Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Before the energy crisis of 1973-4 and the National Maximum Speed Limit (first 50 by executive order and then 55 mph by Congressional legislation) 60 mph speed limits were common. Examples in my area were the entire length of the New Jersey Turnpike, the Connecticut Turnpike, I-91 in Connecticut, in Westchester County such roads as I-287 (the Cross Westchester Expressway), the New York State Thruway until Suffern, when it went to 65, and the New England Thruway.
In 1995 New York allowed a 65 mph limit but initially restricted it to far upstate roads. Even now in Westchester only I-684 have 65, and the New York State Thruway's 65 starts at Airmont. New Jersey splits the New Jersey Turnpike into a 65 mph zone just south of Newark Airport to the southern termimus, and otherwise 55. The Connecticut Turnpike and I-91 are split in a similar manner.
The question is, why not a return to 60 mph on most of the roads formerly set at 60, but not raised to 65? All of those roads were designed for higher speeds. Disrespect of the law is bred by having roads such as the newly rebuilt Hutchinson Parkway or the New York State Thruway set at the same speeds as unposted and undivided rural two-lane roads.
A national speed limit is totally insane. Each state should set their own. I have driven big rigs in every state except Hawaii and one thing is certain: A lightly traveled road in Nevada and a heavily congested road in Washington, D.C are going to have drastically different factors to consider when setting a SAFE speed limit. I am sure that individual state legislators have a better idea about what a states speed limit should be than Senators and Congressmen from other states.
My understanding that the so-called national speed limit of 55 mph was established to save fuel; which was spurred by the OPEC oil embargoes in the early 1970's. That really is the optimum speed for fuel savings. I say "so-called" national speed limit because the federal government has no authority to set speed limits in individual states, only the state governments can do that. But what the federal government can, and did, do is mandate that states set a 55 mph maximum speed limit as a condition of receiving federal highway dollars--the power of the purse as it's sometimes called. If a state did not want the highway funding, then they could forgo it. It was the early 1990's when the federal government lifted that restriction on highway funds and that's when we started seeing the states set higher speed limits.
My understanding that the so-called national speed limit of 55 mph was established to save fuel; which was spurred by the OPEC oil embargoes in the early 1970's. That really is the optimum speed for fuel savings. I say "so-called" national speed limit because the federal government has no authority to set speed limits in individual states, only the state governments can do that. But what the federal government can, and did, do is mandate that states set a 55 mph maximum speed limit as a condition of receiving federal highway dollars--the power of the purse as it's sometimes called. If a state did not want the highway funding, then they could forgo it. It was the early 1990's when the federal government lifted that restriction on highway funds and that's when we started seeing the states set higher speed limits.
That was the initial reason. It became semi-permanent as a result of insurance industry lobbying. Since most people drive quite safely at 65 to 75, the insurance industry got a lot of undeserved "safety surcharges" for minor and political violations. And then there was the issue of political correctness. Carter certainly wasn't going to push repeal. And during the Reagan era he did seek repeal. Congress kept tucking the bill into other legislation Reagan promised to veto. In fact when the limit was finally raised, if I recall correctly, it was part of a bill in which Congress overrode Reagan's veto for unrelated fiscal reasons.
I think people will speed no matter what the posted speed limit is.. Put it at 60 people will do 70-80 put it at 70 people will do 90-100.
Uh, not quite. Most vehicles have a speed limiter set to the low-mid 90s. Not everyone has a Z28, Corvette or Viper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gg
This seems to be the trend. As the police force is more into texting and social media in their squad cars, the speed average out there is pretty fast. I don't think posted limits matter much because if a cop has to write a ticket, that would tear them away from their smartphone. I think the limits are fast enough. So many giant SUVs on the roadways and they really should be driven slowly, since they can't handle or break well at all, not to mention have the aerodynamics of a brick.
Enjoy.
Speaking of enjoyment, I thought you enjoyed a car that could steer around potholes (ie, handled well...aka did stuff when you yank on the steering wheel)? Can't you just weave around those portly SUVs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by engineman
The 55 mph national was a boon for companies manufacturing radar detectors and CB radios. They sold millions of them.
Speed limit on I-10 in west Texas is 80mph. That area is miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles.
Which is a laugh in itself, since you aren't getting ear better than what the po-po uses.
That data was from the DOT and NHTSA and law enforcement departments in the state. Did you even READ the link? Hmm? Did you notice the sources quoted in it and where the link itself was from? Sorry, but you're flat out WRONG.
There are lots of areas in cities in southern New England where you'd need to dial back the speed limit due to the congestion. In Boston, you're not going to post the Southeast Expressway and the Big Dig tunnel at 85. Connecticut is the only state with roads so crappy and congested that it wouldn't be possible on most of the interstate highways. Even there, I-84 from the Mass Pike to Hartford would be fine and I-91 from Hartford up to Springfield would be fine. Of course, Connecticut is such a transportation failure that Amtrak trains have to slow to 35 mph. The whole state should be bulldozed into Long Island Sound.
In urban and maybe suburban areas you could use electronic speed signs and vary the limits according to conditions. I read as early as 1969 in the New York Times that New Jersey used to cut the speed limit on the New Jersey Turnpike from 60 to 40 during blizzards. Why not based upon time of day or day of week as well?
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,551 posts, read 81,085,957 times
Reputation: 57744
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa
In urban and maybe suburban areas you could use electronic speed signs and vary the limits according to conditions. I read as early as 1969 in the New York Times that New Jersey used to cut the speed limit on the New Jersey Turnpike from 60 to 40 during blizzards. Why not based upon time of day or day of week as well?
We do that already here, along several freeways in the greater Seattle area. As you can see, it can be 30 or even lower at commute times in some lanes.
The problem is the drivers. They drivers on average are dumber these days...that's just the fact. And they are distracted. So that cancels out all the tech advantages of today's cars.
And drivers are older. Design reaction times have increased.
The question is, why not a return to 60 mph on most of the roads formerly set at 60, but not raised to 65? All of those roads were designed for higher speeds.
Roads that were designed for higher speeds in the 1950s probably don't meet the same design speeds today. I know of one road in particular that opened in 1969, and had the speed limit raised to 65 in the 1990s due to political pressure. There's one segment where the vertical curve of the road only meets current design standards for 45 mph. Guess where there's always a report of an accident on the morning traffic report?
In a puny little state like Jersey I can see where maybe between traffic and the lousy hiways you might want to slow things down. Here in Texas it may be hours between towns. Some times traveling from El Paso to San Antonio you swear somewhere you had to have gotten lost as it can run into a 10 hour plus drive, and that's at a posted speed limit of 75 that nobody pays any attention to. Most are 90+ mph including the big rigs. Many running well over 100. Jeez, 60 mph, we have faster speed limits here on our expressways thru town.
Quote:
Originally Posted by engineman
The 55 mph national was a boon for companies manufacturing radar detectors and CB radios. They sold millions of them.
Speed limit on I-10 in west Texas is 80mph. That area is miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa
Quite true. But I don't think that Southern and Western states have done badly in raising speed limits on Interstates, though Colorado, with its 65 and under limits on Interstates in the Rocky Mountains makes me wonder. I am referring mostly to the failure of urbanized states to return to pre-energy crisis limits on most of their roads. They all now have 65 mph limits but those are mostly for show; they apply to very few roads.
The area you are referring to is about a 400 mile stretch, from about 30 minutes east of el paso to around Kerrville (an hour west of san Antonio). The speed limit is 85mph, and there are many people (usually with California plates) who go much faster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunluvver2
A national speed limit is totally insane. Each state should set their own. I have driven big rigs in every state except Hawaii and one thing is certain: A lightly traveled road in Nevada and a heavily congested road in Washington, D.C are going to have drastically different factors to consider when setting a SAFE speed limit. I am sure that individual state legislators have a better idea about what a states speed limit should be than Senators and Congressmen from other states.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp775
And drivers are older. Design reaction times have increased.
And younger drivers are too busy on there cell phones to notice.
On AZ highways, its either nearly all 55, 65, or 75. I have had plenty of times where I have been doing well over the speed limit and have been going next to a cop. I know it has a lot to do with how understaffed they are that they have better things to do then pull people over for a small speeding ticket. Here the magic number is 80mph, (and the speed I stay under). Anything 80 or over is considered reckless driving, and makes it from a small fine to a several hundred dollar one. I'm sure most of us who speed, the risk is not getting into an accident, the risk is getting a ticket and losing my money. If I could go faster without worrying about a (big) fine, I certainly would. If they were to drop reckless down to 75, that would be my new max speed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
