Here's a good one. Not the left lane, but that lane was moving at a faster pace than I felt comfortable with in the rain. Driving down the 400, I see hazard lights up ahead on a slow-moving vehicle. No problem, once I pass this centre-lane bandit of a white Cherokee, I'll move over and pass. Nope! (Chuck Testa) The VW mirrors my lane change for no apparent reason, doing 65 km/h while I'm doing 95. Sure, we eventually do pass some vehicles, and I suspect the VW was moving over for the upcoming on-ramp, but 1) hazard lights are on, so make damn sure the lane change is predictable and intuitive, 2) way too early, nothing was in front of the VW when it changed lanes, and 3) there were several opportunities for it to move over to allow faster traffic to pass. By that time, the Cherokee and several other vehicles had queued up behind us and I didn't want to do the ~110 km/h that vehicles were doing in the left lane, especially not accelerating up from 65 km/h. I was stuck.



By the way, I would loooove to see this driver's response to the first snowfall. The rain wasn't even coming down hard, my wipers were on intermittent before getting caught in the spray of the VW. Nowhere close to bad enough for 65 km/h.

_________________
         

Yeah I didn't even touch on the 'middle lane' bandits

He was travelling faster than those in the slow lane it seems so for me the puzzling thing is why did he have his hazard lights on at all? Seemed unnecessary (and sadly I see people like him occasionally too) and if he was truly worried, he should have been in the right lane obviously.

Here is a question, for those in the know and it leads into the issue I mentioned in the prior post, if you see someone merging onto the highway from an on-ramp is there a law that says if you are in the right lane you have to move to the middle lane to let them in? (I suspect there isn't but could be wrong and can't remember)

I suspect this is why some slow drivers drive in the middle, just to avoid some oncoming traffic trying to merge in.

While this seems like the courteous thing to do, yield your right lane to oncoming traffic by moving to the middle lane, to me the onus is on the person merging to get up to the speed of traffic so he can successfully merge into the traffic. Instead what often happens is you have some people switching lanes to help them merge, people slowing down to help them merge and both of these cause gridlock.

I drive the highways everyday and often near the tipping point of gridlock and no gridlock, some days I get lucky and manage to get through this one particular bottle-neck (merging) spot before it starts backing up. Other days I see it firsthand exactly what I described and everything coming to a crawl, yet others I arrive to an already completely gridlocked highway and I know damn well it starts with the people not speeding up enough to merge properly and then further compounded by others compensating for them.

The law places the onus on the driver merging or changing lanes to do so only if safe. There is no requirement to assist motorists in merging (though nothing wrong with doing so if needed).

I'd say it's reasonable to help those vehicles that can't easily get up to speed, like tractor trailers, campers, fully loaded pickups, boat trailers, etc. I also try to move over for a long queue of merging vehicles whenever I can, but sometimes doing so would cause congestion in the centre lane so I try to maintain my speed as much as I can and hope the others can merge properly.

For single passenger vehicles trying to merge, heck, our Escort had all of 110 HP when brand spanking new and it gets up to 100 by the end of the on-ramp with no problem. No sympathy for those who try to merge at 60-80 km/h, and I won't move over for them unless safety becomes a factor (e.g., they're so obviously clueless that I either slow down/move over or they'll wind up on the shoulder).

There is no special law for merging onto a highway, it is treated as any other lane change (i.e., onus is on the vehicle changing lanes, traffic already in the lane has right-of-way). I've heard an argument before that highway on-ramps should fall under an uncontrolled intersection, thus traffic yields to vehicles on the right, but as the lanes are completely parallel at the point of the merge, I didn't buy that argument as I don't believe it is an intersection.

_________________
         

you guys didnt know?
the right lane has been the new left lane for yrs.

everyone just dive bombs the left lane and parks at 100-120 depending and dont care who or what is behind them. right lane...free and clear for km's.

That's cause I keep it clear with my slow driving.

You're welcome.

_________________
         

Slow merging = Stoopidity, but that's just my personal opinion.

However, there have been numerous times I have gotten on to the 407 at Neyegawa heading east and some sally who for whatever reason decides it's ok to get to the end of the ramp doing 70!!

The flow of traffic in this area is around 110-120 at pretty much all times of the day. This is an example of unreasonable caution causing issues for other drivers. I think that these people too need a road side meeting with a nice officer to explain what merging is about.

_________________
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com

If you're lucky, they'll be even stupider and merge before the end of the ramp so you can leave the carnage behind!

_________________
         

So by about 35 seconds how fast were you going and what is the speed limit?

And we are missing if the Jeep cut anyone off.... just sayin.

_________________
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com

I'm doing 100 and the limit is 100, notice how I'm not gaining on any traffic except the Jeep? It's a 9-year old Ford with a plugged cat.

Traffic was light enough that the vehicle coming up on the Jeep slowed down for it and eventually passed it on the left. After the slow merge, the Jeep eventually passed me at the next off-ramp.

_________________