When will the 55-mph national speed limit be reinstated?

[NickB79]

I WANT to drive 55; most of the time I can't because Joe Dumbass in his Ford F150 truck or Chevy Tahoe get right up on my ass and practically run me over if I don't do at least 65 in a 70mph zone.

With the crazy gas prices the past few years, when are they finally going to reinstate the 55-mph national speed limit to curb fuel demand? Doesn't it make sense to start doing so?

[devilgrrl]

1. When will a nation public transportation system will reinstated?

Oh, I forgot - we've never had one.

Nevermind.

[Xenotime]

149. I agree with you.

The govt should pay for our transportation.

[devilgrrl]

165. That is NOT what I was suggesting

What I was suggesting is better public transportation nationwide - like in Europe, you can take a train anywhere at anytime, unlike the United States.

Dig the freeperish insinuation though.

[Xenotime]

167. I'm just saying...

gov't should be paying for alternate means to get around. Why the hell does every other country have a bullet train and we don't? Hell, Disney World has a better transportation system than most cities. WTF!?

[Burning Water]

2. You need to be more

ASSERTIVE. Just don't speed up. Why should the government cover for you?

[Left Is Write]

4. Driving 55 in a 70mph zone in good weather conditions...

can be dangerous.

[NickB79]

13. Around here 70 mph is the starting speed

Just like stop signs are just a suggestion. I swear, the whole "Minnesota Nice" thing goes right out the window when you get onto the highway anywhere near the Twin Cities.

[Left Is Write]

16. And the road rage on the metered freeway entrances...

Getting onto 494 between 6am and ...well, ever... is a nightmare.

[Burning Water]

15. That's true, but

safety wasn't the question. Why should those of us who have to be somewhere on time be hobbled by the government and their piddly-ass regulations about driving at horse speed on a six lane highway?

Anywhere you want to go, there's a back route you can drive 55 on.

[CottonBear]

62. Because driving is a privilege not a right and the publics health, safety

and welfare are at stake when we Americans hit the roads.

[CottonBear]

21. Driving at 70 MPH is very dangerous especially for those with small cars

like my Corolla. I lived during the 55 MPH era. It was so much safer and so many lived were spared.

[Atman]

43. NONSENSE!

Modern highways and all modern cars are designed to easily be able to handle 70 mph. Corolla's are quality vehicles, and there is no reason you should feel "unsafe" driving 70 in one, unless you don't trust your own driving abilities. Besides, if you're buckled in, you're as safe as you're going to get. A tractor trailer truck running over your Corolla at 70 isn't gonna hurt much more than if you're run over at 55. And if you're keeping proper distance and driving the way you should have been taught, you should be safe at whatever legal speed you are driving.

The only reason 55 was enacted was to save fuel. A noble goal in itself, but the safety issus of the 70's has been more than trumped by airbags and safer restraints and better built cars.

[CottonBear]

55. I don't like going too fast in either my Corolla or my Dodge truck.

I've nearly been killed twice (along with my family) in interstate accidents (neither our fault.) We were going between 60 and 65 in each case. Had we been going faster we would have been seriously injured or killed. I always wear a setbelt, lock my doors and drive defensively.

I learned to drive stick shift while driving a Porsche 912E and I also used to drive my dad's Porsche 928. I do feel more comfortable driving fast in a performance car rather than a work truck or economy sedan. Unfortunately, I can't afford a sports car. :(

I don't know if you've ever driven on I-75, I-85 and I-285 which is the Perimeter Interstate Highway around Atlanta. Speeds range from 70 - 90 MPH and there is virtually no speed enforcement. Fatal accidents occur all the time.

:scared: I've driven to NOLA, Chattanooga, Nashville, Knoxville, Mobile, Miami, NYC, and across the country and back including driving in SF and LA. Atlanta is the most dangerous place I've ever driven.

[Atman]

60. Yes, I've driven all of those hiways, as well as Miami, Boston and LA

Miami was probably the worst. Six lane hiways, everyone doing 90. I'd feel unsafe doing 55 on those roads, constantly looking in my rearview for a truck to overtake me!

The interstates in Florida could be 110 as far as I'm concerned...flat and straight for miles and miles...I'd rather go extremely fast and get it over with than fall asleep driving 55 for three hours.

I like driving fast, but I also know and where it is "safe," relatively speaking. I drove back from the OH/PA state line to Connecticut last year at about 95-100 for nearly three hours, in a brand new Chrysler Town & Country. Sweet. But man, it can get nerve racking. At those speeds, you can't lose concentration for a minute!

[CAcyclist]

65. Explain why 40,000 people a year die on the roads

And why that number is climbing and not declining.

[Atman]

68. More people and cars on the road, for starters.

Come on, this isn't rocket science. Massachusetts went through this year ago, when states were bucking the fed over loss of hiway funding if they raised their speed limits. The research didn't support you. I don't know what it is now, but if fatalities are indeed going UP, then you should also be against air bags and seat belts, because they obviously aren't working, either.

[Atman]

69. Seems to be nearly constant, according to the govt

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

Up a bit since 1993, but I find it hard to believe there aren't more cars on the road helping to feed this statistic.

[guinivere]

71. Some of the accidents have to be those damn cell phones.

And the DVD players in the car, changing a cd. There's too much junk in cars that people play around with instead of just driving the vehicle.

[lumberjack_jeff]

147. There are fewer fatalities per mile driven than ever before.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

In 2004 there were 38,253 fatal crashes in 2.9 trillion miles driven by 196 million drivers, for a rate of 1.46 per 100 million miles travelled. In 1994 this rate was 1.73.

1) increasing the speed limit on the interstate reduced fatalities on the secondary roads
2) my car gets its best mpg on the fastest roads. On our country roads I get 25, on the freeway I get closer to 30 and the 70mph freeways are about the same as the 60mph freeways.

I doubt that changing the speed limit would significantly lower fuel consumption, and the evidence indicates that it'll worsen traffic safety.

[joeunderdog]

154. nice post. the fallacy of "the safety of the slower driver."

I hate aggressive drivers, people weaving at high speeds, tailgaiting and cutting people off. But driving too slow can be dangerous as well if it causes congestion and disrupts the flow of steady traffic. People have to switch lanes to go around slower drivers, and the slowpokes in the passing lane can frustrate even the patient drivers who should be afforded that lane to travel the speed limit.

I only drive 55 if I have to, and I only drive feul-efficient vehicles.

[lumberjack_jeff]

156. Speed doesn't kill, Delta-V does.

When a freeway has 50mph drivers sharing the road with 80mph drivers, it's inherently unsafe. Bring the speed limit up to the maximum safe speed that the roadway will support given the driver in the average car with average skill and you will have less differential between the slow drivers and the fast ones.

... and ticket the ones who significanly exceed that limit.

[madinmaryland]

157. Aren't a third of those deaths directly attibutable to

drunk driving?

[MadHound]

72. Sorry, but despite technolgical advances in safety devices

Going fifty five is still safer than going safety. It is that extra second of time that you get going fifty five that can, and has time and time again, make the difference between life and death. No matter what safety devices are installed in modern cars, they can't install those extra seconds that make the difference between life and death.

Another thing, when the speed was ramped up to 70mph, people immediately took that as a license to up the speed to seventy five, eighty, even ninety mph. Ramp it back down to fifty five, and people will actually start maxing out at seventy mph.

[Atman]

78. The data doesn't support you

The number of motor vehicle crashes has only increase by 2000 over ten years, while the number of deaths per 100m miles has actually DECREASED.

[MadHound]

81. Only 200 more killed per year

:eyes:

Yeah, we should just consider it as collateral damage after all. Two hundred more deaths a year, increased fuel wastage, no big deal, a small sacrifice in order to complete a trip fifteen minutes sooner:eyes:

Oh, and your number of deaths per 100 miles stat. It's bogus, for the simple fact of the sheer number of miles of new road that has been constructed. A meaningless stat used by propagandists in order to fool the gullible. Always question stats and sources, it will save you from wiping egg off your face.

[Atman]

92. Wow...sure. "MADhound"

The number of road miles traveled has been used as a benchmark, and that stat has DECREASED. Plain as the bug on your windshield. It is NOT the number of miles of road miles existing, it is the number of miles traveled. So in actuality, that might make your claim even more bogus, because if more miles of road have been built and the stat is still going down...well. Doesn't matter, because the stat indicates the number of miles TRAVELED. As for the 200 more deaths per year, that is also a bogus assertion as the number WENT DOWN for the last few years, although there was an increase from TEN YEARS AGO. How many more drivers do you supposed are on the road?

Never mind worrying about the egg on my face. Wipe those smilies off your post!

[Left Is Write]

47. I was around for nationwide 55mph also.

That doesn't change the fact that going 55 when everyone else is going 70 or more can be dangerous.

[XemaSab]

83. My Corolla is happy going 85...

:hide:

[JVS]

128. Is it happy crashing at 85?

[Atman]

144. Run your car into a tree at 55 or 85...you won't much care either way.

You'll be one fucked up piece of hamburger.

[CottonBear]

163. There is no 85 MPH speed allowed on interstates on which I drive

nor should there ever be. I will contimue to drive over the minimum but under the maximum.

My father was an orthopaedic surgeon who operated on many people who crashed their cars at high speed or were in terrible car accidents.

I have no desire to die young or be horribly injured if I can avoid it.

[da_chimperor]

113. The 'Speed Kills' argument = Bullshit (fun statistics included!)

Ok, here we go.

Germany has no speed limits on the Autobahn away from major towns, cities, etc. I know, because i've driven a few hundred miles on it in a french car loaded with personal belongings not more than 2 months ago. German traffic fatalities are also HALF that of the US.

If speeds kills, and lower speed limits result in lower traffic fatalities, then no speed limit should increase traffic fatalities. I'm not saying this is a proper premise, but it's the one that's made by the 'speed kills' crowd.

In 2004, 7.1 Germans were killed per 100,000 inhabitants in traffic accidents (http://www.destatis.de/basis/d/verk/verktab6.php)

In 2004, 14.3 Americans were killed per 100,000 inhabitants in traffic accidents

Number of fatalities in 2004: 42,636
(http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/RNotes/2005/809897.pdf)

Population of the US: 298,548,524
(http://www.census.gov/)

Math

298,548,524 / 100,000 = 2,985.48524

42,636 / 2,985.48524 = 14.2810956



The impartial side of me does have to note that there are substantial differences between driving in Germany and the US. I'm not that convinced that you can disprove a causal relationship between speed limits and traffic fatalities with the comparison i've made, so feel free to show me more convincing statistics to prove your point.

[The Revolution]

153. Exactly

If speed alone was so dangerous, then Germany should have a much higher rate of deaths on the highway.

High speeds are not the problem. There is a point at which speed becomes very dangerous, but it certainly isn't 70 or 80 mph. I believe Germany does have much stricter driving laws, which helps a lot. If people would just follow the "drive on the right, pass on the left" model, that would take care of a lot of problems. Also, I think they have more limits on who can get a license in the first place, and they actually enforce them. Here in the US, there are supposed to be restrictions, but they don't seem to get enforced. I remember sitting in the DMV once, watching them give a license to a really old guy who obviously couldn't read the eye chart, and hoping he wouldn't get somebody killed because he couldn't read a "Do Not Enter" sign. :(

[CottonBear]

160. I've been on the Autobahn and in German cities and on GA highways.

There are super strict laws in Germany regarding speeding, drunk driving and car maintenance and repair (i.e. you can't drive an unsafe junker and you have to spend a lot of money and time to get a license) not to mention strict speed limits in cities along with automated red light and speeding ticket cameras. (I have German friends who I visit.)

There are minimum and maxium, speeds on interstates and speed LIMITS on GA roads and highways.

I won't drive under the minimum on the interstates but I refuse to exceed the speed limit anywhere unless there is some sort of emergency that would compell me to do so.

You don't have to drive a safe car, drive safely or even be functionally literate to get a drivers' license here in the US. Any idiot can drive and they do. I live in a college town. I've been hit by uninsured drivers, drunk drivers, speeding pizza drivers and speeding stuidents (50+ in a 35 zone right in front of my house). Not to mention the time a deer hit the side of my car and exploded both driver's side windows into my car while I was going about 45 on a country road.

My husband, stepdaugher and I have nearly been killed twice in terrible accidents on the interstates and narrowly avoided a third just two su,,mers ago on I-85 in metro Atlanta.

You have no idea how horrible Atlanta area drivers are and how many people from teens to old folks are killed each and every year in the metro Atlanta area.

In short: I won't speed and I won't drive the maximum if not required.

[Atman]

162. I've been driving 27 years, and never come close your number of accidents

Methinks it ain't the speed limits that have caused your accidents. Wow. I'm surprised you're willing to get in a car! I sure wouldn't drive with you after reading that post!

[CottonBear]

166. I wasn't at fault and the other drivers were speeding (except the deer)

These incidents have occured in the college town where I live (bad, bad , bad spoiled rich student drivers in huge SUVs from metro Atlanta and white flight folks in Hummers and giant trucks and SUVs from the suburbs) and on I-65 (AL) and I-85 (Atlanta.)

I am a good driver which is why I'm still alive. I drive extremely defensively. I have driven many, many miles safely all over the USA. However, I now fear driving on the interstates. :(

Mr. CB has never had a ticket and he's 56 this year.You obviously have never driven in metro Atlanta or in suburban GA where SUVs and deer abound. There is virtually zero traffic enforcment in the red counties and on I-285 in Atlanta.

My blue city has stricter traffic laws and even some red light cameras to combat the asshole Republican W sticker commuters and students from Atlanta. Gah! I hat those fuckers.

[Deja Q]

88. I have observed that humans do better when given a set of rules.

Left to their own devices, they'd kill and get no punishment for it.

[xultar]

3. I'm a speeder. I hope NEVER!

[guinivere]

77. I can't drive fifty-five nt

[sweetheart]

140. really, how about 95... or 100...

Or make a federal open speed limit on intercity-interstates
for vehicles under 2tons. :-)

[madmom]

5. If I'm driving the speed limit and someone gets on my ass, I

slow down, that will either get them off my ass of make them pass.

[bunkerbuster1]

22. As long as you're staying to the right when you do that

it's cool.

(No excuse to tailgate in any case, but I can't stand left-lane bandits.)

[CottonBear]

33. I can't stand the people who tailgate me at 70 MPH. on I-75 in GA

When I'm in the left lane passing or gettting ready to negoiate a major split in the highway. It's a speed limit not a speed suggestion. No matter how high the limit, there are so many freaking NASCAR wannabes in GA who are incredibly dangerous behind the wheel.

My family and I were run off the interstate at 65 MPH by idiots who pulled into our lane: right beside us almost hitting our car at 65 MPH. We were sent out of control into the median and across three lanes of the southbound side of I-65 (we were going north on the south side of I-65.)

It was a miracle that we were not hit by oncoming vehicles. :scared:

[bunkerbuster1]

40. Yeah, the GA interstates are pretty awful

and having dealt with NYC metro and DC metro traffic, I know from awful.

[converted_democrat]

44. I live south of you, just off 75 in FL.. It's no better here.. If you

aren't going 80mph they pass you like you're standing still.. I *hate* driving on 75..

[CottonBear]

59. I've driven from Atlanta to Chattanooga on I-75 since 1981.

I-75 has been widened to three lanes each way, the speed limit gradually raised to 70 MPH and the amount of traffic has increased seemingly exponentially. The drivers are awful and many are truly dangerous. I described I-285 around Atlanta in another post in this thread.
:scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared:

[maveric]

25. I take it you dont live in SoCal?

Where people either drive over 70, or under 55.

[tammywammy]

52. I hate that too!

I'm making an effort to stay at 60 (left lane, of course) and I hate it when someone's tailgating me. Mostly I'm scared to death that they're going to hit me. I have an 06 Beetle TDI and it's becoming rarer each day to get one. The last thing I want is someone to total my car out.

[uncle ray]

125. of course?

i guess it's NOT common knowledge that the left lane is the fast lane.

please move to the right, we'll all be happier.

[Freedom_Aflaim]

6. 65 in a 70?

Hope you have a good rear bumper and have some pillows in the back seat.


I wonder if cars are enough tuned to get their best mph at 55 still? Generally cars get the best mpg when the engine is spinning at peak torque.

Back in the old days of 55mph limits, cars were geared so that the engine was spinning at peak torque at 55.

I wouldnt be suprised if thats now 65.

[uncle ray]

129. good point

as engines get more powerful for their size, five and six speed transmissions are the norm, of course with the fifth and sixth gears being overdrive, that car is going to be just as efficient cruising along at 75 as it would be 55, because at 55 you'd have to use a lower gear because the engine would be so low in it's torque curve in a higher gear.

[catmandu57]

7. You're better off at 60

or 65 even. The only reason we got 55 instead of 60 was congress was giving nixon shit, he wanted 60 they said yeah well 55.

[RedG1]

8. maybe when it gets to

55 cents-per-mile for fuel <eyeroll>

[mrcheerful]

9. With the new engines they are putting into the cars and trucks today

makes the 55 mph speed limit meaningless. It won't save any fuel by going slower. What needs to be done is stop these idiots that can't regulate their speeds, you know the ones, one mile they are doing 75 the next mile they are doing 50, then speed back up the following mile. Also these numb nuts that go 80 down hill and 15 up hill. By driving a consistant speed it saves more gas. Thats why cruise control works so well at saving gas, just a lot out there refuse to use it.

[NickB79]

17. That is BS

The primary cause of fuel consumption at higher speeds is wind drag. The efficiency of new engines means nothing; when you go from 50 mph to 70 mph, you DOUBLE the amount of drag on your vehicle, greatly increasing your fuel use. Click and Clack from Car Talk on NPR debunked this argument a couple months ago.

From personal experience, the few times I have been able to drive 55 mph in my virtually new 2005 Scion xA, I was able to get 40-45 mpg using cruise control. When I cruise at 70 mph, I only get 36 mpg. Even regulating my speed with cruise control doesn't change the fact that I lose a substantial amount of gas mileage by being forced to drive at higher speeds.

[Strelnikov_]

28. Second The BS

My VW TDI (diesel) obtains maximum efficiency in mpg at around 45 mph, graph was posted on the TDI site a while back.

It is a balance between engine efficiency (thermal/mechanical losses) and drag.

Gassers may be slightly different, but the IEA published a report recently that predicted a 5% reduction in petroleum consumption if a 55 mph limit was adopted.

Of course, this will be disputed, since it is inconvenient. We can't expect to change our behavior, after all.

[Mr_Spock]

146. Depends a lot on the engine displacement & drag coefficient

Many of the hybrid cars get better city mileage than highway, but most others do better on the highway than city & only see a 1-2 MPG loss between 55 & 70 MPH. My PT cruiser is cammed in such a way that it is only slightly more efficient at 55 MPH even though it has a relatively high drag coefficient. In general you will always see better mileage driving slower, but it's not always a significant amount. Driving slower can't make a big V8 Dodge truck get good mileage though.

[texastoast]

64. Oh, no

My fuel economy goes way up when I'm able to drive even 65.

[ProfessorGAC]

150. Horsepower is Horsepower

The faster you go, the more drag resistance. The more resistance the more constant force is required to overcome it. The more force required means more gas, since the heat of combustion (kJ/mole) is a constant.

Sorry, but no amount of engine tweaking can change that it ALWAYS will take more fuel to go faster. The ONLY exception is at the point of shift. When operating a maximum torque for a given gear, the moment the shift occurs, there is less burden on the engine and more overall efficiency of energy tranfer. That lack of lost heat to the transmission means that 44 mph might be slightly more efficient than 43mph. But, at constant highway speeds, faster always requires more energy, thus more fuel.
The Professor

[RB TexLa]

10. I drive about 55 in 70s, no problem

I couldn't care what the people behind me do, not my business. And I certainly couldn't care what they do with their horns, also not any of my business or concern.

[CottonBear]

26. They just go around us 55 MPH drivers and leave us alone which is great.

That is my srategy. They pass me and then I'm mostly alone on the interstate or highway and the idiots are tailgating each other at high speed far ahead of me.

[Bake]

27. Then PLEASE stay in the right lane

So that other law-abiding citizens can get around you.

Bake

[RB TexLa]

30. I drive in whatever lane I wish

I have passed people using the left lane without going over 60.

[Bake]

46. Then you may be breaking the law

Which, in most states, says that drivers are to remain in the right lane EXCEPT to pass another car.

Bake

[RB TexLa]

49. It doesn't in all and in states it does it's not on all freeways

If no such requirement is applied, you may drive anywhere between the minimum and maximum posted limits. And usually when I am in the left lane it is to pass someone, or when I am going to be making an inside exit ramp turn or merge to the left.

[tammywammy]

50. Actually it does in Texas

The right lane is for passing only, even on the freeways. Now you won't get a ticket for being in the right lane during rush hour, bumper to bumper. Also, in Texas you can get a ticket for going too slow and impeding traffic and thus making a dangerous traffic situation for you and others.

So if you're going to go 55 on LBJ and everyone else is going 70, you better be in the left lane.

[Atman]

53. What? Don' you have that backwards?

The LEFT LANE is for slow traffic? Do they do this just to try and bust tourists or something? That's freakin' crazy.

[tammywammy]

56. Oops

There's that right/left thingy they told my parents about when I was in pre-k. :blush:
You're right the left lane is for fast and the right is for slow.

[RB TexLa]

57. The speed limit on LBJ is 60 MPH

And I drive around 55 on it just about every day.

[RB TexLa]

51. "slower" laws

http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html

[High Plains]

110. And you're a traffic jerk.

If you want to drive slow, stay out of the fast lane.

[name not needed]

106. Good for you. Please don't ever drive in New Jersey.

[RB TexLa]

112. I have driven in NJ, and will anytime I choose to do so n/t

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

138. Stay in the right lane and ignore the NJ state birds flying by then. nt

[RB TexLa]

143. I always ignore other drivers

nothing going on in someone else's car is any of my business

[da_chimperor]

117. Do you change lanes to let people behind you pass?

Please say yes.

[RB TexLa]

118. I'm normally in the right lane

I don't drive the speed I drive for saving gas or anything like that. I drive it because I usually relax when I drive. Like I said I am usually in the right lane when driving, sometimes I have to pass someone or merge left or make an inside turn from the left lane. As far as cars passing me or anyone else, nothing they are doing is any of my business and I have no concern for what they are doing.

[da_chimperor]

119. Perfect. That's just how it's supposed to be. No complaints here n/t

[RB TexLa]

120. People just need to learn patience

I had a police car in front of me at a red light the other day. He was doing whatever in his car, something on the computer, phone, radio or whatever. He missed the light when it was green I guess he looked up and saw it turning back to red. He got out of his car came back to mine, when I put the window down he asked "why didn't you blow your horn when you saw I didn't see the light change?" I told him "nothing you are doing in or with your car could be any of my business." The asshole just said "jerk." and walked back to his car.

[Ron Green]

11. I'd much rather see national fuel consumption standards.

The resulting rise in smaller vehicles would make speed limits much less important as well.

[bunkerbuster1]

23. Why do you want to KILL US??! Small cars are DEATH TRAPS!!1!1!

just kidding. but that's the stupid line of argument you'll hear from every Hummer-driving Nazi out there.

[Atman]

45. Isn't it funny that small cars only seem to be death traps in America?

The rest of the world lives on them just fine. But in America, we keep building vehicles the size of apartments in some parts of the world, saying we need to feel "safe."

Hey, what was that thump? Oh, nothing...we just ran over a Hyundai Accent.

[bunkerbuster1]

48. In so many ways, we Americans are such wussies.

Too scared to get on two wheels, or in anything that weighs less than three tons!

Whenever I've visited a European city of any size, you see all kinds of people (from all economic strata) scooting around on a nifty variety of motorized two-wheelers. I think everyone would drive a lot more responsibly if they had to spend at least some of their time in a more vulnerable vehicle.

[RedEarth]

12. I wouldn't be opposed.....

Like most everyone else I prefer to drive 70 mph, but if it would help conserve energy, I'd gladly slow down.

[CottonBear]

29. It conserves so much fuel to drive slower and lives are saved. n/t

[Snotcicles]

14. It won't it slows down commerce to much. n/t

[Bonhomme Richard]

18. Never I hope. I can't drive.........55 N/T

[Media_Lies_Daily]

19. If you're in the fast lane, you should move over....

...maybe you're the one not hitting on all cylinders.

As far as curbing speed, why don't we get the heck out of that mess in the Middle East...that'll save an enormous amount of gasoline.

[TheCowsCameHome]

20. Let's all drive 90 - we'll get to the gas station to refill much quicker.

We bitch about gas prices and then drive like maniacs. Nobody wants to sacrifice a little. Meanwhile, the Arabs and the Oil execs. keep raking in the $$$.

Go figure............................

[B Calm]

24. I drive an 18 wheeler and get paid by the hour. I drive the posted speed

everywhere I go. The speed limit in Illinois for trucks is 55 MPH and I get cussed out almost everyday on the CB.

[CottonBear]

37. Good for you! I've nearly been killed twice in Interstate Hwy. accidents.

I always stay far behind the big trucks and I'm very careful when passing them.
Have you driven on I-75 and I-285 in Atlanta? It's a freaking NASCAR race with bad drivers and no safety rollbars and fireproof race car outfits and helmets.
:scared:

[B Calm]

89. I drove an 18 wheeler in and around Atlanta many times. Every

time was an adventure. Atlanta is one of the most dangerous cities to drive in, but then so is Chicago, LA, San Fran, St. Louis, and Louisville...

[SammyWinstonJack]

31. I drive a Chevy Tahoe and I don't run my SUV up anyone's ass.

In fact I drive in the slow lane while people in compact cars get right up on my ass, before they pass me, driving in excess of the speed limit. But thanks for lumping me in with "Joe Dumbass" Nice!

[Book Lover]

32. I would decouple your two complaints:

speedsters and the availability/price of fuel. You want me to drive slower and that will somehow curb my demand for fuel? No; what needs to be done to curb my demand for fuel is to provide to me another $500 car that will return better gas mileage than the one I have now. To address your other issue: if you want to drive slow, get in the right lane.

You sound to me like someone who doesn't like driving or cars, which is fine. I think it sucks that I have to share the road with you; I *want* you to have better public transport. Can we agree on that?

[SammyWinstonJack]

34. !

:applause:

[AngryAmish]

35. Never

Cars are even faster than the 70s.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

36. If it were up to me we'd all be driving twenty miles an hour.

And lookin real cool while doing it.

But yeah, it's time to bring it back to 55.

[SammyWinstonJack]

38. If you drive the freeways in Calif, aka, parking lots, you are probably

driving 5 miles an hour and getting real pissed off in the meantime. :evilgrin:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

41. I was in LA a few months ago.

I thought the freeway system was great.

Try driving Seattle.

[SammyWinstonJack]

54. I was born and raised in SoCal, lived there up until '92, the freeways

were parking lots when I left , I doubt it's any better now. I am not saying the freeway system is bad in Calif, there are just way too many cars.

[EFerrari]

75. I flew down there to my brother's wedding and stayed at that

cylindrical hotel just off the freeway -- Holiday Inn?

Looking out the window, I thought, "Wow. That's a really big parking lot."

It was the freeway. That was in 1990.

[SammyWinstonJack]

82. Yep! I went to my brother's wedding in 2004, he lives in the high

desert, Victorville. I flew into Ontario and drove up, I have driven that freeway many times. This was on a friday and the traffic was insane. Took me forever! It wasn't crowded when I lived there, from the late sixties into the early ninety's. And it is so much more brown than I remember. The smog has crept up the hill.

[EFerrari]

84. We lived in Santa Monica a few years -- by the beach you can still

have clear air.

My bro is a sax guy. He HAD to get out of the valley because he couldn't breathe.

[SammyWinstonJack]

85. By the beach, clean clear air, yes. . I sure miss my home state!

:-(

[EFerrari]

87. CA misses you, too, BSN.

We could use some help with the Republican coup now in progress. :(

[SammyWinstonJack]

90. I wish I could afford to live in Calif! It's such a beautiful state!

Californians will never let the repugs take over! I have faith in my fellow Californians! :yourock:

[EFerrari]

93. I truly hope you are right!

:hi:

[cherokeeprogressive]

137. Born and Raised in So. Cal. Live in South Orange County

I live in Aliso Viejo and work in Santa Ana. I can take the side streets, namely west on Moulton Parkway to Red Hill, north on Walnut, West on McFadden, and be at work in less than THIRTY MINUTES while travelling almost 17 miles.

Keep bitching about commute times in California. I'll keep laughing.

[High Plains]

111. I-5 sucks all the way from Everett to Olympia

[warrens]

39. Never

Those of us who grew up with that abomination will never allow it to come back. It's just a panacea anyway; better, more efficient cars, new fuel technologies, and the end of gas guzzlers are better things to work toward. Someone who lives in Wyoming or whatever is never going to accept 55 again.

[slackmaster]

42. My 1985 Nissan pickup got better gas mileage at 65 than at 55

YMMV.

[Renew Deal]

58. It always depends on the road.

The areas around NYC are 55. Why? Because there is a lot of traffic, lots of exits, and people are generally insane. Wide open areas in midwest, plains, and west should be 75. There is no one on the roads in non urban areas and the roads are wide and straight. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think speed limit is the way to solve the problem.

[AllieB]

61. If you drove 55 mph in Massachusetts

you would cause an accident. I drive 75 mph and everyone passes me.

[RB TexLa]

67. Actually the person who hits the person driving within the mim and max

speed limits would be the one to "cause" the accident, not the one driving near the minimum end.

[Freedom_Aflaim]

70. Being legally right doesnt cure whiplash though

Foolish people who drive below the speed of traffic may be legally right, but that won't help their injurys heal any better if they are by a vehicle moving at the speed of traffic.

I understand and agree with what you say. The hitter is at fault and it will be their insurance company paying money to you or your heirs.

Just saying their are practical aspects and Id rather avoid an accident, than be deemed not at fault.

[maveric]

74. If you drive 55 in SoCal...

you'll be flipped the bird and subject to road rage.
Lets try to keep traffic moving.

[CAcyclist]

63. When will they get serious about accomodating cyclists

instead of letting the police go around saying this or that street is too 'narrow' for cyclists. Like any vehicle is narrower than a bicycle.

[maxsolomon]

66. don't get in front of me

anyone going 15 miles under speed limit in washington state, home of total idiot drivers, is asking for the bird.

it may say limit, but its more like a rough guide.

[guinivere]

73. If you are going 55 in the 70mph

you are going to cause an accident.

Driving too slow is just as bad as speeding.

[B Calm]

139. Then WHY in some states do they have two posted speed limits

for trucks and cars?

[donheld]

141. Because some states are run by idiots nt

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

76. I Hope To Hell Not!

I will freely admit, if someone is in the left lane doing 55 in the 65 zone (weather permitting), I am not a happy camper and will let that be known. If they are in the slow lane, god bless em, no problem there. As far as me condoning the overall speedlimit being 55 and abiding by it, ain't gonna happen LOL.

Doing 55 on a 4+ lane highway is torture to me.

[meow2u3]

79. 55 is just a bit too slow for me

If there has to be a national speed limit, it should be 60, or even 65. 55 mph causes many people to nod off behind the wheel.

[SmokingJacket]

80. I stay off the frigging highways

whenever possible.

55 would be great, if everyone was driving that speed. But when everyone's going 75, you have to also, or else present a danger.

You fucking hiccup at 80 mph, and your car's in the other lane.

[XemaSab]

86. You're welcome to campaign for a 55 mph speed limit in Georgia

But as someone who has probably driven 10,000 miles on Interstate 5 through California in the last 2 years please don't ask me to drive that slowly.

The last time I did it I was close to falling asleep I was so bored after, say, hour 4 in the Central Valley.

55 just won't happen here in California.

[immoderate]

91. Why don't you take this to the lousy drivers forum?

If a road is properly designed, 70 mph is easy cruising. Nothing unsafe about it. If you can't drive at 70, I wonder if you can really handle street traffic.

The 55 limit seems like slow motion to me. My time is worth more than the difference in gas mileage.

--IMM

[high density]

94. Never, I hope

Cars today are geared to run efficently at higher speeds. Most of us don't have three speed automatic transmissions in our cars anymore.

I know I'd be on your ass and royally pissed off I were stuck behind you driving 55 in a 70 zone. I haven't calculated the exact difference in gas consumption in my car between 55mph and 75mph cruising, but I generally get the same range from a tank of gas for highway driving.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

95. They can change it back any time they want

I, for one, will NOT be obeying it.

[bluestateguy]

96. Not over my dead body

That's a state and local decision.

[JVS]

131. Which federal highway funding seems able to control at will

[Strelnikov_]

97. Reduction To 55 mph Could Reduce Oil Consumption By 3.4%

The following report estimates a 3.4% reduction in oil consumption.

The more significant impact is that it would reduce transport fuel consumption by 5.1% which is critical considering that the current shortage is in refined product.

Of course, this will be disputed, since it is inconvenient. We can't expect to change our behavior, after all.

Saving Oil in a Hurry: Measures for Rapid Demand Restraint in Transport
International Energy Agency
28 February 2005

http://www.objectfarm.org/Activities/Publications/SolareWeltwirtschaft/Energiekrise/IEA-Saving_Oil_In_A_Hurry_2005.pdf (.pdf)

The tables below are from the report and summarize fuel savings from speed reduction to 55 mph.


Table 2-35: Consensus estimate of effect of reducing speed limit to 90 km/hr

US /Canada

Thousand barrels saved per day 727 (672 US 2001 data)
Percent transport fuel saved 6.2% (5.1% @ US 13.1 M bbl/dy)
Percent total fuel saved 4.7% (3.4% @ US 19.5 M bbl/dy)


Table 2-29: Fuel Economy by Speed, based on ORNL
Percent Change In Fuel Economy

55–65 mph 11.0%
65–75 mph 17.7%
55–75 mph 30.6%

Note: Based on Model years 1988–97 automobiles and light trucks, based on tests of 9 vehicles.

[sendero]

99. I knew someone would post..

... those fuel economy stats.

I drive 75 miles to and from a place in the country almost every weekend. I check my gas mileage obsessively, with every tank I top off and divide into the trip odometer.

I just don't believe those stats. Not for modern vehicles anyway. I see no difference whatsoever going from 55 to 70.

I'm sure there is some, but the claims of 20-25% are pure bullshit for my Ford f150, Chevy CK1500 and Mazda Protege. Might be 2-3%. no more.

[Strelnikov_]

102. And I Knew Someone Would Post That Peer Reviewed Science

does not jive with their personal observations.

Considering that from 55 to 70 mph, the drag force increases 62%, maybe you need to contact ORNL and let them know of your stellar success. I am sure they would be interested in the wormhole you seem to have found, particularly considering two of the vehicles you cited are highly aerodynamic trucks.

[sendero]

103. you can like it or not..

... when I see not even a half a mpg change, I know that there is no freaking 25% difference.

I also know that scientific studies often reflect the conclusions the folks paying for them want them to reflect.

There is a helluva lot more to fuel efficiency than coefficient of drag, but you knew that already I'm sure. I'm sure you also know that modern trucks have a serious overdrive (ususally less than 2K RPM at 70 mph) and few if any vehicles in the date range of the study were so equipped.

I don't know how much difference the average MODERN vehicle will get going from 55 to 70 MPH, but I'd bet you ANY AMOUNT it's nowhere near 25%.

[Strelnikov_]

104. No, Not 25%, Probably More Like 18-20%

And, actually, drag is a significant force component at the speeds we are talking. 65% more drag means 65% more energy required to overcome drag.

But, I guess it is pointless arguing against faith based science. I mean, it has done so much for the country over the last few years.

[sendero]

105. Hey..

... I'm a 20 year computer programmer and general technologist, I know science just fine.

I just prefer looking at my own measurements to those of an interest group, who in the fields of energy and especially medicine, have reversed themselves so many times as to be laughable.

Maybe 10%, maybe.

[Deja Q]

101. 17%, per car, is still a lot. Besides, what about the veracity of those

who do the research?

Like with food where one day it's bad and the next you better make it the only food you eat... :D

[CRK7376]

98. Never from Shrub's Administration!

Too many Mercan's will fuss and hollar and protest that they have the right to speed along at 70+mph Guess they have deeper pockets than I do. I hate filling up my Tacoma, Sienna or Ford Escort. Gas prices are just killing me, and my family and I are not well off, but not hurting either, not like when I was teaching.

[Cats Against Frist]

100. Last time I checked

there was an alternate route to get just about everyplace that would allow one to skip the "death highway." Who the HELL wants to drive on that shit, anyway? It's the suburbia of roads. I hate when people I'm riding with want to shave 2 minutes off an across-town trip by "hopping on" I-5 (Seattle) or (I-80) Iowa.

My situation is this: I will only drive on the Interstate if I MUST, or only on ones that I'm familiar with, and that are relatively empty. When I drive on them, I keep to about 75 mph. In my younger days, I loved Interstate Highways and would cruise around on them at about 90. I will still drive 45 mph on all city streets -- so, I'm kind of a leadfoot, but I do NOT want to die because I couldn't find another route. And driving through the country/2-lane is much more fulfilling, anyway.

So, I really don't care what the speed limit is on highways -- but, yeah -- people get ridiculous. And ANY, and I mean ANY semi/tractor-trailer that is going 1 mph above the speed limit should immediately be pulled over and arrested for reckless driving. That I AM serious about.

[YouthInAsia]

107. never. Why dont they simply but governors on cars so

you cant go above, say, 70 mph (for passing purposes.) That would also eliminate the police chase.

[mrcheerful]

108. The number 1 cause of poor gas mileage is

Cars that are not maintained. If people would have their cars oil changed regularly, and all the adjustments done to their cars when recommended, instead of driving the car into a fix or break down situation it would save more gas then lower speed limits. The real problem is people drive around until their cars are all gummed up and everything from timing to valve adjustments are ignored until the car breaks down on the side of the road.Did you know that your timing being off by 1 degree decreases gas mileage? Did you know dirty fuel injectors can cause miss firing and leaning out, which means loss of power which decreases gas mileage? Dirty oil means engines over heating again decrease in gas mileage. The major causes of less gas mileage is lack of maintenance and not speed limits. The reason they attack speed limits is because they can not legislate people maintaining their autos and trucks.

edited to add, Tire inflation also plays a big part in gas mileage, when was the last time you checked your tires air pressure?

[ecstatic]

109. I am pro choice on this issue! If you want to drive slow, do so

but don't try to force everyone else to drive slow with you. Unfortunately, the speed limit is 55 or less in most areas around here which means most people are breaking the law anyway.

[kineneb]

114. 55 is sooo boring, and takes forever to get anywhere

especially when you are talking about somewhere like CA, where the distances are so great. Come on, no one wants to drive 55 on I-5 north of Sacramento. The danger would be from falling asleep. Mile after mile of rice paddies and orchards, almost dead straight...zzzz. And I don't drive really fast on the freeways (65 mph-for gas efficency), just on our lovely 2-lane mountain roads. :evilgrin:

[da_chimperor]

115. IMO, if you're driving 55 in a 70 zone, you're driving too slow.

Get into a slower lane, at least to let them pass.

That said, I also think tailgaters are total dumbasses. I get especially peeved when it's some jackass in a pickup, so you have my sympathy. :hi:

[TheFarseer]

116. "When will the 55-mph national speed limit be reinstated?"

Just a few minutes before I KILL MYSELF. It would take so freeking long to get anywhere outside of the city.

[JVS]

126. Amen!

[bluestateguy]

133. The movie Cannonball Run was a political statement against it

As was the movie Gumball Rally in 1976.

[DetroitProle]

121. drive the speed limit.

Not over, not under. Either way, you're presenting a danger. I leave the far left lane for speeding idiots. It would be nice if everyone drove the speed limit in the middle lane, but there's always some geezer going way under and I-94 in Detroit is always packed with semis doing God knows what.
I say, trucks and slowmo's get in the far right lane. Crazies and risk takers in the far left lane. Speed limit-abiders in the middle lane.
You CANNOT just drive however you please, oblivious to everyone else. Driving is a responsibility. You have to respond to traffic conditions and your fellow drivers. Go ahead, go 50 in the far left lane of the freeway like an asshole. Just don't cry to me when your shit gets ruined and you get a ticket for impeding traffic.

[RB TexLa]

122. within the law yes you can drive however you please

There is a minimum speed limit and a maximum speed limit. Anyone is allowed to drive anywhere between those two speeds.

[DetroitProle]

124. yes, but

It isn't open-ended. If one decides to go 55 in the far left lane in a 70 mph zone and a line of 70 mph drivers build up behind the said individual, and a cop sees, a ticket for impeding traffic is probably on its way. Driving isn't just about following signs.

[U4ikLefty]

123. I blame the Mexicans!!!

.....gotcha!!! :sarcasm: ;)

[donheld]

142. Oh hell no!

It's us queers in our rush to the altar that's too blame :sarcasm:

[JVS]

127. It will coincide with life totally sucking ass!

[JVS]

130. Ok I've reconsidered. I will tolerate 55 mph on one condition!

If it is going to be so fucking slow and boring. I say we double the legal BAC threshold. Going that speed we surely should be able to handle a slightly delayed reaction and the booze will help us curb our rage at the slow moving traffic

[name not needed]

158. You're a fucking genius.

[cherokeeprogressive]

132. If you want to drive 55 WITHOUT BEING BOTHERED....

Get the FUCK out of the fast lane. That would be the lane on the far left of any freeway/interstate/tollway/thruway etc. I PROMISE you that you won't be bothered if you drive where you should be driving.

In Europe, they have something called the "Autobahn". While most forget that it was designed for Hitler to get his military forces from one place to another, there is still an important lesson to be learned there: LANE ETIQUETTE. Slower cars keep to the right. Faster cars pass using left hand lanes. NO ONE GETS INTO THE FAR LEFT LANE UNLESS IT'S TO PASS A SLOWER CAR.

You want to drive 55? Stay the FUCK in the far right lane. No one will bother you.

[CottonBear]

161. The Autobahn is only in Germany. German cities have red light cameras

and speed cameras which automatically radar the speed, take a picture and mail you a ticket in the mail (with the picture of you in your car.) They also have super strict and very expensive drivers licenses and laws requiring that all cars pass maintenance and repair inspections (I.E. No unsafe junkers on German roads.) Drunk driving laws are strict and public transportation is excellent.

You simply cannot compare Germany or Europe to the US.

[NickB79]

134. This thread will be fun to remember in a year or two

When gas hits $4-$5/gallon, I bet a lot of opinions will change compared to now.

I mean, it's not like oil is a finite, rapidly diminishing resource or anything, right? :sarcasm:

[JVS]

136. Time is also a limited resource, and not one you get to choose how...

much to consume. If you want to save gas, go 55. I'd rather go 65 and use slightly more gas, but get there sooner.

[Strelnikov_]

148. If It Is Even Available. My Main Concern Is Availability, Not Price

Considering how inelastic surface transportation fuels appear to be, I expect shortages.

At 55 mph (highway), I can probably go 520 mi. on my 10 gal. allotment, or 2080 mi. on the 40 gal. of diesel I can store.

[donheld]

135. Never -- Bad Idea

:spank:

[Mr_Spock]

145. Hopefully never

I try to drive with traffic - but SUV's going 80 MPH are always barging down the highway & up my arse. I thing the 70 MPH typical cruising speed (5 over limit) is fine though.

[williesgirl]

151. Need a nat'l law against left lane huggers! freeways were built for 70

MPH, even the hated PA turnpike with all its hills and curves - so safety's not the issue. If you want to go 55, get the hell in the right lane and forget laws.

[rinsd]

152. LOL.....DU EMBRACES Ralph Nader! (nt)

[jukes]

155. WHAT?

enact legislation to cut their profits?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[B Calm]

159. They could do like trucking companies and put governors on

all vehicles..

[LaPera]

164. If it waste or burns more gas, this OIL admistration is ALL for it!