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
Yes it will add congestion, and here's why:
Car A is going from Point A to Point Z during the hours of 1 to 10.
Car B is going from Point A to Point F during the hours of 1 to 3.
Car C is going from Point F to Point Z during the hours of 3 to 10.
Now if you lower speed limits this is what'll happen:
Car A will be on the road from hours 1 to 15.
Car B will be on the road from hours 1 to 5.
Car C will be on the road from hours 3 to 14.
So during hours 3 to 5 there are now 3 cars on the road instead of 2. From the hours of 10 to 14 there are two cars on the road instead of 1.
If just 3 cars in this scenario can raise traffic levels by 50 and 100% respectively during certain hours, imagine the exponential chaos that will result from millions of vehicles adding millions of minutes on the road due to lower speed limits!
Ain't gonna happen. The road belongs to all of us.
It is truly the case that Speed Limits have NOTHING to do with safety, and everything to do with Gov't Revenue.
Only the Gov't doesn't want to make it obvious to the common folk, or at least too obvious. Judges don't like their ruling overturned or overruled, and therefore, would not find someone guilty for 1 MPH over the speed limit, and since convictions would not occur, officers don't ticket. Also, officers don't have any means to accurately estimate or determine a single vehicles speed within 1 -5 mph unless they are the only car on the road moving.
Officers are notorious for having bad power of observation and judgment.
Lets look at it this way. Suppose the speed limit is 70 MPH and all the cars are exactly 200 yards apart. you will have a car pass any particular point once every 1.4 seconds. Reduce the speed to 60 MPH now the interval is one every 1.6 seconds.
You see that even though all three of your cars might be on the road at the same time there will be more space (in terms of time and maybe distance) between cars.
Also remember that as you increase the speed you will need more space between each car resulting in fewer cars being able to use the road.
In heavy traffic it is the congestion that causes the slower speed now the opposite.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Here is what matters : Slower traffic yield to the right. Faster traffic take to the left. Traffic efficiency and safety increases with obediance to this rule, and safety is more important than the number posted on a piece of aluminum on the side of the road. If you pass someone going slower than you, you should pass swiftly enough as to not impact the flow of traffic in the lane left of you. You will not risk a ticket as having to speed for "safety reasons" is a valid defense in court to and for speeding. The problem isn't speeders, it is slow pokes, but it is mostly bad drivers. Everyone needs to keep the hell up! You cannot be in the far most left lane unless you are the fastest moving vehicle on the road. It is as simple as that. If you are not the fastest moving vehicle (or equal to) then get out of the way to the right.
Now granted, this is a rare day in the life of SoCal, but it happens every blue moon. It happens when no idiots have crashed, or no idiots have blocked traffic for 10 miles in the fast lane going 60 MPH when there are 4 or 5 perfectly good lanes to the right.
My 3 car example and argument was designed to simply the process of understanding lower speeds increases conjestion. You have cars having to travel the same distances but take more time. You have millions of cars on the road everyday and not just 3. The more cars on the road due to being on the road longer, means that you start running out of that "space" on the road. Soon, your gridlocked.
If there are 1,000 cars all stuck in bumper to bumper traffic in a single lane not moving, and then all 1,000 cars floored it at the same time (and all had the exact same vehicle), then everyone would be able to speed up without colliding or requiring more "space."
Here in MO someone can be ticketed for driving in the far left lane and staying there if they are not in the process of passing another vehicle. I have never seen anyone pulled over for this common violation but I wish it would be better enforced.
"I usually only resort to tailgating when an obviously incompetently unskilled driver is in a left most lane and blocking traffic (and/or causing traffic to pile up), I won't usually find tailgating to be an issue in the slow lane, as the faster drivers understand that the right lane is the slow lane, but when the fast lane is dominated by the slow lane drivers, yes, the faster drivers are MORE IMPORTANT and should have first rights to that far left lane!" :sick:
For a few of the tailgaters aggression is the problem. The problem is not just impatience, not sharing the road, or having an emergency of life or death to drive to the hospital (hopefully not themselves although that's undertaken by some shooting victims in the urban Dayton area).
The word choice shows the aggressive attitude rather than a sharing the road attitude: incompetently unskilled blocking to pile up dominated MORE IMPORTANT first rights.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Hate to say this but catam is right
I guess I'm not part of the "most" group because my commute is anywhere from 45-55 minutes, depending on traffic, and there are spots where we can get up to 75mph.
true but if some little kid ran into said street right infront of that first car you will have a 1,000 car pile up.
Also remember that even if they all had the exact same car no two cars would accelerate at the same rate.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Passing someone is never a valid defense for speeding. Breaking the law so that others can continue to break the law is no defense for speeding.
In other words if you speed up while in the left lane and get a ticket your excuse that you were speeding for "safety reasons" so you wouldn't impede traffic won't stand up.
Everyone needs to keep the hell up!
So if two people with a death wish are driving wildly down the road at 110 MPH everyone should?
You cannot be in the far most left lane unless you are the fastest moving vehicle on the road.
OK so I am traveling on I-80 in Ohio and doing 75 coming on someone doing 65 I cannot get in the left lane because there is some yahoo in Iowa on I-80 doing 80?
But in reality if I am doing a reasonable speed (say SL or above) and I am actively passing someone and you race up behind me you will have to wait until I complete my pass.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Sure you have the right to move left and pass in a relatively slow manner. And you have the right to holdup faster traffic. You also have the right to not hold doors for people at stores. You also have the right to splash thru puddles, not swerving when you can safely do so and splash pedestrians.
It's all about politeness. Don't be polite and you'll get the same treatment in return. And then you're going to wonder why someone gets :mad:
Oh speaking of speeders - my last experience was driving 50-55 mph in a 50-zone on a 2-lane road, and having a car close-up quickly behind me. As soon as there was a passing lane the car went by and was out of sight in 1-2 minutes. You guessed it - a state police car. There were no lights or siren, so why are they significantly speeding? I've seen this many times thru the years.
They do that around here too
Why should I speed up any further (and risk a ticket) for YOU?
You gonna be "polite' and stop and tell the officer that you should get the ticket becuse I was being polite?
Yeah-I'm being polite by NOT calling 911 to report a dangerous and aggressive driver.. I believe in live and let live.
Got to be kidding on this. None of your business. State police car or any police has authority to speed if necessary. Many reasons why they might not want to put on siren.
End of story.
Insane. It is the business of every taxpaying citizen.
To say it is not your business means one is afraid so-called authorities might be abusing their privileges.
I disagree with this and I believe the laws as written in CA disagree with you too. The laws of this State apply to all humans, whether they are legal, illegal, officers of the law, judges, senators, or celebrities.
Unless a police vehicle has lights and/or sirens on, they should be obeying the laws of the land. They have no right to break laws unless they indicate an emergency situation. It is dangerous for them to change lanes without signaling, as it is dangerous for them to run red lights, speed, and or make any other emergency manuevers without signalling other drivers by having those lights and/or sirens on.
In fact, just a couple of months ago, I got rear ended by a city cop on a bike on the freeway of all places.
In the last 10 years I've had zero at fault accidents.
In the last 10 years Cops have caused 1 accident against me!
In the last 10 years I've probably gotten 8-9 citations/tickets of which 4 stood up in court.
Who iw the better driver between me and CHP and Police Officers? Me or the officer's who enforce the so-called laws? I'd wager I am the better driver, and the record agrees with me. I won't only wager, I will state for the record I know, I have proof, and I predicted I'd be the better driver.
In fact, after receiving enough BS tickets in my life, I was just relishing and waiting and dreaming at night about the day an officer would rear end my vehicle. I knew that it would happen before the day I cause an at-fault accident on the road (and before pigs fly). I'm not saying this because I was proven right and saying I told you so, I'm saying it because I rightfully predicted it.
Can we come to a compromise on what is reasonable on this with someone like Golfman4 (because he isn't the only one like himself out there).
I'd say 5 MPH over the car in front of you when you start your passing manuever on the left is reasonable, but by the time you get in front of that vehicle you should probably have accelerated to at least 10MPH over the vehicle to the right.
I hate truckers who block the left lane indefinitely while going 66MPH to pass someone going 65.5 mph.
Actually it is my business as a citizen and taxpayer.
>State police car or any police has authority to speed if necessary.
Actually there are definite rules about the manner and method. Lights should be on, e.g.. I have seen officers turn on lights while passing cars illegally and going through intersections w/ without/ signal lights because they are doing something official. In our area we have a jurisdiction that surrounds our political division who make emergency runs through our city. One nearly caused an accident at an intersection because he dodged and went through in a dangerous manner between the cars already present. He turned his lights on about 70 feet from the intersection but acted as though he had had them on while approaching and as though his siredn were on. I simply gave the time and location to the mayor who checked on it and later told me it was handled by his boss.
Many officers have had to explain where and why.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That sounds demeaning toward Golfman4. I'll have to say in his support that I'm like him then. :sick:
Perhaps the problem is people who think that going over the speed limit and aggressive driving is their right... think so?
Everyone needs to be more courteous.
The real test about the mental attitude and driving courtesy of a higher speed driver on the interstate is do they stay in the right hand lane except to pass. If they do, then they get my vote, let them continue as bear bait if they wish. If they just stay in the left hand lane, because it's their lane, then I drive in a safe courteous manner in my right hand lane unless I'm passing one of the slower drivers in the right hand lane.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Yep its all about politeness. If you are traveling down the interstate and come onto someone passing someone else be patient and polite and wait for them to complete the pass. Its that simple,
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
A lot of police departments have a policy that in cases of pursuits only the cars directly in the pursuit (the cars right behind the suspect) are allowed to have sirens going. Other vehicles responding (say to cut off the suspect) must do so without sirens. This is so that they can hear the sirens of the pursuing units and act accordingly.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
It is that simple and easy if the person doing the passing is doing so in a manner that is REASONABLE, prudent, and efficient. If they are passing at an unreasonable rate of speed (less than 5MPH faster than the vehicle they are passing), then it changes from a situation of politeness to a situation where behaviour has to be corrected with negative reinforcement.
Police cars run quick & silent so they don't spook the bad guys they're trying to apprehend (Burglary in progress, prowler, armed robbery in progress, etc.). They can often make better time in 'stealth mode' vs. the idiotic things people do when they see emergency vehicles. I often see them clearing intersections with lights/no sirens.
Cheers!
Paul
But who is to determine what is unreasonable?
Say I set my cruise control to 70 and come on someone who has set theirs for 68 when I pass them I am not going to speed up just so you can continue on with your speeding,
then it changes from a situation of politeness to a situation where behaviour has to be corrected with negative reinforcement.
So now you are advocating violence against those who you think wronged you?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The law states that you cannot exceed the posted SL on a road. So technically you cannot break the SL when passing, (That was actually stressed when I was going through the process of obtaining a government drivers license).
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
But golfman4 is being discourteous to other drivers in the scenario he describes. There is a flow of traffic in each lane, and he is changing into a lane he isn't going fast enough for simply because something in his lane is going even slower than him.
When entering a lane of traffic, you must match your speed to the traffic in that lane. Anything else is discourteous. Your option is to stay in the lane you are already in.
Indeed, drivers like golfman4 are exactly why there are massive clumps of traffic on I-5 between San Francisco and LA every weekend, but especially in the summer and on holidays. 1 guy going 2 mph faster than the truck he is passing, holding up 50 cars who were cruising at a speed 10 mph above the speed in the right lane.
I will set my cruise to the 70 mph SL and wait in the right lane for a while, while everyone else jockeys for a spot in the hopes of passing the truck. Some terrifically bad traffic pile-ups have occurred out there because of exactly the behavior golfman4 describes.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
So the right lane is moving at the SL or above because you say that you set your cruise at 70 and wait in the right lane.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I know it is everyone's first thought to pass that vehicle that is moving slightly slower, but there is always a second option: slow down and wait for the faster-moving traffic in the passing lane to go by.
And it can be tough to follow lane courtesy when the passing lane is moving 10+ mph faster than the other lane, but still it is discourteous to pass in a way that impedes the flow in that lane.
And I have never found it was necessary to wait more than a minute or so for the proper gap to pass so as not to impede traffic in the passing lane. And think of it: while you are going slower waiting for your gap, you are saving gas, the whole intent of this crazy notion concerning restoring a national 55 SL! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
>slow down and wait for the faster-moving traffic in the passing lane to go by.
That's always the judgement call. Interestingly the fast traffic that doesn't move in and out of the nonpassing lane is always the traffic that wants to run right up on someone to demand that they get out of their way. The fast traffic that is moving in and out to follow the "passing only" rule for many left lanes is often more considerate of someone passing who doesn't gun it to zoom zoom around.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I am a very strong proponent for a very serious investment plan in mass transit and high speed lines. Although US is a much bigger country than US or EU, I trust that a serious programme as extensive as the Interstate highway programme launched in the 1950s would allow a measurable % of US population access to Rail services.
I had a discussion on this subject on this post 3055 on the "Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?" forum
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f0fc7a5/3054
it may be surprising to discuss this on a motoring forum, but my view is that mass transit systems are an outstanding way to improve the motorist life. (I exclude buses from this)
-They offer an alternative way, less dependant from oil
-They offer a lower rate of fatalities
-They would reduce competition for road space.
-HST would lower plane use, especially on short distances (less than 500-800 miles)
-Such investments could be a sound way to relaunch US economy
-Building a HST line requires 1/3rd the amount of real estate of a same capacity highway for the same lenght.
There are some trades off of course. these would be
- Starting from zero in the US. No valid existing infrastructure (and I include the Boston-Washington train corridor)
- Huge investment amounts, to the same scale of the 1950s Highway or 1960s NASA programmes.
- even if launched today, won't see any benefit before contruction is finished.
- No US technology for that yet. Mostly Japan or Europe technology.
- Infrastructure works will bring topical disruptions (noise, roadworks...)
So far, nobody wanted to seriously discuss this view. People just see me wanting to wipe out all cars out of US.
" Plenty of nothing to look at. Heck, when El Paso is the highlight you know you're in trouble. I meant to stop just as the sun went down but ended up a little further down the road. Ended up in Kerrville, TX. Nowhere near the eastern end of the state - south of San Antonio. (All this accomplished in an 80 Accord. You can do that when you're short.)
The next evening I was in Houston after spending a couple of hours checking out San Antonio which was the one place I saw in Texas that I liked big time.
Funny thing - in that tiny piece I drove in the dark into Kerrville the long stretches of desert, barbed wire and tumbleweeds turned green and nice. I almost went back to see where it had changed. "
Plenty of nothing is right. It's a long flat drive and west Texas is mostly lacking in scenery. Funny that you ended up in Kerrville for the night. I like Kerrville, and the hill country is nice, ditto your comments on SA, though I live in Houston now, SA is a much nicer town to visit and has items of interest for tourists. Austin is pretty nice as well.
The first time I traversed Texas was in the '70's in a van filled with kids ranging from upper teens to low 20's. We were headed from Florida out to California. It was July and the van had no a/c. We would mist each other with water from a spray bottle and hang out the window alot. To paraphrase a song by David Bromberg.
" It was a stinkin summer trip through southern hell"
With a good mass transit system we could keep our SUVs and pickups for just weekend outings and vacations. We could afford to look into light weight small personal vehicles to get us to where we can connect with the light rail or what ever. Like I said once i tried the Metro link into LA I knew that if it had been available when I was commuting I would have used it rather that the two hour drive I had to make 5 days a week.
I am willing and have made quite a change in my transportation habits and have decreased my own carbon foot print by at least 50 percent if not more. It wasn't as hard I as thought it would be but it takes some effort. I now live in a bike friendly community and I am considering a used EV like the GEM or a used Hybrid like the insight. I wouldn't need either one if we had a good mass transit system.
If you cause someone to touch their brake while your are passing and blocking the left lane, then it is unreasonable.
Say I set my cruise control to 70 and come on someone who has set theirs for 68 when I pass them I am not going to speed up just so you can continue on with your speeding,
You don't have to choose to block traffic by passing someone going slightly slower than you, you can do the right thing and slow down 2 MPH and wait until there is time and room to pass at 2 MPH faster without impeding traffic.
So now you are advocating violence against those who you think wronged you?
I'm not advocating violence, but if wrongful behaviour is not corrected with negative outcomes, people keep doing the same thing and may not even realize they are a bad driver. The key is this, if you get honked at, lights flashed at, or tailgated more than seldomly to occassionally, maybe you are doing something wrong.
Again, this speaks to a two-lane road. As far as freeways, technically, you're probably right regarding passing vs. maximum speed limits. Realistically, however, it happens a few million times a day, and that will probably never change.
Cheers!
Paul
Anyone who believes that the national speed limit should be set at 55 mph or even 65 mph really does needs to get out more.
The minimum speed was 70 mph, and most people were driving between 80-90 mph. Which was quite nice, as lane discipline was pretty good, too. I came away further convinced that the problem isn't drivers being aggressive by exceeding the (ridiculously underposted) speed limits on limited access highways, but drivers being stupid (or passive aggressive) by not exercising proper lane discipline.
Between Kerrville, San Antonio and such that was a nice day. I did end up in Houston. In 1982 this wasn't a good thing to do. Was a tough time for them. Saw some neat things, though.
grbeck - right you are! It's hard enough to maintain 60 on the Garden State Parkway. I can't imagine doing so out west.
The speed limit here in Pennsylvania is 65 mph, but almost everyone drives 70-75 mph. Driving is just more comfortable at those speeds.
I haven't been on the New Jersey Turnpike for a few years, but I remember traveling at 70 mph - and still being passed by quite a few cars - when going to Englishtown. And this was in the 1990s.
Speed limits there were 55 to 65 and going over 65 wasn't too comfortable in most spots. 60 would have worked ok on the four lanes there. Too many deer on the back roads to feel ok going much more than 55 - we had 4 trot across the road in front of us on one stretch.
Yeah, on either the Turnpike or the Parkway in the 65 zones the average actual speed is much closer to 75 all day long. Heck, it's probably close to 70 in the 55 zones.
I think I'd rather be a drug dealer to underage kids, or a thief and burglar, and I'd feel better about myself than if I had to enforce ridiculously low speed limits.
From what I've seen, on rural limited access highways, most Pennsylvania state police officers are willing to cut drivers some slack up until 75 mph, unless said driver is doing something really stupid (tailgating, weaving in and out of traffic), or 75 mph is too fast for conditions (ice storms, fog, etc.). On most stretches of rural interstate around here, 75 mph is the "de facto" speed limit. (On the urban limited access highways, drivers are lucky to hit 65 mph, due to heavy traffic.)
In the era of the 55 national limit, Pennsylvania was the state with huge billboards at the border and on the Turnpike telling everyone the fines for 56-65 were $$$, 66-ETc., were $$$$.
You're saying now the 65 is violated regularly... I recall the regulars slowing down at spots where the mounties would hide and run their speed traps. Then the regulars would speed back up to 70 and up during the 55 national limit era.
Seemed hypocritical at the time.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
On the Edens Expressway part going south after entering IL a few days before that, I was lucky to be hovering at 20. Gotta love road construction season. :shades:
I remember those "pick a speed you can afford" signs on the PA Turnpike. Always found them rather amusing - priceline for speeding tickets.
http://blog.recklessdriving.net/2008/03/09/maryland-police-dont-have-to-obey-the- -traffic-laws/