Is 85MPH The Safest Speed Limit?
 

as seen on Cyril's Blog

I'm all for it... but maybe not for the safety aspect... how about the fact that I do this speed already and then it wouldn't be illegal. MORE THROTTLE boys!

Road technology and vehicle safety have been improving for years, however speeds have gone nothing but down. Government officials are full of shit, speed limits are not based on safety, they are based on revenue generation. Engineering studies go through "management review" in which they are changed based on management discretion. That's how the game is played.

Precisely.

The "Safest speed" has been determined, time and again, to be the 85 percentile.

See, when you drive, unless you just started driving last week, your subconscious is usually doing most of the work. Consciously, you're probably thinking about other shit, or listening to the radio.

If you're at all fucking normal, your subconscious is (oddly enough) not out to fucking KILL YOU, and thus you drive at a speed that is "so safe" that your conscious mind need not get involved most of the time.

Few may drive faster, a few slower, but the vast majority tend to maintain a safe and reasonable speed as a result.

The government ignores all of this, despite the many commissioned studies bearing this out, and sets limits unrealistically low for the reasons Trip mentioned.

I liked Montana's "reasonable and prudent" speed limit. I was on the highway and flew by a cop sitting in the median. I was going between 90 and 100. I didn't slow down. He stayed put. It was wonderful.

You should see the number of law enforcement hitting the ticket books right now on the side of our freeways. It looks like it's going to be a reality here, and they are doing their best effort to get every dollar out while they can. I mean, I haven't EVER seen this many on patrol freeway-side.

Personally, I don't think the US vs European statistics are EVER fair though. Countries in Europe require much higher education levels and produce drivers that are more aware and capable than even the above average US drivers.

True, but factor in the fact that cars are so fucking idiot proof and safe now that we can go a wee tad faster.

The other thing is, how slow is "safe enough"?

Sure 55 saves lives, but wouldn't 45 save more?

How about 35?

Heck, 10.

Fuck it, stay home.

Wait. No.

Most accidents happen in the home...

Problem is, only new cars are being made more and more idiot proof. What about those of us that don't buy new cars? Hell, I probably won't have a car with any type of traction control for at least 10 to 15 years. I don't buy new cars. I buy cheap old cars and drive them till they die or get wrecked, whichever comes first. If the speed limit is based on car safety features, we'll really have a mess on our hands and government will then try to get involved in what I drive. Fuck that.

In a way, you're preaching to the choir. I currently have a car with traction control.

I'm selling it to build a 1969 car with nary a safety feature to be found on it.

These things must be based on averages, and let's face it, most people aren't you and me.

Suffice to say, crusty fuckers like you and I can probably handle a car that isn't made by Fisher Price.

Texas is a flat barren wasteland where you can see 12 miles ahead of you. If you can't drive 100mph safely there, well you deserve everything you get.

That's exactly right. No one else should ever move here. This place sucks. :wink:

And what happens when all the idiot proof technology fails? People have become so dependent on it that they can't actually "drive" a vehicle anymore, they are just along for the ride.

Yup, ND too.

Dude, cars fucking park themselves now.

We're about to turn out a generation of drivers that can't fucking park. God forbid they borrow an older car from some poor pleeb; they'll have to abandon it in the fucking street.

I know, thats my point.

There are soccer moms that can't park a hybrid escape in a 30' spot when equipped with back up sensors and a rear view camera.
Pretty sure I can (and have) parallel parked a 25' pickup pulling a 32' trailer in a spot with about 2' on each end when done.

I guess the good news is that we're probably less than ten years from cars that follow a wire, or GPS, and drive themselves entirely. I say "good news" as in less stupidity and carnage, but "totally horrendously bad news" as in actually enjoying much of fucking driving anymore.

I suspect that first it will be primarily on interstates, and you'll still have the drudgery of navigating back roads with the silly disk before you, but at least on the highway, you'll be able to chill, and update your faceyspaces, and watch dancing with the porn stars.

You know I drove over there in Germany for three years. I saw how well most of them drove most of the time. I would agree that a faster speed limit may be allowed but you have to take into consideration one thing about the drivers there (where on the Autobahn there is only a "suggested" speed limit the Blue signs with white numbers white signs with the red circle and speed limit is actually a limit in that area). The drivers have to take a nearly one year long drivers ed class. and it costs buku dinero, not cheap in the slightest. Hell, their laws over there are so strict on driving that if you leave the sheet of snow on the roof or the trunk lid of your vehicle, you would get the equivalent of a $2000 fine. NO SHIT.
What with American driving education getting to the point where its not even done in the school anymore and in the 2 week long private classes that are only out to make a buck to pay for their piece of shit car. Perhaps we need to take serious considerations about raising the limit. Granted there is a percentage of us out there that have the experience and the forethought that would mitigate any dangers from increased speeds, but what about the rest of the majority?

I personally wish you could get a plate that said, "I can't drive 55." That would be permission to drive at faster speed.:dvrofl: But that is unconstitutional and the fools that weren't allowed to drive at the elevated limit would just find a way to forge them. "Make a rule and some asshole will find a way to break it." Not sure if thats already a quote but if not, I take claim.

Buku dinero? What is that? Japanese/Mexican currency?

Beaucoup. Means "a lot" in French.

NJ already has the snow removal law, but it's not two thousand, it's a fine ranging from $25 to $75.

Everyone already drives 80-85. Let's stop the fucking Russian Roulette Road Tax shit.

We do need better drivers ed and enforcement of the left lane is a passing lane law.

That, exactly.

you know that could be their new revenue generator and I wouldn't have an issue with that at all. :lol:

Me either. I've always said that if I were a cop, that's the ticket I'd write all fucking day long.

States could make a freaking mint actually enforcing that one for once.

Sounds like BS to me. What makes driving 85 "safer" than 55?

Also, the 55 mph speed limit was created to reduce fuel consumption. You car is more efficient at 55 then at 85.

I would argue that last part is all about gearing rather than anything else.

The title is bs...... he's not claiming 85 is the "safest" speed limit.........He's simply saying it's a lot safer than people would think.

Wind resistance is a bigger factor.

Blame your cheap housing.

:lol:

And I would say a lot of that ha to do with styling more than anything. I know road friction played a big part in the past but new materials and technologies have improved that as well.

I don't know about you guys, but I can't afford to drive a Tahoe @ 85mph!

Nor do I trust anyone else to go that fast legally. Car safety technology may have improved by leaps and bounds...but the operators are just getting stupider and stupider.

Color me crazy, but our F350 averaged MORE mpg when we freight-trained from Houston to San Marcos along I-10 at 80. I mean, that was the only thing we did differently on that tank of fuel and the mpg went up to 26.

Why not 35 then?

Individual vehicle gearing has a lot to do with it as well.

Ahem

OH AWESOME YOU WROTE IT TOO:nf:

I can't personally fucking believe there is a single post in this thread even questioning the raising the limit, since everyone does 85 anyway.

Some people must like paying fines.

:shrug:

Aerodynamics make a big difference which is why most hybrids and electric cars look so much different than conventional cars. But the average car still creates a lot of drag and no mater how streamlined the vehicle is, power required increases drastically with speed.

From Wikipedia:

Nobody around here drives that fast, unless they are crazily weaving in and out of traffic. Maybe they go faster in more open areas.

Really? I live in the most densely populated state in the USA, and there's days I get on the highway, and I'm doing 70 and being passed like I'm standing still.

Typical middle lane speeds on the NJTP are about 70-75, and about 75-80 on the GSP.

Left lane on the NJTP is usually 80-90, as it is on the GSP.

The speed limits range from 55-65.

It's a fucking farce.

Rt. 195 runs near my house, and is the primary highway I tend to travel.

As I don't care to pay any road taxes, I usually travel about 72 (the limit is 65).

This usually relegates me to the slow lane, where some are moving slower, but most are just steaming the fuck up my ass before passing on the left.

True story. I was on 287 on Friday doing 73 in the far right lane and almost got rear ended more times than I could count.

Good thing there's nothing in the fucking middle between NY and LA, huh (I guess)? Keep's dem folks safe, I reckon.

I mean, take the Schuylkill expressway in PA, along the main line (Route 76).

Typical speeds are about 65-75. Think a slightly more stretched out "Deals Gap", and you kinda get an idea of the turns. In certain areas, there's virtually no shoulder (edge of mountain), turns are completely blind, speeds are 65-75 and sometimes higher...oh, one other minor detail: It's so overcrowded that if you leave more that one car length, someone will cut in.

It's like NASCAR. People fucking draft each other, at 75 and even 85.

There's parts of the Belt Pkwy in NY like this, only there it's 4 lanes wide chaos, not two, and there's the occasional shore-bound family replete with all manner of recreational equipment - toys, rafts, bikes, lawn chairs, etc. - doing 25-40 which act as multi-colored prickly slalom pylons, which everyone careens around madly in an effort to avoid "losing position".

Sounds like some people on this board wouldn't last 5 minutes on the East Coast.

:shrug:

Yeah my wife freaks out when I don't leave multiple car lengths of space driving in those areas. I did it once just to show her what would happen and ended up almost losing my bumper from people cutting in

I should video it. I think some people have no notion...

You should. You'd fit right in with all the fuckers doing it while staring at their Blackberries (which adds a whole new level to the fun)

BTW, kids, EVERYTHING in life is a risk/reward scenario.

We lament disease so much, we devote great monies, and research to it...meanwhile, car accidents kill more.

If we stopped to consider the risks of ever fucking going anywhere, we'd be paralyzed.

If you tried to reduce the speeds on 76 in PA, the area would grind to a halt, and no one would move. 1/4 as many cars could use it on any given day if everyone kept to the currently imposed limits, and observed proper following distances.

You have to live in the realm of WHAT'S FUCKING POSSIBLE.

Yes it's risky. You guys are all motorcyclists. WTF. You gonna start this kinda rationalizing NOW?

Save it.

Spare me the fucking road tax, and the guilt and paranoia just for trying to get home, like everyone else. PLEASE.

kinda makes you think about the editorial written by catterson in motorcyclist. bikes are becoming just like cars now days. I think those of us who enjoy driving/riding are in the lower percentile now days and the newer vehicles, which are obviously and necesarily made for the average "wheel holder" will remove much of the "excitement" of driving for us.
I have traction control in my Jeep even. At least I can turn it off to go have fun. LOL

The Schuykill Is downright scary when its congested but "flowing" I hate riding my motorcycle on it bc people dont look before they switch lanes...and they damn sure dont use a blinker.

and I've had multiple State troopers come into my work and flat out say the only people they bother to pull over on the NJTP and GSP is anyone doing OVER 85...and the speed limit is 65 for most stretches. So essentially your buffer is 19MPH over. its apparent that not every police officer has this mentality but the vast majority will agree with the higher speed limit being "safer"

Arent there parts of road in the desert that dont have a speedlimit?

You have a tuner on it. With proper tuning, they can get crazy milage at high speeds. All depends on how good your computer guy is.

Try that with a stock pickup. My 7.3L will get 20 driving 55, it gets about 13 at 85.

I'm seriously impressed at your ability to keep arguing without anyone presenting a dissenting opinion. :lol

Obviously someone is dissenting, or else we'd have reasonable limits. A few posts here questioned the safety of raising limits.

If safety were the only consideration, we'd have NO cars.

Cars kill more people than hand guns...Maybe we should change our licesning requirements...

I think we should all get RFID transponders easily readable from a patrol car. Then we could license the most worthy, well trained, and experienced for higher limits.

Just thinking out loud...

Sure, but posts #38-#45, you were on quite a roll there.

Personally, I don't buy the "road and car safety has advanced so let's raise the limit" argument. The last thing I want is some moron in a Ford Excursion to have even more kinetic energy when they do something stupid around me on the bike. And I don't really see much need to get home any faster than I already do. :shrug:

Today's speed limits are set for the ability & comfort of senior citizens.

Anyone who doesn't feel the need to exceed those limits might as well give up on life. Push the recycle button and start over.

I buy it, but saying that a higher speed limit is somehow safer is ridiculous... maybe it's not proportionately less safe, but going faster can never possibly be more safe.

The higher speed itself isn't more safe..........It's the belief that it would reduce the differential of speed between the slowest & fastest drivers.

Maybe by and large in volume, but incidental situations are going to be progressively worse... the little old lady who's driving at 45mph on the highway, is probably not going to increase her speed proportionately, therefore more people are going to encounter her at higher rates of speed.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for increased speed limits, but to somehow justify it as a safety measure is bad logic.

Lets take a recent I 540 example...PU headed Northbound at 65 changes lanes and clips a vehicle, sending the P.U across the median and head on into a Hyundai traveling South at 65.

Both people in V1 and V2 dead on impact, probably a 100-115 mph head on.

If they were meeting at 170 would it make a diff? Maybe in how many other cars would be involved?

Or Last week, older Ford PU leaves the road and strikes a tree 45 mph impact. Driver ejected and killed. So he hits it at 80...All that changes is the length of the debris field?

OMG, somebody fucking gets it!

You win a prize; whip or a doll, anything from the top shelf.

No more calls, please, we have a winner.

The Skook SUCKS. I drive it fairly often.

the belt is prety bad too, now theyre doing long term roadwork in one section, people still blast through there and it doesnt always end well for them.

Bad examples. How about some examples where everyone survived 100-115 closing speed head-on collision. Would they have survived meeting at 170? Much different question (and a lot harder to answer).

I've got no doubt that the posted speed limit has little bearing on the "safest" speed for a particular stretch of road. Yeah Avatard, you've thoroughly argued that your small part of the motoring world would be better off with a higher speed limit. Fine, but I haven't been on too many stretches of Texas roads that I think would actually be SAFER with a higher speed limit. And wasn't this about roads in this part of the country in the first place?

Big difference between Austin and the rest of Texas, as you know.......especially West Texas, or up near the panhandle. Besides it isn't like they would make it 85 everywhere.

Those were just two recent crashes here regionally. I betcha I could research all day and not find actual survivors of a 100+ combined speed head on...

Anyways, I think the biggest impact people will notice from the new speed limit is how bad their mileage sucks at 85 compared to 55...

Maybe you should read my statement below instead of just focusing on what's convenient for your line of thought.

Again... increasing the speed limit is not going to make things safer, however I am all for it.

Yep, I bet you're right about the mileage (unless you're in a drafting convoy like azoomm).

And I'm just saying that if they're dead at 100mph closing speed, then of course they'll be dead at 170mph closing speed. The thing I'd be interested in is how many people who are surviving crashes today would be dead if everyone was going faster.

Fixed :lol:

Behind Kmart was the place in my town...