While fatalities did drop during for the entire year the 55 mph speed limit was enacted, they actually dropped PRIOR during that portion of the year prior to the enactment of the speed limit, and then rose after it was enacted.
Where did you get that information? Here's the year, number of fatalities, and the fabled deaths per 100 million miles driven for every year from 1970-1980. Sourced from here.
The big drop in fatalities occurred in 1974, the first year of the 55-mph limit, and stayed down for two more years before beginning to rise again.
...there was no clear correlation between increases or decreases in fatalities and increases in the speed limit.
We've been round and round on this before. Yes, there are valid studies that have shown a clear correlation on the roads were the speed limits have been changed -- mainly rural interstates. But you don't want to believe them, and just go with the Brock Yates/Pat Bedard crowd (who don't publish in peer-reviewed journals). See here for solid data, not rants. Look at the footnotes to see how much of this research has been accepted by respected, peer-reviewed journals.
Let's be honest -- the setting of speed limits is a political issue, not a scientific one. Politicians should admit that saving travel time will in general cost some lives; where to set the limit is up to them and the people they represent.
I myself think today's rural interstate speed limits by and large strike the right balance. I didn't like going 55 either.
Tractor-trailer should have lower speeds limits, and about 10 states have such split limits, clustered in the Midwest and west coast. But trucking groups have powerful lobbies to influence state legislatures.
Yes, here on the west coast we have lower limits on trucks. It is definitely a mixed blessing. The way that many truckers drive these days, I prefer NOT to have them traveling 70-80 mph, as do the cars.
On the other hand, in moderately heavy traffic, on a two lane interstate, traffic is pretty much limited to trucker speeds. When it opens up to three lanes (again in moderately heavy traffic), the trucks effectively clog-up the right two lanes, funneling all of the car traffic though a single lane. :mad:
Oh you should see the Kingery (Illinois) and Borman (Indiana) expressways (I-80 and 94). Its the main route around the underside of Lake Michigan. That stretch of highway is nothing but trucks, its not unusual to see a lane with ten or more trucks in a row. :sick:
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I think I specifically said "most" in my post. 10 out of 50 isn't gonna do it if you really want to claim the speed limit is based on "safety". I don't live in the midwest or west. It seems so hard for some people to think outside of thier own little box where cars seem to flip around and jump out of control over humps in the road or even get lost in potholes. Again, I'm glad I don't live in that reality.
It seems that 65 or 70 or even 100 aren't really based on any real data that correlates with the risk. If we are after a utopia, we'd have to stop driving altogether. If the fatalities drop at 55 why not lower them to 45. I'm sure that would show some improvement. Where do you draw the line. Why should my speed limits in my area where the trees are far away from the highway and there is a huge divider or a 10 foot high wall, be the same as an area where the interstate is divided by one of those old fashioned guardrails? Why is someone with bald tires and worn brakes allowed to follow me at 70 miles per hour? The speed limits are based on lowest common denominator drivers. It's like the education system in this country, those of us with average or above skills are forced to dumb down to the lowest level so everyone can participate.
I just took my little boy to Mcd's on a 4 lane state highway at 65MPH. I could have taken my hands off the wheel and drove with my knees for most of the way there. Visibility is at least a quarter mile ahead of me all the way there. 65 is snooze level driving my local interstates. I don't see what obstacale or obstruction could occur on empty straight Georgia interstate that I couldn't react to at 100MPH.
Again, that data is based on the effectiveness of safety equipment. They are measuring the risk of injury posed to occupants in various crash scenarios. The more stars, the lower the risk relative to other vehicles tested. If they state that X car is the "safest," then what they are really saying is that X car poses the lowest risk of injury to the occupants in each of the various scenarios, if it were to actually happen to the occupants. In other words, trying to sell the potential owner the feeling of safety. Again, it is perception, but is based on risk.
Think about the commercials you hear, "And, with a 5-star crash test rating, you will know your family is safe."
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
No sir, the current 65, 70, and out west, 75 mph interstate speed limits are perfectly adequate, a reasonable compromise considering safety, convenience, and fuel economy. We'll see how Texas' experiment with 80 mph limits on about 500 miles of west Texas interstates pans out.
Agreed. Regardless of the #, the SL itself is good to have. If people choose to go faster, that is their perrogative, but they simply must continue to accept responsibility for their choices. The members here who do so have done just that and, from what has been said, drive responsibly in my opinion. But, again, everyone's opinions will differ. The SL is there to set a standard. There are way too many folks out there who drive faster than SLs indiscriminately - those are the problem drivers.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
Will be seen. And it won't pop up overnight. At least not in the SE where I live. I've driven in Ohio near Toledo and Akron and experienced the whoopdy doos that they have up there.
Right - it has a lot to do with road familiarity. Here, (In Fairbanks, Alaska), pot holes and such CAN pop up overnight, but those of us who drive those roads know this and account for it. We are all coming to this from our perspectives and not taking too much into consideration regarding others'.
I think it would be nice to drive in Georgia and have a smooth road! I would still be loafing along near the SL 95% of the time though, but that is my choice. I enjoy adverse weather driving far more than speed.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I actually couldn't imagine if the speed limit were actually 100 mph. I'm actually being devil's advocate when arguing in support of it.
For every person that think anything over 70 mph anywhere would cause instant death, this forum proves that many American aren't ready for 100MPH driving. I'm sure if the speed limit were really that high, I wouldn't ever get on the interstate.
That being said, I don't think that driving 100 mph can't be done safely. This forum proves that we have enough unsafe and inconsiderate activity already.
If the fatalities drop at 55 why not lower them to 45. I'm sure that would show some improvement. Where do you draw the line.
Ah, I knew this would come up, the old straw man argument. For one thing, the limit will never be lowered to 45. Even if it were, do you think people would even come close to obeying it? We tolerated 55, at least while the Arab Oil Embargo was going on. Then we started cheating on it, little by little, until it was finally repealed.
As I said before, the current rural interstate speed limits of 65, 70, and 75 mph are a reasonable compromise.
Today, the left rear of my '04 Camry almost got clipped by a Jeep Wrangler that was apparently engaged in an impromptu little race with a sporty coupe (I don't even remember the make and model). This, on the 8-lane(!) main road into my small town (not a freeway).
Then just yesterday, my wife had to slam on the brakes in our '05 Camry when a clueless woman with 2 children barreled across her path in a shopping center parking lot. If my wife hadn't stopped as quickly as she did, our car would have been hit squarely on the passenger side.
Local reductions in speed limit are still speed limits.
They don't get enforced much, but unless your state is different, every traffic control sign is backed by law.
40 in a 35 (based on what error bounds for calculation?) requires a 30% increase in cornering force. Without knowing the radius, whether the road is crowned/flat/banked, I can't guess what the required radial acceleration is.
Out in Missouri an airplane was damaged on trying to takeoff, about 100mph, by a deer that ran out. Oddly, we don't keep trees or any other obstructions any nearer the runway than trees are kept to highways in GA.
There are deer in GA, aren't there?
The legal speed limits are based on political influence.
Actual speed limits are set based on self-interest or selfishness, depending. Think the limits should be higher? VOTE FOR THEM.
It is understood those who proclaim "politics" and "revenue gathering" for having reasonable speed limits, have a streak of anarchy causing them to be frustrated with having to be submissive to Rules of the Road.
Maturity and wisdom comes with age. Let's hope they will live so long.
One time came to the aid of a few ladies on I-80. Perfectly flat and straight section of road with no obstructions to block the view for at least 150 feet. Guess what happened to these ladies, they were hit by a deer. Yes there were hit by the deer not the other way around. The deer rammed into the rear drivers side door basing it in breaking the window and injuring the passenger in the back.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
1.) Pulled up behind a line of cars in a left turn lane waiting on a red light. I basically stopped in front of entrance of a shopping area. Needless to say I thought nothing of that since the entrance had a raised center island where it really only allowed right turns in and right turns out (more like a ramp on a highway than a driveway) and there was a big "No Left Turn" sign for oncoming traffic. That still didn't stop the guy in the pickup truck from yelling at me for blocking his left turn which he legally couldn't do and physically couldn't do without running over a curb.
2. Coming back I was going down the isle of the parking lot and almost got hit by someone cutting across the isles.
3.) Saw a Honda Civic racing down the road with one of those custom loud exhausts that was banging on the road because he lowered the suspension.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
It should be up to the bodies proclaiming a limit to be "reasonable" to ante up with some evidence as to why their numbers and rules are the best. To the lawmakers - put up or shut up. As it is now, an awful lot of limits, and especially the way limits arbitrarily change on so many roads, do indeed look like revenue generation schemes.
It seems like blind deference and a lack of critical thought also comes with old age...
This morning I was driving in to work on a 4 lane suburban main road, about 5:45am, no traffic but me and a dopey Kia Sportage in the far right lane....thhe Kia suddenly decides it wants the turn lane in the middle of the roadway, and cuts directly across, only missing me because I saw the idiot and slowed.
Some top reasons why 65-75 is reasonable (no particular order)
1. Can use cruise control 2. Can watch DVD's 3. As some folks watch DVD's others can listen to radio, IPOD, satellite radio- something for every passenger 4. Less chance of those 14 cup holders most folks would see as standard equipment spilling their contents. 5. can chat on the phone as one drives and sips their fav java houses brew 6. keep the unionized enforcement forces in high paying jobs 7. it is usually far safer to stop a so called speeder than look for real dangerous behavior. 8. keep the insurance companies happy so they can have multiple reasons to raise their rates. 9. can actually shave with a razor while driving 10. not forgetting the ladies, can apply make up using the rear view and visor mirrors. 10. can eat while driving, keeping fast food places in customers 11. can log onto the internet while driving 12. keeps the municipalities from actually letting folks live within walking distance of their jobs 13. I guess this sums up this post: multi tasking!!!?? 14. let the drunk driver have a fair shake being as how we almost sanction their being on the road. (40% of all fatalities and accidents are alcohol related)
15. I almost forgot, why did we get into the vehicle again?
Yeah, voting solves the problems, I mean, it only took a mere 20 years to do away with 55. Brilliant idea! Defer! Conform!
It's up to the people who set the limits to defend their numbers. Why can't they? Why shouldn't they?
I don't disagree with 65-75 on many roads, myself, and I rarely exceed that. However, that doesn't justify the current blind legislation, nor does it justify the places on the road where limits randomly change (and coincidentally revenue collecting begins).
Yeah, voting solves the problems, I mean, it only took a mere 20 years to do away with 55. Brilliant idea! Defer! Conform!
Well the only other way to make the change is to take up arms and overthrow the government. Two problems with this 1.) Speed limits isn't a good enough reason and 2.) The U.S. has a mighty impressive army.
However, that doesn't justify the current blind legislation, nor does it
Hey we voted them in to make these laws, deal with it.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Here in West Texas on certain Highways. I hope a few around here get the sign change from 70 to 80 mph. This would help me out a great deal getting home on my hour drive.
Absent political reasons (gas savings, insurance lobby, police revenue generation) I believe the way limits are set is to let people figure them out themselves. Might be hard to believe, but most people actually do (in this car drive a speed) what they are comfortable with.
I think the rule is 85%. That is, let everyone just drive normally, and find the speed that 85% of the drivers naturally do, and bingo that's the speed limit.
The Gees of the world will be an outlier, as will the granny's doing 45 on the highway. They can then get weeded out by enforcement (or natural selection!!)
Based on my experience/gut feeling, this probably sets the limits on most highways at 70-75 anyway (probably 75 for more limited access roads like the NY Thruway, mass turnpike, etc., at least in the more rural areas).
It has been proven in the past that trying to get the majority of people to do something they consider pointless, just because a law is passed, doesn't work. All it really does is lead to civil disobedience, and often a defacto law.
Well in rural area's where the population is spread out a speed limit that is higher should be the standard. God only knows why we still don't have a autobahn yet. We are suppose to be a free country and the autobahn in Germany shows the pweople that they are free some of the times to pick their desired speed. Wish we had one.
But we didn't defer or conform with the nationwide 55. Most cops turned a blind eye to going up to 64-65. Montana even had an "energy wasting" fine of only $5 for going up to 70.
If the limit had been rigidly enforced, you had better believe it would have taken a lot less than 20 years (actually it was 13 for the 65/55 part to kick in) for the politicians to act! Look how quickly they acted to repeal the hated seat belt/ignition interlocks in 1975.
Local roads -- yes, there are problems. One of them is the NIMBY syndrome (not in my backyard) where residents don't want so-called outsiders speeding through their neighborhoods. Of course, these same complainers will merrily speed through others' neighborhoods and even through their own.
Result: the local politicians will post 25 where it should be 35, 35 where it should be 45, etc. At least in VA, they don't put in 4-way stop signs every other block like they did in my native PA! One other thing about VA - virtually all roads are controlled by the state, not localities, so tinpot local pols don't have as much say.
That is the best post during this whole discussion. That's the real reason for the speed limit. There are just some stupid ignorant people out there. That has been my point all the time. Outlaw obviously dangerous behaviour. That's the way they do it in more vehicularly advanced societies. They get you for tailgating, agressive driving, lane discipline, phone using and stuff like that. Barring mechanical failure I really don't see the big deal. I'd back a total ban on anything other than driving on the interstate if it came with a decent increase in the speed limit. Heck I'd even support photo radar.
You have to look at he speed limit as the place where you can comfortably be a total idiot or drive a rattletrap and not kill yourself. You really can't justify "safety" when the same speed limit is in effect for more densely populated areas as for wide open spaces. When 65 is the limit on the hilly 4 lane highway that leads out to my house along with the maximun you can travel on the fast boringness that is I-81 through Virginia. Or when someone in the Autobahn rated S-class Benz is forced to follow a base Yugo.
A deer hit your plane. Yeah...Okay....And planes are known for thier handling, braking capability, and 360 degree visibility. Isn't that like apples and watermelons.
or perhaps their blind spot was extra wide because of the mirrors angled in a good deal, and they failed to look.
this is why we must drive defensively.
you've probably made the same mistakes. maybe not. sometimes i've forgotten to reset the mirror position set by the wife, and a quick over-the shoulder glance looks good... when it's not so good.
it is also the reason why anarchy and the "everyone decides how fast to go" don't fly. you may know the condition of your vehicle and your alertness level, and the environmental conditions - but you do not know the situational awareness (directly) of anyone else in front of you or comming up behind you.
indirectly and to some limited extent, perhaps, but then, you aren't constantly monitoring everyone in your immediate vicinity on the road.
if one advocates going to higher speeds because the road design: dimensions, lanes, turning radius, surface, lighting (etc etc) and condition: weather, state of repair, etc, and traffic-level, current speed, etc supports it - you have to consider the human element and the variability of skill, alertness, motivation, condition of the vehicle of the others on the road.
Some massive civil disobedience could at least get some wheels in motion. Of course, with the majority blinded by fear and faith, it probably won't happen. Right now, probably as much as any time in history, people are aching to be told what to do. This line of thinking will doom the country.
As I have stated, the incompetent powers that be need to defend their numbers. We both know they can't....
I hope I've never done anything like that. If I am really tired, I simply don't drive. I won't claim to be a F1 winner quality driver, but I've never had so much as a parking ticket, so I must be doing something right.
Probably the worst I have done was to turn in front of an oncoming car, and got honked at. Of course, I still had plenty of room, and it was night - and the other car didn't have its lights on.
Do current limits also take into personal and environmental factors? I see plenty of heaps on 70mph roadways that are not fit for such speeds.
The legislation was allowed, and it survived in strong form for almost a generation. People were sold a bill of goods - and many liked it. Today, you'll still be widely ignored for going 8-10 over.
Sorry, as I said before and you failed to grasp, that's not how it works. If you have a finding, you defend your numbers. You apparently love doing what you're told...well, I'm telling you.
Why the call for civil disobedience with regard to speed limits? It's already done, all the time, on almost any road. Almost no one goes exactly the speed limit.
Brock Yates himself (not that I like his point of view) has said the de facto speed limit on rural interstates is 75 mph, so why bother with a radar detector? It's just the outliers like gee35 that might get stopped.
Now if you're talking about the broader picture with this administration...but we don't want to go there, do we? At least the Supreme Court smacked him down some yesterday!
That the largest reason the speed limits are the way they are has more to do with ignorant people than anything else.
There is a road in front of a shopping area near my home in a very congested and busy area. Yet the speed limit is still 55 mph. During some parts of the day, that's insane. Especially when that's the same limit that's on the interstates through Atlanta.
If you are doing 70 mph down the interstate, you should never be passed by someone doing 100 MPH. That more inconsiderate than dangerous. But on the same token, if you see a car coming up behind you in the left lane and you have room to move right, you should let them. That way we can all share the highway. No matter what speed.
I hope I've explained why I think the speed limit is too low. But I hope I also conveyed I understand why they are the way they are. What i would like to see is more inforcement of "unsafe driving" rather than picking some guy off while cruising alone at 15-20 mph above the speed limit. Which is all radar is good for.
Sorry I see how it works very well, you are calling for an increase in the speed limit but you won't defend that statement hiding behind "Its not my job, you have to show why I am wrong".
You are making the claim, now back it up.
But you are wrong, I don't like people telling me what to do, thats why I will not let you tell me what to do.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
People only talk about Civics with loud exhausts (easy target? not part of a culture that people want to protect?), but I've never thought that they were any worse than just annoying.
But today a truck with a loud muffler drove by me. While not as bad as some of those motorcycles, it went beyond annoying. With motorcycles and modded V8s, it's the bass. It just gets painful, and it seems to be more about making noise than making 5 extra hp. I hate them.
Loud mufflers for attention-getting irritate me. The motorcycleswith the pop-pop and the drivers that run down through the gears to make them bark all the way down to a stop, instead of using their brake are an irritation. The loud fartcans put on little 4 cyl to get an extra 2 horsepower at 6500 rpm are my next.
Time to call my local police to remind them we get tired of hearing the noise ordinance violators.
It should be up to the bodies proclaiming a limit to be "reasonable" to ante up with some evidence as to why their numbers and rules are the best.
I think with regard to state highways, especially rural interstates, authorities including transportation departments, the police, and the legislators try to do this. But it still comes down to a political balancing act between convenience (most people will get there faster) and lives lost (the few who only make it to the morgue).
When you get to the local level, corruption and influence play a bigger role, plus trying to satify the whiners -- "I don't want speeders in my neighborhood."
The legislation was allowed, and it survived in strong form for almost a generation. People were sold a bill of goods - and many liked it.
Strong form? That so? Are you old enough to remember? The 55 mph limit was widely detested from its earliest days. The whole CB radio fad started because of 55.
It was passed initially to save fuel. But careful studies did show lives were saved, because travel speeds were reduced, so it persisted.
But no one actually went 55, except in the very earliest days, when the oil embargo was still in effect. It had to be the most widely flouted law since Prohibition. I can assure you that if it had been strictly enforced, it would have been repealed as soon as Reagan took office, if not before. There was actually a plank in the 1980 Republican political platform to repeal the limit.
Your beloved controllers make the claim about the current legislation, it is their responsibility to answer for their actions. I fail to see how a bunch of fat old men with too much money and not enough sense should be given a pass on explaining themselves. Why shouldn't they be required to justify their numbers?
Comments
Where did you get that information? Here's the year, number of fatalities, and the fabled deaths per 100 million miles driven for every year from 1970-1980. Sourced from here.
1970 53,672 4.82
1971 53,761 4.54
1972 55,704 4.40
1973 55,113 4.19
55 mph speed limit goes into effect (March 1974 or earlier, depending on state)
1974 46,078 3.59
1975 45,500 3.42
1976 45,523 3.25
1977 47,878 3.26
1978 50,331 3.26
1979 51,103 3.34
1980 51,091 3.35
The big drop in fatalities occurred in 1974, the first year of the 55-mph limit, and stayed down for two more years before beginning to rise again.
...there was no clear correlation between increases or decreases in fatalities and increases in the speed limit.
We've been round and round on this before. Yes, there are valid studies that have shown a clear correlation on the roads were the speed limits have been changed -- mainly rural interstates. But you don't want to believe them, and just go with the Brock Yates/Pat Bedard crowd (who don't publish in peer-reviewed journals). See here for solid data, not rants. Look at the footnotes to see how much of this research has been accepted by respected, peer-reviewed journals.
Let's be honest -- the setting of speed limits is a political issue, not a scientific one. Politicians should admit that saving travel time will in general cost some lives; where to set the limit is up to them and the people they represent.
I myself think today's rural interstate speed limits by and large strike the right balance. I didn't like going 55 either.
On the other hand, in moderately heavy traffic, on a two lane interstate, traffic is pretty much limited to trucker speeds. When it opens up to three lanes (again in moderately heavy traffic), the trucks effectively clog-up the right two lanes, funneling all of the car traffic though a single lane. :mad:
james
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
It seems that 65 or 70 or even 100 aren't really based on any real data that correlates with the risk. If we are after a utopia, we'd have to stop driving altogether. If the fatalities drop at 55 why not lower them to 45. I'm sure that would show some improvement. Where do you draw the line. Why should my speed limits in my area where the trees are far away from the highway and there is a huge divider or a 10 foot high wall, be the same as an area where the interstate is divided by one of those old fashioned guardrails? Why is someone with bald tires and worn brakes allowed to follow me at 70 miles per hour? The speed limits are based on lowest common denominator drivers. It's like the education system in this country, those of us with average or above skills are forced to dumb down to the lowest level so everyone can participate.
I just took my little boy to Mcd's on a 4 lane state highway at 65MPH. I could have taken my hands off the wheel and drove with my knees for most of the way there. Visibility is at least a quarter mile ahead of me all the way there. 65 is snooze level driving my local interstates. I don't see what obstacale or obstruction could occur on empty straight Georgia interstate that I couldn't react to at 100MPH.
Think about the commercials you hear, "And, with a 5-star crash test rating, you will know your family is safe."
Agreed. Regardless of the #, the SL itself is good to have. If people choose to go faster, that is their perrogative, but they simply must continue to accept responsibility for their choices. The members here who do so have done just that and, from what has been said, drive responsibly in my opinion. But, again, everyone's opinions will differ. The SL is there to set a standard. There are way too many folks out there who drive faster than SLs indiscriminately - those are the problem drivers.
Right - it has a lot to do with road familiarity. Here, (In Fairbanks, Alaska), pot holes and such CAN pop up overnight, but those of us who drive those roads know this and account for it. We are all coming to this from our perspectives and not taking too much into consideration regarding others'.
I think it would be nice to drive in Georgia and have a smooth road! I would still be loafing along near the SL 95% of the time though, but that is my choice. I enjoy adverse weather driving far more than speed.
For every person that think anything over 70 mph anywhere would cause instant death, this forum proves that many American aren't ready for 100MPH driving. I'm sure if the speed limit were really that high, I wouldn't ever get on the interstate.
That being said, I don't think that driving 100 mph can't be done safely. This forum proves that we have enough unsafe and inconsiderate activity already.
Next topic...
eta...I love driving in the rain or snow too.
Yes, even the cops speed here. Maybe they know better?
Ah, I knew this would come up, the old straw man argument. For one thing, the limit will never be lowered to 45. Even if it were, do you think people would even come close to obeying it? We tolerated 55, at least while the Arab Oil Embargo was going on. Then we started cheating on it, little by little, until it was finally repealed.
As I said before, the current rural interstate speed limits of 65, 70, and 75 mph are a reasonable compromise.
Today, the left rear of my '04 Camry almost got clipped by a Jeep Wrangler that was apparently engaged in an impromptu little race with a sporty coupe (I don't even remember the make and model). This, on the 8-lane(!) main road into my small town (not a freeway).
Then just yesterday, my wife had to slam on the brakes in our '05 Camry when a clueless woman with 2 children barreled across her path in a shopping center parking lot. If my wife hadn't stopped as quickly as she did, our car would have been hit squarely on the passenger side.
They don't get enforced much, but unless your state is different, every traffic control sign is backed by law.
40 in a 35 (based on what error bounds for calculation?) requires a 30% increase in cornering force. Without knowing the radius, whether the road is crowned/flat/banked, I can't guess what the required radial acceleration is.
Out in Missouri an airplane was damaged on trying to takeoff, about 100mph, by a deer that ran out. Oddly, we don't keep trees or any other obstructions any nearer the runway than trees are kept to highways in GA.
There are deer in GA, aren't there?
The legal speed limits are based on political influence.
Actual speed limits are set based on self-interest or selfishness, depending.
Think the limits should be higher? VOTE FOR THEM.
Maturity and wisdom comes with age. Let's hope they will live so long.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Does it really or does the immature and stupid just kill themselves off before getting old?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2. Coming back I was going down the isle of the parking lot and almost got hit by someone cutting across the isles.
3.) Saw a Honda Civic racing down the road with one of those custom loud exhausts that was banging on the road because he lowered the suspension.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
It seems like blind deference and a lack of critical thought also comes with old age...
Or maybe you could show us why higher speeds are more reasonable. Or let us know why your figures are more reasonable than someone elses.
For now I will second 210delrays assessment that 65-75 is reasonable.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
1. Can use cruise control
2. Can watch DVD's
3. As some folks watch DVD's others can listen to radio, IPOD, satellite radio- something for every passenger
4. Less chance of those 14 cup holders most folks would see as standard equipment spilling their contents.
5. can chat on the phone as one drives and sips their fav java houses brew
6. keep the unionized enforcement forces in high paying jobs
7. it is usually far safer to stop a so called speeder than look for real dangerous behavior.
8. keep the insurance companies happy so they can have multiple reasons to raise their rates.
9. can actually shave with a razor while driving
10. not forgetting the ladies, can apply make up using the rear view and visor mirrors.
10. can eat while driving, keeping fast food places in customers
11. can log onto the internet while driving
12. keeps the municipalities from actually letting folks live within walking distance of their jobs
13. I guess this sums up this post: multi tasking!!!??
14. let the drunk driver have a fair shake being as how we almost sanction their being on the road. (40% of all fatalities and accidents are alcohol related)
15. I almost forgot, why did we get into the vehicle again?
It's up to the people who set the limits to defend their numbers. Why can't they? Why shouldn't they?
I don't disagree with 65-75 on many roads, myself, and I rarely exceed that. However, that doesn't justify the current blind legislation, nor does it justify the places on the road where limits randomly change (and coincidentally revenue collecting begins).
Well the only other way to make the change is to take up arms and overthrow the government. Two problems with this 1.) Speed limits isn't a good enough reason and 2.) The U.S. has a mighty impressive army.
However, that doesn't justify the current blind legislation, nor does it
Hey we voted them in to make these laws, deal with it.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Rocky
I think the rule is 85%. That is, let everyone just drive normally, and find the speed that 85% of the drivers naturally do, and bingo that's the speed limit.
The Gees of the world will be an outlier, as will the granny's doing 45 on the highway. They can then get weeded out by enforcement (or natural selection!!)
Based on my experience/gut feeling, this probably sets the limits on most highways at 70-75 anyway (probably 75 for more limited access roads like the NY Thruway, mass turnpike, etc., at least in the more rural areas).
It has been proven in the past that trying to get the majority of people to do something they consider pointless, just because a law is passed, doesn't work. All it really does is lead to civil disobedience, and often a defacto law.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Rocky
If the limit had been rigidly enforced, you had better believe it would have taken a lot less than 20 years (actually it was 13 for the 65/55 part to kick in) for the politicians to act! Look how quickly they acted to repeal the hated seat belt/ignition interlocks in 1975.
Local roads -- yes, there are problems. One of them is the NIMBY syndrome (not in my backyard) where residents don't want so-called outsiders speeding through their neighborhoods. Of course, these same complainers will merrily speed through others' neighborhoods and even through their own.
Result: the local politicians will post 25 where it should be 35, 35 where it should be 45, etc. At least in VA, they don't put in 4-way stop signs every other block like they did in my native PA! One other thing about VA - virtually all roads are controlled by the state, not localities, so tinpot local pols don't have as much say.
You have to look at he speed limit as the place where you can comfortably be a total idiot or drive a rattletrap and not kill yourself. You really can't justify "safety" when the same speed limit is in effect for more densely populated areas as for wide open spaces. When 65 is the limit on the hilly 4 lane highway that leads out to my house along with the maximun you can travel on the fast boringness that is I-81 through Virginia. Or when someone in the Autobahn rated S-class Benz is forced to follow a base Yugo.
A deer hit your plane. Yeah...Okay....And planes are known for thier handling, braking capability, and 360 degree visibility. Isn't that like apples and watermelons.
or perhaps their blind spot was extra wide because of the mirrors angled in a good deal, and they failed to look.
this is why we must drive defensively.
you've probably made the same mistakes. maybe not. sometimes i've forgotten to reset the mirror position set by the wife, and a quick over-the shoulder glance looks good... when it's not so good.
it is also the reason why anarchy and the "everyone decides how fast to go" don't fly. you may know the condition of your vehicle and your alertness level, and the environmental conditions - but you do not know the situational awareness (directly) of anyone else in front of you or comming up behind you.
indirectly and to some limited extent, perhaps, but then, you aren't constantly monitoring everyone in your immediate vicinity on the road.
if one advocates going to higher speeds because the road design: dimensions, lanes, turning radius, surface, lighting (etc etc) and condition: weather, state of repair, etc, and traffic-level, current speed, etc supports it - you have to consider the human element and the variability of skill, alertness, motivation, condition of the vehicle of the others on the road.
As I have stated, the incompetent powers that be need to defend their numbers. We both know they can't....
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Probably the worst I have done was to turn in front of an oncoming car, and got honked at. Of course, I still had plenty of room, and it was night - and the other car didn't have its lights on.
Do current limits also take into personal and environmental factors? I see plenty of heaps on 70mph roadways that are not fit for such speeds.
Of course, accountability isn't to be expected from politicos (and those who bend over for them)
It sure is your job, you're the one calling for the change now support it.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Brock Yates himself (not that I like his point of view) has said the de facto speed limit on rural interstates is 75 mph, so why bother with a radar detector? It's just the outliers like gee35 that might get stopped.
Now if you're talking about the broader picture with this administration...but we don't want to go there, do we? At least the Supreme Court smacked him down some yesterday!
There is a road in front of a shopping area near my home in a very congested and busy area. Yet the speed limit is still 55 mph. During some parts of the day, that's insane. Especially when that's the same limit that's on the interstates through Atlanta.
If you are doing 70 mph down the interstate, you should never be passed by someone doing 100 MPH. That more inconsiderate than dangerous. But on the same token, if you see a car coming up behind you in the left lane and you have room to move right, you should let them. That way we can all share the highway. No matter what speed.
I hope I've explained why I think the speed limit is too low. But I hope I also conveyed I understand why they are the way they are. What i would like to see is more inforcement of "unsafe driving" rather than picking some guy off while cruising alone at 15-20 mph above the speed limit. Which is all radar is good for.
You are making the claim, now back it up.
But you are wrong, I don't like people telling me what to do, thats why I will not let you tell me what to do.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
But today a truck with a loud muffler drove by me. While not as bad as some of those motorcycles, it went beyond annoying. With motorcycles and modded V8s, it's the bass. It just gets painful, and it seems to be more about making noise than making 5 extra hp. I hate them.
Time to call my local police to remind them we get tired of hearing the noise ordinance violators.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Don't they actually reduce HP?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I think with regard to state highways, especially rural interstates, authorities including transportation departments, the police, and the legislators try to do this. But it still comes down to a political balancing act between convenience (most people will get there faster) and lives lost (the few who only make it to the morgue).
When you get to the local level, corruption and influence play a bigger role, plus trying to satify the whiners -- "I don't want speeders in my neighborhood."
Strong form? That so? Are you old enough to remember? The 55 mph limit was widely detested from its earliest days. The whole CB radio fad started because of 55.
It was passed initially to save fuel. But careful studies did show lives were saved, because travel speeds were reduced, so it persisted.
But no one actually went 55, except in the very earliest days, when the oil embargo was still in effect. It had to be the most widely flouted law since Prohibition. I can assure you that if it had been strictly enforced, it would have been repealed as soon as Reagan took office, if not before. There was actually a plank in the 1980 Republican political platform to repeal the limit.
I'll tell you as I please, thanks anyway.