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.
Exactly. Also notice how speed limits in many states have not returned to pre-55 levels even though the NMSL was repealed in the mid-1990s.
In general they are the same or 5 mph lower as pre-NMSL speed limits were 70 or 75 mph and most post-NMSL maximum interstate/federal highway speed limits are 65, 70, or 75 mph. Only Utah and to a lesser degree Texas have increased their current speed limits to something higher than anybody had during the pre-NMSL days. Utah has 80 mph limits statewide and Texas has a good stretch of 80 mph and a very limited area with an 85 mph limit.
You would think that in the last 40 years we would be able to raise speed limits as cars, tires, and brakes are so much safer and efficient at higher speeds than 1973 and older cars were. Road technology is also considerably better as well. Yet this has not happened, likely due to combination of environmental groups trying to make car travel less appealing, states not wanting to be forced to keep up as much on road maintenance, and the NIMBY types spreading FUD about highly distracted drivers barreling down the highway at higher speeds causing crashes that kill babies. I don't think that the ticket fines have as much to do with this as people will still speed and there are other avenues to nickel and dime people that are easier and require less manpower (red light cameras, parking meters, inspections, higher registration fees, automatic plate readers dinging people for expired tags, etc. etc.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by northbound74
As for Missouri, I was thinking they were fairly quick to ditch 55. They have some of the higher limits for two-lane roads that I know of. Some are actually set at 65. Most are 60. 55 is only when you're approaching a town, or on curvy, narrow, non-updated rural roads.
I don't recall seeing 55 on a four-lane divided highway in recent years unless it's in a busy city area. Pretty much all of those are 65-70 once out of the older, densely populated urban areas. Perhaps 60 in places like the St. Louis suburbs. I-70 through Kansas City goes down to 55 once you get west of the eastern 435 interchange to downtown, but that's an old section of interstate with sharp curves and short on-ramps.
I was referring to state lettered and numbered routes such as MO-100. Interstates in MO were quick to go up to 65 when that was allowed in 1987 and went back to the pre-national speed limit speed of 70 when the NMSL was repealed fully in '95. The federal highways such as U.S. 50, 54, and 63 were quick to go to 60-70 mph in '95 depending on if they were two lane or 4+ lane. The state highways generally stayed at 55. I do know that the rules are loosening a little bit as I did recently drive on a short part of MO-5 south of the lake which had a 65 mph limit which was very surprising. Let's hope that MO decides to bump more speed limits up as people already drive considerably faster than the posted limits without much of any trouble. The general speed on decent two-lane highways is 65-70 and most people drive 75-80 on the interstates. Drive 55 and 70 respectively and you'll be passed by pretty well everybody except heavy trucks, some minivans, and people driving Priuses and Smarts.
As far as I know, the chart has not been disputed, and I assume it would be if there was data that contradicted it.
It it well known why accidents happen. 1) Inattentive drivers, 2) too much discrepancy between the speeds of the mixed traffic. 3) Drivers not emotionally prepared to share the road with others of a different mindset.
If the flow of traffic is 70 in a 60 zone, the law-abiding drivers are the ones causing accidents according to 2) above. If by some control device, all cars could be locked in at exactly the same speed, there would be zero accidents except those caused by inattentive or deranged drivers. Nobody would ever need to change lanes or speed up or slow, except to exit.
in the case of number two, the law abiding driver is not the cause of any accidents, it is the ones that fail to follow the law. if the speed limit is 60, and i am doing 60 in the right lane, even if traffic flow is at 70, they ar the ones breaking the law not me. if someone hits me, i didnt cause the accident, they did by failing to reduce or control their speed.
Quote:
I don't know the correct answer, but I suspect that the best way to minimize 2) above is to set a liberal speed limit (say 70), allow zero tolerance, and enforce it selectively, targeting drivers who are conspicuously driving faster than the flow of traffic. I suspect, in spite of the whiners, that such targeting is already the usual practice with conspicuous speeders getting the bulk of the tickets. Zero tolerance would hold nearly all drivers within the 68-72 range. Little can be done about 1) and 3), but police could be trained to detect those kinds of drivers and issue tickets when that is observed.
the answer is to set a speed limit at what ever the state or locality decides, and have a zero tolerance, but avoid setting a "liberal" speed limit. as for distracted drivers, they can be handled the same way as there are already laws against distracted driving. as to number three, what can i say, we need better driver education in this country, and we need graduated licenses as well. as people gain experience with driving, they are allowed more freedoms.
Quote:
By the way, I have a suspicion that a fourth cause will begin to emerge: Drivers with an unrealistic expectation that their car will avoid accidents all by itself. I was dismayed when I saw a TV ad for a car with a radar, alerting the driver of objects ahead. I can picture a driver of such a car driving 70 in dense fog, merrily convinced that his car will stop by itself if there is something in the fog.
in this we agree. back in the day you really had to pay attention to driving, what with drum brakes that let lightly loaded freight trains compete with full size cars in braking competitions, power steering that all but insulated you from road feel, suspension systems that were so soft that when you went around a corner at decent speeds, you always felt the car was going to roll over at worst, and at best you got away with a scraped shoulder. add to that headlights that had all the output of a jar full of fireflys, and you can see that safety took a back seat to performance and comfort.
You're just as guilty as the tailgater. Moving right apply to both the left and center lanes. Keep playing games with other drivers. You're going to get run off the road. Good luck with that.
Dude you really are not thinking this through. The center lane is generally for those going the speed limit. In the case of the guy you are bickering with he was actually going over.
Stop being so internet tough guy and learn to be a responsible driver. Follow traffic guidelines and all is well. If you can not do that, than you are the only one who is playing games.
In general they are the same or 5 mph lower as pre-NMSL speed limits were 70 or 75 mph and most post-NMSL maximum interstate/federal highway speed limits are 65, 70, or 75 mph. Only Utah and to a lesser degree Texas have increased their current speed limits to something higher than anybody had during the pre-NMSL days. Utah has 80 mph limits statewide and Texas has a good stretch of 80 mph and a very limited area with an 85 mph limit.
Speed limits should be higher today than they were 50 years ago, but that is generally not the case. Montana and Nevada used to have reasonable and prudent speed limits. The limit on the Ohio Turnpike used to be 75mph. Many states had 65mph limits on 2-lane roads. The Kansas Turnpike used to be 80mph. Oregon used to be 75, but is now only 65. Many state highways are still posted at 55mph despite being built to Interstate standards.
Many of the current state speed limits were just raised to current levels within the past few years. Ohio just raised the Interstate speed limit back to 70 last week.
The bold part was not in your original post. You never mentioned that you were already passing vehicles on the right or the fact that you were waiting for an opening to move over. If there was slower traffic to your right or limited spacing, then yes I agree with you but you never mentioned it. I read your post and respond in the way you presented it.
And I apologize for that. Although to be honest I didn't expect the firestorm that resulted.
And just to clear things up; I left bread crumbs in my later posts that I was thinking someone would pick up on - sort of a puzzle if you will.
Since the right lane was full of cars I had to pull into the left, passing, lane to let the dimwit go by. So all the hooting and hollering about moving right if driving slow became moot.
After he passed me, and yes he basically floored it right before the camera, I moved back to the center lane and he ended up behind another car going about the same speed as I was - tailgating again.
Again, my intention was not to mislead in that initial post. It was a quick funny story to tell. But you have to admit it led to a pretty lively discussion and I appreciate the video about moving to the right. Something I wholeheartedly agree with.
as to number three, what can i say, we need better driver education in this country, and we need graduated licenses as well. as people gain experience with driving, they are allowed more freedoms.
Not the answer. People can memorize the book and take the True-False test a million times, and that still won't raise their competency above the ceiling of their natural capacity, just as no amount of training will ever make me a soloist in the choir. Some people will simply never acquire things like a sense of timing or spatial perception or psychological discipline necessary to rise above the bottom ten or 20 or 30 percent, and the Americans have already committed themselves to a transportation formulation in which it would be unthinkable to deny that many people any realistic means of transportation. Almost 50% of the population of the USA is still non-urban, and an increasingly high percentage are commuting long distances to work where it would be inconceivable to even dream of a working public transportation system meeting the needs of rural shift workers needing to go to work at midnight 20 miles away from where they have committed themselves financially to a family home. They have to drive a car, even if they peak before they become good at it.
The drivers whose competency potential is below what you would like it to be are always going to be there, and you're only choice is whether to crash into them, or learn to accommodate them as a part of your daily traffic environment. The drivers whol can't make that unselfish accommodation are the ones who are psychologically incapable of driving safely, and are the ones who ought to have their license revoked, or be re-educated..
Dude you really are not thinking this through. The center lane is generally for those going the speed limit. In the case of the guy you are bickering with he was actually going over.
Stop being so internet tough guy and learn to be a responsible driver. Follow traffic guidelines and all is well. If you can not do that, than you are the only one who is playing games.
Let me guess, the right lane is for people exiting right? If that was the case when why does it continue beyond the exit. The right lane is a travel lane unless otherwise posted. That means, if you do not see a this lane MUST turn right or an sign with EXIT ONLY in yellow or the arrow pointing at which lanes leads where, the right lane is a travel lane.
Judging by your username, I'm assuming you're a Porsche guy and hope you've been on the Autobahn, or at least know how it really works; it's not a highway with no speed limit. The speeds are regulated based on traffic, times, etc. Please get your facts straight before making a comment like that.
Yes and you would have to agree that it averages much higher speeds than North America and at a much safer rate.
How many Americans would leave the Nurburgring in a morgue van after trying their "skills?"
In Florida , effective 7/1, if you drive 10 mph below the posted limit in the left lane, you are subject to an 'impeding traffic' ticket. It should have been 'not maintaining the speed limit. Don't you just love the idiots doing 65 in a 70 while everybody else is doing 75
The essence of the matter is that both safety and driving-satisfaction are increased if drivers cooperate, and decreased if drivers compete. This is a deeply-rooted cultural issue. While it's true that driving in America is more universal and more subject to common-denominator issues than say in Western Europe, where driving is more exclusive, I don't think that the root problem is incompetence of American drivers. In other words, the paucity of formal driver-ed training or lax standards in driving-exams are not the problem, because Americans drive very frequently and drive long distances. What American drivers lack in education, they make up in experience.
Rather, the root problem is the competitive nature of American society, that is reflected in driver habits. Germany is famous for its speed-unlimited highways (of which, by the way, there are fewer and fewer), but as typical Western Europeans, German drivers are more cooperative and less competitive. Moving over to pass is the norm. I've cruised at a steady 130 mph in rental cars in Germany, pushing the poor little thing to its limit (near red-line in 5th gear). An example is the flat, straight stretch of highway from Frankfurt south to Darmstadt. It works because drivers cooperate. And let me tell you, even at that speed, I was passed by several cars. So mostly I drove in the middle lane.
Now back to the chart in the article linked above. If it is to be believed, then the preponderance of accidents happens not from speeding per se, but from deviation from the median speed. If the speed limit is 65, but most drivers go 75, then driving at 80 mph is actually safer than driving at the posted 65 mph limit. In many jurisdictions, 75 in a 65-zone won't necessarily garner a speeding ticket, but 80 most likely will. From the authoritarian viewpoint, all of those folks going 75 are criminals, violating the law and deserving punishment. Police resources are finite. Police can't punish everyone, so they target the most egregious offenders, say the ones going 80 or above. In a perfect authoritarian world, police resources would not be limited and all violators would be punished.
But the opposing view is that the 65 mph limit is an example of unjust laws. Laws are supposed to be set for the greatest good and the greatest efficacy. If safety is more contingent on uniform traffic flow than on the numerical value of a particular speed, the 65 mph number by itself is not justified. It becomes an arbitrary standard. By this thinking, explicitly disobeying and flaunting the law is NOT irresponsible; quite the opposite, it is the decent and honorable thing to do. Speeders aren't crass miscreants; they're patriots, and to assert to the contrary is a cowardly kowtowing to entrenched magisterial authority.
In practice, those of us who grouse about unjust speed limits do so with impotent vitriol. We complain to one another and on forums, but to what effect? The minority, but a vocal and influential minority, has vested interest in lower speed limits. Thus we see low limits. I'm amazed how far car design, road design - and yes, driver competency - have progressed in 50 years; and yet our speed limits are similar, if not lower.
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.
