Is Every Speed Limit Too Low?

[cpzilliacus]

Priceconomics.com: Is Every Speed Limit Too Low?

When Lieutenant Gary Megge of the Michigan State Police attends a meeting, he sometimes asks, "How many of you broke the speed limit on your way here?"  

Hearing his question, you might assume that Lt. Megge is a particularly zealous police officer. The type of person who walks half a city block to avoid jaywalking on an empty street. The model citizen who defers almost obnoxiously to the letter of the law. But that is not the point of Lt. Megge's question at all.

"We all speed, yet months and months usually pass between us seeing a crash,"  Lt. Megge tells us when we call to discuss speed limits. "That tells me that most of us are adequate, safe, reasonable drivers. Speeding and traffic safety have a small correlation."

Over the past 12 years, Lt. Megge has increased the speed limit on nearly 400 of Michigan's roadways. Each time, he or one of his officers hears from community groups who complain that people already drive too fast. But as Megge and his colleagues explain, their intent is not to reduce congestion, bow to the reality that everyone drives too fast, or even strike a balance between safety concerns and drivers' desire to arrive at their destinations faster. Quite the opposite, Lt. Megge advocates for raising speed limits because he believes it makes roads safer.

[kphoger]

The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130.  Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling.  Pretty much all other highways I find to be under-posted.

Neighborhood streets, OTOH, should often be less than 30 mph, especially where there are uncontrolled intersections.  I would advocate 20 or 25 mph tops where there are uncontrolled intersections.

[Brandon]

The Michigan State Police, unlike other police departments, actually get it.

This link was in the article: http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-72297_30536_25802-87384--,00.html

[jeffandnicole]

The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130.  Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling.

Would this be true for nighttime and other time periods where traffic isn't as heavy?

I would think that not meeting the speed limit is a good thing.  It's a *limit*, not a goal.

[Joe The Dragon]

IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.

[doorknob60]

Most of the roads around me are about right. Many of the arterials in Meridian are 40 MPH, which I think is about right (and probably somewhat near the 85th percentile). 45 would be pushing it in most of those places due to the amount of turning traffic, but 35 would be too slow (and a lot of cities would probably have gone with 35). Eagle Rd/SH 55 is 50-55 MPH, which honestly might be too high. The 85th percentile speed on that road is probably around 45 MPH, even taking away peak hour congestion (but I don't have data to back that up). 80 MPH on the rural interstates is a good speed. 65 on the urban interstates is too low, it should be 70, maybe 75 in spots.

Stark contrast to growing up in Bend, where minor arterials were often posted at 25 MPH and everyone went 35, US-97 posted at 45 and everyone goes 55-60, and rural highways posted at 55 and everyone goes 70 (at least they mostly fixed that one). And then on two different roads they lowered speed limits from 45 to 35. I would have accepted lowering those to 40, but I think 35 is too low.

Boise has a couple head scratchers (27th St. being lowered to 25 as an attempted road diet, despite nearby more residential roads like 28th and 32nd being 30 MPH, and Hill Rd should probably be 35 the whole way), but overall I never really need to worry about speed limits here (except on the freeway, where it's easy to go 80 when there's not much traffic), it's nice.

[TheArkansasRoadgeek]

The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130.  Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling.  Pretty much all other highways I find to be under-posted.

Neighborhood streets, OTOH, should often be less than 30 mph, especially where there are uncontrolled intersections.  I would advocate 20 or 25 mph tops where there are uncontrolled intersections.

The residential areas are tricky, because people take advantage of the 5 over "grace mph", so I would do a lower speed. Even at 20 to 25mph you can do severe damage to a person in the street (if hit by a considerablely sized vehicle or any vehicle for that matter).

[UCFKnights]

The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130.  Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling.  Pretty much all other highways I find to be under-posted.

Neighborhood streets, OTOH, should often be less than 30 mph, especially where there are uncontrolled intersections.  I would advocate 20 or 25 mph tops where there are uncontrolled intersections.

The residential areas are tricky, because people take advantage of the 5 over "grace mph", so I would do a lower speed. Even at 20 to 25mph you can do severe damage to a person in the street (if hit by a considerablely sized vehicle or any vehicle for that matter).

And you won't do severe damage to a person, even in another vehicle, at 70mph on a freeway if you aren't paying attention?

The point is changing the speed limit and setting them at the actual speed that it is safe to drive on the roads. My (admittedly anecdotal) experience is that if people feel like they're driving the actual maximum safe limit on the road, they stop doing all of the distracted driving things. No playing on the phones, no eating, no reading a book or doing their makeup and hair. They put all their attention on the road, as it requires that.

To me, the question I feel that should be presented, when we're worried about our kids on the road as a reason to lower the speed limit, is do you think its safer for the driver to do 25-30mph while playing on their phone not paying attention to the road, and possibly failing to hit their brake when the kid runs in the street... or 35mph with their full focus on the road, slamming on the brake when the kid runs out and impacting at a lower speed or missing the kid with a large screech of the tires? Because reality seems to dictate those are our choices.

[TheArkansasRoadgeek]

The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130.  Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling.  Pretty much all other highways I find to be under-posted.

Neighborhood streets, OTOH, should often be less than 30 mph, especially where there are uncontrolled intersections.  I would advocate 20 or 25 mph tops where there are uncontrolled intersections.

Well, drive 95, keep kids alive!

The residential areas are tricky, because people take advantage of the 5 over "grace mph", so I would do a lower speed. Even at 20 to 25mph you can do severe damage to a person in the street (if hit by a considerablely sized vehicle or any vehicle for that matter).

And you won't do severe damage to a person, even in another vehicle, at 70mph on a freeway if you aren't paying attention?

The point is changing the speed limit and setting them at the actual speed that it is safe to drive on the roads. My (admittedly anecdotal) experience is that if people feel like they're driving the actual maximum safe limit on the road, they stop doing all of the distracted driving things. No playing on the phones, no eating, no reading a book or doing their makeup and hair. They put all their attention on the road, as it requires that.

To me, the question I feel that should be presented, when we're worried about our kids on the road as a reason to lower the speed limit, is do you think its safer for the driver to do 25-30mph while playing on their phone not paying attention to the road, and possibly failing to hit their brake when the kid runs in the street... or 35mph with their full focus on the road, slamming on the brake when the kid runs out and impacting at a lower speed or missing the kid with a large screech of the tires? Because reality seems to dictate those are our choices.

[connroadgeek]

I-95 drops down as low as 50 and 40 mph in CT. Those are speed traps waiting to happen if I ever saw one except you rarely see traffic enforcement on I-95 and never south of New Haven to the NY line. I think the state keeps speed limits low because of heavy traffic that's frequently stop and go and it's dangerous to have cars going 65-70 then having to suddenly stop (for no reason).

[Duke87]

The residential areas are tricky, because people take advantage of the 5 over "grace mph", so I would do a lower speed. Even at 20 to 25mph you can do severe damage to a person in the street (if hit by a considerablely sized vehicle or any vehicle for that matter).

Yes, you can do damage at those speeds, but the damage is not determined by the speed limit, or even by the prevailing speed of travel - rather, it is determined by the speed the vehicle is traveling at the point of impact.

For one thing, a majority of collisions between a vehicle and a pedestrian involve a vehicle making a turn at an intersection. That turning vehicle is likely traveling below the speed limit already.

For another, a driver anticipating a collision is instinctively going to hit the brakes, which means that in general the vehicle will have slowed down before it actually hits the person.

Let's also bear in mind that drivers are adaptable. Even if we decide it's not safe to drive over 25 MPH in the presence of pedestrians, that doesn't mean no vehicle can ever safely travel over 25 MPH on a street where pedestrians may be present. It simply means the driver needs to be on the lookout for pedestrians and prepared to slow down if he sees any. There is a temptation to idiot-proof this by simply making the limit 25, however I would argue in favor of idiot-proofing it by not granting driving privileges to people who are incapable of adjusting their speed to current conditions.


And to answer the original question, yes - most speed limits are too low. More states need to adopt the Texas model of setting speed limits (rural two lane road? Usually posted at 70). Texas does it mostly right, the only thing I think they really do wrong is only allowing 80 on rural interstates in a small region of the state rather than throughout.

[jeffandnicole]

I-95 drops down as low as 50 and 40 mph in CT. Those are speed traps waiting to happen if I ever saw one except you rarely see traffic enforcement on I-95 and never south of New Haven to the NY line. I think the state keeps speed limits low because of heavy traffic that's frequently stop and go and it's dangerous to have cars going 65-70 then having to suddenly stop (for no reason).

Then it's not a speed trap.

[busman_49]

IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.

Uh, YEAH!!!  I occasionally travel to the Chicago/Naperville/Schaumburg area for work and am usually taking the tollway.  I try to obey the speed limit because I don't want a ticket, but I feel as if I'll be run over because everyone else is going 65 or above.

[kphoger]

IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.

Uh, YEAH!!!  I occasionally travel to the Chicago/Naperville/Schaumburg area for work and am usually taking the tollway.  I try to obey the speed limit because I don't want a ticket, but I feel as if I'll be run over because everyone else is going 65 or above.

I once drove from Michigan to Iowa without without dropping below 75 mph, hardly ever dropping below 80 mph.

[inkyatari]

IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.

I heard a bill is being talked about in springfield to make every interstate west of, and including 355, and south of, and including I-80 75 MPH

[Takumi]

Cut to Virginia State Police representatives laughing hysterically.

[Brandon]

IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.

I heard a bill is being talked about in springfield to make every interstate west of, and including 355, and south of, and including I-80 75 MPH

It exists and Oberweis is behind it (as he was for the 70 mph bill as well).

SB2036

[tribar]

IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.

I heard a bill is being talked about in springfield to make every interstate west of, and including 355, and south of, and including I-80 75 MPH

That would be nice.

Would that include urban stretches of freeway like I-74 through Peoria or I-55 down by East St. Louis though?

[LM117]

Cut to Virginia State Police representatives laughing hysterically.

I've lived 14 years in NC and traveled through other states and have yet to find a state that matches Virginia's aggressive revenue collection speed enforcement. The only place I've seen that comes close is the Ohio Turnpike. That turnpike is always crawling with state troopers every time I've driven it. Last time in 2013 one trooper was driving on there exactly 70mph with traffic as far back behind him as you could see, bumper to bumper, and getting visibly pissed with him. As soon as he turned off, it was like seeing the green flag at a NASCAR race. Everybody took off!

Virginia hit a fuckin' gold mine when they raised the speed limit on interstates to 70mph a few years ago without raising the Reckless Driving limit above 80mph. Virginia shouldn't have raised the speed limit to 70mph unless they included raising the Reckless Driving limit to at least 85mph as a package deal, IMO. But Virginia loves money too much.

[1995hoo]

You know, it's funny, I've lived in Virginia since I was one year old and I've never found the speed limit enforcement here to be nearly as draconian as everyone says it is, although I certainly agree that the "over 80 mph is reckless" thing is an abomination in 70-mph zones. I'll admit I don't drive as fast as I did when I was younger, but I used to bomb along Virginia highways at 90 mph or more on a regular basis (not just Interstates, either) and I never got nailed for it. Maybe it was luck.

[oscar]

You know, it's funny, I've lived in Virginia since I was one year old and I've never found the speed limit enforcement here to be nearly as draconian as everyone says it is, although I certainly agree that the "over 80 mph is reckless" thing is an abomination in 70-mph zones.

IMHO, Maryland is worse, both with speed cameras not allowed in Virginia, and also the cops seem to work harder and with more creativity. I wonder whether the Virginia State Police leans so much on the state's radar detector ban that it otherwise puts in less speed enforcement effort.

[1995hoo]

I also remember back when Maryland did those rolling roadblocks to enforce the NMSL. Never saw that in Virginia that I can recall. In fairness to Maryland, though, I think part of it had to do with some federal regulation about a certain percentage of drivers having to obey the 55-mph limit, and the feds were permissive about how states could meet it.

[Brandon]

I also remember back when Maryland did those rolling roadblocks to enforce the NMSL. Never saw that in Virginia that I can recall. In fairness to Maryland, though, I think part of it had to do with some federal regulation about a certain percentage of drivers having to obey the 55-mph limit, and the feds were permissive about how states could meet it.

Interesting, because I never saw any rolling roadblocks here in the Midwest during the NMSL in the 1980s.  IIRC, Michigan would actually pull over people who were Nestoring for obstruction of traffic.

[kalvado]

An issue I see here is +10-15-25MPH speed over limit used by most traffic, making realistic speed limits dangerous as everyone would go over.
It can be resolved by new speed limit paradigm (just thinking another day - posting something like "recommended speed 70 / enforcement 80" encourages actually staying below limit. Problem is that any new paradigm would be quickly abused by local agencies.
Another issue that stupid old documents - like 4th amendment - don't allow effective operation  of government and law enforcement. Ability to write ticket to anyone and make them pay fee for tax on surcharge along with ability to inspect any car is priceless for governments and police.

[inkyatari]

IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.

I heard a bill is being talked about in springfield to make every interstate west of, and including 355, and south of, and including I-80 75 MPH

That would be nice.

Would that include urban stretches of freeway like I-74 through Peoria or I-55 down by East St. Louis though?

Synopsis from the bill Brandon linked to...

Amends the Illinois Vehicle Code. Provides that unless some other speed restriction is established under a Chapter in the Code governing rules of the road, the maximum speed limit outside an urban district for any vehicle is 60 miles per hour (rather than 55 miles per hour) on all highways, roads, and streets that do not have 4 or more lanes of traffic and are not interstate highways and 75 miles per hour (rather than 70 miles per hour) on Interstate Route 355, Interstate Route 80, and every interstate west of Interstate Route 355 and south of Interstate Route 80.