Change Speed Limit?

[SuperTrooper]

The days of cooperation by the press ended decades ago. Anything the gov't puts out gets disected by news departments with one point of view or the other and it's impossible to shut out the dissenting point of view. To describe the current situation between the press and the gov't as "antagonistic" would be putting it mildly. My neice interned with CNN in Washington this summer and she was shocked by the level of disrespect by the news people for ANYBODY in the Whitehouse or Congress, regardless of party.

I also have a tremendous problem with creating a crisis atmosphere in order to get the people to agree with you. (see: Iraq) Eventually, any house of cards comes tumbling down. Creation of any "crisis" further erodes the respect of a people for its leaders.

[RH77]

Let's steer the discussion back to reducing the speed limit

RH77
Moderator

[dcb]

Ok

Originally Posted by wagonman76

...This summer they raised the minimum speed on the freeway from 45 to 55...

I think this is a key point for many ecomodder, or anyone who is trying to save gas. That by allowing the herd to push the upper limit, the lower limit will also get moved upwards. Today, you can legally drive 45 on many highways, that you helped pay for. You might raise a few eyebrows, but it is significantly more efficient in almost every case, especially if you drive a brick.

But we have evidence here that higher maximum speeds translate into higher minimum speeds as well. And I think it is equally important, and even patriotic, to allow folks to drive conservatively and still take the shortest path.

If it were just a case of slower traffic keep right, and overtake with caution, I wouldn't care, but I believe a higher speed limit implies we are talking about making it illegal to drive more efficiently. A lot of cars around here will lose %13 efficiency if forced to go from 45 to 55.

[whitevette]

Originally Posted by dcb

Ok

I think this is a key point for many ecomodder, or anyone who is trying to save gas.

But we have evidence here that higher maximum speeds translate into higher minimum speeds as well. And I think it is equally important, and even patriotic, to allow folks to drive conservatively and still take the shortest path.

... but I believe a higher speed limit implies we are talking about making it illegal to drive more efficiently. A lot of cars around here will lose %13 efficiency if forced to go from 45 to 55.

"The majority rules" or some such.... Whatever happened to logic?
A wonderful book, written by an ex-Congressman, tells all about opinions in gov't. " A Nation of Sheep". And this was published many years ago...I guess things don't change that much.
The point I wanted to make : There is no energy policy in this country. None! The dollar rules. Virtually everyone knows ( or can see the argument) speed increases create more "wind wall" to overcome. These penetration requirements are exponential...the faster you push through this (47ish MPH) "wall" the more gas / diesel / jet fuel its gonna take. Speaking of jet fuel, how much CO2 does a high altitude airliner produce? How many tons per flight? Tons!
We live in a fantasyland if we believe the Global Warming beast is going to be opposed by some "magical" means. The glaciers are all but gone, the permafrost is getting softer ... this ice melts, releasing much methane gas...which is 20 times more reflective of heat radiation than CO2.
"We have met the enemy, and they is us." -"Pogo", Walt Kelley's comic strip character.
...my logical viewpoint. Any comments?

[tasdrouille]

I was just reading SAE paper 2007-01-1610 Experimental Measurement of On-Road CO2 Emissions and Fuel Consumption Functions and stumbled upon info that is relevant to this thread.

In this paper, they measured fuel consumption as a function of speed for the following 5 vehicles.

1997 Chevy Cavalier 2.2L auto with 80k miles.
2004 Pontiac Vibe 1.8L auto with 14k miles.
1999 Audi Quattro 1.9L mt5 awd turbo with 63k miles.
1999 Chevy Silverado 5.4L auto 4wd with 75k miles.
2001 GMC Savana 5.7L auto with 275k miles.

Here are the results for the lowest fuel consumption speed:

Cavalier: 51.6 mph
Vibe: 55.9 mph
Quattro: 55 mph
Silverado: 54.6 mph
Savana: 59 mph

[Frank Lee]

Good find!

I'd like to read that. I'm surprised the speeds are that high.

[tasdrouille]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Good find!

I'd like to read that. I'm surprised the speeds are that high.

Those were the lowest values of simple polynnomial functions used to illustrate data trends.

The lowest data point for each vehicle tested was between 38 and 52 mph.

[Frank Lee]

Now that's what I would have expected.

[craig5_12]

I guess we all just have to take the "law" into our own hands. Me doing 55 on a 65 two lane highway with 25 cars stacked behind me is saving the gas of all those poor saps back there. In addition to producing less emissions and helping to reduce our dependancy on foreign oil. I'll take a 55mph speed limit anyday...and I commute 120 miles per day with 2500' of elevation gain. My apologies if you're driving a 1962 Dodge, but I don't commute in my '65 F100 because of this.
If I get pulled over for impeding my argument will be for the fact that the max limit for "Trucks and Autos with trailers" is 55mph.

[CobraBall]

craig5_12,

Thanks for driving 1+20 per day longer than the average American commuter. Your daily contributions to exhaust emissions is exemplary .