The Middle Lane Militia

[Alex_225]

Well, we all know the Middle Lane Hoggers the once who mindlessly drift along in the middle lane for mile upon mile without even considering going back into lane one. To the extent that you can be prosecuted for doing so, good times.

I think many of us will have experienced this frustration but it seems there is another group of middle lane mentalists, The Milddle Lane Militia.

These are the people who's job it is to Police the middle lane and make sure everyone is adhering to how they think it should be used.

I only do 500 miles motorway driving a month but I've seen a number of people who will not remain in the middle lane for long than a second. So they'll be in lane one for a short time, then use lane two, then lane three then immediately swerve back across the width of the motorway to lane one.....then they'll be back in lane two and they spend their entire motorway time chopping and changing lanes. I appreciate not sitting in the middle lane all day but changing lanes constantly is not exactly great driving either. It appears as if their soul purpose is to show others how to keep to the left, even if it means leaving lane one every ten seconds. Don't forget though staying in the middle lane for longer than that is hogging it!!

Then the other person I've spotted is the, 'get out of my way' type who knows exactly when every other driver should move back into lane one. Take for example the chap at 6am on the M4 on Saturday. I was doing a steady 70mph passing cars in lane one. I had just passed a car and with another approaching I stayed in the middle lane to pass it but that was not quick enough for Mr van driver who puts his high beam on behind me and keeps it on! He had an empty lane three but no, he wants me to fit into a smaller than necessary gap to facilitate his Policing of the middle lane. Am I wrong for thinking that I'll pass the next car, whilst van drivers uses lane three to pass me, then we all move over to the left accordingly once everyone is past who they want to overtake?! Is that too obvious??

I'm not claiming to be the perfect driver but I have always been of the thinking that if you know you'll be back out into the middle lane to pass another vehicle quite quickly, you're within your rights to stay in that lane until you pass and then move back to lane one. Rather than lane one for 10-20 seconds then back out again. I'm not sure if this is just me that's noticed it and I by no means sit in the middle lane but I will not swerve lane to lane constantly, I plan ahead and keep left.

It just seems that we have middle lane hogger and now people militant about middle lane use who don't seem to quite grasp how to use a motorway safely and that all three lanes can be used when used correctly.

[Alex_225]

You could be absolutely right, no way to know from him coming up behind me but the speed he approached and the fact that he used lane three a couple of times before he headed off would indicate that he was able to use lane three.

Also, I'm not sure whether that is entirely relevant to the fact that I was doing a steady 70mph and passing cars, nor does it defend putting your high beams on behind someone for no reason other than his own thoughts to push people out of his way. My point is I wasn't hogging the middle lane but this guy decided I should be out of the way.

[Alex_225]

Red Devil said:

Are we to equate 10-20 seconds as your definition of 'quite quickly'? If so, please tell the PH readership what time interval you consider to be acceptable before reverting to lane 1. 20 seconds at 70mph is more than one third of a mile (0.39). If you're staying out for that distance when the traffic level is such that you could safely pull back in to lane 1 then maybe you need to have a rethink. If somebody else chooses to exceed the speed limit in lane 2 it doesn't confer on you the right to act as policeman.

As for your use of the word swerving, why the need for hyperbole? Anybody who does that shouldn't be using them as they are an active danger to others.

I personally would move back into lane one as soon as I had sufficient space behind me from passing any other vehicles. My point was that 10-20 seconds is not a particularly long time in the scheme of things. In reality I probably plucked that figure from the air and in reality it's 5-10 seconds. Keep in mind that I'm referring to time taken to pass a car and be a sufficient distance ahead before pulling in.

My point is more that with that being a relatively short time in the real world, is 10-20 seconds long enough to then warrant intimidating other drivers into moving? Miles and miles of sitting in lane two, I can understand the frustration but literally seconds different doesn't warrant that in my option.

I suspect that if I'd written my original post from the perspective of someone not moving out of the way quickly enough (albeit moving over) I'd have been berated for not using the entire road and why not just pass and move on with life!

As for my use of the word swerving, it's definition is : change or cause to change direction abruptly.

Swerving dangerously or doing so abruptly, so if pedantry is the order of the day then my use of the term is correct in how I am referring to it. Swerving dangerously is another subject altogether and as you say a danger to others. Some of the manoeuvres I have seen in which someone changes lane quickly, could easily catch other drivers out.

[Alex_225]

Garybee said:

In general I believe the problem is caused by the average speed differential between lanes 1 and 2 being so large. With this being the case it's often pointless on a busy motorway to move back into lane 1.

I have no doubt that I will soon be in the wrong for typing the above line.

Thanks for that post mate, I must admit there does seem to be a habit of first posts on PH being dissected and then picked apart for some reason whether there is a valid point or otherwise.

As for this point above, I can see exactly what you mean. Lorries doing 55-60mph in lane one, then a lot of drivers at 80mph cruising speed. Unless the motorway is extremely quiet even at 70mph you could end up in lane two simply passing slower moving vehicles the entire time.

I always assumed, that the whole thing of not moving back to lane one was more of a problem with those drivers that sit in the middle lane for no reason. If you are passing vehicles, I've always assumed you were entitled to staying that lane as it is for overtaking and that is what you're doing. If on the other hand you are simply sitting at the same speed as vehicles in that lane or lane one is empty, you should move over.

[Alex_225]

esxste said:

I do question how you're managing to see the Middle Lane Militia though.

Just seems to be a small percentage of drivers out there who are intent on being quite the opposite of the middle lane hoggers. As I mentioned Mr Van driver trying to get everyone over to the left whether suitable and other various drivers moving constantly from lane one to two to three etc. Some drivers, again a minority almost drive in such as way as to over emphasise moving back to lane one.

[Alex_225]

Well your impressions would be wholly incorrect I'm afraid I am far from being a middle lane hogger. I do indeed have a dashcam and have done for the last 18 months or so. As much as many on this forum wish to dissect the entirety of someone's post in any given thread, to the point of belittling the original poster and invalidating what they were originally referring to. Users on here have such a way of taking what someone was referring to and criticising it to the point of ridicule. The level of pedantry is staggering and not like any forum I've ever frequented, I'm not sure why this of all car forums has a culture of pushing people into a corner when we're all meant to be car fans.

My original point was merely if anyone had spotted the polar opposite to the middle lane hogger using a couple of examples, that's all. It wasn't a huge, complicated discussion. I experienced a van driver at the weekend who tried to intimidate me out of the way, rather than use lane three, all the while I was gaining speed on a vehicle in lane one so waited to move into that lane myself until I was passed. That's not the same as being in the lane for mile upon mile and never moving back to lane one.

I also pointed out that number of drivers I've witnessed returning to lane one, only to be back out into lane two or then three so spend their entire time swapping lanes.

That's all it was, a few casual observations and wondered if anyone had seen these types of drivers.

esxste said:

I kind of get the impression that you're a Middle Lane Motorist, and you're overly sensitive to people who drive properly.

Just in response to this directly. Do you consider someone not using lane three to overtake a car which is overtaking cars in lane one, coming up too close and flashing their headlights at you to be 'driving properly'? This is what I referred to in my first post.

I was doing 70mph and passing cars on my left, I didn't consider squeezing into a gap to only shorten braking distances on my left a sensible option when within moments I'd have passed the next car and then moved to lane one. All the while van driver at 80mph+ could have simply used lane three and carried on his way. This being a van driver who stayed in lane two the entire time he was in sight.

Red Devil said:

Hang on a minute, you've just halved the time (and therefore the distance at the same speed). That makes it a quite different proposition!
See the post by M1KeH above yours. That's exactly what I was taught too.

To clarify this point. I would say that 10-20 seconds is the amount of time I would consider in my mind reasonable to allow someone to complete an overtake and then move back into lane one. As much as I think people should move back as soon as is safe I don't expect every driver to be that forward thinking, move back immediately or move back at all. It was just my personal thinking on what is a reasonable expectation of others.

Edited by Alex_225 on Wednesday 7th December 13:55

[Alex_225]

TooMany2cvs said:

So post some of the videos of people doing what you claim...

Riiiight, so this is a bullsh!t test? Of course, I sat here and completely made up these scenarios. What an odd accusation, I would assume if I was to lie on an internet forum I could think of some wilder stuff than commenting on someone else changing lanes on a motorway. I assume your request is to analyse what I'm doing and find fault, a PH hobby for some.

Just for you mate, next time I have video footage of someone being oddly militant in the middle lane, I'll put it up just for you. I suspect by saying that I'm not that fussed about traipsing through 5-6 hours of uneventful driving to find 10 seconds of footage of a van driving like a cretin, I'm admitting it's all a fairy tale but I'll be honest this was merely a discussion on a forum that was intended to be fairly light hearted.

Out of interest, has this subject raised a particular annoyance to you? Genuine question.

Edited by Alex_225 on Wednesday 7th December 14:03

[Alex_225]

Of course, there is always perspective and I can categorically tell you that I am not a middle lane hogger. It is a bug bear of mine when I see this happening and I will keep left (as stated throughout the thread) throughout the regular motorway driving I do.

I have been a member of the IAM (so by that I like to think I'm not completely ignorant to decent driving!) and my understanding was that if you are doing say, 70mph and passing vehicles in lane 1 fairly quickly. I look ahead, not miles but a few seconds and see I am gaining on the next car in lane 1. Reading the road ahead, knowing I would need to be in lane 2 to pass, it is safer to remain in that lane for a few more seconds, pass that car and then move over. As opposed passing one car, back into lane 1, closing the gaps between cars, another few seconds and then back out to lane 2 and so on.

I'm not sure staying in lane 2 and passing one more car is justification for another driver (in this case the van) to come up behind me at significantly more than my speed, putting his main beams on solidly rather than just going into lane 3, overtaking and carrying on with his day.

I have always been of the thinking that if vehicle in lane 2 is clearly gaining and passing cars in lane 1 yet I am travelling faster than them, I would just use lane 3 and pass them.

Ultimately there are three lanes which can be used. Sitting in an overtaking lane for mile upon mile on a nearly empty motorway is one thing, sitting alongside cars not overtaking in said lanes is also unnecessary but spending an extra few seconds to pass vehicles safely, being easier to predict for other motorists and then moving aside to the correct lane? I don't see as being a bad methodology!


Also, just for scale of reference, I do a 260 miles motorway drive every other weekend. I would say that nine times of ten it's fairly uneventful. You'll see the odd idiot, a couple of random crashes in the time I've been doing it but essentially it's stress free. I certainly haven't incurred the wrath of other drivers for being in the middle lane as like I have said, I don't hog the middle lane. This one driver stood out on this occasion and I have seen it happen to other motorists and not because they are necessarily the typical middle lane hogger we are dislike but because the aggressor thinks everyone should be out of their way regardless.

Edited by Alex_225 on Wednesday 7th December 14:45

[Alex_225]

TooMany2cvs said:

You say it happens all the time. I've never seen it. Is it just a matter of perspective? If so, whose perspective is out?

I didn't say all the time but in the comparatively small number of miles I do per year, I have seen a handful of drivers who seem oddly militant with the usage of the middle lane. Enough for me to remember them at least whether they impacted on my drive or not. I assumed that there may be some others out there (such as the post above) who have experienced other drivers that have done the same.

This is by no means a regular occurrence and I can honestly say that the driving displayed by the van driver example was the only time I have experienced such aggression. The impression given by him was that everyone should be in lane 1 whether they're over taking or not.

My other example was having witnessed some drivers who return to lane 1 (that's good obviously), then are back in lane 2 within a short moment and seem to chop and change lanes without reading the road ahead. So instead of going lane 1, 2, 1, 2 constantly, could have seen they were catching up on cars ahead stayed in lane 2 that bit longer and then moved over with zero impact on other road users. That may be an awkward way to explain it.

Edited by Alex_225 on Wednesday 7th December 16:10

[Alex_225]

johnao said:

A couple of observations here. This is an advanced driving forum and in the rarefied world of advanced driving there is no such thing as an "overtaking" lane on a motorway or dual carriageway. We have lanes 1, 2, 3 etc [lane 1 being that on the left, or nearside, of the carriageway].

Although would I be correct in saying that the Highway Code states that on motorways you should keep left unless the road ahead is clear. Once you are then past slower moving vehicles you then return to lane 1?

I only mean it in the sense that I'd sit in lane 1 at a steady speed, overtake in lane 2 or 3 and then return to lane one. So essentially using them predominantly for overtaking. Also for example on a dual carriageway motorists should return to lane 1 unless overtaking rather than sitting in lane 2 as that enables faster moving vehicles to pass?

Edited by Alex_225 on Thursday 8th December 09:30

[Alex_225]

There's been some good discussion on here I must admit.

Slightly baffled by the post regarding sitting in the middle lane and laughing as people have to manoeuvre round you to overtake. Sounds like that's just deliberate belligerence, regardless of this being an advanced driving forum that just sounds like poor driving.

I actually did Surrey to Bristol and back in the last couple of days and by contrast found it to be a pleasantly stress free journey with minimal idiocy. There were a few drivers in the middle lane just sitting there but overall it seemed people were quite patient in the main part.

I spent most of my journeys in lane one but I actually observed a couple of pleasantly observant drivers out there. For example, in lane 1 doing 70 (cruise control) and someone overtaking in lane 2) but as they see I'm nearing slower moving traffic, moved out to lane 3 enabling me to continue at the same speed. I was all set to ease off the throttle or move out once they passed. Was good to see some considerate driving as I wasn't sitting there indicating to move or bumper to bumper with the car in front, just a handful of road users making space for others, I suspect as they were doing 80+ so approaching slower traffic at some rate but at least they were taking that into account.

[Alex_225]

johnao said:

Good to hear that there are some thinking drivers out there; and good hear that someone, like yourself, acknowledges and appreciates their application of advanced driver thinking.

Now, what were we discussing about the Highway Code and always aiming to be in the left-hand lane? Oh, yes. I remember. It was if you want to drive-by-numbers do exactly what the Highway Code tells you under all circumstances and in all situations because the law recognises only one standard of driving. No, I still don't see any merit in a literal reading of everything contained in the Highway code or any consequential link to the truism.

Edited by johnao on Thursday 15th December 09:55

Got to take the positives out of things right? Driving can be stressful with the lack of consideration others can take but nice to see there are decent drivers out there who are reading the road ahead in the same why I try to.

I do agree that in terms of the Highway Code there can be an element of driving by numbers and I suppose common sense is the main factor when it comes to advanced or just good driving in general.

I suppose I look at the motorway and think that there are three lanes, which can all be used. If I'm in lane 2 overtaking vehicles in lane 1 and I come up behind someone moving more slowly than me in lane 2, I'll move to lane 3 and pass. If they are overtaking cars rather than just sitting at the same speed, I think it makes sense for them to remain in lane 2, rather than pull into 1, then moments later end up back out into lane 2. If that makes sense.

My opinion is that I would ideally cruise in lane 1 and use 2 and 3 to overtake, I wouldn't remain in those two lanes for miles on end but if there is a constant row of slow moving vehicles which I am passing, it makes sense to remain in lane 2 until necessary.

I'm probably not making much sense typing it all out haha