The psychology of passing

[Brandon]

I take it you've never been to Chicago.  That's the exact same shit they pull here.

Do Chicagoans switch lanes without signaling? Because over here, out of staters tend to do that much more than us Jersey drivers. I still scoff when they say New Jersey has worse drivers than Pennsylvania or New York. Maybe not the entire states, but New York City and eastern Pennsylvania/Philadelphia DEFINITELY has worse drivers than ALL of New Jersey!

By the way - signaling - that's something EVERY driver should do. If you are switching lanes, or you are turning where it may not be clear which direction you are going, you should signal. I can't stand people who don't signal. It's literally a flick of your damn fucking wrist to activate it, and it helps other people behind you know of your intentions. /rant

YES, Chicagoans fail to signal quite often.  They'll switch lanes with no signal, they'll make turns right in front of you without a signal, and they'll merge onto the interstates without a signal.  It must take a lot of effort to push down the turn signal button.  As for merging, without a signal, I don't make any effort to let them in, then they get mad at me, but they really just made themselves angry.  Signal on, I let you in.

I call it the "sneak attack lane change".  Why?  Because if you do use your signal and leave it on for more than two seconds, the vehicle behind you and in the lane you want to change to will cut you off.  It's a sport around here.  I think of it as "full-contact driving".

[texaskdog]

I've noticed a slightly different phenomenon. When I'm in the right lane approaching a slower moving vehicle, very often a car behind me decides to pass me right before I need to pass the car ahead of me, though I'm maintaining my normal speed. At that point I have two options. I can cut the passing car off or slam on the brakes. Usually I end up doing the latter, but either way it's really annoying.

The car behind you is doing it right.  They notice a slower moving vehicle - whether it be you or the vehicle in front of you - and merge over when they can.  If you get so close to that slower vehicle that you have to slam on your brakes, you are failing to compensate for the vehicle in front of you.  You should have either merged over when you can, or gently slowed a little to merge when you have available room.

What I hate is when you're crusing along in the left lane and there is a slow driver in the right lane, and the guy behind him is going slightly faster and gets over right in front of you taking forever to pass.  if the car in the left lane is coming up fast, let them by first!

[empirestate]

Now you start to see how the frustrations come about. There are two broad categories of drivers: those that are acting according to a set of rules and/or principles, and those that are just kind of doing whatever. On top of that, there isn't complete agreement within the first group as to which exact principles apply, or how they apply.


iPhone

[texaskdog]

We have every bad type of driving in Austin.  Now I know where the Jersey Slide came from. 

[vdeane]

I experience the issue of people behind me moving to pass right as I was going to quite often as well, usually on the Thruway, but sometimes the Northway as well.  There's a reason why it's almost always these two (aside from the fact that I drive them the most): AADTs are high enough on these roads that the left lane is rarely free of traffic.  If I move over to pass, unless I go 80, somebody WILL have to slow down while I pass.  Because of this, rather than merge over whenever an opportunity presents itself, I typically wait to pass until I'm on top of the person I want to pass and then wait for a gap I can merge into.  Often someone more aggressive will end up behind me, and whip over into the left lane as soon as the gap I intend to use arrives, forcing me to wait longer.

[J N Winkler]

Another manifestation of the same phenomenon: I've had cruise set on Interstates where I may be maintaining 70 in a 65 zone–always in the right lane unless I'm actively passing another vehicle. Then some car–let's say it's a red Civic–barrels by at 80+. Fine. I continue along at my solid 70, and several minutes later I pass a lumbering truck...with the red Civic lumping along at 55 just ahead, even though there are miles of open pavement ahead. Then, one of two things happen: I'm side-by-side with the Civic and the driver speeds up until he's back to his 80+ in the right lane...Or, I pass him, move right, and he immediately shoots into the left lane and floors it. And in my experience, this never happens just once; it's frequently an hours-long game of leapfrog that only one of the two (the Civic) is perpetuating.

In this example, the red Civic might have pulled out to pass a larger vehicle immediately in front, only to discover that the larger vehicle was the last in a multi-car platoon, leaving the Civic with the option either of cutting into the platoon somewhere or putting on a lot of speed to finish passing the entire platoon without tying up the passing lane for a lengthy period of time.

When I find myself in this situation, I generally proceed with a high-speed overtake and keep going at the higher speed for some time after I return to the driving lane, before I take my foot off the throttle and let the cruise control pick up.  The purpose of the latter step is to build up a margin of space and time to give the platoon a chance to break up on its own before the vehicles in it start to overtake me (not all do).

When I was younger, I was much more tolerant of leapfrogging because I valued maintaining a steady speed much more than I did a fixed position in the traffic sequence.  However, as I have gotten older, I have become more willing to vary my speed a little as needed to avoid changing sequence position, as other drivers tend to see leapfrogging as aggressive behavior.  Much of driving is about staying out of the way of others making mistakes.

...Of course, I come from the state where the "Jersey Slide" was invented, and I have seen a bunch of dickhole Jersey drivers execute it and shift across 4 lanes of traffic in one fell swoop. Gotta love it.

And here I thought it was the "Chicago slide" where they do the exact same thing with little care as to who might be in the far lane they want to go to.  One could also call it the "Chicago exit" as it's used quite commonly for exiting purposes, i.e. from the far left lane to the right side exit ramp.

Sounds like the LA Shuffle. Impressive -- and scary -- when they seemingly cut across five-six lanes of traffic at at 90° angle from traffic to get that exit.

In Britain the technical term for this behavior is "swooping" and tiger-tail markings were developed specifically to discourage it.

I've noticed a slightly different phenomenon. When I'm in the right lane approaching a slower moving vehicle, very often a car behind me decides to pass me right before I need to pass the car ahead of me, though I'm maintaining my normal speed. At that point I have two options. I can cut the passing car off or slam on the brakes. Usually I end up doing the latter, but either way it's really annoying.

The car behind you is doing it right.  They notice a slower moving vehicle - whether it be you or the vehicle in front of you - and merge over when they can.  If you get so close to that slower vehicle that you have to slam on your brakes, you are failing to compensate for the vehicle in front of you.  You should have either merged over when you can, or gently slowed a little to merge when you have available room.

What the rear following car is doing is gazumphing the front following car's passing opportunity.  It is annoying for the front following car, and I would not go so far as to say that the rear following car is doing the "right thing."  The reality is that neither car has a prior claim on the passing lane.  The best way to avoid being gazumphed is to check for a following car that may wish to gazumph and plan the passing maneuver accordingly, either by moving to the passing lane first and putting on speed, or drawing back on the throttle so that it is not necessary to brake to avoid overrunning the car in front, and allowing the other car to pass first.

There is usually--not always, but usually--a way to avoid the need for undesired abrupt application of the brakes that involves taking action further back in the chain of causation, based on inferences about what other vehicles are likely to do.  In this particular case the necessary inferences are reliably supported by experience, so they are not difficult to make.

[Mergingtraffic]

If myself and a car in front of me are passing someone...I will notice the car in front of me takes forever to pass, sitting in the right lane car's blind spot or just slowly passing and then when they get back over in the right lane do about 20mph faster than when they were passing!?

Or the guy that races to pass all of us before a lane drop and then goes slow.

[corco]

I've noticed a slightly different phenomenon. When I'm in the right lane approaching a slower moving vehicle, very often a car behind me decides to pass me right before I need to pass the car ahead of me, though I'm maintaining my normal speed. At that point I have two options. I can cut the passing car off or slam on the brakes. Usually I end up doing the latter, but either way it's really annoying.

The car behind you is doing it right.  They notice a slower moving vehicle - whether it be you or the vehicle in front of you - and merge over when they can.  If you get so close to that slower vehicle that you have to slam on your brakes, you are failing to compensate for the vehicle in front of you.  You should have either merged over when you can, or gently slowed a little to merge when you have available room.

What the rear following car is doing is gazumphing the front following car's passing opportunity.  It is annoying for the front following car, and I would not go so far as to say that the rear following car is doing the "right thing."  The reality is that neither car has a prior claim on the passing lane.  The best way to avoid being gazumphed is to check for a following car that may wish to gazumph and plan the passing maneuver accordingly, either by moving to the passing lane first and putting on speed, or drawing back on the throttle so that it is not necessary to brake to avoid overrunning the car in front, and allowing the other car to pass first.

There is usually--not always, but usually--a way to avoid the need for undesired abrupt application of the brakes that involves taking action further back in the chain of causation, based on inferences about what other vehicles are likely to do.  In this particular case the necessary inferences are reliably supported by experience, so they are not difficult to make.

I agree with this, and will typically give the car in front of me right of way- if I'm coming up fast on somebody approaching a truck, for instance, I'll lay off the gas and even start to move into the right lane so that they are aware that they can pass. That seems to be how most folks drive in this part of the country, but in other regions that doesn't seem to be the case. When I lived in Arizona, for instance, what jeffandnicole describes seems to be the norm.

[jeffandnicole]

I've noticed a slightly different phenomenon. When I'm in the right lane approaching a slower moving vehicle, very often a car behind me decides to pass me right before I need to pass the car ahead of me, though I'm maintaining my normal speed. At that point I have two options. I can cut the passing car off or slam on the brakes. Usually I end up doing the latter, but either way it's really annoying.

The car behind you is doing it right.  They notice a slower moving vehicle - whether it be you or the vehicle in front of you - and merge over when they can.  If you get so close to that slower vehicle that you have to slam on your brakes, you are failing to compensate for the vehicle in front of you.  You should have either merged over when you can, or gently slowed a little to merge when you have available room.

What the rear following car is doing is gazumphing the front following car's passing opportunity.  It is annoying for the front following car, and I would not go so far as to say that the rear following car is doing the "right thing."  The reality is that neither car has a prior claim on the passing lane.  The best way to avoid being gazumphed is to check for a following car that may wish to gazumph and plan the passing maneuver accordingly, either by moving to the passing lane first and putting on speed, or drawing back on the throttle so that it is not necessary to brake to avoid overrunning the car in front, and allowing the other car to pass first.

There is usually--not always, but usually--a way to avoid the need for undesired abrupt application of the brakes that involves taking action further back in the chain of causation, based on inferences about what other vehicles are likely to do.  In this particular case the necessary inferences are reliably supported by experience, so they are not difficult to make.

I agree with this, and will typically give the car in front of me right of way- if I'm coming up fast on somebody approaching a truck, for instance, I'll lay off the gas and even start to move into the right lane so that they are aware that they can pass. That seems to be how most folks drive in this part of the country, but in other regions that doesn't seem to be the case. When I lived in Arizona, for instance, what jeffandnicole describes seems to be the norm.

There's also an assumption here that the front car wants to pass.  If they have an exit coming up, they may not have the desire to pass anyway. Or, in the case of one of my carpoolers, he may sit behind that slower vehicle for 5 miles, regardless of the numerous passing opportunities that exist.

[corco]

I've noticed a slightly different phenomenon. When I'm in the right lane approaching a slower moving vehicle, very often a car behind me decides to pass me right before I need to pass the car ahead of me, though I'm maintaining my normal speed. At that point I have two options. I can cut the passing car off or slam on the brakes. Usually I end up doing the latter, but either way it's really annoying.

The car behind you is doing it right.  They notice a slower moving vehicle - whether it be you or the vehicle in front of you - and merge over when they can.  If you get so close to that slower vehicle that you have to slam on your brakes, you are failing to compensate for the vehicle in front of you.  You should have either merged over when you can, or gently slowed a little to merge when you have available room.

What the rear following car is doing is gazumphing the front following car's passing opportunity.  It is annoying for the front following car, and I would not go so far as to say that the rear following car is doing the "right thing."  The reality is that neither car has a prior claim on the passing lane.  The best way to avoid being gazumphed is to check for a following car that may wish to gazumph and plan the passing maneuver accordingly, either by moving to the passing lane first and putting on speed, or drawing back on the throttle so that it is not necessary to brake to avoid overrunning the car in front, and allowing the other car to pass first.

There is usually--not always, but usually--a way to avoid the need for undesired abrupt application of the brakes that involves taking action further back in the chain of causation, based on inferences about what other vehicles are likely to do.  In this particular case the necessary inferences are reliably supported by experience, so they are not difficult to make.

I agree with this, and will typically give the car in front of me right of way- if I'm coming up fast on somebody approaching a truck, for instance, I'll lay off the gas and even start to move into the right lane so that they are aware that they can pass. That seems to be how most folks drive in this part of the country, but in other regions that doesn't seem to be the case. When I lived in Arizona, for instance, what jeffandnicole describes seems to be the norm.

There's also an assumption here that the front car wants to pass.  If they have an exit coming up, they may not have the desire to pass anyway. Or, in the case of one of my carpoolers, he may sit behind that slower vehicle for 5 miles, regardless of the numerous passing opportunities that exist.

Yeah, once I start to slow down I typically give about five seconds before I'll speed back up to overtake, and I do make an effort to pass quickly in case that car does want to get around. Out here the sightlines are honestly so good that it's not usually a problem- in 95% of situations I can tell if the car intends to pass long before I approach the situation.

[empirestate]

I find it helps, especially on longer trips, to set out with the mindset that you don't need to be among the faster vehicles on the road. Although it's often our instinct, as soon as we come upon a slower vehicle than ourselves, to immediately start thinking about how and when we'll be able to pass it, just taking a moment to ask ourselves if we need to pass at all, rather than simply making a small adjustment and remaining in the line, with passing reserved for a last resort, can take a lot of the stress out. Quite often, this still allows us to cruise along at or comfortably above the speed limit, and usually keeps us free of traffic, because all of the traffic tends to zoom by and get out of our way.

At least for me, this approach works quite well on high-pressure roads like the Merritt Parkway. I just amble along at 5-10 above the limit, and every other car in the world leaves me peacefully behind. :-)

[corco]

Honestly, driving a bit faster than the speed of traffic helps me stay engaged on long, boring trips, so I use it for that as much as anything.

[J N Winkler]

I find it helps, especially on longer trips, to set out with the mindset that you don't need to be among the faster vehicles on the road. Although it's often our instinct, as soon as we come upon a slower vehicle than ourselves, to immediately start thinking about how and when we'll be able to pass it, just taking a moment to ask ourselves if we need to pass at all, rather than simply making a small adjustment and remaining in the line, with passing reserved for a last resort, can take a lot of the stress out. Quite often, this still allows us to cruise along at or comfortably above the speed limit, and usually keeps us free of traffic, because all of the traffic tends to zoom by and get out of our way.

I tend to set my cruise control at 72 in 75 MPH zones to keep revs right at 3000 RPM.  The main motivation for this is actually to limit oil consumption at high RPM (a well-known design problem in my car), but being left out of platoons is a nice side benefit.

On two-lane roads other factors tend to come into play.  I don't like to follow another car for an extended period of time if I can avoid it, because it gets tedious to trim speed even with cruise control, and even if I maintain a safe following distance, my forward visibility and my scope for maneuver are more limited than they would be if the road ahead were completely clear.  I also don't like to contribute to platoon formation.  However, I will drive on crowded two-lanes if I have to, and will deploy coping strategies such as pulling over and waiting, stopping for extended breaks, etc. rather than always choosing a high-stakes overtake as the first resort.

Yeah, once I start to slow down I typically give about five seconds before I'll speed back up to overtake, and I do make an effort to pass quickly in case that car does want to get around. Out here the sightlines are honestly so good that it's not usually a problem- in 95% of situations I can tell if the car intends to pass long before I approach the situation.

Also, since some drivers are slow to read the situations they are in, while others change their minds abruptly, it is just good defensive driving not to approach "hot" from behind.

[Rothman]

 

I tend to set my cruise control at 72 in 75 MPH zones to keep revs right at 3000 RPM.  The main motivation for this is actually to limit oil consumption at high RPM (a well-known design problem in my car), but being left out of platoons is a nice side benefit.

As long as you stay to the right, poking along like that's fine by me. 

[J N Winkler]

As long as you stay to the right, poking along like that's fine by me.

I haven't said that I camp out in the passing lane, or advocated that others do so.  Since you are in a completely different region of the country, I am not sure how you would have been able to observe my driving at first hand, so I am a little perplexed as to the reason for your concern.

[Rothman]

As long as you stay to the right, poking along like that's fine by me.

I haven't said that I camp out in the passing lane, or advocated that others do so.  Since you are in a completely different region of the country, I am not sure how you would have been able to observe my driving at first hand, so I am a little perplexed as to the reason for your concern.

Going 3 mph under the speed limit must mean the majority of the other traffic is passing you, that's all.

[J N Winkler]

Going 3 mph under the speed limit must mean the majority of the other traffic is passing you, that's all.

Generally this is true, but on occasion I do have to pull out and pass somebody and when I do that, I try to do it with a reasonable speed differential, not at the cruise control setting.