By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
No, you just have to understand what information they are providing, and then how it relates to the information you seek. here, not so much when it comes to weight. As someone else pointed out, even if you remove the driver-demographic tendencies, you have the fact that the EPA size classes are so imperfect for this discussion - they don't specify type or size of car, but rather total passenger/cargo volume, which can be achieved in lots of very different ways...
As for bumper height disparities, I thought NHTSA was very close to moving on new regulations to address that problem?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Don't you think the consequences of repeated DUI aren't severe enough, when people convicted multiple times of DUI get behind the wheel again and kill someone? Don't feel bad for the criminals.
And don't make driving reasonable speeds on the speed feel guilty or lawless, by setting speed limits that are too low.
I'm not sure when the car was actually available for sale, but as of the DC and Philly auto shows this past winter, they were still just up on the pedestal, for display only.
At the GM Nationals in Carlisle PA, they had a test drive event and we drove a V-6 and V-8 G8. I liked 'em both. If I had money to burn, I'd definitely consider one.
I believe one in Ohio several months back had 32.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Tell that to people who live in the suburbs who have anywhere from 60-90 minutes driving ONE WAY to work. I don't know where you live, but for many people they'd sacrifice a lot more than 5 minutes.
The long commute
It's never been about safety or saving fuel... it's about control. Forcing others to do your bidding.
Makes sense to me. I can't see this becoming a law.
I don't think it's the roads or the cars. But the drivers is a plausible reason IMO.
You've obviously driven through Missouri.
If that is true obviously quite a few more small vehicles are crashing to get a higher percentage rate per 100,000 registrations.
If I had posted that full sized SUVs represent 7.92 percent of the fatalities in rollovers out of 100,000 registers vehicles most people would have said, "there you go, it proves SUVs are not as safe as a Compact that only has a 4.42 percentage rate of fatalities. But post the numbers in total fatalities showing the smaller car getting the fuzzy end of the sucker with 17.76 percent verses 12.34 for full sized SUVs and the study in invalid.
But even if Nippon had a point that NHTSA was considering doing something about the bumper height it wouldn't do anything for the more than 7 million full sized SUVs and more that 25 million full sized pickups already registered.
But because NHTSA would have had to do a study to see if there was a problem that needed a solution should we pay any attention to the numbers they came up with? After all they are the ones saying Compacts have a higher fatality rate than larger cars and trucks. I know I am beating a dead horse but we have to have something to go by and just reason to yourself what will happen if we start getting small cars that sacrifice stopping distance and lane changing ability because of high MPG tires. Add in a subtraction of several hundred pounds from those same small cars and what do any of the rest of us Envision will happen? I am not talking wishing what might happen but what is the most likely outcome?
Like I said I approve of vehicles being lighter I am worried about how that will work out with so many heavy high bumpered vehicles still on the road.
Our daily commutes, however, are NOT part of that. We all must get to work everyday, spend an extra 5 minutes doing it and everyone will be better off.
OK, but what about the people who LIKE to drive? What about those where the daily commute is something they look forward to? Personally, I like to drive. Getting off work opening the sunroof and playing some nice music is a stress releiver for me.
Note that's at a speed a tad higher than 55.
Hate to say this but catam is right.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
That was a nice try, but I am afraid tailgating and poor lane discipline are rather associated with the slow speed limits I encountered in the US. On the contrary, European countries display a much stronger lane discipline, whereas tailgating occur mostly during congestion times.
The rationale behind the poor driving practices is the following. "I drive slow enough, so why would I care to drive well ?" . This rationale is supported by some state laws that don't enforce lane discipline whereas tailagting is virtually not enforced, as all enforcement resources are being sucked by SL enforcement.
My idea is of course to shift this situation high enforcement against speed and low enforcement against poor driving. This would make traffic flows more predictable and safer, while allowing anyone to drive the speed he/she feels comfortable with.
I would recommand the British experience of lane discipline. A rare blend of courtesy and efficiency.
I guess your fuel economy was pretty poor on that commute.
This is another example where a SL of 55 would bring zero benefit.
Nice try too, but poor lane discipline and tailgating are more a symptom of "I'm more important than you and I can do what I want"
Its more associated with a lot of the opinions I see here from people that want to be able to do as fast as they want on the highway and claim that SL's are to slow.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Anyway my point was that lowering the speed limit to 55 would not affect many of those with 60-90 minute commutes simply because of the traffic at the time that they commute is so heavy that traffic rarely goes anywhere near SL for any amount of time.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Because its the same attitude of "I can drive much faster than the SL because I am a good driver and my car can handle it" attitude that caused the accident. The numbers may be different but the attitude and the results are the same.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Then we should leave the speed limits alone, and simply enact laws that regulate people's attitudes.
Take a look at several previous posts and you'll see the true reason some citizens want to force everyone to drive slower:
"its the same attitude"
"try to dominate others who are following the speed limit by tailgating, lane changing, and zooming around"
"a symptom of 'I'm more important than you and I can do what I want'"
Some people have encountered jerks on the highway who "dominated" them, so they think that punishing the jerks (and everyone else) by dominating THEM is appropriate. They trot out all the old fish -- 55 will save gas, it'll save lives, it won't really affect your morning commute, etc. -- but really it's just a passive-aggressive response to a personal problem.
In the words of the philosopher Don Henley; "Get over it!"
So in order to ride in the middle and left lanes and not have people go around that - who may be slightly peeved by their actions, now they think the law should be 55 mph to match what they want to do.
Is it jealousy? "I'm not a good driver", or "I have a crap car" or "my car doesn't get good mpg at higher speeds and I don't have the $ to drive at 80mph", so therefore you can't? I think there's a lot of jealousy mixed in here - people who feel they have to keep up with the Joneses, and can't and therefore everyone has to [non-permissible content removed] along with them.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
So in order to ride in the middle and left lanes and not have people go around that - who may be slightly peeved by their actions, now they think the law should be 55 mph to match what they want to do.
I would agree that on any given day and commute/drive one can see drivers in middle or left lane that are holding up traffic and that should be in the right lane.
On some of my drives, weekday non-rush or weekend, on I90 three lanes each way, Speed limit posted is 55. I frequently see drivers going perhaps 80+ mph in far suburb area on this interstate. All lanes occupied, somewhat strung out and very few left lane blockers.
Typical speeds might be 55-65 right, middle a little faster than the right lane and left lane perhaps 70-75. Those going 80+ will of course be spotted first in rear view mirrors jumping "all" lanes into slots. So, you watch them to see when they are close behind you and make sure you give them space as necessary.
There is "NO" speed that is apparently fast enough for them as they are so important, their time so valuable, or maybe they just get off on speeding and weaving.
As one poster has talked about GPS gadgets for setting speed limits by conditions, weather, etc., this idea is more realisitic given that Oregon (?) had the idea on "distance" but did not mention "velocity".
If we don't get a national 55, or 60, whatever, perhaps institute black box recording of speed. Any speed over 55 would incur a fee. The black box would accumulate the data and would be downloaded at each State's DOT or Secretary of State office once per year. The download and payment of fee would be required in order to get the yearly tag (with fee) for the license plate.
One formula would calculate a fee for every minute the vehicle went over 55 over the year. Perhaps 2 cents a minute. So, if one drove a total of one hour a day over 55, over 300 days per year, the yearly fee would be $360 for the extra "Priviledge" of going over 55. No tickets would be issued for driving record. Drivers would take their chances as usual in disobeying any speed limits and getting caught by police. The moneys collected for speeding priviledge would be "strictly" dedicated to road and bridge building and maintenance.
Just building on gadget ideas by another poster and idea from Oregon (?).
What really pi$$es me off is that the federal Govt has not attempted , through independent testing, to quantify how much energy loss there is through driving faster than 60 or so. If we go under the assumption that the loss of energy in driving beyond 60 mph is ONLY equal to the loss of enerfy due to inadequate tire pressure (thanks Edmunds) that figure is 70B. But the figure is probably a lot more particularly in states that have 75 mph speed limits to begin wih.
So you young ones out there, keep driving 80; you'll probably have to work to that age in order to retire.
From the data cited, you seem to have concluded that smaller vehicles are less safe and larger vehicles are more safe. That is a reasonable conclusion based on that set of data. You also appear to have concluded that this is especially true when smaller vehicles and larger vehicles are involved in various accident situations with each other. While that may indeed be true, that conclusion is not supported by the data you cite. The data simply doesn't tell us anything about that.
I'd say in my experience this is about 0.1% of the drivers on the road. And I agree these people should be ticketed - if not for speeding, then for some sort of dangerousness.
This does not mean that the road could not have a 75-80 mph speed limit with people wanting to do 55-60, and the largest trucks in the right lane, with the middle or left lanes allowed to flow at higher speed. The 80% of the people who want to drive 75mph should not and will not be held to 55 mph.
So again, please stop trying to make your point on why we need 55mph by using examples of those very few who act without any regard for safety or sensibilities. Whether you put a 55 mph or 75 mph speed limit those people will drive the same. Try and focus on the vast majority - those people who already drive 75mph every day safely, yet have to do so while violating a speed limit that is probably lower.
Most people driving 75mph are trying to stay in the same lane and just cruise along. We are not into continuing changing lanes and racing. Now if it's out-west maybe cruise speed would be 85mph? Again it depends on the road. Those who are racing or are going much faster (100mph when everyone else is going 75mph) than the flow of traffic are dangerous and do need to be stopped.
Go back to Post #512 in this topic and you'll see the DOT did do a study. It was between 0.5 -1.0% saved during the 55mph era. I don't know what study would be better than looking at 20 years of actual data.
If you want to know why it is so low, you have 2 big reasons to start with - 1) most people do the majority of their driving in urban areas, and 2) when people do drive on interstates a lot of that is during commuting hours when there's a lot of stop-and-go which replicates urban driving.
So if you really want to conserve fuel we must either relieve congestion so that cars could actually go 55 mph or 65 mph, or get people to drive vehicles that get better city mpg, or just get people to drive less. And if you want to consider the global fuel market, we'd need for people without cars and scooters to stop buying them. Saving 1% gasoline in the U.S. is not going to make much difference for very long.
I understand that the title of this board solicits ideas and situations, pro and con, about the 55 speed limit. Any poster that abides by rules of posting and stays on topic is allowed their opinion here, I think.
But then, driving 50 mph wastes billions, so we should drive 40 mph.
But then, driving 40 mph wastes billions .....
There's no end to this argument. Pretty soon, the same people pushing this line of reasoning begin to make judgements about everyone's "needs.":
"You don't NEED to drive your car to the grocery store, because your neighbor is going there, too. You two should carpool, to save gasoline. Therefore, the government should REQUIRE you to carpool."
When people object, the folks have their excuses and platitudes rehearsed and ready:
"It'll save billions of dollars nationwide, reduce our dependency on oil, plus it's good for you to get to know your neighbors."
The folks don't really believe all that stuff. They're only trying to satisfy their own lust for power. They also know that they can only convince a minority of people that they're right. But if they target that critical mass of people who have the power to push through their agenda, and promise enough "additional revenue" to politicians, the new law will pass.
This is how the 55 mph limit got passed the first time. It took us two decades to get out from under it. Now the next generation of do-gooders is trying to kick us right back there.
Don't fall for it. It'll do nothing, and save nothing, but it will be an important step for the control freaks that want it to be the law.
People who ask you to conserve gasoline, and offer evidence of its benefits are environmentalists. People who TELL you to conserve, and pass laws to force to do so are socialists trying to hide their political agenda behind a green cloak.
Don't fall for it.
A scheme like that is too insane even for England, the king of the surveillance grid.
And why, pray tell, is 55 used as an example speed? Why should the US go for the most regressive speeds in the industrialized world?
Again, the point is that some people wish to go as fast as they wish without considering the good of the country by conserving fuel. The point is not that many people wish to drive over 55 on that road..., and I have probably driven 40-45 when I've gone down that particular country road.
Iterating that the point and that is where do people's own wishes and desires supercede the good of society?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The germ of the idea came from, I believe, a liberal state of Oregon. Thought that this state was solidly blue. Liberals should especially love the 55 speed limit because they seek more and more control of our lives.
It would be interesting to see a map of US and overlay of states' DOTs that have expressed an opinion about 55, either pro or con. How do the pros match up with the blues?
When Ronald Reagan allowed Elizabeth Dole to inflict the 55mph speed limit on America, I then knew that he was fallible, you might say. Let's not revisit that horrible place in American motoring history. It was and remains ridiculous.
So you think we've been saying that that country road should have a 55mph or higher SL? You haven't read where that we're talking about the multi-lane roads, and particularly the interstates?
No wonder you're disagreeing; because you're disagreeing with something we're not saying.
Iterating that the point and that is where do people's own wishes and desires supercede the good of society?
Where? In the U.S. You have the opportunity to run your life such that you live in a cardboard box, or live in Beverly Hills. We have over the last 100 years comsumed gasoline such that the price of gasoline was beyond the reach of some people. Today is no different in ideals, only that the number may expand a little in this country.
The basis of this economy is that everyone can spend their money on what they wish. This country is not based on concepts like - everyone must park their RV's and powerboats so we use less fuel, so the price goes down, and the poorer can then afford it.
And since thru the majority of history gasoline was not used, there is not much of an argument that civilization will collapse without gasoline. As others have suggested in other topics - it may be good that high prices for oil and gas are here. I for one will be happy if it results in the roads are less congested.
People ARE the society. Society is an imaginary concept, dreamed up by socialists who want to impose their will on everyone, without the consent of anyone. So they call a bunch of independent, free individuals by a collective name, then purport to know what's best for that collective.
They claim that any new whim they have should be law because it's good for everyone. When a person speaks up and says, "It won't be good for me," they point at other people and say, "But it will be good for everyone else."
Then, when another person from the 'everyone else' group says, "It won't be good for me, either," they point at the rest of the group -- including the first person who spoke up -- and say, "But it will be good for everyone else."
Truth is, it will only be good for the socialists who want control over yet another aspect of everyone's daily life. They're trying to convince us to surrender our individual freedoms and, instead, act as a submissive group to achieve an imaginary "greater good."
Yet the greatest good of all is for individuals to maintain their freedom, and keep a distant, central government from imposing superfluous restrictions on them, based solely on the whims of control freaks and the lies of lobbyists.
The 55 mph speed limit was a stupid exercise in bureacracy 30 years ago. It's still a stupid idea today.
If you haven't already taken enough of a beating on this priority of "good for society", you may also want to consider that the government used this 40 years when justifying the draft to send men to Vietnam. Wasn't the justification then that we needed to win that war for the "good of Western societies"?
People came to this country for individual freedom to get away from kings and barons, and religious leaders deciding what the individuals had to do for the good of their society. Forced to plow a field for a baron? Only 1 religion to choose from? Go fight in a crusade? Ah, no thanks.
Do any of the 55-lovers here who operate under the guise of the "good of the country" complain about the crony capitalist elite building mega-mansions that suck down more energy in a month than several families will use in a year? I doubt it.
Conserving fuel is a red herring.
Whine about the supposed liberals "controlling our lives", but I see several people on this thread who wish for arbitrary and capricious road legislation who aren't exactly liberal.
On a somewhat related note, high gas prices are definitely reducing congestion and therefore improving fuel economy without a new speed limit. I drove through the exurbs of DC during rush hour last week and was shocked to find that the traffic moved freely and without obstruction. A trip through Leesburg, VA took several minutes less than it did a year ago, with a lot less of stop and go than I was expecting.
Me. Me. Me... You mean like Al Gore and his homes. When I searched on googleearth for his house, it came up with more than one home in the Nashville area (one was in Brentwood).
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
But if you are going 75 and all of a sudden come to a violent stop, there is more force applied to your body than if you had done the same stop at 55 mph.
Nah that isn't going to happen. If you want to drive 55 or 60 mph in the right lane on an interstate go-ahead. If you feel intimidated get a gun-rack mounted in the rear window.
Thanks for not insisting that everyone has to follow your speed.
But, some of these mega-mansions, and even modest well insulated 2-stories, such as on 5 acre or more wooded lots are very eco friendly vs apartment buildings in ashphalt/concrete jungles. Owners of these who also drive Priui or smilar at modest 55 speeds are very earth friendly.
I see Prius all the time in the local 7+ figure neighborhoods, but they are they are used as toys, alongside a Range Rover or Bentley in the garage.
The talking head control freaks do a poor job of practicing what they preach. I have no doubt the politicos who would support a 55 limit would also support private planes and big SUVs for their own transportation.