Motorway Middle Lane Hoggers

[Dhimmi]

Normally I'm coming from the M2. ;-)

I saying if you're happy to go along at half walking pace faster than the slow lane you may as well be in the slow lane. Then those who just want to be roughly at the speed limit can have the middle and free up the fast for the faster drivers...

 

[Griff]

You're quite right, I'm often baffled to find slow lane traffic moving at 60, middle lane at 62.5 and fast at 65.

Sorry, now I know where you're coming from. You mean the actual speed.

I know what you mean, stopping distances when you're in a procession of cars doing 60 is quite long, and it's one of those things that is quite disconcerting about 'speed' and 'motorways'

I always stay in the left hand lane when it's like that, it's so unpredictable.

Anyway, bed now.

 

[ymu]

Yes, I should add I was really just talking about motorway driving. I've no time for folk tearing around on our small streets and roads.

You're quite right, I'm often baffled to find slow lane traffic moving at 60, middle lane at 62.5 and fast at 65.

This is basically a ~60 mile an hour traffic jam, which is sometimes caused by middle lane hoggers when the traffic isn't heavy enough to cause it otherwise. It happens a lot when there is a moderate density of lorries and caravans in the inside lane, causing the "must drive within the speed limit but 60 is too slow" people to move out into the middle lane and not move back because there's another lorry 50 yards ahead.

 

[Fuzzy]

but how busy the motorway is can and will dictate which lane i stay in. if its busy and land 1 and 2 are busy i sit in lane 3 travelling at the same speed as the car in front of me. the car behind me may want to overtake but i dont see the point of getting out of its way to allow it to get one car further forward in the queue. some drivers are just inpatient. naturally if conditions lightened and there was room to pull over i'd happily get out a car's way if i clearly saw that they were were travelling faster than i was.

i think this interpretation of how fast cars are travelling around you is important. as stated earlier i dont have a powerful car and i'd rather get out of the way of a more powerful car. i used to have a hang up about bmw drivers but now i just accept that they've got a better bit of kit than me and thats fine because its my choice. someone will always want to drive faster than you. i say let them get on with it.

 

[moose]

I saying if you're happy to go along at half walking pace faster than the slow lane you may as well be in the slow lane. Then those who just want to be roughly at the speed limit can have the middle and free up the fast for the faster drivers...

And this is the crux of the problem. People thinking of the lanes as 'slow' and 'fast'. The middle and outside lanes are the 'overtaking' lanes.

 

[aqua]

I don't understand a word you're saying there; you're speaking that odd driver-speak usually only heard on AM radio phone-ins Which one's the inside and outside lane?

you're driving on the motorway and yet you don't understand the basic language?

 

[aqua]

And this is the crux of the problem. People thinking of the lanes as 'slow' and 'fast'. The middle and outside lanes are the 'overtaking' lanes.

absolutely.

 

[beeboo]

chio - inside lane is the one furthest to the left (aka Lane 1 or the "slow lane"). Outside is furthest to the right.

I always found this confusing as the inside lane is actually on the "outside" edge.


Just found this site

http://www.howmotorwayswork.co.uk/index.htm

 

[chymaera]

Middle lane hogging is more of a complex issue than many might think.
Often staying in the middle lane is the best option due to high traffic density.
There is no point in constant lane changing, just to obey the highway code.
For instance I always if possible go out into the middle lane when approaching traffic joining from a junction as this is safer for all concerned, and go back to the nearside lane when when past the junction.
There is however no excuse for hogging the midde lane when there is **** all traffic except a juggernaut up your arse who cannot use the outside lane.

 

[beeboo]

If the inside lane is busy, and you're moving at a consistantly faster speed than that lane, then staying in the middle lane is obviously sensible - it's not a game of leapfrog.

However, as soon as you get a substantial gap in traffic in the inside lane, you should move back into that lane.

Most of the middle lane hogging I see is where the motorway is patchily busy, and people overtake a cluster of vehicles in the inside lane, but then don't move back when it is clear again, which means the inside lane is under-used, leading to more congestion.

Sitting in the middle lane on an otherwise empty motorway is plain daft, but at least the extent to which they're inconveniencing other people is limited.

 

[cybertect]

You're quite right, I'm often baffled to find slow lane traffic moving at 60, middle lane at 62.5 and fast at 65.

However, it's also far from unknown to come across a situation where the outside lane is doing 65, the middle 65 also (or 64mph) there's about ten metres between each car and the inside lane is almost empty.

On the five-lane sections of the M25 I've often seen this repeated, but with *three* empty lanes on the nearside.

When it gets like that, I usually duck straight for the inside lane, match the speed of the nearest outside lane so I don't pass on the nearside and enjoy a huge stopping margin to the car in front.

When approaching 60mph MLOC members from behind, I'll make an exaggerated sweep to overtake from lane 1, round into lane 3 and back to lane 1, with plenty of indicator action (I don't flash unless they're a real hazard, e.g. doing <50)

Y'see, I really don't buy this idea that you need two lanes clear to overtake.

You don't, but often there would be no need for you to use two lanes to overtake if the numpty sitting in the middle lane was in lane 1 where s/he should be.

It means you have to check two lanes behind you before starting the manoeuvre, not just one. Twice as much room for error. There may be a third car speeding in lane 3, just in your blind spot (been nearly caught out by that before). The alternative is to give in and drive in the middle lane yourself, but then lane 1 becomes quite unused, or pass on the nearside, which is illegal.

It's quite unnecessary.

 

[subversplat]

Keeping people's concentration active by constantly going L1 to L2 and back again has got to be a good thing for monotonous motorway journeys, surely? Sitting in L2 just encourages people to fall asleep.

For this safety-orientated reason I hereby propose that L2 hoggers are fair game targets for PIT Maneuvers, just to keep them on their toes.

 

[Pingu]

*makes machine gun noises*

 

[fear-n-loathing]

it annoy the shit out of me people who do this

 

[sojourner]

I'm sure this won't go down too well given the amount of comments I've seen on here about it, but I undertake all the time, due to middle lane hoggery. Can't see what's so dangerous about it. They won't move, L1 is fairly empty, I go in it, then back out to L2 to overtake others in L1 again

Tell you what else pisses me off (happened today, twice) - people sitting in the right turning lane on a normal road at lights (which goes into one lane), and then driving straight ahead Get in the fucking left hand lane you cunts


Oh yeh - just wanted to add, that I've never had a motorway lesson, and they scared the shit out of me for years. Got taken on one by my old boss last year, and worked it out by myself, and felt safe as houses within the 2nd go

 

[beeboo]

Tell you what else pisses me off (happened today, twice) - people sitting in the right turning lane on a normal road at lights (which goes into one lane), and then driving straight ahead Get in the fucking left hand lane you cunts

What's the point of that (unless you're front over the queue) as you just get stuck behind the people turning right?

 

[chymaera]

I undertake all the time, due to middle lane hoggery. Can't see what's so dangerous about it.

I am sure when you get caught doing it, the nice police officer will expain why it is dangerous and why the Brownie points on your licence.

 

[Gromit]

I read the title as Middle Lane Doggers and so am disapointed by this thread

 

[Spion]

I'm sure this won't go down too well given the amount of comments I've seen on here about it, but I undertake all the time, due to middle lane hoggery. Can't see what's so dangerous about it.

It's dangerous cos people won't necessarily expect you to be coming along the inside. If they pull over to the left, bang. In the US it's quite legal and expected so people are aware of it. I do it sometimes but don't like doing it

 

[sojourner]

It's dangerous cos people won't necessarily expect you to be coming along the inside. If they pull over to the left, bang. In the US it's quite legal and expected so people are aware of it. I do it sometimes but don't like doing it

But - surely they should be looking at where they're going anyway Never mind expectations - it's a motorway!

 

[sojourner]

I am sure when you get caught doing it, the nice police officer will expain why it is dangerous and why the Brownie points on your licence.

Fuck off toby

 

[sojourner]

What's the point of that (unless you're front over the queue) as you just get stuck behind the people turning right?

The offenders were at the front of the queue - then nearly bashed straight into the side of me. And it wasn't the ones where the arrow says straight ahead or right, the arrow said right - I've driven along there fuckin loads so I know

 

[Deareg]

Just been listening to Jeremy Vine and there seems to be a campaign by the Driving Agency or some other body to try and educate these ignorant cunts who sit in the middle lane while the inside lane is totally empty.

Couldn't believe there were people ringing up to defend their actions of sitting there at 70 in the middle lane on safety grounds.

Makes me fucking sick.

Middle Land Morons

if someone is doing 70 on the motorway then how are they holding up traffic?

 

[Pingu]

if someone is doing 70 on the motorway then how are they holding up traffic?

because.. becasue... they just are ok.


even if they are doing 70 and the inside lane is clear they should be in it rather than sitting in the middle lane.

and yeah the speed limit is 70 but a lot of people will do 80, and provided you are not driving like a muppet the bizzies dont give a shit until you hit about 85

 

[Deareg]

because.. becasue... they just are ok.


even if they are doing 70 and the inside lane is clear they should be in it rather than sitting in the middle lane.

and yeah the speed limit is 70 but a lot of people will do 80, and provided you are not driving like a muppet the bizzies dont give a shit until you hit about 85

yeah i know that you should use the left lane i just cant see why the op is getting so wound up about someone doing 70 i could see his point if they were doing below that

is that true about the coppers turning a blind eye up to 80? i have heard that before but thought it was bollox

 

[chymaera]

is that true about the coppers turning a blind eye up to 80? i have heard that before but thought it was bollox

It is bollocks now average speed cameras are being installed on motorways and main roads. (The M4 and M5 in the Bristol area being two examples).

 

[Griff]

yeah i know that you should use the left lane i just cant see why the op is getting so wound up about someone doing 70 i could see his point if they were doing below that

Well, 1) they should be driving in the left hand lane.

& 2) In the real world, on a clear empty motorway 80-85 is really the speed limit. I've never heard of anyone being stopped on a motorway for doing in-between those speeds.

3) Their speedos are probably saying 70 yet they're probably doing 65.

4) They're just fucking dim.

 

[detective-boy]

is that true about the coppers turning a blind eye up to 80? i have heard that before but thought it was bollox

There is guidance that there should be a 10% margin of error before report - so 77mph which is usually rounded up in practice to 80mph.

In reality, most traffic officers would not prosecute under about 90mph unless there were aggravating circumstances (e.g. some actual danger). It would then usually be a fixed penalty notice up to about 100mph, above which it would normally be a summons as Magistrates would be considering immediate disqualification.

 

[chymaera]

There is guidance that there should be a 10% margin of error before report - so 77mph which is usually rounded up in practice to 80mph.

In reality, most traffic officers would not prosecute under about 90mph unless there were aggravating circumstances (e.g. some actual danger). It would then usually be a fixed penalty notice up to about 100mph, above which it would normally be a summons as Magistrates would be considering immediate disqualification.

I would not make those assumptions on the M5 between Bristol and Exeter. I know several people who lost their licences with accumulated speeding offences on that section of motorway.

 

[sam/phallocrat]

I would not make those assumptions on the M5 between Bristol and Exeter. I know several people who lost their licences with accumulated speeding offences on that section of motorway.

bollocks