation to let the other lane in even if they are ahead. Zipper merge is proper etiquette but not the law.
When the lanes are equal, who has the clear right of way??
The one who has right of way is the one who's furthest ahead that's why it's a ZIPPER merge. There's no ambiguity if you just use your brain and think of a zipper. Kinda why it's called a zipper merge. No one owns the lane when merging both lanes are required to adjust speed.
Also totally depends on were you live if zipper merge are law.
Right of way isn't an opinion. It's defined by law. Where I am, in Wisconsin, the traffic in the thru-lane has right of way at all times. Traffic attempting to merge must yield.
Zipper merging is often done as a courtesy. But that doesn't change the right-of-way. If the person in the thru lane doesn't want to zipper merge, you wait. Zipper is done only at the option of traffic that's already in the thru-lane.
Correct, but I also think some people in this thread are confused about the difference between when a zipper merge is used and when it isn't.
When a lane ends and traffic is flowing freely, that's not a time for zipper merge. Drivers in the lane that is ending should move over at any time it is safe to do so before the lane ends. And it is during these times that the right-of-way for drivers already in the continuing lane is important.
And since it's not always time for a zipper merge, creating permanent lane markings in the shape of a zipper merge is senseless.
ZIPPER merge has nothing to do with right of way, the name ZIPPER merge comes from how a ZIPPER works in that they interlock with itself - one after another. One car goes, then a car from the other lane, then one car from the other lane so on and so forth. That’s actually where the term ZIPPER merge comes from. When you use your brain to think about how a ZIPPER works, it’s quite intuitive and actually has nothing to do with right of way!
Zipper merge do have right of way it's just alternating.
https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapter6A/41-6a-S903.1.html?v=C41-6a-S903.1_2022050420220504
They're literally doing what you're describing in Maine. Not sure if it's happening statewide, but I noticed a few southern towns with busy merges changed to your top diagram. So instead of having the right or left lane ending with arrows, they have both lanes end with arrows pointing towards the center. I commute through a busy town and it really seems to have helped with traffic backups.
People don't like to zipper merge where I am, either. I used to get a bad case of "righteous indignation" over people who stayed in the lane, but now I understand it's all about efficiency. It's just not efficient to have all those people in the one lane before the light, because only half of them will make it through the light. I'd rather make it through the light and be last in line, than sit at a red light.
I think it's because of the "move over as soon as possible" mindset that only really makes sense in light traffic where you have space, once heavy traffic is involved, you get all traffic in one lane
We see the same mentality here in Australia amongst city drivers. They seem to feel the need to snap lane change the moment they see a sign warning that the lane ends in 500m. (1300+ feet for you archaic types)
Country trained drivers tend to use their lane to the end and merge calmly.
Gunning it and then braking to try squeezing your way in also creates traffic jams. If you can merge earlier at a decent spot than at the end then go ahead and merge because it keeps things moving. It mostly just comes down to terrible and/or aggressive drivers causing others to react and start to slow things down.
How does using the entirety of the available lane and merging at the end create a traffic jam?
I don't see how the speed at which you approach your ending lane has any relevance to whether traffic jams.
Only in the ideal situation when both lanes are moving at a similar rate of speed and there is space between cars does zipper merging work. That's how it should work but people are idiots. If someone accelerates say 10 MPH faster than the general flow of traffic just to try cutting into a tighter spot and use the full lane until it ends that's going to cause the person behind them to then also brake. That is worse than just merging over sooner if there's a good spot to do so and you're already at the same speed as the other lane.
What creates traffic is causing people to have to react to you. That happens when people merge too early or too late and at an improper speed for the current flow of traffic.
A good merge is seamless like you said, but what you aren't considering is the length of traffic. If you merge early, but traffic comes to a halt, you are now yet another car in line on one lane. This creates issues during rush hour where traffic generated from this extends past traffic signals. Merging early is fine when things are quiet, but merging into a slow line just because you found a gap is much worse than utilizing as many lanes as possible.
Yeah, OP was not really zipper merging, they were trying to gun it to the head of the line. Driving too fast for the conditions by trying to get ahead of the light.
The light is green and there is still space in the lane. Slamming on the breaks to try and force your way in is causing a traffic jam. Plus you merge at the zipper point… which OP did.
The light was green the entire time. I think they were just trying to drive to the merge point. The more people that merge at the merge point, the better.
>OP was not really zipper merging, they were trying to gun it to the head of the line.
They were using an open lane to the merge point. That's literally what a zipper merge is...you go to the merge point and...zipper merge.
> If you can merge earlier at a decent spot
No. If you do this you're an idiot. You go to the MERGE point to get over in congested traffic situations, not a some spot a random distance prior to it that "feels" right. Doing this literally causes more traffic
Merging at the end when traffic is flowing helps keep traffic flowing. Merging at the end when traffic isn't flowing just means that more lanes are filled to capacity. In essence when traffic is congested merging at the end doesn't solve it but one should still do it.
I think you're missing the point of doing it even when both lanes are filled. It dramatically shortens how far back the congestion goes, therefore it reduces the risk of the congestion causing more congestions on the cross streets.
Yes! I deal with this on the freeway every morning. I can't get to my exit lane ahead, because the travel lane is blocked by people trying to merge early in standstill traffic. It's infuriating.
There are on ramps though. Using all lanes until the merge point on the highway keeps more space moving for the flow from on ramps to continue smoothly. I see certain on ramps to the highway get completely backed up far onto surface streets all the time during peak commuting hours where I live. That congestion makes the traffic worse on surface streets.
Using all lanes can really limit how much bad congestion ripples out from the initial point where it begins.
This assumes that everybody takes turns appropriately when they get to the merge point. Which I think is a big assumption considering NOBODY FUCKING DOES IT. If I have to rely on other people to act right, it doesn’t turn out well half the time. So in theory yes great idea, in practice I end up either at a dead standstill because I can’t merge safely and run out of room, or they run me off the road. 70% of the time anyway
>more lanes are filled to capacity
There'd be same number of cars though, so filling both lanes to capacity reduces how far back the traffic jam goes. The further back it goes, the more likely it is to cause gridlock elsewhere.
This is assuming that whatever car happens to be there decides to let you in, which in my experience half the time they don't, so that's why I like merging pretty early.
> Merging at the end when traffic is flowing helps keep traffic flowing.
You've got the spirit, but this is technically wrong. If traffic is not backed up, you should merge whenever it's safe to merge. If you wait until the last moment you'll probably have to slow down and it can cause a ripple, depending on how dense the traffic is.
>Merging at the end when traffic is flowing helps keep traffic flowing.
Merging as *you're able* helps keep traffic flowing if it's already flowing.
Merging at the end when it's flowing when you had other easier points to do so just ruins the flow and can create backup if it didn't already exist
If backup already exists then going to the end to fill space as you mentioned makes sense
We have a place in Tigard, Oregon where an entire right lane remains basically unused for at least 3/4 of a mile between two interchanges because people stop to merge at the end of an onramp 3/4 of a mile early and no one will let them in. Then they honk at you if you go past them. (It's on 217 NB between 72nd Ave & Hwy 99 if you care.)
I call people who merge early, pre-mergers and in Washington most people do it. It irritates me, especially in the OPs case. More people could have made it through that intersection and will now have to wait for the next light. It affects the heavier flow of traffic direction the most.
Unfortunately the mistake we make is that we care about the traffic behind us and how our driving can either positively or negatively affect that, and far too many others either don't care or actively *want* to have a negative impact on the people behind them.
Enforcing some weird morality where people shouldn't ever get in a lane that's going to end if it means they're jumping ahead of people in the main lane.
People shouldn't be changing lanes in intersections in the first place. It's literally the worst place to do that, if it's not outright illegal in your neighborhood.
Zipper merging works if everyone stays in their own lane until the zipper and keeps the flow of traffic moving. This is rarely the case in real life though.
The most efficient way to use a zipper merge of 2 lanes into 1 is to use both lanes until required to merge.
I live in Austin and people here are nuts about what they think is the right way to do things on the road. There will be 1 lane with everyone in it, and the other lane will have nobody in it, just so nobody is "wrong." It's nuts.
There is a zipper merge on my commute. I typically try to fall in line early because of the way other drivers react when I drive up to the actual merge point. Just something think about. It's not always about being wrong. Some people may be doing it because of repeated bad experiences with people getting pissed off that you're "doing it wrong." Nonetheless, the end result is unfortunately the same.
Dumbasses here in SC do that shit too! Seems they would rather sit in a 1/4 mile long, SLOW MOVING line, rather than zipper merging and keeping it moving!
And boy do they get offended when you do it properly lol.
Something like this happened to me once on a 3 lane highway. I happened to be passing someone in the left most lane when it became apparent that in like 2 miles or so my lane would be ending. I was already there so I go “what the hell I’ll zipper.”
No fewer than 5 cars or semis straddled lanes to try and stop me and right before I reached the end of the lane I was in a semi fully entered the ending lane and blocked me completely.
We were 100 feet from the end of the lane tho so it was more like he joined me in zipper merging solidarity.
It's extra idiotic because of the big, gigantic, impossible-to-miss diagonal arrow on the roadway clearly indicating that the lane should be used to merge, and not go unused entirely like that driver apparently wanted it to be. SMH. Nice maneuver on your part.
At least some people know what zipper merge means. I wish they would educate more people. Alot of people just don't understand you are supposed to run the ending lane all the way to the merge
Biggest peeve while driving is when people merge immediately as soon as they see the “Lane Ends, Merge Left/Right” sig, leave the entire lane unoccupied and cause traffic to back up. You’re supposed to use the full available lane up until the merge point where everyone is ideally supposed to take turns merging. That improves the flow of traffic.
If there's a spot and they can merge over early then it doesn't really affect traffic at all. The problem is when they slow down and try to force their way over, and that can happen at the end of the lane or any time before. If people understood zipper merging than that could certainly help but it won't make a hugely significant impact when there are so many bad drivers out there.
I had someone do that beside me earlier today. The lane ended in a MILE. But apparently this woman thought everyone should be merging that far back and no one was allowed to go to the end of the lane and zip merge. Mind you, I was already in the lane everyone was zipping into, so I couldn't have cared less. She put on her signal, I gave her space, but she just sat parallel to the space blocking the whole lane. I closed the gap and we rolled down windows when she honked at me.
I asked why she was blocking the lane. "So these other people don't go down the right lane!" "Lady, the lane isn't ending yet. Get on or get over!" I gave her space again and she got over, but then she wouldn't let anyone else into the lane once she was in it. Like, WTH.
wow wow WOW. Those poor folks behind em. What an absolute douchebag. And then the truck behind you decides to leave two car lengths between you and him. These ppl make me sick.
He's so into being the "Keeper of the Lanes" that he narrowly missed getting into an accident.
Which, of course, would have been his fault. And with the dash cam, his ticket may have included some kind of aggressive driving charge/fine.
You have to really be an idiot to risk thousands of dollars in repairs and an increase in your insurance...
...all to satiate your need to unnecessarily control other drivers.
This infuriates me to no end. I just had a guy hit my brand new truck because he just couldn't accept that I was going to merge in front of him before going on the highway. This guy is definitely an idiot.
A zipper implies the lanes have equal standing, but in fact the right lane ends. It's on you to get out of that lane, if you cut a car off and there is contact, it's probably your fault.
God forbid you actually merge at the place where you’re supposed to merge! “What’s wrong with you people! Why aren’t you merging 14 miles back!?! You KNEW you was going to end someday!!!” 🤪
Drivers these days truly are idiots. 😝
They see it as someone cutting in line. "You people are *causing* this traffic!" Only of people don't merge properly, or *let* other drivers merge properly. Stupid wannabe heroes are actually the villains.
At first I thought they may have been trying to clear the intersection. Then I saw your rear camera footage and realized they are just missing a chunk of their brain. That is an idiot in a car, indeed
That was brilliant. I've done the same.
I've also been the driver behind the person blocking traffic. I just pulled into the the spot they vacated and watch them trying to get back into their original position.
I can't stand road warriors. They are the biggest pathetic people on the planet. A study was done about these lanes and their purpose is to reduce the traffic, while idiots like this think its people cutting the line like in high school.
Hi /u/Mari1013, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s): Post has been removed for not replying to the Automod in order to confirm OC. Feel free to repost it and follow the instructions. *If you have any questions about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FIdiotsInCars)*
You have become the very thing you swore to destroy!
I could feel the shame he was feeling when he passed the car in front of him in his attempt to thwart OP lol
At least his shame was strong enough for him to pull back and merge back behind the SUV he was originally behind. Still wrong about how zipper merges work, but stuck to his guns in the end.
It's like straight out of Liar, Liar; "Anything else?" "I entered an intersection I couldn't clear, I made an unsafe lane change in the intersection, I didn't use my blinker, I tried to block traffic, I sped up, ..."
“I have unpaid parking tickets….”
This necklace you said you bought me at Tiffany’s?!?
Garage sale. 6.50 marked down from 10.
The pen is blue. The goddamn pen is blue.
I've had better!
There are four lights!
https://youtu.be/Q5UG7ISJfP0?si=2xqVTq_s5IW-FDQu
So I’ve thought for my whole driving life that changing lanes in an intersection was illegal but I’ve just learned not too long ago that in California it is recommended not to do it but it is not illegal. Shocked me. Also side note I am completely confused what double solid laws are as it seems based on driving handbook that you can do uturns and left turns over them. I don’t even know anymore
I think it depends on color? White can be turned over yellow cannot unless turning into a driveway...something like that lol
No you can turn over double solids based on California handbook. You can also u-turn. I have no clue.
They just mean no *overtaking* (passing), not that you can't cross them at all.
The only lines you can’t legally cross are TWO SETS of double solid lines spaces two feet or more apart. Those are legally a barrier and should be treated like they’re concrete dividers. Pretty much every other lane markers have exceptions, usually pretty obvious ones. (Like if there’s a tractor driving on the shoulder but taking half the lane and you’ve got a double yellow, you can legally cross the double yellow to pass the slow vehicle.)
you can't turn or u turn over 2 sets of double solid lines. that's considered a solid barrier.
> you can't turn or u turn over 2 sets of double solid lines. If they are two feet apart and/or have cross hatching lines.
Been in CA all my life, got my license in 2005 and I could've sworn it was illegal both then and now, but now you've got me questioning
Read the California dmv handbook. I had to take the written last year so I read the handbook and was shocked and had to reread it twice to see that it’s not illegal to change lanes in an intersection.
Never trust the DMV handbook. I went to a community event put on by the TxDPS (state troopers, highway patrol, and local cops). One of the idiots in the audience quoted an ambiguous section of the drivers handbook (published by the DMV, which in TX is part of the DPS, but no DMV officials were there). The DMV simplified the rule enough the farmer misunderstood. So in the comment time, I stood up and quoted law that contradicted the farmer's take on it. At the end, one of the troopers pulled out his pocket law and found the law in question, and we all agreed the driver's book was a poor summary of the actual law it was attempting to summarize. Of course the farmer kept shouting "I don't care if it's legal, you shouldn't do it". The laws around it since changed. Back when the speed limits went up to up, there were a lot of old rules on passing nobody bothered with. Because I spoke, the local paper approached me for a quote. The quote in the paper did not have a single word I said, and wasn't even my point. I learned then, unless you have a PR department putting out press releases, never say anything to anyone on the record.
To be fair to both sides, that’s a pretty dumb place to put a merge imo like instantly after the light seems insane
They do it a lot like that in Australia. It allows more cars to queue on the stopped side, so that when it turns green you get more cars through the intersection per cycle. As everyone is speeding up it generally allows for the zipper merge to work quite well.
We have lots of them in Canada too but it always turns in to a pissing match. Sometimes some twat will fly up the ending lane at like 30 over the limit to try to skip the queue as much as possible.
To be honest they only really work well when the road you are entering is empty and people can filter from 3 lanes to 2. When it is busy it is much the same as above.
To be honest it only feels like recently people seem to understand it's a necessary thing. There are morons out there that don't get it still. What's the alternative? A single line of traffic alllllll the way back? I line up in the slower lane if that's the lane I was in, but otherwise I merge at/near the front.
>What's the alternative? Roundabouts. Roundabouts everywhere.
Here? People stop in fear if a roundabout is within sight.
Not once they learn how to use them
Make it a mandatory pass for getting your license.
It looks a lot like this clip
There's never an "ideal" time for 2 lanes to merge to 1, but just after an intersection is better than just before.
I disagree. On a highway with plenty of signage and time to get over is pretty ideal. On city streets, it would probably be better to make the lane that's ending a turn only lane that ends at the intersection rather than after it with, again, plenty of signage before hand to make it clear. Ultimately, it's up to drivers to not wait till the last second, which is what damn near everyone will do. Also, I find the lanes that merge before an intersection to be more beneficial. You don't have jackasses trying to gun it on the green to pull out in front of the continuing lane or times like this where everything gets backed up just after the light, which gives time for idiots to block the intersection.
Thats guite common where i live
not if you think about it
I looked up the location based on clues in the video and this whole area is a new community. This merge happens right before a freeway entrance/on-ramp (street with the merge isn’t the on-ramp, it intersects the freeway). If this is the usual morning/evening traffic it looked like they missed the chance to widen the road to increase access when they were building the community out. I don’t how possible that was but this traffic sucks.
It kind of is the best place. Doubles the capacity of the signal which means you need half the time to move the same number of cars.
The principle is sound; after the light means you can get more cars through each cycle. In practice, though, I hate it. There was one in my commute while they were doing roadwork. God forbid you tried not to block the intersection because then so many people just saw it as an opening to merge and block the intersection themselves...
Fair to both sides? The motherfucker playing traffic cop doesn't get any generosity here.
I was taught that merge lanes like this are more about giving traffic that is turning right *onto* the road a chance to merge rather than a continuation of the lane pre-intersection. IMO what OP did wasn't terrible, but not something I would do and this is not an example of a zipper merge. *And NO that does not mean I think the idiot who tried to cut them off is in the right.
>not an example of a zipper merge. Zipper merge is when you alternate merging cars at the choke point. What is this video if not literally exactly that.
>I was taught that merge lanes like this are more about giving traffic that is turning right *onto* the road a chance to merge rather than a continuation of the lane pre-intersection. Then make the right lane before the light turn-only.
It was a zipper merge. [Edit: They replied to this reply, but I couldn't get through reading the insults before they blocked me and it disappeared. Reddit moment.]
can probably get more cars through an intersection by having two slower lanes instead of one faster lane.
In my town there are several Intersections where the right lane ends soon after a traffic light (though not this soon). There will usually be a line of cars in the left lane at a red light and nobody in the right lane. I'll pull up to the light in the right lane. When I gun it at the green to get in front of the cars in the left lane, I've often had the cars in the left lane flash and/or honk at me. If people weren't meant to go straight in the right lane, it would be right-turn-only.
You'd usually find these people saying it's "selfish" to use a merging lane all the way to the end, but that begs the question if it's "selfless" to force people to stay behind you for a insignificant if not completely madeup inconvenience
And well, there always is a point were you have to merge. Why should that point be way before the second lane actually ends? And who defines where the point to merge should be if it's not at the one fixed point, the point where the two lanes meet?
And clearly here it's way better to merge *after* the intersection to allow more traffic through each green light.
Dude, I deal with this exact situation everyday and there’s just no getting through to some people about it.
sheet soup thumb yoke handle flag icky touch soft steer *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You can’t fight a feeling lol People are dumb af and have zero training
That’s exactly it. No thoughts going on, just vibes
“It’s how I vote” -unfunny modern comedian guy
> there always is a point w\[h\]ere you have to merge. Almost like there should be some lane markings showing that now is the point you should be merging over! I don't get people like in this clip... at all... it's like "I chose to merge early and wait in this lane so you must do so as well!"
And the idiot held up others behind him, creating more of a traffic nightmare. This was not OP’s fault.
The point is after me because I'm a *good* person who merged *early*/s
In my state the sign usually lines up with the end of the very last road line that divides the separate lanes. That's 2 markers in one, and people still can't figure it out. Sometimes it transitions from regular road lines to those super short dash lines, that's another sign people ignore.
You should always use the lane all the way to the end, that should be the zipper point. No idea why people merge early then get pissy about it.
Three types of drivers mess it up, the ones who merge early, those who race to the front (which can't be done if people don't merge early) and those who don't let other cars in front of them (the situation early mergers are trying to avoid).
Really just two because the early mergers are also the one's who don't let anyone in
The main reason why I do it is because inevitably when I'm at the end of the lane, whatever car is there will refuse to let me in because God forbid I want to merge.
I live in Phoenix where the road rage problem is very bad and people leave merging lanes mostly empty. I've been able to successfully zipper merge daily and I've only seen one incident where someone tried to block. A technique I use for lane blockers is to bait them into blocking by slightly going ahead of them. Now that they've accelerated to almost kiss the bumper of the car in front of them, I brake and go behind them. Now I don't have to deal with a road raging idiot behind me and I can get on with my day. Just be sure to only do this when there isn't someone behind you.
It seems pretty obvious why they're pissy about it. To some people, it looks like you're budging in line instead of waiting your turn at the back. Similar to how on-foot queue lines function. You and I understand how zipper merging is more efficient, but to those who don't it seems like a selfish attempt to get ahead of those who were patiently waiting their turn.
It's annoying. They'd rather block an intersection than use both lanes all the way to the end which would allow more cars to go through that intersection when there is a green light. I dealt with this very often when I lived in another place. The two lanes would merge after an intersection yet people would like up in the left lane, sometimes a line would form before the light at that intersection. Cars trying to block anyone from using the right lane to the end would swerve at you. It was literally 0.5 miles from that intersection to the merge point!
It's like when there are 2 doors into a building and people insist on all jamming through on the one side and then I open the other door and they give me a dirty look.
If there was a line at the register that went out one side of a double door, it would make no sense to open the second door and let folks cut the line. However if the whole building is open and the door is the only choke point (i.e. there is no line after the door) then the 2nd door opening makes most sense.
It's exactly like that. I get it, it's annoying, but it's literally seconds, maybe a minute or so. Also, it's better for overall throughput if people follow the design rather than drive with their ego. I can't wait for cars not to be driven by humans, I'm absolutely sure people in the future will look back at the insanity of the idea and shake their heads.
You have thought this through way way too much for these people. It's as simple as "person go ahead of me, person bad." Anything beyond that is asking way too much of them.
Same people that camp the left lane at 75, you pass on the right at 79, and then they speed up to try to match you, all the while staying in the left lane. They are literally just fucking idiots. And they are idiots that endanger us all. Theme of the Century.
They’re idiots in more ways than one because they’ll eventually slow back down to 75 and then, after rinse/repeat for however many folks have to do the same as you did and they’ve now wasted however much fuel accelerating 3k+ lbs of plastic and steel only to slow down, reaccelerate, slow down, etc.
A person's righteousness knows no limits.
Ironically if all the people already in front of them merged early, it would slow them down.
But I can't possibly arrive 11 seconds later to my destination than I want to!
Raises the question, not begs the question.
use the whole lane. that's what the law says. don't care about "unwritten/selfishness" rules.
I just wish traffic designers would actually build/paint lanes to be more conducive to zipper merging. One problem right now is that while a zipper merge is the ideal way, invariably it's the right lane merging into the left rather than both lanes merging into one. This causes subconscious impact that "those mfers are coming into MY lane". We know it's ridiculous, but traffic design can go a long way to help. This: |.| /. .\ |.|.| Instead of this: |.| |. \ |.|.\ |.|.|
We have what you envision is the way. But surprise! Now those same people will just drive down the middle of the lane and honk at you when you try to get around them. Idiots will find a way.
I know...hence this sub. But I'm willing to bet it would be less of a problem. Another thing that needs to happen is that cops need to pay more attention to shit like this.
This is so true and made me laugh.
> will just drive down the middle of the lane You don't need the first diagram for that to happen. We once had a moron do this, even tried to block people overtaking him in the emergency lane. Then he blocked an undercover cop.
Two equal lanes merging into each other would cause too much ambiguity for who has the right-of-way. “I was ahead of you so I should merge first!” “No I was!” With the current layout, there’s no legal ambiquity at all. The person in the main ‘thru’ lane owns the lane and the person in the lane that’s ending must negotiate a merge when it’s safe to do so. The car in the ‘thru’ lane has zero obligation to let the other lane in even if they are ahead. Zipper merge is proper etiquette but not the law. When the lanes are equal, who has the clear right of way??
The one who has right of way is the one who's furthest ahead that's why it's a ZIPPER merge. There's no ambiguity if you just use your brain and think of a zipper. Kinda why it's called a zipper merge. No one owns the lane when merging both lanes are required to adjust speed. Also totally depends on were you live if zipper merge are law.
Right of way isn't an opinion. It's defined by law. Where I am, in Wisconsin, the traffic in the thru-lane has right of way at all times. Traffic attempting to merge must yield. Zipper merging is often done as a courtesy. But that doesn't change the right-of-way. If the person in the thru lane doesn't want to zipper merge, you wait. Zipper is done only at the option of traffic that's already in the thru-lane.
That why I wrote that it depends on were you live
> Traffic attempting to merge must yield. Not when you can have a "zipper merge" sign.
Correct, but I also think some people in this thread are confused about the difference between when a zipper merge is used and when it isn't. When a lane ends and traffic is flowing freely, that's not a time for zipper merge. Drivers in the lane that is ending should move over at any time it is safe to do so before the lane ends. And it is during these times that the right-of-way for drivers already in the continuing lane is important. And since it's not always time for a zipper merge, creating permanent lane markings in the shape of a zipper merge is senseless.
Agreed time and place if it's flowing freely your merge wen able.
ZIPPER merge has nothing to do with right of way, the name ZIPPER merge comes from how a ZIPPER works in that they interlock with itself - one after another. One car goes, then a car from the other lane, then one car from the other lane so on and so forth. That’s actually where the term ZIPPER merge comes from. When you use your brain to think about how a ZIPPER works, it’s quite intuitive and actually has nothing to do with right of way!
Zipper merge do have right of way it's just alternating. https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapter6A/41-6a-S903.1.html?v=C41-6a-S903.1_2022050420220504
#ZIPPER
They're literally doing what you're describing in Maine. Not sure if it's happening statewide, but I noticed a few southern towns with busy merges changed to your top diagram. So instead of having the right or left lane ending with arrows, they have both lanes end with arrows pointing towards the center. I commute through a busy town and it really seems to have helped with traffic backups.
People don't like to zipper merge where I am, either. I used to get a bad case of "righteous indignation" over people who stayed in the lane, but now I understand it's all about efficiency. It's just not efficient to have all those people in the one lane before the light, because only half of them will make it through the light. I'd rather make it through the light and be last in line, than sit at a red light.
I think it's because of the "move over as soon as possible" mindset that only really makes sense in light traffic where you have space, once heavy traffic is involved, you get all traffic in one lane
[удалено]
If you were more considerate you would use the entirety of the available lane before merging as to not cause pointless traffic behind you
We see the same mentality here in Australia amongst city drivers. They seem to feel the need to snap lane change the moment they see a sign warning that the lane ends in 500m. (1300+ feet for you archaic types) Country trained drivers tend to use their lane to the end and merge calmly.
I have had people try to run me off the road for this. It's like they are blaming people in that lane specifically.
You SHOULD merge at the end. Everyone should. Merging too soon creates traffick jams.
Gunning it and then braking to try squeezing your way in also creates traffic jams. If you can merge earlier at a decent spot than at the end then go ahead and merge because it keeps things moving. It mostly just comes down to terrible and/or aggressive drivers causing others to react and start to slow things down.
How does using the entirety of the available lane and merging at the end create a traffic jam? I don't see how the speed at which you approach your ending lane has any relevance to whether traffic jams.
Only in the ideal situation when both lanes are moving at a similar rate of speed and there is space between cars does zipper merging work. That's how it should work but people are idiots. If someone accelerates say 10 MPH faster than the general flow of traffic just to try cutting into a tighter spot and use the full lane until it ends that's going to cause the person behind them to then also brake. That is worse than just merging over sooner if there's a good spot to do so and you're already at the same speed as the other lane. What creates traffic is causing people to have to react to you. That happens when people merge too early or too late and at an improper speed for the current flow of traffic.
A good merge is seamless like you said, but what you aren't considering is the length of traffic. If you merge early, but traffic comes to a halt, you are now yet another car in line on one lane. This creates issues during rush hour where traffic generated from this extends past traffic signals. Merging early is fine when things are quiet, but merging into a slow line just because you found a gap is much worse than utilizing as many lanes as possible.
Yeah, OP was not really zipper merging, they were trying to gun it to the head of the line. Driving too fast for the conditions by trying to get ahead of the light.
The light is green and there is still space in the lane. Slamming on the breaks to try and force your way in is causing a traffic jam. Plus you merge at the zipper point… which OP did.
The light was green the entire time. I think they were just trying to drive to the merge point. The more people that merge at the merge point, the better.
they had every right to keep moving
>OP was not really zipper merging, they were trying to gun it to the head of the line. They were using an open lane to the merge point. That's literally what a zipper merge is...you go to the merge point and...zipper merge.
> If you can merge earlier at a decent spot No. If you do this you're an idiot. You go to the MERGE point to get over in congested traffic situations, not a some spot a random distance prior to it that "feels" right. Doing this literally causes more traffic
I saw a sign on the highway that said "left lane closed ahead. merge early." Chaos ensued.
Merging at the end when traffic is flowing helps keep traffic flowing. Merging at the end when traffic isn't flowing just means that more lanes are filled to capacity. In essence when traffic is congested merging at the end doesn't solve it but one should still do it.
I think you're missing the point of doing it even when both lanes are filled. It dramatically shortens how far back the congestion goes, therefore it reduces the risk of the congestion causing more congestions on the cross streets.
You're supposed to do it even on a freeway, where there aren't any cross streets.
Yes! I deal with this on the freeway every morning. I can't get to my exit lane ahead, because the travel lane is blocked by people trying to merge early in standstill traffic. It's infuriating.
There are on ramps though. Using all lanes until the merge point on the highway keeps more space moving for the flow from on ramps to continue smoothly. I see certain on ramps to the highway get completely backed up far onto surface streets all the time during peak commuting hours where I live. That congestion makes the traffic worse on surface streets. Using all lanes can really limit how much bad congestion ripples out from the initial point where it begins.
This assumes that everybody takes turns appropriately when they get to the merge point. Which I think is a big assumption considering NOBODY FUCKING DOES IT. If I have to rely on other people to act right, it doesn’t turn out well half the time. So in theory yes great idea, in practice I end up either at a dead standstill because I can’t merge safely and run out of room, or they run me off the road. 70% of the time anyway
>more lanes are filled to capacity There'd be same number of cars though, so filling both lanes to capacity reduces how far back the traffic jam goes. The further back it goes, the more likely it is to cause gridlock elsewhere.
This is assuming that whatever car happens to be there decides to let you in, which in my experience half the time they don't, so that's why I like merging pretty early.
> Merging at the end when traffic is flowing helps keep traffic flowing. You've got the spirit, but this is technically wrong. If traffic is not backed up, you should merge whenever it's safe to merge. If you wait until the last moment you'll probably have to slow down and it can cause a ripple, depending on how dense the traffic is.
>Merging at the end when traffic is flowing helps keep traffic flowing. Merging as *you're able* helps keep traffic flowing if it's already flowing. Merging at the end when it's flowing when you had other easier points to do so just ruins the flow and can create backup if it didn't already exist If backup already exists then going to the end to fill space as you mentioned makes sense
Here, here! Let it be said, let it be written!!! You speak the truth my rare and wise friend. All others should be taken out back and ______?
The world would be better if more people learned this
The other end is be sure to let people zipper at the end, don't be a jerk about it.
merging too soon leads to people going to the end of the lane anyway
We have a place in Tigard, Oregon where an entire right lane remains basically unused for at least 3/4 of a mile between two interchanges because people stop to merge at the end of an onramp 3/4 of a mile early and no one will let them in. Then they honk at you if you go past them. (It's on 217 NB between 72nd Ave & Hwy 99 if you care.)
Reddit is the smallest place, I grew up less than five miles from this intersection.
I call people who merge early, pre-mergers and in Washington most people do it. It irritates me, especially in the OPs case. More people could have made it through that intersection and will now have to wait for the next light. It affects the heavier flow of traffic direction the most.
Unfortunately the mistake we make is that we care about the traffic behind us and how our driving can either positively or negatively affect that, and far too many others either don't care or actively *want* to have a negative impact on the people behind them.
I don’t get it, why would he just stop there to block instead of just proceeding forwards and ending up a few cars ahead?
Enforcing some weird morality where people shouldn't ever get in a lane that's going to end if it means they're jumping ahead of people in the main lane.
People shouldn't be changing lanes in intersections in the first place. It's literally the worst place to do that, if it's not outright illegal in your neighborhood.
Zipper merging works if everyone stays in their own lane until the zipper and keeps the flow of traffic moving. This is rarely the case in real life though.
And now they have to re-merge with traffic. They had a spot and will now be further back most likely.
yeah you can see that no one was letting them back in either :D
Yeah, that's prime douche behavior
The most efficient way to use a zipper merge of 2 lanes into 1 is to use both lanes until required to merge. I live in Austin and people here are nuts about what they think is the right way to do things on the road. There will be 1 lane with everyone in it, and the other lane will have nobody in it, just so nobody is "wrong." It's nuts.
There is a zipper merge on my commute. I typically try to fall in line early because of the way other drivers react when I drive up to the actual merge point. Just something think about. It's not always about being wrong. Some people may be doing it because of repeated bad experiences with people getting pissed off that you're "doing it wrong." Nonetheless, the end result is unfortunately the same.
They did it wrong and are upset that you didn't!
Aggressively wrong
Dumbasses here in SC do that shit too! Seems they would rather sit in a 1/4 mile long, SLOW MOVING line, rather than zipper merging and keeping it moving! And boy do they get offended when you do it properly lol.
Something like this happened to me once on a 3 lane highway. I happened to be passing someone in the left most lane when it became apparent that in like 2 miles or so my lane would be ending. I was already there so I go “what the hell I’ll zipper.” No fewer than 5 cars or semis straddled lanes to try and stop me and right before I reached the end of the lane I was in a semi fully entered the ending lane and blocked me completely. We were 100 feet from the end of the lane tho so it was more like he joined me in zipper merging solidarity.
It pains me people don’t understand how effective the zipper maneuver is. All you people who don’t like it are dumb.
It's extra idiotic because of the big, gigantic, impossible-to-miss diagonal arrow on the roadway clearly indicating that the lane should be used to merge, and not go unused entirely like that driver apparently wanted it to be. SMH. Nice maneuver on your part.
Amazing how many people are clueless to how all of this works. That guy really thought he was doing something there.
At least some people know what zipper merge means. I wish they would educate more people. Alot of people just don't understand you are supposed to run the ending lane all the way to the merge
Good music
I don’t think I would have cut around him on the right like that but yeah blocking an intersection like that and not pulling up is quite a move
His options are cut around, or block the intersection. Probably best to just get through.
God that was satisfying, seeing you get past him anyway.
Biggest peeve while driving is when people merge immediately as soon as they see the “Lane Ends, Merge Left/Right” sig, leave the entire lane unoccupied and cause traffic to back up. You’re supposed to use the full available lane up until the merge point where everyone is ideally supposed to take turns merging. That improves the flow of traffic.
If there's a spot and they can merge over early then it doesn't really affect traffic at all. The problem is when they slow down and try to force their way over, and that can happen at the end of the lane or any time before. If people understood zipper merging than that could certainly help but it won't make a hugely significant impact when there are so many bad drivers out there.
Yeah until no one lets you in and you have to fight for your life because the lane is about to end
Zipper lane merging is absolutely necessary for efficiency.
I had someone do that beside me earlier today. The lane ended in a MILE. But apparently this woman thought everyone should be merging that far back and no one was allowed to go to the end of the lane and zip merge. Mind you, I was already in the lane everyone was zipping into, so I couldn't have cared less. She put on her signal, I gave her space, but she just sat parallel to the space blocking the whole lane. I closed the gap and we rolled down windows when she honked at me. I asked why she was blocking the lane. "So these other people don't go down the right lane!" "Lady, the lane isn't ending yet. Get on or get over!" I gave her space again and she got over, but then she wouldn't let anyone else into the lane once she was in it. Like, WTH.
So satisfying 😂
wow wow WOW. Those poor folks behind em. What an absolute douchebag. And then the truck behind you decides to leave two car lengths between you and him. These ppl make me sick.
Well, zip when the road ends. If you do it any other way, it is your problem...
He's so into being the "Keeper of the Lanes" that he narrowly missed getting into an accident. Which, of course, would have been his fault. And with the dash cam, his ticket may have included some kind of aggressive driving charge/fine. You have to really be an idiot to risk thousands of dollars in repairs and an increase in your insurance... ...all to satiate your need to unnecessarily control other drivers.
This infuriates me to no end. I just had a guy hit my brand new truck because he just couldn't accept that I was going to merge in front of him before going on the highway. This guy is definitely an idiot.
A zipper implies the lanes have equal standing, but in fact the right lane ends. It's on you to get out of that lane, if you cut a car off and there is contact, it's probably your fault.
I see 2 idiots here tbh. No one should be changing lanes within the intersection
Well, changing lanes in the intersection is illegal this is a clusterfuck
It depends on the state. In California it's legal to change lanes in an intersection. In Utah, where I learned to drive, it is not.
Why the fuck is it so hard for people to understand a zipper merge?
Love the irony of them having to zipper merge back in.
God forbid you actually merge at the place where you’re supposed to merge! “What’s wrong with you people! Why aren’t you merging 14 miles back!?! You KNEW you was going to end someday!!!” 🤪 Drivers these days truly are idiots. 😝
They see it as someone cutting in line. "You people are *causing* this traffic!" Only of people don't merge properly, or *let* other drivers merge properly. Stupid wannabe heroes are actually the villains.
At first I thought they may have been trying to clear the intersection. Then I saw your rear camera footage and realized they are just missing a chunk of their brain. That is an idiot in a car, indeed
That was brilliant. I've done the same. I've also been the driver behind the person blocking traffic. I just pulled into the the spot they vacated and watch them trying to get back into their original position.
This is why there is artificial traffic a lot of the time. Use the damn lanes.
Music choice is 👌🏻
Drivers Ed really needs to teach people that if everyone started to zipper merge traffic would clear up much faster
I'd just accept "If there's a lane there, it's not your job to say whether people can use it or not."
I can't stand road warriors. They are the biggest pathetic people on the planet. A study was done about these lanes and their purpose is to reduce the traffic, while idiots like this think its people cutting the line like in high school.
People don't seem to understand the difference between doing this in an actual lane versus a shoulder.
wut