What to do with middle lane people

usernamegoes

So newly qualified driver here now using the M50 to commute. I get into the driving lane and usually stay there as I am not too fussed about going faster than the lane is moving.

However, I am regularly encountering people in the middle lane going slower than I could go in the driving lane. I have a few options as far as I can see it:

1) Drive slower than them; Pro - I am not in a huge hurry so don't mind although its frustrating to monitor the speed of a driver in the lane over. Con - People behind me going spare at how slow I am going with a open lane in front of me. I get I shouldn't worry about them but I don't want them tail gating me or being aggressive.

2) Undertake the middle lane people; Pro deals with the people behind me issue. Con - Dangerous and illegal.

3) Change into the middle lane - then the 3rd lane, then the middle lane then the driving lane. Pro- the correct way to do it. Con - getting a space in the middle lane then the 3rd lane then the middle lane again is tricky in busy traffic particularly when my exit is soon

4) Become a middle lane hogger!

What are people's thoughts?

Dravokivich

Whenever I come across someone driving slower then I'd expect, my first thought is, did they see something or did something happen that I missed? I'm rarely considering getting pass them. I also would not compound their mistake (If one seems appearent) by making a mistake myself.

Id drive behind them in first lane. Give room for anyone else who wants to swerve in front of you, to cut inside them.

Gauge if it's worthwhile transitioning to third lane and back again to over take them. No point if you are looking to exit very shortly afterwards. Or if you are just going to get stuck up ahead anyway.

Recently on the m50, I let 3 people in the middle lane over take me, so I could go in behind them, then overtake via the 3rd lane and pull back into the first lane.

dennyk

Undertaking is legal in slow-moving traffic when the queue in the left lane is moving faster than the one to the right. Granted, "slow-moving traffic" isn't precisely defined, so it's rather open to interpretation; if you're rolling along at 120km/h in the left lane and the middle has one aul wan in an ancient Cressida puttering along at 80, you'd probably get done for improper passing if a guard sees you pass 'em on the left. If traffic in both lanes is crawling along at well under the speed limit and the left lane just happens to be faster from time to time, though, then it's unlikely you'd get into any trouble for it (nor is it really unsafe at low speeds with queued traffic in both lanes, provided you pay attention and leave sufficient following distance of course).

Now, deliberately moving to the left lane to overtake some slowbie in the right lane would definitely be unacceptable and unsafe in just about any circumstances.

Wishbone Ash

dennyk wrote: »

.... and unsafe in just about any circumstances.

Funny how it's perfectly legal and considered to be safe in other first world countries.

dennyk

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Funny how it's perfectly legal and considered to be safe in other first world countries.

It's unsafe in large part because it's illegal here and therefore people don't expect it (although habitual right-lane bandits ought to be used to it, I'd think... :pac: ).

Dravokivich

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Funny how it's perfectly legal and considered to be safe in other first world countries.

So?

Next time a general election is up and you've someone knocking on your door, discuss this.

J_R

Hi,

If you have a "hands-free" kit then why not give 1890 205805, Garda Traffic Watch a call.

Or if you have some time to spare, drop into a local Garda station with all the details

Failure to drive on the left hand side of the road earns 2 penalty points.
and
Driving without reasonable consideration also 2 penalty points

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishbone Ash View Post
Funny how it's perfectly legal and considered to be safe in other first world countries.

I have being driving here in Thailand for the past year. Here the left-most lane, or the left side of the road is "usually" used by motor-bikes and cars turning left. (Turning left at red traffic lights is the norm here). Three and four lane roads. vast number of people use the right-most lane. But no problem whatsoever re undertaking, same same as overtaking

Thailand has the highest traffic accident rate in the world. Above would be one of the reasons.

I simply can not get used to traffic overtaking on the left - its unsettling and dangerous.

I miss driving in Ireland, there I drove with my car nicely tucked to the left, then I only had front, rear and right hand side to worry about, here it is a full 360 degs

Advanced drivers are taught to maintain a "Safety Zone" around their car. Because of the large blind area to the left, to minimise the possibility of somebody entering this blind spot, they maintain a line as close as they safely can to the left hand side of the road. This fits in nicely with the very basic rules of the road which is to drive at a safe but not excessive distance from the left.

corks finest

Dravokivich wrote: »

Whenever I come across someone driving slower then I'd expect, my first thought is, did they see something or did something happen that I missed? I'm rarely considering getting pass them. I also would not compound their mistake (If one seems appearent) by making a mistake myself.

Id drive behind them in first lane. Give room for anyone else who wants to swerve in front of you, to cut inside them.

Gauge if it's worthwhile transitioning to third lane and back again to over take them. No point if you are looking to exit very shortly afterwards. Or if you are just going to get stuck up ahead anyway.

Recently on the m50, I let 3 people in the middle lane over take me, so I could go in behind them, then overtake via the 3rd lane and pull back into the first lane.

1. Don't undertake.2. don't mind the guys behind,if they want ,let them overtake,and 3 welcome to the south of Ireland driving,mist don't understand how to use roundabouts, overtaking lane, indicators.

jimmycrackcorm

A work colleague was up in court once and among the charges was one for illegally undertaking on a dual carriageway. His solicitor asked the guard if he had observed him actually overtaking or if he had manouvered into the overusing lane after passing.

As he had stayed in the left lane all the time and despite the speed, the judge threw out that charge because of the argument about slower moving traffic vs undertaking had he switched lanes.

Dravokivich

corks finest wrote: »

1. Don't undertake.2. don't mind the guys behind,if they want ,let them overtake,and 3 welcome to the south of Ireland driving,mist don't understand how to use roundabouts, overtaking lane, indicators.

I was behind a middle lane hogger intending to over take, but those 3 came up behind and sat there beside me. So I let them get by me, so I could go by all 4 of them, as no one was on my lane behind me.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

A work colleague was up in court once and among the charges was one for illegally undertaking on a dual carriageway. His solicitor asked the guard if he had observed him actually overtaking or if he had manouvered into the overusing lane after passing.

As he had stayed in the left lane all the time and despite the speed, the judge threw out that charge because of the argument about slower moving traffic vs undertaking had he switched lanes.

The act of over taking doesn't require one to switch lanes.

Dravokivich

Dravokivich wrote: »

Id drive behind them in first lane. Give room for anyone else who wants to swerve in front of you, to cut inside them.

Gauge if it's worthwhile transitioning to third lane and back again to over take them. No point if you are looking to exit very shortly afterwards. Or if you are just going to get stuck up ahead anyway.

If someone is doing is doing 80 in the middle lane, it is more dangerous (IMO) to slow to 70-ish in lane 1 to provide enough room for undertakers than it is to do any of the options outlined in the OP.

Much better to drive at the speed you are comfortable at and overtake when necessary. I've never heard of anyone being stopped for undertaking before, let alone charged.

Dravokivich

Deleted User wrote: »

If someone is doing is doing 80 in the middle lane, it is more dangerous (IMO) to slow to 70-ish in lane 1 to provide enough room for undertakers than it is to do any of the options outlined in the OP.

Much better to drive at the speed you are comfortable at and overtake when necessary. I've never heard of anyone being stopped for undertaking before, let alone charged.

I'm not going to over take someone on the left just because they are "slower." If there's room to over take them to the right, i'd assess the ability to do so.

Otherwise, I'll wait and give anyone else in a rush, room to make the decision themselves to force through.

I've never heard of anyone being charged for a lot of stuff. But then again, the absence of gossip isn't really an endorsement for firing ahead.

Henry Ford III

Pass them on the rhs only.

The legislation doesn't define "slow moving traffic" per se, but it's important to appreciate the difference between "slow" and "slower" in that context.

p.s. For what it's worth an interpretation has been made in the UK whereby "slow" moving means congested and stop/start traffic.

p.p.s. The M50 is pretty lawless. I hate it.

Dravokivich

Dravokivich wrote: »

I'm not going to over take someone on the left just because they are "slower." If there's room to over take them to the right, i'd assess the ability to do so.

Otherwise, I'll wait and give anyone else in a rush, room to make the decision themselves to force through.

I've never heard of anyone being charged for a lot of stuff. But then again, the absence of gossip isn't really an endorsement for firing ahead.

I'm not advocating undertaking, just for the record.

What I'm saying is, rather than slowing to 70km/h in lane 1 because lane 2 (middle lane) is doing the same speed, it is 99% of the time safer to switch lanes x 2, overtake and switch back.

I mean, what do you do if there's an on-ramp on your left with 2 or 3 cars trying to enter at 100km/h and you're pootling along at 70 because you didn't have the foresight to overtake?

Dravokivich

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not advocating undertaking, just for the record.

What I'm saying is, rather than slowing to 70km/h in lane 1 because lane 2 (middle lane) is doing the same speed, it is 99% of the time safer to switch lanes x 2, overtake and switch back.

I mean, what do you do if there's an on-ramp on your left with 2 or 3 cars trying to enter at 100km/h and you're pootling along at 70 because you didn't have the foresight to overtake?

You seem to have miss read my posts. But if someone is cutting across at the last moment to exit. I doesn't matter what I had done or didn't do prior to that. They should have reviewed the road ahead and switched lanes properly before that point.

I don't think I've misread your post at all. You said you are not going to "overtake on the left" just because they are slower. I never advocated doing that in my original post.

You did make the point:

"Id drive behind them in first lane. Give room for anyone else who wants to swerve in front of you, to cut inside them.

and my answer to that is that it is almost always much safer to execute a proper overtaking procedure (on the right!) than it is to sit in lane 1 and drive at a much slower speed than the limit. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's more dangerous in certain circumstances than undertaking (on the left).

I don't know where you got the part about an exit from.

Dravokivich

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think I've misread your post at all. You said you are not going to "overtake on the left" just because they are slower. I never advocated doing that in my original post.

You did make the point:



and my answer to that is that it is almost always much safer to execute a proper overtaking procedure (on the right!) than it is to sit in lane 1 and drive at a much slower speed than the limit. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's more dangerous in certain circumstances than undertaking (on the left).

I don't know where you got the part about an exit from.

That's assuming a 2 lane carraige way as most of the road network is here, as they tend to carry the same or similar moniker of "middle lane hogger." I've also posted about how I recently approached over taking one, along with considering what one could be looking to do afterwards. There's no point overtaking them on the third lane if you are due to exit shortly, or will end up hitting traffic anyway.

You're only objective has been the person sitting in that lane being a hinderance. Driving isn't just about progressing ahead.

I agree, its about safety first and foremost. Making sure everyone gets home in one piece. I was also under the impression we were talking about the M50 here, hence the reference to three lanes.

That driver is not just a hindrance, in certain circumstances, he is a threat to your safety and well-being. Imagine the following scenario:

Driver A is sitting in the overtaking lane doing 85km/h on a 120km/h stretch of two-lane motorway. You're not exiting for another 20 mins at least. You slow down to 85 also and sit back, providing enough room for others to undertake should they see fit (as per your initial post in this thread).

The person who comes up behind driver A is similar to you and refuses to undertake so they slow down to 85km/h, and are more or less side by side with you. Traffic begins to build up behind all 3 of you, with a rolling blockade all travelling 35km/h below the advertised speed limit.

2 km ahead, at the next exit/entrance to the motorway, there are 5 cars looking to join, all accelerating down the on-ramp at 120km/h looking to merge with your blockade. That's a crazy dangerous situation that could be avoided by you just doing 110km/h and undertaking him in the beginning. Yes its illegal, but its safer.