Speed Limit Hypothesis

[Tonytone]

From old cars still on the toad to people who hog the left lane. Until the risky variables are taken off the road the speed will not increase.

Did you forget cars aren't the only vehicles on the road? Trucks, buses, etc. represent a good portion of the traffic on the highways and it's not easy for them to do 75 - 85 mph like the rest of us and maintain it.

Nope I did not forget. Buses seem to only be an issue on the streets they have stops, they have to stop & go so that slows traffic a little. Only a little. Same goes for the trucks even though their acceleration is much slower sometimes. 2 Axle vehicles use the right lane most of the time. So unless its a two lane highway there would be no problem if slow vehicles sticked to the right lane & people drove concisely. (Speeding drives too).


iPhone

[jeffandnicole]

Reminds me the fact that doing over 80 mph or 20 mph over the speed limit in Virginia is a reckless driving charge which is a criminal offense with up to 12 months in jail or $2,500 fines.

The speed limit on most rural interstate highways is 70 mph, so that means if you're going with the flow of traffic doing as little as 10 mph over, you risk a punishment that high.

Doing 80 mph on a rural interstate highway is not reckless. It's a ridiculous law that's strictly a revenue generator.

Technically, going over 80 gives the officer the *option* to cite someone for reckless driving.  It's not mandatory.  Going to jail is not a revenue generator - in fact, it costs the state more money than simply fining someone.  It's a ridiculous law, but I bet it does keep speeds in check in that state.  And to be fair, most states have some sort of law that significantly increases penalties for high rates of speed; VA is just either the most well known, the most talked about, or the most stringent.  For what it's worth, on I-95, you'll find plenty of people going over 80 mph. 

...However, because the roadway is not a "freeway" and it's in the northeastern states, the speed limit is an absurdly low 55 mph for a 40-mile-long rural stretch.

Has nothing to do with Northeastern states.  Has everything to do with how Maryland chooses to post the speed limit on that particular roadway.

As many people I know say: "Speed limit is more of a suggestion". Flow of traffic is always faster than the limit around here so you just have to adapt and stay with the crowd. Means doing 70-75mph in a 55 zone, 80 in a 70 zone, etc... or running the risk of being "ran off the road".

I always found it interesting how people think their area is somewhat unique when it comes to speeding.  The fact is, EVERY area has people going faster than the speed limit.

As for being run off the road, while many people think that the speed they're doing is the speed everyone is doing, there are actually people going 55 or 60 mph out there too.  If you're finding yourself passing more people than are passing you, you're just driving faster. 

Funny enough, today is speed awareness day in Illinois where ISP will be cracking down on speeding. Curious to see how that goes.

They'll have a press release saying they pulled over X number of vehicles.  The media will make mention of it.  But when there's so many vehicles going 15 or 20 mph over the limit, they're not looking for the guy going 5 mph over, or even 10 mph over.

If they really wanted to bring in revenue, they wouldn't announce a crackdown on speeding.  They would just do it.  It's more publicity to try to get people to slow down.

[SP Cook]

If they really wanted to bring in revenue, they wouldn't announce a crackdown on speeding.  They would just do it.  It's more publicity to try to get people to slow down.

Well, not exactly.  It is mostly to reinforce the incorrect belief that underposted SLs "save lives" and more broadly that SL enforcement is about "safety" rather than money and power.   So every so often they announce some idiotic "crackdown" and send Trooper Tommy out to spew about "safety" and other such.  It keeps the useful idiots that believe in underposted SLs in their corner. 

No reporter in these situations has ever had the sense, or courage, to ask Trooper Tommy why the doom and gloom predictions of what would happen when the NMSL was repealed were DEAD WRONG; or why if driving at the SL "saves lives", he never does so.

[vdeane]

Has nothing to do with Northeastern states.  Has everything to do with how Maryland chooses to post the speed limit on that particular roadway.

There is a definite paradigm in the states in the greater northeast region of the country that nothing with at-grades can ever have a speed limit higher than 55.

[sprjus4]

Has nothing to do with Northeastern states.  Has everything to do with how Maryland chooses to post the speed limit on that particular roadway.

There is a definite paradigm in the states in the greater northeast region of the country that nothing with at-grades can ever have a speed limit higher than 55.

I wonder if any state will ever change that to make a reasonable speed limit on at-grades.

I'm hoping Maryland would be the first. Those interstate-standard, limited-access roadways (again with the exception of those intersections) can easily handle 65 or 70 mph.

Its neighbor West Virginia allows 65 mph on those roads. Virginia allows at least 60 mph on divided roads (it should be 65 mph, but 60 mph is better than 55 mph)

[jeffandnicole]

Has nothing to do with Northeastern states.  Has everything to do with how Maryland chooses to post the speed limit on that particular roadway.

There is a definite paradigm in the states in the greater northeast region of the country that nothing with at-grades can ever have a speed limit higher than 55.

I wonder if any state will ever change that to make a reasonable speed limit on at-grades.

I'm hoping Maryland would be the first. Those interstate-standard, limited-access roadways (again with the exception of those intersections) can easily handle 65 or 70 mph.

Its neighbor West Virginia allows 65 mph on those roads. Virginia allows at least 60 mph on divided roads (it should be 65 mph, but 60 mph is better than 55 mph)

While that's mostly true, the Northeast region is also the oldest and the most populated region in the country.  In the 11 states from Maryland and PA North and east to Maine, the size of the land is about 200,000 square miles.  Texas alone is nearly 270,000 square miles.  Yet, in those 11 states, there's over 62 million people, compares to about 30 million people in Texas.

So while it appears that the Northeast is against non-highways going above 55 mph, the reality of the situation is there are so few roads that would technically qualify that most states don't bother. 

As it was, when the Northeast states started allowing 65 mph, it basically allowed all vehicles to go 65 mph. Yet, in many other states to the south and west, trucks were limited to 55 mph at the time!  You can be sure that when the 14-lane wide NJ Turnpike allowed trucks to go 65 mph, yet other states such as Ohio only permitted trucks to go 55 mph, that certainly raised some eyebrows!

And while Texas is an easy state to compare to, other states are much more restrictive.  Largely rural Montana only allowed 65 mph max limits for trucks on all roadways and on non-interstate highways for cars; the same max speed limit found on many non-interstate highways in the Northeast.  And truckers were limited to 60 mph day/55 mph night limits on non-interstate highways...SLOWER than most other states!  Just this year they slightly increased those limits.

[sprjus4]

the reality of the situation is there are so few roads that would technically qualify that most states don't bother.

I would disagree. Maryland has a handful of long-distance arterials that can handle it, even some of the non-limited-access ones could be 65 mph.

[kphoger]

the reality of the situation is there are so few roads that would technically qualify that most states don't bother.

I would disagree. Maryland has a handful of long-distance arterials that can handle it, even some of the non-limited-access ones could be 65 mph.

What you said does not contradict the previous statement.  Maryland may simply consider "a handful" and "some" to be not worth the bother.

[sprjus4]

the reality of the situation is there are so few roads that would technically qualify that most states don't bother.

I would disagree. Maryland has a handful of long-distance arterials that can handle it, even some of the non-limited-access ones could be 65 mph.

What you said does not contradict the previous statement.  Maryland may simply consider "a handful" and "some" to be not worth the bother.

I've counted at least 109 miles of limited-access, at-grade rural divided highways with interstate-cross-sections in Maryland that could all qualify for 65 mph. And plenty more of the non-limited-access highways could be evaluated to determine how safe they would perform at 60 or 65 mph.

Also keep in mind, plenty of the 109 miles of limited-access highway currently have average speeds of 65 - 70 mph, so that alone should be a reason to raise it. 55 mph is absurdly low.