SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Behave.
Merge in turn
- Thread starter theoneandonly
- Start date
Jamesbrown
Head Pro
It doesn’t, that’s not what it’s for.
It’s to not create tail backs and limit disruption to junctions, roundabouts and slip roads behind.
Jamesbrown
Head Pro
The internet loves this motoring argument alongside “I don’t have to keep left as I’m doing 70 and nobody should be overtaking me”.
D
Deleted member 23270
Guest
Well if there isn't miles of road it's a different scenario but the place where I often see this happening is at the end of an 8 mile stretch of dual carriageway.
Golfmmad
Tour Winner
So in that situation some people will queue in the inside lane and others will approach in outside lane - no one has priority and both lanes should "Merge in turn" in a courteous manner.
D
Deleted member 23270
Guest
In all the years I have driven that road one thing is abundantly clear. The traffic only stops when people push down to the front. When people join the back of the queue the traffic always continues to move.
BiMGuy
LIV Bot, (But Not As Big As Mel) ?
Does the traffic stop because the people using the left lane don’t leave a sufficient gap for those using the right lane to join easily? Meaning they have to slow down suddenly or stop.
Don Barzini
Assistant Pro
Dave it's clear you hate the concept of people "pushing in". I'm assuming you'd like them to not be able to do that......?
If I've assumed correctly, you should be a supporter of everyone doing merge in turn. If half the queue are in the inside lane and half are in the outside lane, the guy who would otherwise "push in" wouldn't be able to do so. He'd have no option but to join the back of one of the lanes. Can you not accept that?
In your preferred scenario of "everybody joins the back of the queue", all that happens is more and more road space gets unused. And in your scenario, if traffic is heavy enough, all that happens is that a merge point happens further and further away from the front. Longer and longer queue, more and more road space being unused. Far better to have the merge point at the end of all available space than a mile or so back, surely?!
Kennysarmy
Newbie
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/driving-advice/zip-merging/
Quote from RAC headline is "Why drivers who merge at the last minute are right: the benefit of zip-merging"
Quote from RAC headline is "Why drivers who merge at the last minute are right: the benefit of zip-merging"
D
Deleted member 23270
Guest
There is a time and place for merge in turn. When the traffic is forming 1 lane and continues to flow then merge is not the answer when merging causes the flow to stop.
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Late merge in turn is good when there are things like roadworks or road accidents blocking a lane. It's not so good when there is a dual carriageway narrowing into a single lane and the queue on the inside isn't long, people driving down the outside to the pinch point are inconsiderate in this case.
There has been mention here that keeping to a single lane uses more road space, that's incorrect.
In the case of roadworks it's best where traffic cones are set in a long taper to encourage earlier merging.
There has been mention here that keeping to a single lane uses more road space, that's incorrect.
In the case of roadworks it's best where traffic cones are set in a long taper to encourage earlier merging.
Foxholer
Blackballed
I'm making (an) assumption/s about what you mean as it's not abundantly clear, but ...
Merging should never 'cause the flow to stop'. It will be something further ahead - in the merged stream - that will be doing that; possibly the presence of workers, drivers 'rubber-knecking' or the safety considerations wrt the incident that caused the lane to close. It will, however, cause flow of the 'open' lane to reduce, ideally approx halved, as combined traffic from 2 lanes moves normally again and gaps between cars normalise.
By merging too early, all that is achieved is a, possibly huge, gap of wasted unused road that pushes the 'beginning of the queue' further back than it should be and that could well have other consequences!
As 'proof' of the above, consider the situation where the driver of a queueing vehicle, some way back from the 'pinch point' decides to 'help' fellow drivers of his/her (I'd bet it's a male, so will use 'he') lane and block the lane to his right. All that achieves is to move the pinch-point back to his position. He, and cars in front of him will move faster, but overall throughput will not change! In all likelihood, he, and the cars in front, could have achieved the same thing if they had alternately moved into the empty lane completely and merged at the 'proper' place.
So, feel free to join the back of the queue in the 'continuing' lane. But don't object to those who go as far down the 'non-continuing' one before merging in turn.They are, perhaps unwittingly, helping the overall situation, while you and others of same inclination, could well be exacerbating an already awkward situation. And when you get to the pinch point, let (only?) 1 vehicle in.
Foxholer
Blackballed
Can't say I've ever seen that - at least not a significant difference - except where the blockage is in the inside lane (like in the vid I posted). That simply means it's the inside lane that has to merge and the outside one that should 'allow' it.
'Space' no; 'Length/Distance' certainly!
All that really does is move the pinch-point further back.
backwoodsman
Tour Winner
Worth a read of the "Comments" section underneath the main article. They degenerated into exactly the same bun-fight as this thread has.
Don Barzini
Assistant Pro
Merging doesn’t cause the flow to stop.
People driving up the arse of the vehicle in front of them and thus not allowing others to merge causes the flow to stop. There’s a big difference.
If merge in turn was practised correctly by all, it would work as it is intended. But it doesn’t - because there are a high number of people on the road with the opinion of “I was here first, he should join the back of the queue, I’m not letting anyone in”.
Last edited:
