Research reveals slow left lane drivers are spiking accident rates

[bahnburner]

This supports what a lot of us were already thinking!

http://yellowhammernews.com/faithandculture/move-alabama-reasons-stay-left-lane/

We've all been there. You're driving down the interstate and suddenly come up on someone who's going much slower than you are. If you're both in the right lane, you just casually ease into the left lane and go around them. But what if there are slower drivers in both lanes? That's when the road rage hits.

Well, we now have scientific proof that driving too slow in the left lane is not only harmful to drivers' mental states, but also to the physical safety of everyone on the road.

New research shows that two cars riding side-by-side going the same speed can result in major traffic buildups.

Additionally, studies reveal that some left-lane-drivers are misguided in believing they are actually keeping people safer by slowing down traffic. In reality, cars going 5 mph slower than the surrounding traffic have a greater chance of causing accidents than cars going 5 mph faster, and having slow drivers in both lanes often results in faster drivers weaving in and out of traffic, drastically increasing the risk of accidents. The research shows that slowing down and changing lanes multiple times can be far more dangerous than speeding, causing almost 10 percent of the total accidents on highways.

Reducing speed limits in general doesn't seem to help either. On the German Autobahn, speed limits are often nonexistent, but accident and fatality rates are lower on the Autobahn than on U.S. highways. Research indicates one of the primary reasons for this is that the Germans are much stricter on lane discipline — meaning traffic is separated by speed, with slower cars staying out of the way of faster ones.

[Brandon]

This, not speed, is what cops really should be enforcing on our freeways.

[NE2]

Sounds like the impatient fucks weaving in and out are the cause.

[empirestate]

This supports what a lot of us were already thinking!

Number one reason to mistrust it...

[SP Cook]

This, not speed, is what cops really should be enforcing on our freeways.

Amen.

But, of course, traffic enforcement is 100% about $$ and 0% about safety, and as this is so subjective, and some traffic cop spewing "you were going 83 in a 70" is so easy.  Much easier than working for a living.

Fact is that it is simple common courtesy and common sense to KEEP RIGHT.

[jeffandnicole]

Sounds like the impatient fucks weaving in and out are the cause.

The cause are the LLDs.  The result is the weaving.

[US 81]

One cause is still unreasonably slow speed limits set for revenue enhancement. Let engineers set the speed limits.
Another factor has to be governors on many vehicles. If companies aren't willing to remove them, could they be engineered to allow short bursts of speed to make passing safer?

[kalvado]

There is actually more than one problem in here.
besides left lane hoggers, there is right lane obsession; there is traffic volume requiring use of more than one lane, often right lane is in significantly worse shape due to higher volume of heavy trucks - which usually relatively slow and tend to keep right.
And any simple problem has a simple, obvious and completely wrong solution...

By the way, someone needs to release their parking brake and move over: "new research" link goes to Nature article which was published in 2012. Words "move over", "right" and "left"  are not used anywhere in the text. 

[Max Rockatansky]

One cause is still unreasonably slow speed limits set for revenue enhancement. Let engineers set the speed limits.
Another factor has to be governors on many vehicles. If companies aren't willing to remove them, could they be engineered to allow short bursts of speed to make passing safer?

Most cars today are massively over powered in comparison to the heyday of the Federally mandated 55 MPH speed limit and could hit 100 MPH no problem.  There used to be cars available in the early 1980s that were specifically engineered with that 55 MPH speed limit in mind, the Chevette comes to mind.  Governor or not a low powered economy car with a small engine is always going to accelerate slower than a sports car or muscle car.  The problem is a lot of people float in the left lane when they aren't passing or don't pass fast enough to not cause a bottle neck behind them.  $hitty driving or not, impeding the flow of traffic is putting you a lot greater risk than going 7 MPH over the speed limit then cranking it up when you need to pass.  I have an Uncle who has gotten pretty up there in years that refuses to drive faster than 60 MPH heading from to Detroit to Tampa on I-75 each year...he has truckers blowing his doors off and is lucky he hasn't been wrecked. 

[MrDisco99]

One cause is still unreasonably slow speed limits set for revenue enhancement. Let engineers set the speed limits.
Another factor has to be governors on many vehicles. If companies aren't willing to remove them, could they be engineered to allow short bursts of speed to make passing safer?

Most cars today are massively over powered in comparison to the heyday of the Federally mandated 55 MPH speed limit and could hit 100 MPH no problem.  There used to be cars available in the early 1980s that were specifically engineered with that 55 MPH speed limit in mind, the Chevette comes to mind.  Governor or not a low powered economy car with a small engine is always going to accelerate slower than a sports car or muscle car.  The problem is a lot of people float in the left lane when they aren't passing or don't pass fast enough to not cause a bottle neck behind them.  $hitty driving or not, impeding the flow of traffic is putting you a lot greater risk than going 7 MPH over the speed limit then cranking it up when you need to pass.  I have an Uncle who has gotten pretty up there in years that refuses to drive faster than 60 MPH heading from to Detroit to Tampa on I-75 each year...he has truckers blowing his doors off and is lucky he hasn't been wrecked. 

Funny how automakers use 0-60 times, horsepower numbers, and racing pedigree to sell cars. For many of us the car buying experience essentially boils down to finding something that will break the law as economically as possible.  I don't think you can even buy a car anymore with a max speed of under 100... except maybe kei cars and SMARTs, and even they can go pretty fast.

I typically cruise on the interstate between cities at 80mph and can even downshift from there to do a quick pass when I want to... in a Hyundai Elantra.  If that car can handle it, then most others should be able to as well.  Judging from experience watching cars around me, most of which doing a similar pace as me, they do just fine.

Meanwhile highways designed for 80 have a posted limit of 55.  What a racket.

I bet your uncle gets great fuel mileage.

[vdeane]

One cause is still unreasonably slow speed limits set for revenue enhancement. Let engineers set the speed limits.
Another factor has to be governors on many vehicles. If companies aren't willing to remove them, could they be engineered to allow short bursts of speed to make passing safer?

Or perhaps we could make a law that would restrict governed vehicles to the right lane except within half a mile of a left exit/turn (that the vehicle will take) or lane drop?

There is actually more than one problem in here.
besides left lane hoggers, there is right lane obsession; there is traffic volume requiring use of more than one lane, often right lane is in significantly worse shape due to higher volume of heavy trucks - which usually relatively slow and tend to keep right.
And any simple problem has a simple, obvious and completely wrong solution...

By the way, someone needs to release their parking brake and move over: "new research" link goes to Nature article which was published in 2012. Words "move over", "right" and "left"  are not used anywhere in the text. 

Not everyone drives the same speed though.  Even when the lanes are full, it's rare outside of stop and go conditions for the lanes to move at the same rate - the lanes to the left move faster.

And how common is it for the right lane to be so damaged that people need to avoid it?  I've only seen that a couple times in my life, and both instances have since been repaired.

[tradephoric]

There is actually more than one problem in here.
besides left lane hoggers, there is right lane obsession; there is traffic volume requiring use of more than one lane, often right lane is in significantly worse shape due to higher volume of heavy trucks - which usually relatively slow and tend to keep right.
And any simple problem has a simple, obvious and completely wrong solution...

I think you make a good point.  There are stretches of road where the right lane is so beat up by heavy truck traffic that it is advantageous to drive in the left lane if you value your suspension parts.  Another thing i do is drive in the left-lane when approaching a bend to the left (since hugging the inside is the shortest distance).  I don't go out of my way to do this, but if I'm already in the left lane to pass someone i will wait to turn back into the right lane until after the bend in the road (assuming no vehicles are approaching from behind).  It's just something to keep your mind occupied during a long road trip. 

The point is there are reasons someone may drive in the left most lane.  As long as a driver isn't impeding traffic i have no problem with that.

[Max Rockatansky]

One cause is still unreasonably slow speed limits set for revenue enhancement. Let engineers set the speed limits.
Another factor has to be governors on many vehicles. If companies aren't willing to remove them, could they be engineered to allow short bursts of speed to make passing safer?

Most cars today are massively over powered in comparison to the heyday of the Federally mandated 55 MPH speed limit and could hit 100 MPH no problem.  There used to be cars available in the early 1980s that were specifically engineered with that 55 MPH speed limit in mind, the Chevette comes to mind.  Governor or not a low powered economy car with a small engine is always going to accelerate slower than a sports car or muscle car.  The problem is a lot of people float in the left lane when they aren't passing or don't pass fast enough to not cause a bottle neck behind them.  $hitty driving or not, impeding the flow of traffic is putting you a lot greater risk than going 7 MPH over the speed limit then cranking it up when you need to pass.  I have an Uncle who has gotten pretty up there in years that refuses to drive faster than 60 MPH heading from to Detroit to Tampa on I-75 each year...he has truckers blowing his doors off and is lucky he hasn't been wrecked. 

Funny how automakers use 0-60 times, horsepower numbers, and racing pedigree to sell cars. For many of us the car buying experience essentially boils down to finding something that will break the law as economically as possible.  I don't think you can even buy a car anymore with a max speed of under 100... except maybe kei cars and SMARTs, and even they can go pretty fast.

I typically cruise on the interstate between cities at 80mph and can even downshift from there to do a quick pass when I want to... in a Hyundai Elantra.  If that car can handle it, then most others should be able to as well.  Judging from experience watching cars around me, most of which doing a similar pace as me, they do just fine.

Meanwhile highways designed for 80 have a posted limit of 55.  What a racket.

I bet your uncle gets great fuel mileage.

He's a got a thing against tolled roads too.  Every time he flies out of Orlando he usually ends up taking US 92/17/441 on OBT just to avoid FL 528.  I wouldn't be surprised if gas savings has something to do with it, he still refuses to buy a new car for my Aunt and stuck her with a 1998 Taurus.  Best part was that he got all upset when I suggested taking US 41 most of the way so he doesn't have people running him off the road. 

[kalvado]

Not everyone drives the same speed though.  Even when the lanes are full, it's rare outside of stop and go conditions for the lanes to move at the same rate - the lanes to the left move faster.

Sure, but the point is that "left lane is for passing only" is good only until something like 1000-1500 cars/hour at most. 

And how common is it for the right lane to be so damaged that people need to avoid it?  I've only seen that a couple times in my life, and both instances have since been repaired.

Did you try I-88 lately?

[US 81]

Not everyone drives the same speed though.  Even when the lanes are full, it's rare outside of stop and go conditions for the lanes to move at the same rate - the lanes to the left move faster.

Sure, but the point is that "left lane is for passing only" is good only until something like 1000-1500 cars/hour at most. 

And how common is it for the right lane to be so damaged that people need to avoid it?  I've only seen that a couple times in my life, and both instances have since been repaired.

Did you try I-88 lately?

I'll see your I-88 and raise you Texas' western half of I-10.

[Max Rockatansky]

Not everyone drives the same speed though.  Even when the lanes are full, it's rare outside of stop and go conditions for the lanes to move at the same rate - the lanes to the left move faster.

Sure, but the point is that "left lane is for passing only" is good only until something like 1000-1500 cars/hour at most. 

And how common is it for the right lane to be so damaged that people need to avoid it?  I've only seen that a couple times in my life, and both instances have since been repaired.

Did you try I-88 lately?

I'll see your I-88 and raise you Texas' western half of I-10.

I-40 from Kingman to Flagstaff was in similar condition although I know some repairs near Williams were made back in 2014. 

[kalvado]

The point is there are reasons someone may drive in the left most lane.  As long as a driver isn't impeding traffic i have no problem with that.

I had quite a few situations when people were OK with impeding traffic just to get out of completely empty left lane. Squeeze themselves in front of me only to push their brakes..   Honestly speaking, I think this is the most dangerous approach  in "keep right" debate.

[Roadrunner75]

We need a lot more of this - except I want it to end in a ticket.

Nothing enrages me more on the road than some clown camping in the left lane.

[vdeane]

Not everyone drives the same speed though.  Even when the lanes are full, it's rare outside of stop and go conditions for the lanes to move at the same rate - the lanes to the left move faster.

Sure, but the point is that "left lane is for passing only" is good only until something like 1000-1500 cars/hour at most. 

And how common is it for the right lane to be so damaged that people need to avoid it?  I've only seen that a couple times in my life, and both instances have since been repaired.

Did you try I-88 lately?

Back in February.  Didn't see a need to avoid the right lane.  Are you one of those people that is paranoid about the pavement being anything slightly less than perfect?  IMO, I've always thought that concrete spalling gave the road character (in general, not just I-88; felt the same about NY 390, NY 590, I-490, and NY 104 before those roads were resurfaced/reconstructed in my lifetime), though I could do without the uneven lanes situation around exit 5.

[kalvado]

Back in February.  Didn't see a need to avoid the right lane.  Are you one of those people that is paranoid about the pavement being anything slightly less than perfect?  IMO, I've always thought that concrete spalling gave the road character (in general, not just I-88; felt the same about NY 390, NY 590, I-490, and NY 104 before those roads were resurfaced/reconstructed in my lifetime), though I could do without the uneven lanes situation around exit 5.

Not really paranoid - had to change struts only twice so far. More concerned about dental fractures, though - dentists charge more than mechanics.
Maybe a matter of what kind of car you're driving?

[Pete from Boston]

Sounds like the impatient fucks weaving in and out are the cause.

The cause are the LLDs.  The result is the weaving.

They made me do it, in other words.

The cause of the weaving is people who decide one unsafe act requires another.  Traffic sucks.  Some of us drive in heavy traffic of people behaving badly every day.  None of those people causes us to behave similarly unless we decide to. 

[Duke87]

Sounds like the impatient fucks weaving in and out are the cause.

The cause are the LLDs.  The result is the weaving.

They made me do it, in other words.

The cause of the weaving is people who decide one unsafe act requires another.  Traffic sucks.  Some of us drive in heavy traffic of people behaving badly every day.  None of those people causes us to behave similarly unless we decide to.

Methinks we're getting a tad too caught up in the concept of "cause" in a literal sense here.

It is true the presence of someone driving slowly in the left lane does not force other drivers to weave around them, but it certainly does provide them with a motive for doing so. And it is also quite fair to say that if people did not drive slowly in the left lane, other drivers would not weave around them. They would have no motive to.

Keep right except to pass is the law for a reason. It is a simple matter of courtesy to avoid unduly getting in someone else's way. Failure to practice this courtesy is inevitably going to lead to road rage.

Now, regardless of who should be blamed or is the "cause", which do you think would be more effective at preventing accidents?
- Enforcing Keep Right Except to pass, and telling people to quit being left lane hogs, or
- Enforcing no passing on the right, and telling people to patiently wait behind the left lane hog for him to wake up and move over

Somehow I think the first option would produce better results. Attempting to train people to respond differently to provocation is an uphill battle against human nature, but removing the motive for an undesirable behavior is quite effective at stopping it.

[kalvado]

Now, regardless of who should be blamed or is the "cause", which do you think would be more effective at preventing accidents?
- Enforcing Keep Right Except to pass, and telling people to quit being left lane hogs, or
- Enforcing no passing on the right, and telling people to patiently wait behind the left lane hog for him to wake up and move over

Since you're from NY, you may be interested in a following quote from the NY driver manual:

You may pass on the right:
[ ... ]
    When you are on a two-way road that is marked for two or more lanes or is wide enough for two or more lanes, and passing is not prohibited by signs or restricted by parked cars or other obstructions.

So passing on the right on a freeway is not just unenforceable, it is fully legal in NYS - I still have to see any signs restricting passing on the right.

[Pete from Boston]

Sounds like the impatient fucks weaving in and out are the cause.

The cause are the LLDs.  The result is the weaving.

They made me do it, in other words.

The cause of the weaving is people who decide one unsafe act requires another.  Traffic sucks.  Some of us drive in heavy traffic of people behaving badly every day.  None of those people causes us to behave similarly unless we decide to.

Methinks we're getting a tad too caught up in the concept of "cause" in a literal sense here.

It is true the presence of someone driving slowly in the left lane does not force other drivers to weave around them, but it certainly does provide them with a motive for doing so. And it is also quite fair to say that if people did not drive slowly in the left lane, other drivers would not weave around them. They would have no motive to.

Keep right except to pass is the law for a reason. It is a simple matter of courtesy to avoid unduly getting in someone else's way. Failure to practice this courtesy is inevitably going to lead to road rage.

Now, regardless of who should be blamed or is the "cause", which do you think would be more effective at preventing accidents?
- Enforcing Keep Right Except to pass, and telling people to quit being left lane hogs, or
- Enforcing no passing on the right, and telling people to patiently wait behind the left lane hog for him to wake up and move over

Somehow I think the first option would produce better results. Attempting to train people to respond differently to provocation is an uphill battle against human nature, but removing the motive for an undesirable behavior is quite effective at stopping it.

So what is the motive for the undesirable behavior of driving slow in the left lane, and how do you remove that motive?

I'm clearly illustrating that this is mostly a circular argument all around, but it's at least once a week as I try to get out of a left lane in which I'm not going fast enough for somebody, I change lanes to the right and said person is already racing around me on the right.  Horn blast from them ensues etc., etc.

There is a general behavior problem that extends way beyond these specific acts and reflects a general low concern for driving with any regard to others that comes with a very low level of taking personal responsibility.

[kalvado]

I'm clearly illustrating that this is mostly a circular argument all around, but it's at least once a week as I try to get out of a left lane in which I'm not going fast enough for somebody, I change lanes to the right and said person is already racing around me on the right.  Horn blast from them ensues etc., etc.

There is a general behavior problem that extends way beyond these specific acts and reflects a general low concern for driving with any regard to others that comes with a very low level of taking personal responsibility.

Yes, unfortunately to many people fail to do things as simple as checking mirrors and looking around the shoulder before changing lanes...