You've heard of left lane camping, but what about CENTER lane camping?

[fwydriver405]

Despite the laws in both MA and ME saying drivers should keep to the right, it doesn't say what a driver should do if other drivers fail to keep to the right; ergo, it doesn't outlaw passing on the right (undertaking). To my knowledge, all six of the New England states permit undertaking on most multi-lane highways.

I'm not aware of any state that prohibits using the right lane to pass someone.

Somebody told me Vermont prohibited it, however, a quick search on VT law shows it is permitted under the usual circumstances.

[sprjus4]

The problem is when this mindset is applied to rural six-lane freeways, which are increasing in number across the country. These freeways don't necessarily have frequent exits and are heavily used by long-distance traffic. They can be frustrating to drive when KRETP is not adhered to, because they're so busy that a single passing lane is not sufficient, so lineups form on the left while large sporadic gaps form on the right. This makes cruise-setting all but impossible.

Some examples include much of the Ohio Turnpike, I-71 between Cleveland and Columbus, I-75 south of Atlanta, I-84 between Hartford and the Mass Pike, I-95 between Baltimore and Wilmington, the aforementioned QEW between Hamilton and Niagara Falls, and ON 400 between Vaughan and Barrie.

I'm not sure I would refer to I-95 between Baltimore and Wilmington as rural. That's the only interstate between those two cities (for 95% of that distance, between Baltimore and I-295 interchange), and it serves the entire I-95 corridor traffic. When you get to the Wilmington-Trenton axis, you have three and/or four limited access highways serving that corridor (I-95, I-495 in Delaware only, I-295 and the NJ Turnpike). But down there, it's the only one. I used to drive from DC to Wilmington often to visit family, and I would avoid I-95 most of the time because if something happened on it, there is no good alternative. My go-to alternative actually was US 1 north of Baltimore (and then cut south at Kennett Square), not US 40.

When I did venture to drive that stretch of I-95, I used to stay in the right lane all the time and I still got scared s***less more than I care to mention because of crazy passing and much-too-high speeds.

The word "rural" to me suggests something like central Illinois, although I know that's not what you meant.

It doesn't matter how much traffic uses it. For example: I-95 between Richmond and Fredericksburg carries over 100,000 AADT, is 6 lanes wide, and often time has congestion especially during peak weekends. It's the only freeway between the two points.

But, it's most certainly, unquestionably a rural interstate highway. Exits are several miles apart and there's not much development. Sure, there's several travel plazas / gas stations, fast food restaurants, and even hotels surrounding some of the interchanges. But if you travel a mile away from the interstate, you're in the middle of nowhere or in some small town. The same applies for some parts between Wilmington and Baltimore.

It can carry heavy traffic but still traverse a rural area.

[tmoore952]

The problem is when this mindset is applied to rural six-lane freeways, which are increasing in number across the country. These freeways don't necessarily have frequent exits and are heavily used by long-distance traffic. They can be frustrating to drive when KRETP is not adhered to, because they're so busy that a single passing lane is not sufficient, so lineups form on the left while large sporadic gaps form on the right. This makes cruise-setting all but impossible.

Some examples include much of the Ohio Turnpike, I-71 between Cleveland and Columbus, I-75 south of Atlanta, I-84 between Hartford and the Mass Pike, I-95 between Baltimore and Wilmington, the aforementioned QEW between Hamilton and Niagara Falls, and ON 400 between Vaughan and Barrie.

I'm not sure I would refer to I-95 between Baltimore and Wilmington as rural. That's the only interstate between those two cities (for 95% of that distance, between Baltimore and I-295 interchange), and it serves the entire I-95 corridor traffic. When you get to the Wilmington-Trenton axis, you have three and/or four limited access highways serving that corridor (I-95, I-495 in Delaware only, I-295 and the NJ Turnpike). But down there, it's the only one. I used to drive from DC to Wilmington often to visit family, and I would avoid I-95 most of the time because if something happened on it, there is no good alternative. My go-to alternative actually was US 1 north of Baltimore (and then cut south at Kennett Square), not US 40.

When I did venture to drive that stretch of I-95, I used to stay in the right lane all the time and I still got scared s***less more than I care to mention because of crazy passing and much-too-high speeds.

The word "rural" to me suggests something like central Illinois, although I know that's not what you meant.

It doesn't matter how much traffic uses it. For example: I-95 between Richmond and Fredericksburg carries over 100,000 AADT, is 6 lanes wide, and often time has congestion especially during peak weekends. It's the only freeway between the two points.

But, it's most certainly, unquestionably a rural interstate highway. Exits are several miles apart and there's not much development. Sure, there's several travel plazas / gas stations, fast food restaurants, and even hotels surrounding some of the interchanges. But if you travel a mile away from the interstate, you're in the middle of nowhere or in some small town. The same applies for some parts between Wilmington and Baltimore.

It can carry heavy traffic but still traverse a rural area.

More true for the Maryland portion of that stretch than the Delaware portion.

I keep forgetting that there may be metrics that a part of these definitions.

By that definition there are a lot of rural interstate highways, although only a subset are three-lane ones.

To go back to the original point, my many experiences driving between Baltimore and Wilmington lead me to believe that you will never see KRETP work there, even if it is against the law. Too many people will disregard it, and the police can only do so much.

[formulanone]

I think this is mostly a perceptual issue than a habitual one; much like left-lane hogging, a center lane is probably tied up by one or two drivers for a given congested segment of road, rather than multiple drivers. If the traffic in that lane is at the speed limit or greater, as the left lane is open, then I don't really see the problem. The road and its drivers are effectively doing their jobs. Some scenarios where I do this, if it can be called "camping"...

Scenario 1: exits every mile or so, lots of entering/exiting traffic, and moving out of the lanes constantly not only impedes the flow of the center lane, it holds up the flow of the rightmost lane. To stay away from of the traffic that has not yet reached the speed limit (or is decelerating to exit), staying in the middle lane(s) makes sense, so as long as the left lane can flow freely.

Scenario 2: numerous slow drivers and vehicles under speed limit in the right lane, drivers would opt for the middle lane to keep at or just above the speed limit, otherwise the ideal of "passing on the left then returning to the right" turns into more of a constant "brake, accelerate, swerve, and slalom" which is entirely disruptive to other traffic. Works best if the left lane is more or less open; maybe a little less than half of the traffic count in the leftmost lane from the one just to the right of it.

Scenario 3: drivers in the left lane are too fast/slow but right lane is way too slow, and my exit isn't coming up for 3-10 miles. I'll just stay put if we're passing calmly; in an ideal world...I'd be in the left lane but for some reason a third of the motorists didn't get the memo (left exits, maybe?).

This all breaks down when too much traffic takes up the left lane, or someone's speed is below the limits in the left lane. Or if one jackass is insistent on speeds much higher than everyone else's speeds; it's not everyone else's job to just temporarily evaporate from the road because somebody has found themselves in the oh-so unique situation of running late for an appointment.

Another example that grates my carrot is when exiting HOV traffic (legally) dumps into the center lane (or the lane just left of center) and slows down those lanes, which cramps up all sorts of traffic expectations; center becomes faster or the lane nearest to the right lane becomes a de facto passing lane, et cetera. Seems like a whole other thread, though.

[Rothman]

I thought some states considered passing on the right reckless driving.  That wasn't the case in MD?

Also, isn't there some passing law in the UK about their equivalent?

[Big John]

Also, isn't there some passing law in the UK about their equivalent?

From this relic thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2388.0
Passing on the right not allowed in Europe (including the Autobahn)

[Henry]

I don't have any problem with center lane camping, since the right lane usually is for entering and exiting traffic, and the left lane is still used for passing. But then, when you bump it up to four lanes each way (or more), the situation becomes even murkier, as it's all a matter of which lanes are designated as passing lanes (left half), and which are the slow ones (right half). Good luck trying to navigate on the Dan Ryan Expressway, the Capital Beltway, Atlanta's Downtown Connector, any of the various L.A. freeways, or the Katy Freeway!

Also, isn't there some passing law in the UK about their equivalent?

From this relic thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2388.0
Passing on the right not allowed in Europe (including the Autobahn)

The way I see it, in countries where all driving is on the left side (i.e. UK), it would be illegal to pass on the left.

[index]

When I did venture to drive that stretch of I-95, I used to stay in the right lane all the time and I still got scared s***less more than I care to mention because of crazy passing and much-too-high speeds.

The absolute insanity of driving up north is why I continually stick to the right lane there. I don't even bother trying to pass unless it's a semi, then I'll gun it and get ahead as fast as possible. Even then I get tailgated. It seems letting people in to merge upsets others often. Sometimes you kind of have to muscle your way in because nobody will let you in if you're the one merging so I like to give people a break from the utter, byzantine stupidity that is northern driving.

It is especially awful to me because essentially the entire time I've been driving regularly, it's been two-lane mountain roads. Freeways up north are worlds apart from what I'm used to.

[1995hoo]

^^^^

There seems to be an attitude in parts of the Northeast that a lane change somehow doesn't "count" unless you get in front of someone. I regularly see people who have half a mile of clear space to get over to exit, but there's a car up ahead in that lane, so they will speed up to pass that car and then cut over at the last second instead of just using all the empty space.

[Rothman]

^^^^

There seems to be an attitude in parts of the Northeast that a lane change somehow doesn't "count" unless you get in front of someone. I regularly see people who have half a mile of clear space to get over to exit, but there's a car up ahead in that lane, so they will speed up to pass that car and then cut over at the last second instead of just using all the empty space.

Better to stay at the same speed or speed up than slow down.

[1995hoo]

^^^^

There seems to be an attitude in parts of the Northeast that a lane change somehow doesn't "count" unless you get in front of someone. I regularly see people who have half a mile of clear space to get over to exit, but there's a car up ahead in that lane, so they will speed up to pass that car and then cut over at the last second instead of just using all the empty space.

Better to stay at the same speed or speed up than slow down.

But if you're going to have to slow down to take the exit anyway, it doesn't make sense to me to speed up bigtime just to cut someone off and then have to slam on the brakes to haul your speed back down for the exit ramp.

[Rothman]

^^^^

There seems to be an attitude in parts of the Northeast that a lane change somehow doesn't "count" unless you get in front of someone. I regularly see people who have half a mile of clear space to get over to exit, but there's a car up ahead in that lane, so they will speed up to pass that car and then cut over at the last second instead of just using all the empty space.

Better to stay at the same speed or speed up than slow down.

But if you're going to have to slow down to take the exit anyway, it doesn't make sense to me to speed up bigtime just to cut someone off and then have to slam on the brakes to haul your speed back down for the exit ramp.

If they're exiting, too, then I'll be ahead of a car that was probably travelling slower in the right lane.  Better to pass them now than be stuck behind them on a two-lane road.

[webny99]

When I did venture to drive that stretch of I-95, I used to stay in the right lane all the time and I still got scared s***less more than I care to mention because of crazy passing and much-too-high speeds.

The absolute insanity of driving up north is why I continually stick to the right lane there. I don't even bother trying to pass unless it's a semi, then I'll gun it and get ahead as fast as possible. Even then I get tailgated. It seems letting people in to merge upsets others often. Sometimes you kind of have to muscle your way in because nobody will let you in if you're the one merging so I like to give people a break from the utter, byzantine stupidity that is northern driving.

It is especially awful to me because essentially the entire time I've been driving regularly, it's been two-lane mountain roads. Freeways up north are worlds apart from what I'm used to.

Agreed that this is a problem in the northeast, but the quote isn't from me, it's from tmoore952.

[kphoger]

Scenario 1:

I'm going to break this one down in detail.

exits every mile or so, lots of entering/exiting traffic

OK, so I'm already envisioning an urban environment with heavy traffic.  So I'm already more prepared to admit that keeping out of the right lane is necessary.

and moving out of the lanes constantly not only impedes the flow of the center lane,

It shouldn't impede the flow of the center lane much more than having stayed in it all along would impede it.  Either the left lane is clear enough for faster traffic to get around you, or there isn't—whether you were camping in it or recently changed lanes into it.  If changing into the center lane impedes the traffic there, then obviously they're driving faster than you are, so camping in front of them instead would impede them just as much.

it holds up the flow of the rightmost lane.

It can hold up the usefulness of the rightmost lane for exiting and entering traffic.  If exits are so closely spaced and traffic is so thick for this to happen, then the right lane is essentially functioning as an accel/decel lane.  I'm assuming this is what you mean by "flow of the rightmost lane".  But, if not, if you're really meaning the flow of through-traffic in the rightmost lane, then I don't follow.

To stay away from of the traffic that has not yet reached the speed limit (or is decelerating to exit), staying in the middle lane(s) makes sense

See above.  If traffic is heavy enough for this to matter, then the right lane has essentially become a de facto accel/decel lane.

so as long as the left lane can flow freely

And as long as the center lane can also flow halfway freely.  If I want to drive 60 mph, exiting/entering traffic is doing 50 mph, but there are two lanes' worth of traffic wanting to go 70 mph, then maybe I should just suck it up and go 50 mph in order for all those other people to not be stuck behind me.

[formulanone]

so as long as the left lane can flow freely

And as long as the center lane can also flow halfway freely.  If I want to drive 60 mph, exiting/entering traffic is doing 50 mph, but there are two lanes' worth of traffic wanting to go 70 mph, then maybe I should just suck it up and go 50 mph in order for all those other people to not be stuck behind me.

It can hold up the usefulness of the rightmost lane for exiting and entering traffic.  If exits are so closely spaced and traffic is so thick for this to happen, then the right lane is essentially functioning as an accel/decel lane.  I'm assuming this is what you mean by "flow of the rightmost lane". 

Yeah, that.

Eh, there's a nuanced difference between two lanes wanting to go 70, but my experience is sometimes that it's not always both lanes, but someone passing on the right who really wants to do 75. Or someone trying to make their way from right to left into the leftmost lane. I don't think there's an exact right or wrong; at some point, some sort of traffic-per-lane density is too high and most drivers will flow to the lane that moves the freest / calmest / safest, or needing the one closest to the exit.

I do recall driver's ed and driver's re-education classes whereby they suggest staying in the middle lane in the case of six-lane surface streets, so I think that's a natural safety zone that people find.

Personally, I don't like holding up traffic and typically travel at or just above the speed limits. And I don't think I see this anywhere near as irritating as the typically 4-lane with holdups in the left. Too many different scenarios, honestly. Everyone's going to paint an exact picture and use it as a gotcha.

[kphoger]

at some point, some sort of traffic-per-lane density is too high and most drivers will flow to the lane that moves the freest / calmest / safest, or needing the one closest to the exit.

In a true traffic jam, where the flow is 20 mph or whatever, my general practice is to just stay in my lane as long as possible—no matter which lane it is—and to change lanes as little as possible.  I only change lanes if I've observed for quite a while that the other lane is truly going to be faster, and not just useful for a brief bunny-hop ahead of six vehicles.  I think jams would be alleviated if everyone did that.

[webny99]

at some point, some sort of traffic-per-lane density is too high and most drivers will flow to the lane that moves the freest / calmest / safest, or needing the one closest to the exit.

In a true traffic jam, where the flow is 20 mph or whatever, my general practice is to just stay in my lane as long as possible—no matter which lane it is—and to change lanes as little as possible.  I only change lanes if I've observed for quite a while that the other lane is truly going to be faster, and not just useful for a brief bunny-hop ahead of six vehicles.  I think jams would be alleviated if everyone did that.

I am guilty of bunny-hopping. While recognized that high volumes of lane-changing drivers can contribute to congestion, I have too little tolerance for time waste to sit in a slower lane if there's an opening in another one. At the same time, I make a concerted effort not to brake while changing lanes or while driving in the same lane, if at all possible.

[DriverDave]

I usually stay in one of the middle lanes to leave the left side of the road open but not be caught behind entering and exiting traffic.  But I'm also usually going at or above the speed of traffic flow when in any lane other than the far right one. Staying in the right lane on urban highways is usually a guarantee that you will have to change lanes dozens of more times anyway.

[kphoger]

Staying in the right lane on urban highways is usually a guarantee that you will have to change lanes dozens of more times anyway.

Unless changing lanes all those times actually impedes the flow of traffic, what's wrong with changing lanes more often?

[DriverDave]

Just more annoying to constantly have to go back and forth. Besides with all the left lane campers the middle lane ends up being the fastest lane anyway a good amount of the time. It's also good to have a lane on each side to be able to move to if sometimes happens ahead in your lane.

[kphoger]

Just more annoying ...

If this is how you decide how to drive, then I'm not going to be convinced by what you say.

[DriverDave]

Well it does also impede traffic flow somewhat to constantly have to accelerate again into faster traffic, everytime you move out of the right lane. It's easier to just stay in the lane that already has the smooth traffic flow.

[jeffandnicole]

I don't have any problem with center lane camping, since the right lane usually is for entering and exiting traffic, and the left lane is still used for passing. But then, when you bump it up to four lanes each way (or more), the situation becomes even murkier, as it's all a matter of which lanes are designated as passing lanes (left half), and which are the slow ones (right half). Good luck trying to navigate on the Dan Ryan Expressway, the Capital Beltway, Atlanta's Downtown Connector, any of the various L.A. freeways, or the Katy Freeway!

There are no lanes 'designated' as passing lanes. The proper method is to keep right if you're a slower driver, and pass on the left as needed then merge back over.  People that claim the center lane(s) are the normal driving lanes are often holding up traffic behind them.

If you're on a 3 lane highway, the center lane is the trucker's passing lane.  If you're driving a speed that's holding them up, you're just as guilty as a left lane hog. On a 4+ lane highway, there's no reason to just cruise the left-center lane at a slower than average speed, unless you just feel that only one lane should be used for passing.

People often talk about the right lane as having too many on/off ramps.  Other than in rare cases, normally in cities, exits are spaced about 3 miles apart from each other.  If everyone claimed they don't drive the right lane because of access points, then that would limit the highway to two travel lanes. 

So, people that claim they don't drive right lane are doing it because they don't care about the flow of traffic. They care about themselves.  They don't care that there's 50 cars behind them, many trying to get to the left lane to pass them.  They get even angrier when traffic passes them on the right, because it's their belief they should only pass them on the left.

I usually stay in one of the middle lanes to leave the left side of the road open but not be caught behind entering and exiting traffic.  But I'm also usually going at or above the speed of traffic flow when in any lane other than the far right one. Staying in the right lane on urban highways is usually a guarantee that you will have to change lanes dozens of more times anyway.

How many exits are normally found in urban areas?  Maybe 6 within the city, maybe around 10 including the nearby suburbs.  If you're changing lanes "dozens" of times, you must have the unlucky ability to not only find people driving slowly in the right lane at every off and on ramp, but also found numerous additional on and off ramps that don't exist.

Well it does also impede traffic flow somewhat to constantly have to accelerate again into faster traffic, every time you move out of the right lane. It's easier to just stay in the lane that already has the smooth traffic flow.

In other words, if you're driving slower than everyone else, you're the unwanted smooth traffic flow because you're going slower than everyone else, forcing everyone behind you to switch lanes.

[kphoger]

Well it does also impede traffic flow somewhat to constantly have to accelerate again into faster traffic, everytime you move out of the right lane. It's easier to just stay in the lane that already has the smooth traffic flow.

Most of my daily commute is on six-lane freeways with closely spaced exits.  I've hardly ever "had to accelerate" when moving out of the right lane.  If I see an entering vehicle, I simply change lanes at the same speed I was already going.

[DriverDave]

In other words, if you're driving slower than everyone else, you're the unwanted smooth traffic flow because you're going slower than everyone else, forcing everyone behind you to switch lanes.

I was saying the opposite. If I am going with faster traffic flow in the middle lanes to begin with, and decide to "keep right" because the right lane happened to be open at that point. Then have to slow down because of slower merging traffic in the right lane, now I have to merge back into the faster traffic in the middle lanes to pass them. It makes more sense to just stay in the middle lane if you are not already going slower than traffic. It's also more like 3/4 to 1 mile in between urban exits, not 3 miles.