Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Hybrids and HOV Lanes
This discussion has been closed.
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
That is funny. They only obey the law going up hill, when that is all the faster they can go. I can tell you I have been passed by trucks in CA when I was going 80 MPH in the right hand lane.
Thanks,
Chintan Talati
Corporate Communications
Edmunds.com
Thanks,
Chintan Talati
Corporate Communications
Edmunds.com
Hmm, my experience is different. I have passed them regularly at 70-75 MPH. In fact, I don't recall when I was passed by one when I was above 65 MPH...
Head North on Interstate 5 or 15. East on 10 or 580. The scariest is highway 99 from Bakersfield to Sacramento. I am sure in urban LA they are not going to go much over the flow.
Actually, my most recent trip was to Yosemite ... on highway 99. Didn't notice any fast trucks.
I use the 15 only to get from Victorville to Barstow, so maybe that one is faster. Certainly I40 east is not that fast (until you hit the AZ border).
I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that it has not been my experience.
In Illinois where I grew up, and NY where I live currently, it is not at all uncommon to encounter truck drivers on open highways travelling above 65 mph.
Drivers from the larger companies go slower, as they know their assets people monitor the GPS. Independents drive like heck whenver they think they can get away with it.
Oh, it's California. Those same trucks that I pass going towards Needles, CA (just west of the AZ border) zoom past me one we are in AZ. Unless there is a Smokey in the area, they really zoom downhill.
There must be some kind of teeth to the laws; I have never seen trucks obey the limits like they do here is CA. Every now and then I find a single truck speeding, but not the lines of trucks speeding behind one another, which I see in other states.
So, yes, Henry Ford was right. I "think" I'm saving money, and therefore the math proves I am.
Gary
I can post from home, just not from work.
As far as HOV, in AZ we have no Hybrid HOV allowance. But most of the time my two kids are with me, so I can HOV like a non-hybrid driver.
I still believe using the "HOV carrot" to increase hybrid sales (and thus help Planet Earf) is a good idea. Time will tell.
I bought a Segway HT last month, and I use it to commute from my kids' school to my work, saving 8 miles a day of driving. Segway gets about 400-450 miles per gallon equivalent using electricity cost, so that's about 10 times better than my HCH !!!
Laters Amigos.....
A bicycle would be far more Earth saving.
Sadly, bike only lanes on highways is an issue even many a hybrid driver does not appreciate - from my experience riding my bike here in New York, anyway.
It is ironic that the Sierra Club fought the dam under the premise there is enough coal in the canyon to supply our electric needs for 25 thousand years. Now they are mining the coal and using the lake as a coolant for huge coal fired electric plants.
PS
The newer coal fired plants are pretty clean compared to the old ones. I prefer Nuclear and geo-thermal.
The air can clean up. What was flooded may be gone forever. (some biologists say if the dam is drained the original eco-system could regenerate. I'm not so sure.)
I think what you probably MEANT to say was not what you ACTUALLY said, if the above quote is correct.
If the hybrids are confined to stop and go driving (non commute lanes) as in a rush hour situation like the greater metro area of Boston at rush hour; they will actually function better both as advertised and intended. If you put the so called gas guzzler in the commute lanes, it would tend to get BETTER fuel mileage at a constant steady speed and emit less pollution AND consume less dollars in commuting!!!!
My own personal take on hybrid in commuter lanes is this let them use it when they meet the definition, i.e. 2/3 total folks or more in the car. To allow singles in a hybrid is disingenuous.
I meant exactly what I wrote. You just misunderstood me.
To be clear - if you don't let hybrids drive in HOV lanes, less hybrids will be purchased. If less are purchased, there are less to "shine" in stop and go environments.
It appears that you and I have a disagreement about the purpose of HOV lanes. You (apparently) believe the sole objective is to decrease congestion. That is a goal, but only because congestion leads to air pollution. The main objective is improved local air quality.
If there comes a time when there isn't room in the HOV lanes for hybrids, then allowing them in HOV lanes should be reconsidered. Just as we should reconsider allowing carpoolers into HOV lanes. Eventually, perhaps, there won
t be room for low MPG, high polluting vehicles in the HOV lanes, even if they are carrying three people. Maybe two-person carpools will be left out, at some point.
I agree that carpooling is better than allowing hybrids, but as long as there is excess carrying capacity in the HOV lanes, that capacity should be used, somehow, provided it furthers the main objective. It does not "belong" to the carpoolers. It belongs to the citizenry.
I am glad you agree with what I said then!
Again if what you are saying is true, "it belongs to the citizenry" then hybrids should meet the requirements ie 2/3 as is currently defined. I do not recall a ballot where "US" citizenry got to vote on the issue of whether or not singles (hybrids) should be allowed in the cp lanes. If it becomes a play for play issue, then charge for the designation, i.e. stickers. or if not then I say get rid of so called "carpool lanes" and give the lane back to the the citizens. This is probably why there is such widespread non compliance with car pool lane use by "singles" in non hybrid cars.
The citizenry acts through the legislators and the regulators. I am fine with that. If you don't like are doing things, write a letter to them.
HOV lanes work. There is no reason to turn them into "normal" lanes. Studies continue to show that they work.
What is the source of your complaint? Are you the carpooler who is slowed down to 55 by the slowpoke hybrid? Or are you the non-carpooler who just can't stand other people zooming by you in the car pool lane? Or are you just the concerned citizen who wants our limtied resources used "fairly" despite the fact that the fair use imposes burdens on the citizenry-at-large (via increased air pollution caused by the increased congestion)?
Even if YOU aren't using the HOV lanes, the HOV lanes are, in fact, working for YOU. The HOV decisions are driven by science, based on legislative and regulatory objectives, not by public perception of fairness.
Judging by the non compliance (and growing), IT also works!? This is of course whether you or I like it or not.
I spent app 4 years on local county transportations issues and had a hand in getting 1.75 B in infrastruture improvements to the local highway's. So in that sense I have been a bit more than "passive" on these issues.
Can't really imagine how the HOV lanes work for me when my commute is app 25-50 feet to my offices.
All of the regulatory agencies, do their level best to make sure as few people have a commute like mine!!
imho carpool lanes WORK to slightly increase the number of carpoolers and also they WORK to substantially increase the amount of pollution emitted and fuel consumed when HOV lane is flying and the other 3,4,5 lanes are stop-and-go.
..."imho carpool lanes WORK to slightly increase the number of carpoolers and also they WORK to substantially increase the amount of pollution emitted and fuel consumed when HOV lane is flying and the other 3,4,5 lanes are stop-and-go."...
Yup, I would agree!!
I think the HOV lanes work for you, because they improve local air quality. Am I safe to assume that you breathe air? :-)
I'm not sure about your last sentence. How does a regulatory agency discourage people working close to their homes? Outlawing home offices?
Are you one of those guys who runs his general contracting business out of his home, and lets his workers park their vehicles in front of your house all day. And then they put their work vehicles in front of your home all night? I hate peole who do that, and there is a reason that is illegal. Guys like this need to grow some huevos and rent a commercial/industrial space like the other big boys. I live in a residential area, not a light industrial zone.
I think you guys are just pissed when anyone has something better than you do.
Hate to break it to you, but you and I will still breathe with or without carpool lanes.
"Are you one of those guys who runs his general contracting business out of his home, and lets his workers park their vehicles in front of your house all day. And then they put their work vehicles in front of your home all night?"
NO! You might have me mixed up with YOUR neighbors? You might want to call your municipalities' code enforcement.
..."those lanes are underutilized - put some more cars in 'em"...
Gets back to what I said about giving back the lanes!!!
..."think you guys are just pissed when anyone has something better than you do."...
Hardly pissed, when I have a 50 foot commute. Or did you miss that?
The truth is there will be nothing close to a crack down on use of commuter lanes by folks who do not meet the definitions until there is about 20% scofflaw rates. This would be about the loading when carpool lanes cease to offer any time advantage.
no duh that we still breathe air with or without carpool lanes. You know perfectly well that I was saying that HOV lanes help make local air quality better. If you disagree, then grow some huevos and step up and say so.
I am glad for you that you have a 50-foot commute. Your lifestyle does not cause the problems that the rest of us are trying to solve. I'm sorry that you don't see a need for HOV lanes. Much of California has local air quality problems, and HOV lanes help improve air quality. Case closed.
I think it's pretty telling that you are more disturbed about scofflaws in the HOV lane ("waah, that's not fair - I'm afraid to be a scofflaw"), than you are about whether HOV lanes help achieve their objective.
I disagreed and disagree and said so!! All you have to is look at a couple of my back posts. So yeah, you should grow and find your huevos.
The case is NOT closed on HOV lanes. It does NOT improve air quality. It does relieve congestion somewhat for those that use the lane. So I will say it again. It does not fulfill the objectives that you think or say or insist that it does!!! Sorry to break the news to you.
Am I disturbed about scofflaws in the HOV lane? Heck no. That is situational voting with their cars!! The more folks that do it will eventually get the situation changed. It does work in the sense that it lets people get by. Short of like red zones in cities like San Francisco, Boston, New Orleans. etc.
It is only closed in your mind. It is not closed in the minds of those that use the HOV lanes as the Federal Mandate has laid them out. If you remember correctly there was a time that CA could not allow the hybrid HOV exemption because it directly violated Federal law. If you have the Government link that states the HOV lanes were put into law for the purpose of cleaning the air I would like to see it. Congestion on the highways was and is the impetus behind HOV lanes. A side benefit when you have 2 or more people in one car is less pollution. All the hybrids have done is encourage solo commuting in the states where they are given access to the High Occupancy Vehicle lanes. The name HOV in NO way means less pollution. If I was so unfortunate as to be a commuter, which I would not be. I would really be upset to see someone in a Prius driving solo in the HOV lane. I am not alone as the LA Times article stated quite clearly. Hybrid road rage is a direct result of allowing solo drivers in hybrids to occupy the HOV lanes.
In other words if you cross the 2x yellow line EVEN if you are a so called commuter (fit the difinitions) witnessed by a CHP, Sheriff etc, you are liable for a MOVING violation. I just assumed folks knew that and it was a NON issue. My understanding has always been you can enter or leave commuter lanes (like on the 405 freeway in the LA area) only when there are NO 2x yellow lines.
I hate to disappoint you but in California we get to vote on every little thing. As an example, a few weeks ago I was asked to sign a petition to place a proposition on the November statewide ballot that would among other things outlaw all cars with less than two or three LICENCED DRIVERS in the HOV lanes. This would include Hybrids, CNG, Electric, etc. How much do you want to bet that this will win by a landslide if it makes the ballot?
Like I said, judging by the so called scofflaw rates, it will probably win MORE than a simple majority.
People who exhibit road rage regarding hybrids should be locked up. Or medicated. Are you telling me that you don't have bigger reasons to get outraged? That's pathetic. (not you, just the people road-raging about hybrids in HOV lanes)
There was no federal mandate to ease congestion. The law (gfederal) requires that California clean up its air or it loses federal highway funds. That is where HOV lanes come from. They clean the air by easing congestion.
People who don't use the HOV lanes, and are upset about hybrids in HOV lanes, are just full of sour grapes. Taking hybrids out of HOV lanes does not put YOU into the HOV lane. All you are doing is adding cars to the lanes that YOU drive in. How does that ease your congestion? Great, get the hybrids out of the HOV lanes. Now they will be in YOUR lane. You got your wish. Be careful what you wish for, eh?
I've been trying to drive 65 (Bay Area) and its just not possible, even in the right-hand lane. I have people climbing up by [non-permissible content removed] when I am in the right-hand lane. They then approach the EXIT going over 65. What is UP with these people?
On to you driving 65 mph. In the (far) right lane, the truth is the law is on your side even if you want to go 40/45 mph. Depending on how you read the law 1. Keep Right Except to Pass 2. Slower Traffic Keep Right,all of the lanes must keep right except the RIGHT lane!!?? The right lane does not have to yield!!??
The ONLY time you can receive a ticket is if you are on a two lane road .(one lane per direction) BUT the law stipulates you have to be holding up 5 vehicles behind you. Then you "should" use a turn out to not further impede traffic.
I do hear ya re the HOV lanes, but I believe that if there is remaining capacity in those lanes, then that capacity should be used. Maybe it should be used first by cars that get over 50 mpg. Or by students who get a 4.0. Or by Republicans. I dunno. I jsut don't see that letting high mpg hybrids use them is that much of a perversion. And I think it meets the overall objective of improving air quality.
Weren't they called "Diamond" Lanes before being called "HOV" lanes? Maybe only Mitsubishis should get to drive in them. yuk yuk
That is absolutely false information. The intent was to save money on building more highways. The fact that less cars pollute less was a distant benefit. That has been totally circumvented by allowing hybrids into the HOV lanes. Instead of eliminating traffic it has caused more traffic. CA carpoolers are not the only ones complaining. It is also up before the VA legislature to stop the practice.
1. What is an HOV lane?
An HOV lane, sometimes called a carpool lane, is a special lane reserved for the use of carpools, vanpools and buses. They are usually located next to the regular, or unrestricted, lanes. These special lanes enable those who carpool or ride the bus to bypass the traffic in the adjacent, unrestricted ("general purpose") lanes.
2. How do they work?
HOV lanes are intended to save time for car-poolers and bus riders by enabling them to bypass the areas of heaviest traffic congestion. Because most drivers, especially during rush hours, are driving alone, the HOV lane is seldom congested. Giving car-poolers a reliable and congestion-free ride during rush hour serves as a strong incentive for ridesharing HOV lanes also provide commuters a needed alternative to congestion, which is not always possible if all lanes are opened to everybody.
http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freewaymgmt/hov/hovqalst.htm#1
Telling me what they "do" (incentivize ridesharing" is not relevant to where they came from.
Frankly, I am OK with changing the objectives of HOV lanes. I don't care what the original purpose was, even though that is unfair to the folks who made compromises and allowed them to be built. (I'm sure you do realize that people fought tooth and nail AGAINST allowing these freeways to be built, never mind the HOV lanes.)
So, what do we want from our HOV lanes? I think that is a subject for a different forum, though this forum does have fairly broad reach (unlike most threads in Edmunds)
California has a long history of using HOV lanes. The first HOV lane in Southern California was the El Monte Busway. This HOV lane consisted of one lane of Interstate 10 in Los Angeles County that was restricted to use by buses only in 1973, and later opened to all vehicles with three or more occupants. Since then, the number of HOV lanes in the Los Angeles area has steadily increased, with most existing lanes being built in the 1990s. By the end of 2000, there was a network of 688 lane-miles of HOV lanes in the Los Angeles area. (There are another 276 lane-miles of HOV lanes in the remainder of the state.)
Federal law and the policies of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) also encourage the construction of HOV lanes for the purposes of congestion reduction and air quality improvement.
If an HOV lane fails to increase the number of carpools, but rather only serves to shift existing carpoolers to the new lane, the HOV lane could actually be less effective at reducing congestion and pollution than a new mixed-flow lane. This is because it would bar all SOVs from using the new HOV lane capacity, thereby relieving less congestion than a mixed-flow lane would. Thus, HOV lane effectiveness, in general, hinges on the extent to which it causes a change in behavior, or a "mode shift" from SOVs to HOVs.
http://www.lao.ca.gov/2002/hov/0402_hov_lanes.html
Makes what worse?
I don't see how allowing hybrids into HOV lanes makes anything worse. Well, except that it does increase the road rage of the people who are not using the HOV lanes.
Is allowing hybrids into the HOV lane making non-HOV users LESS likely to use the HOV lane? I'm sorry, but somne guy who doesn't carpool, telling me that he would carpool if not for the hybrids....well, he doesn't have a lot of cred. "Errrr, dude, what was your excuse BEFORE we allowed hybrids in the HOV lane?" :-)
If the HOV lane is at capacity, I would not let hybrids use that HOV lane. But if there is excess capacity, then we should come up with a good use for it. Again, EXCESS capacity is a fundamental premise to this argument.
Hybrids are not (per se) better than carpools, but they are better, from an emissions standpoint, than any vehicle not containing more than one person (on an emissions/person basis). I could also see allowing HOV lane use by cars that get more than 50 mpg. Or by Suburbans carrying more than 5 passengers. And so on.
I understand the complaint from a guy in an Echo. His comlaint has some validity. But a guy driving a 20 mpg vehicle has no business complaining about hybrids in the HOV lanes. He's just a poor loser. He should find some ridesharers and be part of the solution.
Err, what was my excuse for what? I have not commuted to work in CA since 1970. There were no HOV lanes in San Diego. Until my retirement 3 weeks ago I flew back and forth to work every 3 weeks.
The question was posed by someone as to the reason for hybrids causing road rage. I was giving examples and the NUMBER ONE reason for hybrids having a negative image is their special exemption for the HOV lanes. I happen to agree with those that are trying to get them removed from the HOV lanes. I still would not have need to use those lanes. I just feel it is poor legislation by some lame brained politician to get votes. It does absolutely nothing to ease congestion only further clog up those lanes. If a hybrid owner is real concerned he should offer to give a couple of his fellow workers a ride to work in his Prius. Then he would not need those tags on his car.
From NPR News:
But hybrids are crowding the HOV lanes in Virginia, and that has some commuters seething. "You have these [hybrid] cars in there, and the HOV lanes are actually slower than the regular lanes," says Sil Carlson, who works at the Smithsonian.
Federal transportation officials worry that congestion caused by hybrids is defeating the purpose of the HOV lanes. They want Virginia to kick them out.
It was meant as a question to "somne guy who doesn't carpool, telling me that he would carpool if not for the hybrids"
if the hybrid was in the normal lane, and is now NOT in the normal lane, the normal lane is at least one car better
and form what I'v eread, there is excess capacity in the HOV lanes. If hybrids are making HOV lanes MORE congested, which I am sure is true, since it is adding vehicles to the HOV lanes, my assumption is that the traffic planners have decided that the HOV lanes can handle that increase
maybe I am wrong
First I doubt that traffic planners had a choice. This is all politics. Satisfying the very noisy enviro lobby. I don't think the Hybrids in the HOV lanes would cause the row they have if the drivers would go with the flow. The LA Times article cited several instances of hybrids slowing the HOV lanes down going 55 MPH. Put yourself in the guys position that has a couple of his fellow workers in the HOV lane and a person traveling solo in a Prius is blocking the HOV lane going 55 MPH. The only HOV lanes I am familiar with are headed North into LA. They have very limited access. You get behind someone you are stuck for miles. If someone wants to save fuel by driving a hybrid I say great. Do it in the right hand lane.
I doubt that this is the reason that so many folks are anti-hybrid use of HOV lanes. There are vocal complainers on this this issue here who don't even use the HOV lanes. Yet they feel compelled to complain.
It's just sour grapes from those guys.
actually, the very creation of HOV lanes was pure politics. It was a way to get freeways widened, to get freeways built - a sop to the anti-freeway folks by the pro-freeway folks. "Let us build the new freeway, and we'll build an HOV lane"
Everything is politics. ugh (we need science-driven decisions - science-driven but with a finger on the pulse of humanity)
I do not believe this to be a true statement. The hybrids would sell fine without this incentive. They were selling fine before this, and would continue without HOV access.
Pick an option and argue.
As many things in our system of government, special interests seem to corrupt the laws to fit their own wants, desires and needs.