Change Speed Limit?

[aerohead]

Driving is a" privilege "bestowed by the state,and may be revoked at any time.Driving is not,and has never been a right,and violating the posted speed limit is a crime punishable under law.

[aerohead]

I've driven on it and I drove the posted limit.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

How about putting some thought into the poll answers? Or if you did think about them, how about answers that aren't so obviously loaded?

"No" is a good option. "No because..." is bad, when there's only one choice of because. In this case, I'd vote no, but not because the public would be unhappy. It's because A) It was tried before, and didn't work; and B) It ignores the real problem. The way to save significant amounts of isn't to drive oversized gas-guzzlers a bit slower, it's to drive cars that get decent fuel economy - 75 mpg at 75 mph! - or which don't even use oil as their primary "fuel" source.

I think the members answers or responses will provide Supa with exactly what is necessary to prepare for the "persuasive argument."Since "extraordinary claims" require"extraordinary evidence",Supa will need to draw on the entire spectrum of human reaction,which seems to be well-represented here at ecomodder, to make a case.------------------------ The more the better,if a "command" of knowledge is to be demonstrated,as I suspect Supa will be attacked from all sides.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Will

I voted Yes. I do not see that lowering the speed limit is increasing government control. They have the same control over how you drive if the limit is 75, 55, or 25, just by virtue of having a speed limit. If they have a speed limit they have, good or bad, the same level of control.

I agree that the real problem is bad FE vehicles, but people have a right to buy what they want. The only way to increase FE is to convince people that they are the right thing to buy. I am sorry to say that it is rare now days to find people willing to put the earth, or anything else ahead of themselves. The biggest concern of most "Americans" these days is their own pocketbooks and bank accounts.

This trend must be stopped. I think it will be a combo of public awareness and rising oil prices.

Will,I wanted to respectfully ask whether you would still choose the word "right" as related to consumer behavior.There may be lurkers too timid to participate in discussions,and its important that the words we choose,best represent our thoughts.I've already jumped on Hasbro.My perusal of the Constitution demonstrated no mention of a consumers "right" to purchase anything.They may have a privilege,and so far,it seems many laws seem to be addressing the "symptoms" of free choice in the market,and behavior with those products.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by RH77

I was indeed a passenger during the "55" era, and it took a while to go 800 miles between parents -- especially in an '80 Caprice Classic coupe with the anemic 265-cid V-8 and no cruise control. $88 Braniff flights saved the day.

I've noticed a few things in this discussion -- the assumption that 55 is the target speed, and that efficiency decreases in Urban settings. What if we all went back to just 65 to start?

Just an observation -- I routinely drive in urban rush-hour slowdowns that force an average speed of 50mph. It isn't stop-n-go, but density increases. I get great FE during these periods due to slower speeds. Hills are harder to keep momentum, but entering/exiting traffic keep 2 of 3 lanes flowing smoothly.

Have others experienced this type of traffic flow?

RH77

We don't have that around here.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by DifferentPointofView

uh, the only way I see you having a mpg loss is if your truck doesn't shift into O/D until like, 65, maybe 100 miles an hour. Not to be rash, but isn't the EPA ratings rated at lower speeds anyway which is the reason people complained in the first place cause no one drives that slow?

Have you confirmed this with like, a scangauge or a mpguino or something? If not, what are you going off of?

Most people get low mileage @ low speeds because they can't keep their pedal still, they keep either letting the speed go to low and it downshifts and they put the pedal down to get back up to speed, or they're foot gets on the gas too much, and they creep up to a higher speed, slow back down, creep back up, start falling a sleep at the wheel, and mpg suffers.

I don't know about you, but my Jeep traveling down the road @ 1250-1300 RPM @ 45 gets much better mpg than it doing 2000 RPM @ 70. or 1550 @ 55, or 1700 @ 60. Thats how its been in all the cars I've driven.

Rant over.

The Dodge has a 4-spd manual OD transmission.All tests were conducted in high-gear,at constant speed,on Interstate-35,with round-trip runs made between Sanger,TX and Ardmore,Oklahoma(270-miles).Runs were conducted back-to-back,with immediate delta-velocity runs,with velocity as only controllable variable.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by tasdrouille

I would just like to point out that more people died when the speed limits were raised (all else being equal). I read a Canadian govt study (can't find the link anymore) in which they were considering getting the highway limit up in Canada (currently ~62 mph), but due to the impact on the fatalities rate they found in the states which went up from 55, they decided not to.



I can agree with that argument when taken in a business perspective. But I'd like to provide a counter argument valid for a lot of people (at least where I live). I work a fixed amount of hours per week and get paid a fixed amount per year. Whatever time I use behind the wheel is taken on my free time, which is worth nothing in term of productivity as I'm not going to work more anyway. But in fact, it's worth quite a lot to me, because I actually enjoy it and I have a feeling I'm doing something good for everyone.

I'm attempting to be neutral and share information as Supa requested.I don't defend the higher limits,I mention the fatalities,as associated with the 55-MPH limit,as it was controversial at the time,and a big bone of contention with the "States-Rights,etc." lobbyists.----------------------------- With respect to accident casualties,my first query with the California Highway Patrol,got me right back in Texas,as the CHP uses physics research conducted at Texas A&M University to calculate collision energy,imparted in impacts,which varies as the cube of the velocity.So higher speeds (or velocity differentials) can definitely lead to higher carnage!---------------------------------- As to the economic stuff,I believe it came from U.S.News & World Report,Autoweek,Dallas Morning News,etc..Its going to take some time to ferret that all out.Again,I don't defend the quanta or analysis,however these considerations will no doubt rear their ugly head as soon as Supa opens his(her) mouth in class.

[aerohead]

Supa,here are some of the articles I have.They all have to do with the 55-MPH National Speed Limit enacted in 1975 in response to the Arab Oil Embargo of October,1973.----------------------------------------- "New federal highway bill sends states mixed signals",AUTOWEEK,July 30,1990.The article discusses the U.S.Department of Transportations use of the Federal Highway Trust Fund to blackmail any states which cannot keep at least 50% of their motorists obeying the 55-mph speed limit.By this time,five states have already bailed from the system,and stand to lose $46.7 million for non-compliance.------------------------------------ CAR and DRIVER,March,1990,page 33.Boston Globe reporters rent a radar gun and clock motorists on the freeway in six states.Drivers are cruising at an ave. 66.94 mph-whether in a 55- or 65-mph zones.Saab owners are the fastest at 72.36 mph,Subaru owners crawl like ants.-------------------------------------- CAR and DRIVER,October,1990,According to a Prevention Magazine 1990 Prevention Index,only 49% of the nation's drivers drive at or below the posted speed limits.-------------------------------------- 1990 Traffic Safety Research Institute Division,Federal Highway Commission,McLean,Virginia,Survey:"Driver Speed Behavior on U.S. Streets and Highways".Only 10% of speed zones surveyed had better than 50% compliance.On average,70% of motorists exceeded the posted speed limit in urban areas.Accident rates were the highest for the slowest 5% of traffic,lowest for the 30-95 percentile range,and increased for the fastest 5% of traffic.Risk of accident is minimum near the average speed of traffic,and increases for traffic moving slower or faster than the average.-------------------------------------- AUTOWEEK,July 1,1991,page 10,"Hey Vern,why didn't we think of this before?" Turner County,Georgia Sheriff's Dept..114 speeding tickets on I-75 yield $7,200." I had heard people say it was easy money,but I had no idea it would be like this." Sheriff Lamar Whiddon.----------------------------------- AUTOWEEK,Sept.30,1991,"LEGAL AIMS",deals with expanding use of laser speed guns,Insurance Institute for Highway Safety,RADAR,a non-profit group funded by the radar detector industry,speed limit enforcement,etc..----------------------- "How fast should we go?",AUTOWEEK,April 5,1993,Allstate Motor Club polls 2278 motorists on the national speed limit:50-55(8% in favor),55-60(19%),60-65(44%),65-70(22%),70-75(6%),75-80(0.008%),80-85(0.001%),unlimited (0.001%).---------------------------- "It's time to dump the 55,or take our national speed limit,please",by Peter Egan,Road & Track,Nov.1994,PP 32,34,35.Opinion-based,defends higher speeds,as highways were designed to be safe at higher speeds.------------------------------ For safety related reading you could check on "Physics and Automobile Safety Belts",U.S.Dept. of Transportation/National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,72-pages of text will allow you to deduce ramifications of collisions from any velocity.----------------------- Also,"Household Vehicle Energy Consumption",Energy Information Administration,U.S.Department of Energy,will allow you to noodle statistics around different scenarios.----------------------------- Finally,you might want to look at the "National Energy Strategy",available from the National Technical Information Service,U.S.Department of Commerce,5285 Port Royal Rd.,Springfield,VA 22161.----------------------------------------- That's about it for here.If you have trouble locating articles,I can "loan" you some.I just skimmed them so you need to see them in their entirety.Best to you on the project!

[Ford Man]

The previous mandated 55 mph speed limit may have not been enforced as tightly as it should have been, but most people weren't driving 75-90 mph like most do on the interstates now. Not only does it save gas it also saves lives. The death rate on the highways dropped drastically during the years that we had a mandated 55 limit. I do know that some states were pretty strict on it. I remember driving on an interstate in TN at 65 mph and a state trooper got on the CB radio and described my car and told me if I didn't slow down I was going to get one. I slowed to about 60 mph and he came back and told me I'd better slow down some more. Even if everyone just slowed down 10 mph look at all the gas that would be saved and how much safer the roads would be for the ones of us who like to drive at 55 to save fuel.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Ford Man

The previous mandated 55 mph speed limit may have not been enforced as tightly as it should have been, but most people weren't driving 75-90 mph like most do on the interstates now. Not only does it save gas it also saves lives. The death rate on the highways dropped drastically during the years that we had a mandated 55 limit. I do know that some states were pretty strict on it. I remember driving on an interstate in TN at 65 mph and a state trooper got on the CB radio and described my car and told me if I didn't slow down I was going to get one. I slowed to about 60 mph and he came back and told me I'd better slow down some more. Even if everyone just slowed down 10 mph look at all the gas that would be saved and how much safer the roads would be for the ones of us who like to drive at 55 to save fuel.

I agree with your take on things.Reading between the lines,it looks like the Federal govt, was only looking for 50-percent compliance.No real mandate.And as the energy crisis abated,it became "safety" as the prime mover.If we can elect an unknown woman to the White House in 60-days,perhaps we could educate the American public in 60-days about mpg and speed.It would be an interesting experiment.