There are 7 NE states were the speed limit still remains at 65. VT,MA,RI,CT,NY,NJ along with DE(sometimes not considered northeast) that have never raised the speed limit since the 90's. Will any of them ever do so or we can assume that will just always be the remaining holdouts?
I would think that VT could raise their speed limit. NY could also do it in many "Upstate" areas. The other states are too congested.
It is interesting to note that before the 55 MPH national speed limit, the speed limit on the Atlantic City Expressway was 70 MPH.
Honestly, I'd say that all of the 65 states have at least some section of road where they could raise the limit. Whether they would is the question. There have been bills in CT, MA, and NY. All have failed.
I'd like to see something like what Maine did in Vermont... go up 5 mph on all accounts. For I-91, I'd keep it at 65 up to just past Exit 3, then go to 70 and keep it that way the whole way up (except in White River Jct where it'd drop to 60). All of I-89's present 65 mph zones would go to 70, and the 55mph zone in Burlington would go to 60 (or kept at 55).
I'm still not sure why, in NH, I-89 didn't get bumped up to 70, from outside Concord to outside Lebanon.
I could see New Jersey doing it... though if so it would probably happen like how Pennsylvania did it, slipped into a larger bill.
Delaware is unlikely because they like their ability to ticket out of staters while giving their own folks leeway, and don't have all that much mileage currently at 65 anyway.
Vermont is unlikely along the same lines, the locals are just fine with the speed limits as they are and resent out of staters complaining about them being too low.
Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island are steady habit central and won't do anything unless enough neighboring jurisdictions demonstrate that raising the speed limit by 5 MPH doesn't make everyone drive 5 MPH faster like everyone seems to think it does.
And New York will have a really hard time convincing downstate politicians to vote for an increase, especially with the whole "vision zero" mindset.
Gov. Christie's term ends this year in NJ. I'll like to see a bill introduced and passed raising the limit to 70, just to see if he'll sign it.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on July 25, 2017, 06:58:54 PM
I would think that VT could raise their speed limit. NY could also do it in many "Upstate" areas. The other states are too congested.
It is interesting to note that before the 55 MPH national speed limit, the speed limit on the Atlantic City Expressway was 70 MPH.
I could see Vermont doing it probably the most likely of all because it's the least populous. NY I highly doubt it they didn't even go to 65 until about 2000. I believe NY,CT and NJ were the last to go 65.
Connecticut is a very driver-friendly, pro-freeway state and I can see all of CT 11 going to 70 MPH when the southern segment is completed. Other new freeway segments in rural areas that could go to 70 are: CT 25 between CT 111 and I-84; US 6/I-384 from Bolton to Willimantic; and US 44 from I-291 out to CT 8 /s
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 25, 2017, 09:53:39 PM
Gov. Christie's term ends this year in NJ. I'll like to see a bill introduced and passed raising the limit to 70, just to see if he'll sign it.
If that were to happen; you can bet your bottom dollar that NJ101.5 FM would pressure him to sign it, just like they pressured Whitman sign the bill to raise the limit to 65 many years ago.
Quote from: shadyjayI'm still not sure why, in NH, I-89 didn't get bumped up to 70, from outside Concord to outside Lebanon.
I vaguely recall that the bill approving 70 MPH in NH limited that approval to I-93.
Quote from: Duke87Vermont is unlikely along the same lines, the locals are just fine with the speed limits as they are and resent out of staters complaining about them being too low.
This may be the case amongst the older locals, but not everybody. I would also venture a guess that one reason why Vermont keeps it at 65 is to reduce the speed differential. We have
*A LOT* of up and down grade changes, which makes it hell on the trucks.
All of Upstate should be at 70 except within Williamsville-Lackawanna (65).
If only Downstate politicians knew how slow 65 really is up here...
Quote from: Duke87 on July 25, 2017, 09:52:59 PM
I could see New Jersey doing it... though if so it would probably happen like how Pennsylvania did it, slipped into a larger bill.
Delaware is unlikely because they like their ability to ticket out of staters while giving their own folks leeway, and don't have all that much mileage currently at 65 anyway.
Agreed with Jersey given how their government works.
Also the freeway portion of DE 1 as well as I-95 (outside of Wilmington) and I-495 should be 70 MPH. There's plenty of mileage on all three of those roads that would benefit from it.
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 26, 2017, 11:50:37 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on July 25, 2017, 09:52:59 PM
I could see New Jersey doing it... though if so it would probably happen like how Pennsylvania did it, slipped into a larger bill.
Delaware is unlikely because they like their ability to ticket out of staters while giving their own folks leeway, and don't have all that much mileage currently at 65 anyway.
Agreed with Jersey given how their government works.
That's not how it works in NJ. They probably would've done it already. The last speed limit change was an actual bill to raise the limit.
Quote from: Duke87 on July 25, 2017, 09:52:59 PM
Delaware is unlikely because they like their ability to ticket out of staters while giving their own folks leeway, and don't have all that much mileage currently at 65 anyway.
Honestly, that doesn't make any sense. They just raised the speed limit on the portion of I-95 driven by most out-of-staters from 55 to 65 mph. If they like their ability to ticket out of staters, they would've left that limit at 55. And for what it's worth, I rarely see cops pulling people over on that road.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 26, 2017, 12:24:50 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 26, 2017, 11:50:37 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on July 25, 2017, 09:52:59 PM
I could see New Jersey doing it... though if so it would probably happen like how Pennsylvania did it, slipped into a larger bill.
Delaware is unlikely because they like their ability to ticket out of staters while giving their own folks leeway, and don't have all that much mileage currently at 65 anyway.
Agreed with Jersey given how their government works.
That's not how it works in NJ. They probably would've done it already. The last speed limit change was an actual bill to raise the limit.
Quote from: Duke87 on July 25, 2017, 09:52:59 PM
Delaware is unlikely because they like their ability to ticket out of staters while giving their own folks leeway, and don't have all that much mileage currently at 65 anyway.
Honestly, that doesn't make any sense. They just raised the speed limit on the portion of I-95 driven by most out-of-staters from 55 to 65 mph. If they like their ability to ticket out of staters, they would've left that limit at 55. And for what it's worth, I rarely see cops pulling people over on that road.
Agreed. I commute into DE every day from PA and I can count on one hand the number of times I have seen police in DE running radar.
Quote from: froggie on July 26, 2017, 09:15:34 AM
I vaguely recall that the bill approving 70 MPH in NH limited that approval to I-93.
A bill was introduced a year later to raise I-89 and NH 101. It never went anywhere, unfortunately. I-89 doesn't strike me as being much different from parts of the I-93 70 mph zones.
Quote from: MASTERNC on July 26, 2017, 08:22:04 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 26, 2017, 12:24:50 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 26, 2017, 11:50:37 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on July 25, 2017, 09:52:59 PM
I could see New Jersey doing it... though if so it would probably happen like how Pennsylvania did it, slipped into a larger bill.
Delaware is unlikely because they like their ability to ticket out of staters while giving their own folks leeway, and don't have all that much mileage currently at 65 anyway.
Agreed with Jersey given how their government works.
That's not how it works in NJ. They probably would've done it already. The last speed limit change was an actual bill to raise the limit.
Quote from: Duke87 on July 25, 2017, 09:52:59 PM
Delaware is unlikely because they like their ability to ticket out of staters while giving their own folks leeway, and don't have all that much mileage currently at 65 anyway.
Honestly, that doesn't make any sense. They just raised the speed limit on the portion of I-95 driven by most out-of-staters from 55 to 65 mph. If they like their ability to ticket out of staters, they would've left that limit at 55. And for what it's worth, I rarely see cops pulling people over on that road.
Agreed. I commute into DE every day from PA and I can count on one hand the number of times I have seen police in DE running radar.
That's funny, because I see it a lot. Maybe because I'm always there on weekends or holidays when the most out-of-staters are there...
Just drove that section of 95 in the truck, i'm governed at 65, but i have a traffic radar on the truck, and it picked up people doing 70,80 and one person even doing 90.
Mass could do it west of Springfield where the exits are scattered miles apart.
CT has no 55 off freeways and ditto for VT. US 7 is a super two so it don't count, but both would be least likely to go 70 especially with US 7 in CT being mostly 40 where it should be 55 or at least 50 mph in its rural stretches.
NJ south of Toms River and north of the ACE along with NJ 55 and the ACE. I-80 west of US 206 and east of NJ 94 could use be 70 and the NJ Turnpike south of Exit 4 for sure.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on July 25, 2017, 06:58:54 PM
I would think that VT could raise their speed limit. NY could also do it in many "Upstate" areas. The other states are too congested.
Congestion is not an excuse for a lower speed limit.
Quote from: froggie on July 26, 2017, 09:15:34 AM
This may be the case amongst the older locals, but not everybody. I would also venture a guess that one reason why Vermont keeps it at 65 is to reduce the speed differential. We have *A LOT* of up and down grade changes, which makes it hell on the trucks.
Somehow Colorado and Utah manage just fine.
Quote from: Brandon on July 28, 2017, 05:46:43 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on July 25, 2017, 06:58:54 PM
I would think that VT could raise their speed limit. NY could also do it in many "Upstate" areas. The other states are too congested.
Congestion is not an excuse for a lower speed limit.
Quote from: froggie on July 26, 2017, 09:15:34 AM
This may be the case amongst the older locals, but not everybody. I would also venture a guess that one reason why Vermont keeps it at 65 is to reduce the speed differential. We have *A LOT* of up and down grade changes, which makes it hell on the trucks.
Somehow Colorado and Utah manage just fine.
A few stretches that are currently 65 in New England (excluding Maine) and New York State that I could see going to 70:
I-84 from east of Exit 65 in CT to Exit 2 in MA
I-87 Thruway Exit 16-23, then Northway Exit 9 to the Canadian border except through Plattsburgh
I-89 entire length except through White River Junction and the Burlington area
I-90 on Thruway except for Lackawanna-Williamsville and from 25A to 24. Free 90 east of the Hudson. Berkshire Spur and Mass Pike west of I-84.
I-91 from Exit 20 in MA to the Canadian border except through White River Junction
I-95 from Exit 88 in CT to Exit 9 in RI. Then all of MA except 128 portion
I-195 east of New Bedford
I-295 from Exit 3 in RI to Exit 1 in MA
I-384 east of Exit 1 to the end
I-395 in CT north of Exit 13 to the Mass Pike.
Stretches that are currently 55 that should go to 65:
I-84 in CT from Exit 25A-33, then Exit 36-41
CT 8 from the Merritt Parkway to Exit 25
US 7 from I-84 to end of expressway
LIE East of Exit 40
NY 27 east of Heckscher Parkway
Taconic Parkway north of I-84
I-93 portion in NH just north of the MA border.
Connecticut considered 75 in a bill once, but that was quickly killed. We were the last Eastern state to adopt 65, and at the speed our legislature moves (except to raise taxes and spend like drunken sailors) and some of the ludicrously low speeds on secondary roads (25 on a couple of state highways not in downtown areas), we'll be the last to raise above 65.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 28, 2017, 06:23:40 PM
I-93 portion in NH just north of the MA border.
This segment has electronic speed limit signs that usually say 65. (I have seen them say 55, but 65 is much more common.)
Quote
NJ south of Toms River and north of the ACE along with NJ 55 and the ACE. I-80 west of US 206 and east of NJ 94 could use be 70 and the NJ Turnpike south of Exit 4 for sure.
Because it's only 2 lane per direction, the section between 1 & 4 seems to actually have lower speeds than North of there. I would say easily up to Exit 6 would qualify, and probably up to Exit 8A.
Parts of I-295 may qualify too.
As has been posted elsewhere, US-3 in MA between I-95/MA 128 and the NH border, now posted at 55, really ought to be posted at least at 65, and 70 wouldn't be a huge stretch either. According to several news accounts, the State Police vetoed the idea. (Gee, I wonder why?$?$?$?)
The road's design makes it, effectively, a 19 mile long speed trap.
Quote from: roadman65CT has no 55 off freeways and ditto for VT.
This is not true. There are segments of US 2 (N of Burlington and W of St. J), US 7 (Wallingford-Rutland), and VT 63 that are non-freeways but still 55. A better way to say what you were trying to is that Vermont doesn't allow a speed higher than 55 on roads that are not a 4-lane freeway.
Quote from: froggie on July 29, 2017, 06:08:23 PM
Quote from: roadman65CT has no 55 off freeways and ditto for VT.
This is not true. There are segments of US 2 (N of Burlington and W of St. J), US 7 (Wallingford-Rutland), and VT 63 that are non-freeways but still 55. A better way to say what you were trying to is that Vermont doesn't allow a speed higher than 55 on roads that are not a 4-lane freeway.
Yes. The rule of thumb for VT is that super-twos and 4 lane at-grade expressways are 55, 4-lane freeways are 65 outside of urban areas and 55 in urban areas, everything else 50 in rural areas. Most of US 7 between Bennington and Rutland is 55 and virtually none of it is a 4-lane freeway.
Quote from: SidS1045 on July 28, 2017, 09:48:45 PM
As has been posted elsewhere, US-3 in MA between I-95/MA 128 and the NH border, now posted at 55, really ought to be posted at least at 65, and 70 wouldn't be a huge stretch either. According to several news accounts, the State Police vetoed the idea. (Gee, I wonder why?$?$?$?)
The road's design makes it, effectively, a 19 mile long speed trap.
I have thought that forever.
Quote from: froggie on July 29, 2017, 06:08:23 PM
Quote from: roadman65CT has no 55 off freeways and ditto for VT.
This is not true. There are segments of US 2 (N of Burlington and W of St. J), US 7 (Wallingford-Rutland), and VT 63 that are non-freeways but still 55. A better way to say what you were trying to is that Vermont doesn't allow a speed higher than 55 on roads that are not a 4-lane freeway.
This does fit in with my understanding, though, that VT will not post 55 without some form of access control. Those sections of 2, 7, and 63 may have at-grade intersections, but they do not have driveways.
That is correct. But to say that there are no non-freeway 55 segments as roadman did is false.
Quote from: roadman65 on July 28, 2017, 12:03:00 PM
CT has no 55 off freeways and ditto for VT.
State law does allow for non-freeway SRs to have 55mph speed limits but CONNDOT just hasn't handed any out.
people do 80 as it is on the LIE, might as well up the speed limit to reflect how people actually drive.
Why is the LIE still 55 considering NYS having other freeways outside the city areas at 65? Even if its just Suffolk that would be sufficient and include NY 27 where controlled access as well.
Quote from: roadman65 on August 01, 2017, 09:07:08 PM
Why is the LIE still 55 considering NYS having other freeways outside the city areas at 65? Even if its just Suffolk that would be sufficient and include NY 27 where controlled access as well.
Because Long Island is physically difficult to leave, so the population there is culturally stuck in a sort of modern Plato's cave.
Most of the rest of the country has seen speed limits higher than 55 many times and doesn't think too much of them. But Long Islanders have not, and are unwilling to accept them because the world as they know it chained to the wall of their
cave island does not feature them as a valid concept.
I truly see New Jersey raising the speed limit up to 70. When ? That is yet to be determined. When New Jersey DOES raise the speed limit to 70. ONLY certain parts of some of the interstates and parts of the Garden State Parkway , Atlantic City Expressway and the N.J. Turnpike will see 70. Here's how I could see it happen.
Interstate 195 (Between I-295 and the G.S. Parkway) 70
Interstate 295 (Between Trenton and the N.J. Turnpike / Del. Mem. Br.) 70
Interstate 78 (Between the NJ/PA Border to EXIT 29 at I-287) 70
(Then from EXIT 29 to Hillside-Irvington Exit) 65
Interstate 80 (Between Del. Water Gap and EXIT 53 at Rt. 46) 70
(From EXIT 53 Wayne to EXIT 68 at I-95 NJ Turnpike - G Washington Br.) 60
Interstate 280 (Between Parsippany at I-80 and EXIT 9) 70
(From EXIT 11 to the NJ Turnpike) 55 (50 in Newark)
Interstate 287 (From the NJ/NY Line at the Thruway and Rt 17 to the NJ Turnpike in Edison) 70
Ok . Here come the big kids!!
Garden State Parkway: 65 between the NJ/NY Border at the NY Thruway to the Essex Toll Plaza.
60 between EXIT 149 and the Union Toll Plaza at EXIT 142
65 between EXIT 140 and EXIT 129 NJ Turnpike
70 from EXITS 129 On down.
Atlantic City Expressway (Between the NJ Turnpike and Atlantic City) 70 the whole stretch.
N.J. Turnpike: From Del. Mem Br. (I-295) to EXIT 11 (G.S. Parkway) 70
From EXIT 11 to EXIT 13A (Newark Airport-Elizabeth) 65
From EXIT 14 to EXITS 16W and 16E (E. Rutherford - Lincoln Tunnel) 60
And to I-80 , Rt 46 G. Washington Bridge (55)
I could see this in New Jersey. They drive fast anyway.
Here is my amended version of your list, based on NJ.
Interstate 195 - Between NJ Turnpike and NJ 34. Definitely not 70 west of Tpk. due to exit density and volume.
Interstate 295 - Between Exit 2 and Exit 13. Then you get into the old 130 section and forget it, on through the traffic and curves of Camden area. MAYBE between Exit 40 and Exit 57.
Interstate 78 - Exits 18-40. The big curve around Alpha would be a short 70 if the DRJTBC does it at all - separate jurisdiction and all. Then I don't expect anything on the US 22 concurrency, with a lot of traffic and exits. East of I-287 you still have a good roadway until the exits and traffic get dense again starting at 40.
Interstate 80 - I laugh at your water gap. Exits 4-25, and probably east of the first big hill past Exit 4. Exits 25-28 are staying where they are due to Netcong. You might see Exits 28-34 up to 70, but then back to 65 as you hit the dense exits with 4 lanes each way, and never again at 70 (I don't see it happening in the curve through Fairfield).
Interstate 280 - No. The traffic and geometry are not conducive anywhere.
Interstate 287 - HAHAHAHAHAHA. Between exit density, geometry, number of lanes, and traffic, you're not getting 70 mph at least to Exit 47 - only to drop it again at Exit 52? And with all the traffic in the two lanes north of Exit 59, I will bet you the answer is not at all.
Garden State Parkway - Exits 0-36, Exits 41-80, Exits 83-102, then the Express Roadways (not Locals, to keep through traffic in the inner lanes). 70 mph ends at the merge. You won't see it again. Too much exit density and curvature near the NY state line.
Atlantic City Expressway - Almost. 70 mph from the NJ 42 split to the Garden State Parkway, but then no because of median parking.
N.J. Turnpike - I think you'll only see it up to Exit 9, since 9-10-11 are relatively close and high volume. The Westerly Alignment is a candidate for at least 65 once a lane is added (if that ever happens).
Quote from: EricJV95 on August 02, 2017, 09:45:00 PM
I truly see New Jersey raising the speed limit up to 70. When ? That is yet to be determined. When New Jersey DOES raise the speed limit to 70. ONLY certain parts of some of the interstates and parts of the Garden State Parkway , Atlantic City Expressway and the N.J. Turnpike will see 70.
I think that if the PA Turnpike can be 70, pretty much anything can be 70, or at least 65, as long as the exits aren't too dense.
You know before the national 55 north Jersey was only 60 on many 65 mph roads, so its possible with the demands of our fast paced society that we could easily see 70 in the Garden State. Only 65 was on the Parkway south of Toms River and I can't say for sure if any part of the Turnpike was even above 60, but my dad claims south of Bordentown the speed limit was 65 mph. My memory is vague but I want to say I saw all the neon speed limit signs say 60 in all locations, but that was so long ago. The Parkway on the other hand I know was 60 in Clark where I grew up as I remember when the law took effect the then NJDOT just covered up the 60 with 55 instead of replacing the whole sign.
Quote from: Duke87 on August 02, 2017, 12:07:59 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 01, 2017, 09:07:08 PM
Why is the LIE still 55 considering NYS having other freeways outside the city areas at 65? Even if its just Suffolk that would be sufficient and include NY 27 where controlled access as well.
Because Long Island is physically difficult to leave, so the population there is culturally stuck in a sort of modern Plato's cave.
Most of the rest of the country has seen speed limits higher than 55 many times and doesn't think too much of them. But Long Islanders have not, and are unwilling to accept them because the world as they know it chained to the wall of their cave island does not feature them as a valid concept.
I've never seen it ever come to a vote down here. Plus most people dont do exactly 55 on the highways here anyway. Average speeds is like 70-75 on 495 and 135 and 65-70 on the parkways
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on July 25, 2017, 06:58:54 PM
I would think that VT could raise their speed limit. NY could also do it in many "Upstate" areas. The other states are too congested.
It is interesting to note that before the 55 MPH national speed limit, the speed limit on the Atlantic City Expressway was 70 MPH.
I don't see why congestion is an issue. The Netherlands, France, and Luxembourg have 130km (80 mph) speed limits on interstate equivalent roads,and Belgium has mostly 120 km (75mph) limits; those are some of the most densely populated countries on earth. The UK has 70 mph limits, even the heavily congested M25 around London. And Germany (also a very dense country by US standards) has no speed limits for a large portion of their autobahn network, and those segments that do have limits are typically 120 (75 mph) or 130 (80 mph). These roads do have significant congestion not only at rush hour but also throughout the day, especially during holidays, and obviously people slow down then, but I don't see why you have to have the almost non-existent traffic volume that Montana or Wyoming experiences to have 80 mph limits when traffic permits it.
In Dallas US 75 within the city limits is at 70 mph. I saw it while watching my youtube video as the 70 mph is plain clear. Now maybe in Houston even 45 mph would be too high as traffic is mostly a standstill on IH 45 most times of the day things to population concentration and developers extending the metro Houston area to what it is now to require more autos.
However, Dallas has it in practice there at least. So its not impossible to have it done. Heck I do 75 on I-4 when the road was empty pre ultimate construction right in downtown Orlando.
Quote from: stwoodbury on August 04, 2017, 12:30:22 AM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on July 25, 2017, 06:58:54 PM
I would think that VT could raise their speed limit. NY could also do it in many "Upstate" areas. The other states are too congested.
It is interesting to note that before the 55 MPH national speed limit, the speed limit on the Atlantic City Expressway was 70 MPH.
I don't see why congestion is an issue. The Netherlands, France, and Luxembourg have 130km (80 mph) speed limits on interstate equivalent roads,and Belgium has mostly 120 km (75mph) limits; those are some of the most densely populated countries on earth. The UK has 70 mph limits, even the heavily congested M25 around London. And Germany (also a very dense country by US standards) has no speed limits for a large portion of their autobahn network, and those segments that do have limits are typically 120 (75 mph) or 130 (80 mph). These roads do have significant congestion not only at rush hour but also throughout the day, especially during holidays, and obviously people slow down then, but I don't see why you have to have the almost non-existent traffic volume that Montana or Wyoming experiences to have 80 mph limits when traffic permits it.
Simply put: The US isn't the UK, Germany, Netherlands, France, and Luxembourg. People's opinions and ideals over here are different when it comes to speed limits.
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 26, 2017, 11:50:37 AMI-95 (outside of Wilmington) ... should be 70 MPH.
How about 95 through Wilmington?
ixnay
Quote from: ixnay on August 05, 2017, 08:56:05 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 26, 2017, 11:50:37 AMI-95 (outside of Wilmington) ... should be 70 MPH.
How about 95 through Wilmington?
ixnay
There was once an old sign on 95 north of Wilmington where a 5 was posted over a 0, signifying the speed limit was *increased* from 50 to 55 on 95 in the Wilmington area!
You may be able to get 60 in some areas, especially on the viaduct south of Wilmington. North of Wilmington, there's actually some surprisingly sharp curves. I don't foresee them ever raising that speed limit.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 05, 2017, 09:05:03 AM
Quote from: ixnay on August 05, 2017, 08:56:05 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 26, 2017, 11:50:37 AMI-95 (outside of Wilmington) ... should be 70 MPH.
How about 95 through Wilmington?
ixnay
There was once an old sign on 95 north of Wilmington where a 5 was posted over a 0, signifying the speed limit was *increased* from 50 to 55 on 95 in the Wilmington area!
You may be able to get 60 in some areas, especially on the viaduct south of Wilmington. North of Wilmington, there's actually some surprisingly sharp curves. I don't foresee them ever raising that speed limit.
Also part of the reason 495 is 65 is to encourage through traffic to use it over 95. 95 through Wilmington is an absolute parking lot during rush hours. If you're trying to pass through, it's not the best option to take.
How come I never see 60 mph in any of the northeastern states? There are several stretches of road that are 55 mph that could easily be raised to more, with low volume and little to no curves.
Agreed that several roads in NJ and NY can be increased to 70 mph. The northern part of the NJ Turnpike seems to have too much traffic for 70, but the southern end, I'd say from either exit 10 or 9 down to exit 1 would be better flowing at 70 mph. Nobody goes the posted speed anymore anyway. The NY Thruway can also be raised in some areas, most likely north of I-84.
Quote from: J Route Z on August 05, 2017, 04:44:23 PM
How come I never see 60 mph in any of the northeastern states? There are several stretches of road that are 55 mph that could easily be raised to more, with low volume and little to no curves.
60 mph seems to be extremely rare, but MA 3 south of Boston is one segment with a speed limit of 60.
Quote from: J Route Z on August 05, 2017, 04:44:23 PM
How come I never see 60 mph in any of the northeastern states? There are several stretches of road that are 55 mph that could easily be raised to more, with low volume and little to no curves.
Agreed that several roads in NJ and NY can be increased to 70 mph. The northern part of the NJ Turnpike seems to have too much traffic for 70, but the southern end, I'd say from either exit 10 or 9 down to exit 1 would be better flowing at 70 mph. Nobody goes the posted speed anymore anyway. The NY Thruway can also be raised in some areas, most likely north of I-84.
In NJ, 65 was only authorized on certain freeway segments, and everything else was still capped at 55. There was therefore never an opportunity to post 60.
Quote from: J Route Z on August 05, 2017, 04:44:23 PM
How come I never see 60 mph in any of the northeastern states? There are several stretches of road that are 55 mph that could easily be raised to more, with low volume and little to no curves.
I was corrected when I brought this up myself. MA 3 is 60 MPH on a stretch between Sagamore and Braintree. I haven't seen it myself, but I saw a sign in GSV. Personally, I haven't seen one otherwise north and east of Maryland (there's a stretch on I-83 near Hunt Valley that is 60 MPH. I can think of a few stretches in CT where 60 would be appropriate: I-84 between Exits 25A and 33, and between 36 and 41, CT 25 north from the CT 8 split, CT 8 between the 25 split and Naugatuck, US 7 north of I-84, and the Wilbur Cross Parkway south of the I-91 split to the Sikorsky Bridge.
Quote from: Alps on August 05, 2017, 04:51:59 PM
Quote from: J Route Z on August 05, 2017, 04:44:23 PM
How come I never see 60 mph in any of the northeastern states? There are several stretches of road that are 55 mph that could easily be raised to more, with low volume and little to no curves.
Agreed that several roads in NJ and NY can be increased to 70 mph. The northern part of the NJ Turnpike seems to have too much traffic for 70, but the southern end, I'd say from either exit 10 or 9 down to exit 1 would be better flowing at 70 mph. Nobody goes the posted speed anymore anyway. The NY Thruway can also be raised in some areas, most likely north of I-84.
In NJ, 65 was only authorized on certain freeway segments, and everything else was still capped at 55. There was therefore never an opportunity to post 60.
The AC Expressway did have a 60 mph construction limit posted in a construction zone near Exit 41. That's the only time one has been offically been posted on the state.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 05, 2017, 04:53:52 PM
Quote from: J Route Z on August 05, 2017, 04:44:23 PM
How come I never see 60 mph in any of the northeastern states? There are several stretches of road that are 55 mph that could easily be raised to more, with low volume and little to no curves.
I was corrected when I brought this up myself. MA 3 is 60 MPH on a stretch between Sagamore and Braintree. I haven't seen it myself, but I saw a sign in GSV. Personally, I haven't seen one otherwise north and east of Maryland (there's a stretch on I-83 near Hunt Valley that is 60 MPH. I can think of a few stretches in CT where 60 would be appropriate: I-84 between Exits 25A and 33, and between 36 and 41, CT 25 north from the CT 8 split, CT 8 between the 25 split and Naugatuck, US 7 north of I-84, and the Wilbur Cross Parkway south of the I-91 split to the Sikorsky Bridge.
Most states do 10 mph intervals.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 05, 2017, 09:05:03 AM
Quote from: ixnay on August 05, 2017, 08:56:05 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 26, 2017, 11:50:37 AMI-95 (outside of Wilmington) ... should be 70 MPH.
How about 95 through Wilmington?
ixnay
There was once an old sign on 95 north of Wilmington where a 5 was posted over a 0, signifying the speed limit was *increased* from 50 to 55 on 95 in the Wilmington area!
I meant what *should* 95's speed limit be through Wilmington city?
ixnay
Quote from: J Route Z on August 05, 2017, 04:44:23 PM
How come I never see 60 mph in any of the northeastern states?
A few years ago when Maine rose the speed limits on I-95 south of Bangor, everything went up by 5 MPH. So what was 65 MPH is now 70 MPH (except Waterville and Augusta) and what was 55 MPH is now 60 MPH, including through Portland. Some of I-395 from I-95 eastward is 60 MPH, before it goes up to 65 MPH, then ends at 1A.
But you're correct, elsewhere, 60 mph is quite elusive (except the aforemtioned Route 3).
And no... the Wilbur Cross shouldn't be anything higher than 55, despite the fact that noone goes that speed.
Quote from: ixnay on August 06, 2017, 08:09:41 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 05, 2017, 09:05:03 AM
Quote from: ixnay on August 05, 2017, 08:56:05 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 26, 2017, 11:50:37 AMI-95 (outside of Wilmington) ... should be 70 MPH.
How about 95 through Wilmington?
ixnay
There was once an old sign on 95 north of Wilmington where a 5 was posted over a 0, signifying the speed limit was *increased* from 50 to 55 on 95 in the Wilmington area!
I meant what *should* 95's speed limit be through Wilmington city?
ixnay
That was getting at that 55 is probably appropriate. Maybe 60 outside the downtown area.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 06, 2017, 09:43:26 AM
Quote from: ixnay on August 06, 2017, 08:09:41 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 05, 2017, 09:05:03 AM
Quote from: ixnay on August 05, 2017, 08:56:05 AM
Quote from: ekt8750 on July 26, 2017, 11:50:37 AMI-95 (outside of Wilmington) ... should be 70 MPH.
How about 95 through Wilmington?
ixnay
There was once an old sign on 95 north of Wilmington where a 5 was posted over a 0, signifying the speed limit was *increased* from 50 to 55 on 95 in the Wilmington area!
I meant what *should* 95's speed limit be through Wilmington city?
ixnay
That was getting at that 55 is probably appropriate. Maybe 60 outside the downtown area.
Mmmhmmm. The state line to 202 segment could handle 60-65.
Also while technically not a state, they control quite a bit of highway miles in the Philadelphia area, I don't see anything in DRPA territory being raised over their magic 45 MPH limit. Not so long as they continue to hemorrhage money the way they do.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 28, 2017, 06:23:40 PM
Quote from: Brandon on July 28, 2017, 05:46:43 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on July 25, 2017, 06:58:54 PM
I would think that VT could raise their speed limit. NY could also do it in many "Upstate" areas. The other states are too congested.
Congestion is not an excuse for a lower speed limit.
Quote from: froggie on July 26, 2017, 09:15:34 AM
This may be the case amongst the older locals, but not everybody. I would also venture a guess that one reason why Vermont keeps it at 65 is to reduce the speed differential. We have *A LOT* of up and down grade changes, which makes it hell on the trucks.
Somehow Colorado and Utah manage just fine.
A few stretches that are currently 65 in New England (excluding Maine) and New York State that I could see going to 70:
I-84 from east of Exit 65 in CT to Exit 2 in MA
I-87 Thruway Exit 16-23, then Northway Exit 9 to the Canadian border except through Plattsburgh
I-89 entire length except through White River Junction and the Burlington area
I-90 on Thruway except for Lackawanna-Williamsville and from 25A to 24. Free 90 east of the Hudson. Berkshire Spur and Mass Pike west of I-84.
I-91 from Exit 20 in MA to the Canadian border except through White River Junction
I-95 from Exit 88 in CT to Exit 9 in RI. Then all of MA except 128 portion
I-195 east of New Bedford
I-295 from Exit 3 in RI to Exit 1 in MA
I-384 east of Exit 1 to the end
I-395 in CT north of Exit 13 to the Mass Pike.
Stretches that are currently 55 that should go to 65:
I-84 in CT from Exit 25A-33, then Exit 36-41
CT 8 from the Merritt Parkway to Exit 25
US 7 from I-84 to end of expressway
LIE East of Exit 40
NY 27 east of Heckscher Parkway
Taconic Parkway north of I-84
I-93 portion in NH just north of the MA border.
Connecticut considered 75 in a bill once, but that was quickly killed. We were the last Eastern state to adopt 65, and at the speed our legislature moves (except to raise taxes and spend like drunken sailors) and some of the ludicrously low speeds on secondary roads (25 on a couple of state highways not in downtown areas), we'll be the last to raise above 65.
You don't think the area inside of the Lackawanna-Williamsville barrier should be 65?
Quote from: ekt8750 on August 06, 2017, 10:23:23 PM
Also while technically not a state, they control quite a bit of highway miles in the Philadelphia area, I don't see anything in DRPA territory being raised over their magic 45 MPH limit. Not so long as they continue to hemorrhage money the way they do.
As irritating as it is, I really don't see them doing much speed enforcement, with generally high allowances. It does suck that it's a constant worry, but traffic moving at 60-65 on 76 doesn't appeared to be bothered, and keeping it under 60 on 322 and 90 appears to be fine as well.
Also, I don't think the DRPA is hemorrhaging money at all...especially since they cut out funding every politician's pet project. The toll rate of $5 has been consistent for several years now.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 07, 2017, 02:11:53 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on August 06, 2017, 10:23:23 PM
Also while technically not a state, they control quite a bit of highway miles in the Philadelphia area, I don't see anything in DRPA territory being raised over their magic 45 MPH limit. Not so long as they continue to hemorrhage money the way they do.
As irritating as it is, I really don't see them doing much speed enforcement, with generally high allowances. It does suck that it's a constant worry, but traffic moving at 60-65 on 76 doesn't appeared to be bothered, and keeping it under 60 on 322 and 90 appears to be fine as well.
Also, I don't think the DRPA is hemorrhaging money at all...especially since they cut out funding every politician's pet project. The toll rate of $5 has been consistent for several years now.
They will for the most part let you cruise up to 60 but any more than that, they'll come and get you. I go back and forth over the Walt at least twice a week and I always see at least one car pulled over on the Jersey side at the foot of the bridge.
Quote from: Roadsguy on August 02, 2017, 11:36:18 PM
I think that if the PA Turnpike can be 70, pretty much anything can be 70, or at least 65, as long as the exits aren't too dense.
Which is a different issue altogether. Some of those exits along I-95 in Connecticut should just be closed off. You don't need that kind of exit density.
I think VT and NY would be next in line for 70, because those are less urbanized than the others mentioned (save the part around NYC and Long Island).
Quote from: shadyjay on August 06, 2017, 08:45:24 AM
And no... the Wilbur Cross shouldn't be anything higher than 55, despite the fact that noone goes that speed.
Definitely not the Merritt portion of the parkway, but I think the stretch north of the West Rock Tunnel can handle 60
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 08, 2017, 12:46:18 PM
Definitely not the Merritt portion of the parkway, but I think the stretch north of the West Rock Tunnel can handle 60
Let's not forget, there are still several on and offramps, even on the WCP, that lack substantial acceleration/decelleration lanes. Stop signs still control entering traffic at several exits including 62-NB, 63, 65-NB-but not for long, plus the DOT maintenance garage ramps to/from Miller St in Meriden. If the ramps were improved, then yes, I could see 60.
I think the Garden State Parkway should be 60 mph from Exit 129 to Exit 140 and from 145 to 165 and then 65 up to the Line. (Of course I am not aware of the 65 to 55 change point, but I know its somewhere around Paramus.) I want to say its the Passack Valley Plaza, but it could be at Exit 165 or even Route 17 now.
Quote from: roadman65 on August 10, 2017, 06:58:31 PM
I think the Garden State Parkway should be 60 mph from Exit 129 to Exit 140 and from 145 to 165 and then 65 up to the Line. (Of course I am not aware of the 65 to 55 change point, but I know its somewhere around Paramus.) I want to say its the Passack Valley Plaza, but it could be at Exit 165 or even Route 17 now.
Pretty sure it's at Route 17
Just north of Route 17, IIRC.
If NJ did what OK did with their 75 zones and make their 70 zones on roads where the interchanges are sparsely separated, they could have only the Turnpike be at 70. However that means the ACE could not be posted at 70 mph being its interchanges are not as far apart to make that law work.
Though the NJ Turnpike from Exit 9 southward would be an excellent candidate for a 70 mph posting IMHO.
Most of the NJ Turnpike can easily be signed 70mph due to it being so straight and flat. Once the widening work is done, the Garden State Parkway should be good for a 70mph zone from Exit 41 to Exit 80 and maybe Exit 0 to Exit 25. The Atlantic City area exits get congested enough to keep the speed limit as-is.
Another candidate for 70 mph is I-80 from Exit 4 in Knowlton to the US 206 North exit near Stanhope as the exits there are very sparsely separated. Only two really as they are CR 521 and CR 517 plus the two overlooks and if the two parking areas are still open that, but nothing too congesting the road between Columbia and Netcong.
Quote from: NJRoadfan on August 12, 2017, 12:26:33 PM
Most of the NJ Turnpike can easily be signed 70mph due to it being so straight and flat.
Looking for America on the New Jersey Turnpike (https://www.amazon.com/Looking-America-New-Jersey-Turnpike/dp/0813519551) said that when the original Turnpike was designed and engineered in the late 1940's and early 1950's, the design speed was
80 MPH (which I believe), at least south of the "urban" part of the Turnpike (then), perhaps around Exit 10.
South of Exit 10, much of the Pike could (
and should) have a posted limit of 80 MPH, or maybe 75.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 20, 2017, 08:50:47 PM
Quote from: NJRoadfan on August 12, 2017, 12:26:33 PM
Most of the NJ Turnpike can easily be signed 70mph due to it being so straight and flat.
Looking for America on the New Jersey Turnpike (https://www.amazon.com/Looking-America-New-Jersey-Turnpike/dp/0813519551) said that when the original Turnpike was designed and engineered in the late 1940's and early 1950's, the design speed was 80 MPH (which I believe), at least south of the "urban" part of the Turnpike (then), perhaps around Exit 10.
South of Exit 10, much of the Pike could (and should) have a posted limit of 80 MPH, or maybe 75.
The design speed is generally 10 mph over the posted speed.
Quote from: roadman65 on August 10, 2017, 06:58:31 PM
I think the Garden State Parkway should be 60 mph from Exit 129 to Exit 140 and from 145 to 165 and then 65 up to the Line. (Of course I am not aware of the 65 to 55 change point, but I know its somewhere around Paramus.) I want to say its the Passack Valley Plaza, but it could be at Exit 165 or even Route 17 now.
[/You are absolutely right.]
If I'm not mistaken, the portion of I-95 in Maine from Bangor to the Canadian border (~130 miles) has the least traffic (cars-per-day) of any stretch of the interstate system - dropping down to about 2000 cars per day around Houlton. I just checked some street view shots on google maps and it's only 65 mph??
Quote from: relaxok on September 05, 2017, 10:04:17 PM
If I'm not mistaken, the portion of I-95 in Maine from Bangor to the Canadian border (~130 miles) has the least traffic (cars-per-day) of any stretch of the interstate system - dropping down to about 2000 cars per day around Houlton. I just checked some street view shots on google maps and it's only 65 mph??
No, it's 75 mph from Old Town to near US 1 in Houlton. I can confirm that with a bad cell phone picture. GSV is from before the change. It is the least-trafficked section of a 2DI in the system. I think I-180 IL has lower counts.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4345/36867648416_5b096c0373.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/YaSkqC)
There is some Street View (https://goo.gl/maps/9TQP1ZKekrj) from after the change.
^^ Per 2012 traffic volumes submitted to the FHWA (latest year where I have a national dataset), here are the 5 least-used segments of the Interstate system:
- I-15 at the Canadian border (just *SLIGHTLY* beats out I-95)
- I-95 in Houlton, ME (I believe it's slightly lower now than in 2012)
- I-15 south of Sunburst, MT
- I-89 at the Canadian border
- I-91 at the Canadian border
Overall, I-15 MT has a longer segment of sub-2000 volumes than I-95 ME does. I-95 west of US 1/Houlton, ME is close to 5,000 AADT.
All of these are listed as an AADT of 2,100 or less. The lightest segment of I-180 IL has just over 2,200 AADT.
IIRC, that northern stretch of I-95 was originally constructed as a Super-2 freeway.
Quote from: froggie on September 06, 2017, 08:53:13 AM
^^ Per 2012 traffic volumes submitted to the FHWA (latest year where I have a national dataset), here are the 5 least-used segments of the Interstate system:
- I-15 at the Canadian border (just *SLIGHTLY* beats out I-95)
- I-95 in Houlton, ME (I believe it's slightly lower now than in 2012)
- I-15 south of Sunburst, MT
- I-89 at the Canadian border
- I-91 at the Canadian border
Overall, I-15 MT has a longer segment of sub-2000 volumes than I-95 ME does. I-95 west of US 1/Houlton, ME is close to 5,000 AADT.
All of these are listed as an AADT of 2,100 or less. The lightest segment of I-180 IL has just over 2,200 AADT.
I-89 will gain some traffic when (and if) Quebec gets it together and finishes A-35.
QuoteIIRC, that northern stretch of I-95 was originally constructed as a Super-2 freeway.
As was the northern 100 miles or so of I-95 in Maine (though I've heard it widened out to 4 lanes at interchanges). I-91 in Derby, VT was also initially built as a Super-2.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on July 25, 2017, 06:58:54 PM
It is interesting to note that before the 55 MPH national speed limit, the speed limit on the Atlantic City Expressway was 70 MPH.
The AC Expressway really goes through East Bumblefart. It can easily support 70 if not 75. Ditto for I-195. The rest of NJ? I'm not so sure. Maybe the northern portions of I-287 where there are miles and miles between exits.
I would think the majority of the Turnpike could support 75, if not 80.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on September 06, 2017, 10:19:30 AM
Quote from: froggie on September 06, 2017, 08:53:13 AM
^^ Per 2012 traffic volumes submitted to the FHWA (latest year where I have a national dataset), here are the 5 least-used segments of the Interstate system:
- I-15 at the Canadian border (just *SLIGHTLY* beats out I-95)
- I-95 in Houlton, ME (I believe it's slightly lower now than in 2012)
- I-15 south of Sunburst, MT
- I-89 at the Canadian border
- I-91 at the Canadian border
Overall, I-15 MT has a longer segment of sub-2000 volumes than I-95 ME does. I-95 west of US 1/Houlton, ME is close to 5,000 AADT.
All of these are listed as an AADT of 2,100 or less. The lightest segment of I-180 IL has just over 2,200 AADT.
I-89 will gain some traffic when (and if) Quebec gets it together and finishes A-35.
Being as A-35 keeps making its way south, I fully expect it to be complete in my lifetime. They only need to finish the last 15 km.
As far as sections that were super-2s, I can confirm I-70 in UT through pictures on AARoads and I-95 on Historic Aerials. I certainly wouldn't doubt that I-91 was at one point, just can't find evidence myself. When I did that stretch of I-95 last year, I didn't see a single other vehicle in my direction and I only passed a handful of trucks going the other way. It was without a doubt the loneliest section of freeway I have ever driven.
QuoteI certainly wouldn't doubt that I-91 was at one point, just can't find evidence myself.
VTrans maps from the early 1960s plus historic photos in their archive, some of which are online (I believe on some UVM website or somewhere).
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 06, 2017, 08:54:54 AM
IIRC, that northern stretch of I-95 was originally constructed as a Super-2 freeway.
It was
absolutely a Super-2. I was on it then, around 1969 or 1970.
I think the Super-2 part started north of Bangor, at Old Town (that I am not 100% sure about).
Quote from: froggie on September 06, 2017, 10:29:47 AM
As was the northern 100 miles or so of I-95 in Maine (though I've heard it widened out to 4 lanes at interchanges).
At least at some of the interchanges it became a conventional 4-lane divided freeway through the interchange, then back to Super-2.
Took a look at Google, and evidence of most of the merge roadways from 4-land divided to Super-2 are gone, but I found one exception that is pretty obvious.
North of Sherman, Exit 264, ME-11/ME-158, the grading for the roadway where southbound traffic left the Super-2 approaching that interchange is still visible (the pavement has been removed), and is consistent with my memory here (https://www.google.com/maps/place/45%C2%B052'55.3%22N+68%C2%B024'31.5%22W/@45.882023,-68.4175147,1747m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m14!1m7!3m6!1s0x4ca52ea1cbb0b109:0x893511e59266d89b!2sSherman,+ME!3b1!8m2!3d45.8711632!4d-68.4178063!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d45.8820227!4d-68.4087598).
I believe the current northbound roadway is the original I-95 Super-2 most of the way.
I do not remember if it remained a Super-2 all the way through any of the interchanges or not.
Here we go: Exit 227 (https://historicaerials.com/location/45.37825661162288/-68.60017776489256/T1980/14). In this area, the SB side is original. Switched over to the NB side around Exit 244, switched back to SB and stayed there at 276. No idea what it was south of here, as imagery stops a little south of 227. Historic Aerials has imagery all the way up to the border. All interchanges we have stuff for are divided. I think the Super 2 started just north of Exit 199, as 1991 imagery shows a crossover there, but unconfirmed.
I can one-up that with USGS Topoview. For some reason the topo maps from 1975 are all aerial photographs.
Sherman area: https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#15/45.8642/-68.4201
You'll have to click on the location, then on the 24K map and click "show" on the 1975 map.
Sweet. That gives us confirmation that the super 2 did indeed begin north of Exit 199, at least originally. Looks like the divided highway was extended north in stages.
I can't see in CT in lower Fairfield county they will raise it higher then 55... people already now do 75-80+
All northeast states should be 70 and most should have at least some 75.
PA might be able to get away with at least two 80 mph sections, even: the Northeast Extension from Allentown to Plymouth Meeting (75 at least), and the "straightaway" on the mainline Turnpike from Blue Mountain to Gettysburg. Plenty more sections of road could easily be 75, though, although a few of them need some ramp improvements, like I-78 west of Allentown, the Turnpike from Valley Forge to Bensalem, the long, straight parts of I-83, and probably all of I-90.
CT hands down 100%. CT was the last state to raise it's limit to 65 over objections saying "our roads weren't designed for above 55mph" even though there's pics of I-95 having a 60mph limit in the 1970s.
CT was also one of the last states to allow right turn on red.
The land of steady habits.
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 04, 2017, 02:58:42 PM
CT hands down 100%. CT was the last state to raise it's limit to 65 over objections saying "our roads weren't designed for above 55mph" even though there's pics of I-95 having a 60mph limit in the 1970s.
CT was also one of the last states to allow right turn on red.
The land of steady habits.
All of this seems to contradict your answer to the topic question.
Quote from: kphoger on November 06, 2017, 12:44:55 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 04, 2017, 02:58:42 PM
CT hands down 100%. CT was the last state to raise it's limit to 65 over objections saying "our roads weren't designed for above 55mph" even though there's pics of I-95 having a 60mph limit in the 1970s.
CT was also one of the last states to allow right turn on red.
The land of steady habits.
All of this seems to contradict your answer to the topic question.
CT
is the land of steady habits. Until 20 years ago, we had 40 MPH speed limits on urban interstates. A perfectly suitable stretch of highway for 65 (I-84 Exit 25A-33) is still signed at 55 MPH 20 years after similar stretches were raised to 65. We have local state routes signed at 25 MPH in lightly populated areas. We still have 95% of our highways with sequential exit numbers, and in the 1980's, when we re-signed highways, we went with reflective button copy that was of 1960's vintage. And we were the almost the last state to allow Sunday liquor sales, and had closing times at our liquor stores of 8PM as of about 10 years ago. Yet, ironically, we have among the most left-wing progressive politicians representing us.
Heck, coming across a surface road signed at 50 in CT is like finding a unicorn. If NY would post 55, CT typically posts 45 or less. Granted, few people follow the limits, but if you get stuck behind a person going the speed limit in one of those ridiculous 35-45 zones, it's painful. And 55? CT is the ONLY state that won't post a road with at-grades at 55 (unless there's one I'm missing somewhere) under any circumstances (even though the law allows it).
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 02:44:14 PM
CT is the ONLY state that won't post a road with at-grades at 55 (unless there's one I'm missing somewhere) under any circumstances (even though the law allows it).
The only other states that I could imagine it has any possibility of being true for are RI, DE, NJ, and HI; the first three are the other three states with no rural areas (although there are some areas in all three that aren't urban or suburban, but not rural either), and HI is a bit of a wildcard.
Quote from: 1 on November 06, 2017, 02:51:51 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 02:44:14 PM
CT is the ONLY state that won't post a road with at-grades at 55 (unless there's one I'm missing somewhere) under any circumstances (even though the law allows it).
The only other states that I could imagine it has any possibility of being true for are RI, DE, NJ, and HI; the first three are the other three states with no rural areas (although there are some areas in all three that aren't urban or suburban, but not rural either), and HI is a bit of a wildcard.
NJ & DE have 55 mph at-grade roadways.
(Edited): And they both have rural areas as well.
Quote from: 1 on November 06, 2017, 02:51:51 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 02:44:14 PM
CT is the ONLY state that won't post a road with at-grades at 55 (unless there's one I'm missing somewhere) under any circumstances (even though the law allows it).
The only other states that I could imagine it has any possibility of being true for are RI, DE, NJ, and HI; the first three are the other three states with no rural areas (although there are some areas in all three that aren't urban or suburban, but not rural either), and HI is a bit of a wildcard.
Several of NJ's "Jersey freeways" and other divided highways with at-grades are signed at 55, as are DE's divided highways. HI goes up to at least 55. I thought RI had a couple of 55 zones, but I can't find them.
NJ and DE are definitely not entirely urban or suburban. Get to NW or SE NJ sometime and you'll see that it's actually a nice state away from the Turnpike.
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 03:14:52 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 06, 2017, 02:51:51 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 02:44:14 PM
CT is the ONLY state that won't post a road with at-grades at 55 (unless there's one I'm missing somewhere) under any circumstances (even though the law allows it).
The only other states that I could imagine it has any possibility of being true for are RI, DE, NJ, and HI; the first three are the other three states with no rural areas (although there are some areas in all three that aren't urban or suburban, but not rural either), and HI is a bit of a wildcard.
Several of NJ's "Jersey freeways" and other divided highways with at-grades are signed at 55, as are DE's divided highways. HI goes up to at least 55. I thought RI had a couple of 55 zones, but I can't find them.
NJ and DE are definitely not entirely urban or suburban. Get to NW or SE NJ sometime and you'll see that it's actually a nice state away from the Turnpike.
NJ has a few single-lane 55 mph roads. This intersection at Routes 72 and 539 is 55 mph all the way around. https://goo.gl/maps/u6zz7VpUBoH2
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 02:44:14 PM
Heck, coming across a surface road signed at 50 in CT is like finding a unicorn. If NY would post 55, CT typically posts 45 or less. Granted, few people follow the limits, but if you get stuck behind a person going the speed limit in one of those ridiculous 35-45 zones, it's painful. And 55? CT is the ONLY state that won't post a road with at-grades at 55 (unless there's one I'm missing somewhere) under any circumstances (even though the law allows it).
Vermont only allows 55 mph on limited-access highways, elsewhere it's 50 mph. The portion of US 2 from Danville to St J which is a limited-access highway that has grade intersections is 55 mph, as is US 2 nearing the "islands" on the other side of the state.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 06, 2017, 02:21:43 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 06, 2017, 12:44:55 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 04, 2017, 02:58:42 PM
CT hands down 100%. CT was the last state to raise it's limit to 65 over objections saying "our roads weren't designed for above 55mph" even though there's pics of I-95 having a 60mph limit in the 1970s.
CT was also one of the last states to allow right turn on red.
The land of steady habits.
All of this seems to contradict your answer to the topic question.
CT is the land of steady habits. Until 20 years ago, we had 40 MPH speed limits on urban interstates. A perfectly suitable stretch of highway for 65 (I-84 Exit 25A-33) is still signed at 55 MPH 20 years after similar stretches were raised to 65. We have local state routes signed at 25 MPH in lightly populated areas. We still have 95% of our highways with sequential exit numbers, and in the 1980's, when we re-signed highways, we went with reflective button copy that was of 1960's vintage. And we were the almost the last state to allow Sunday liquor sales, and had closing times at our liquor stores of 8PM as of about 10 years ago. Yet, ironically, we have among the most left-wing progressive politicians representing us.
This is how I'm reading it, though:
Question – Which state is
most likely to raise its speed limit?
Answer – Connecticut, because it
rarely raises its speed limits.
Me – Say what?
Rhode Island also has rural areas...basically anything beyond about 10 miles west of Providence. But I'm hard pressed to think of any RI surface roads with a 55 limit.
Quote from: shadyjay on November 06, 2017, 04:09:50 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 02:44:14 PM
Heck, coming across a surface road signed at 50 in CT is like finding a unicorn. If NY would post 55, CT typically posts 45 or less. Granted, few people follow the limits, but if you get stuck behind a person going the speed limit in one of those ridiculous 35-45 zones, it's painful. And 55? CT is the ONLY state that won't post a road with at-grades at 55 (unless there's one I'm missing somewhere) under any circumstances (even though the law allows it).
Vermont only allows 55 mph on limited-access highways, elsewhere it's 50 mph. The portion of US 2 from Danville to St J which is a limited-access highway that has grade intersections is 55 mph, as is US 2 nearing the "islands" on the other side of the state.
The US 7 Super 2 was 55 when there in 1999. I am guessing VT allows limited access two lanes to be and other than part of US 7 in Rutland I do not think the state has four lane divided non freeways to post a 55 with at grades.
CT is a strange one as US 7 is mostly 40 on its two lanes where only the freeway parts are 55. Even MA and NH allow 55 on two lanes with intersections although the latter state US 7 don't enter, but compared to the comment about CT being with low speed limits they could learn from NH.
US 2 might be a super 2 in theory, but it still has at grades (and a ton of them at that) and allows bikes/peds. The section west of I-89 near the islands is a designated bike route. US 2 near St. Johnsbury bans bikes/peds and is considered by the state to be limited access. The key for Vermont allowing 55 on a 2 lane is no driveway access
Other than US 2 around I-91, US 7 south of Rutland is the only 4-lane divided highway in the state of any decent length.
Quote from: roadman65The US 7 Super 2 was 55 when there in 1999. I am guessing VT allows limited access two lanes to be and other than part of US 7 in Rutland I do not think the state has four lane divided non freeways to post a 55 with at grades.
There's about a mile or so of US 2 in St. Johnsbury that is 4-lanes divided and also 55 MPH. This is the 4-lane part of the section that shadyjay mentioned in his post.
And yes, VTrans can and (occasionally) will post 55 MPH on 2-lane limited-access highways. Besides the aforementioned route segments, this also includes VT 63 and VT 279.
QuoteEven MA and NH allow 55 on two lanes with intersections
My experience with NH and 55 MPH is that they will generally only do it where the roadway has improved geometry (i.e. gentler curves) and wider shoulders. I was recently on a stretch of NH 10 that didn't have full 10ft shoulders and was still signed 55, but they weren't narrow shoulders either.
Quote from: cl94US 2 might be a super 2 in theory, but it still has at grades (and a ton of them at that) and allows bikes/peds. The section west of I-89 near the islands is a designated bike route. US 2 near St. Johnsbury bans bikes/peds and is considered by the state to be limited access. The key for Vermont allowing 55 on a 2 lane is no driveway access.
VTrans' general definition of limited-access does not explicitly prohibit bikes/peds.
Quote from: froggie on November 06, 2017, 06:43:26 PM
QuoteEven MA and NH allow 55 on two lanes with intersections
My experience with NH and 55 MPH is that they will generally only do it where the roadway has improved geometry (i.e. gentler curves) and wider shoulders. I was recently on a stretch of NH 10 that didn't have full 10ft shoulders and was still signed 55, but they weren't narrow shoulders either.
That is generally my experience in NH as well. MA can be a little more random with how it applies the 55, but this is also the state that lowers the speed limit for every little curve.
Quote from: froggie on November 06, 2017, 06:43:26 PM
VTrans' general definition of limited-access does not explicitly prohibit bikes/peds.
Well aware of the fact, hence why there's always a bikes/peds prohibited sign. Similar to why Vermont posts "unsafe to pass"/"no passing zone" more than other states, as that's the only way they can legally prevent people from passing.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 06, 2017, 02:21:43 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 06, 2017, 12:44:55 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 04, 2017, 02:58:42 PM
CT hands down 100%. CT was the last state to raise it's limit to 65 over objections saying "our roads weren't designed for above 55mph" even though there's pics of I-95 having a 60mph limit in the 1970s.
CT was also one of the last states to allow right turn on red.
The land of steady habits.
All of this seems to contradict your answer to the topic question.
CT is the land of steady habits. Until 20 years ago, we had 40 MPH speed limits on urban interstates. A perfectly suitable stretch of highway for 65 (I-84 Exit 25A-33) is still signed at 55 MPH 20 years after similar stretches were raised to 65. We have local state routes signed at 25 MPH in lightly populated areas. We still have 95% of our highways with sequential exit numbers, and in the 1980's, when we re-signed highways, we went with reflective button copy that was of 1960's vintage. And we were the almost the last state to allow Sunday liquor sales, and had closing times at our liquor stores of 8PM as of about 10 years ago. Yet, ironically, we have among the most left-wing progressive politicians representing us.
I bet the Waterbury to Farmington stretch is 55 as a political consolation to those who opposed the raise to 65.
Also, CT used to prohibit car dealerships from opening on Sundays.
Quote from: froggie on November 06, 2017, 04:44:15 PM
Rhode Island also has rural areas...basically anything beyond about 10 miles west of Providence. But I'm hard pressed to think of any RI surface roads with a 55 limit.
I've clinched Rhode Island and I don't recall there being any. RI pretty much copies CT on speed limits - rural 2 lane roads are typically 40 or 45, with the occasional 50 if the road is improved to the highest standards the state will improve a 2 lane road to. But no 55s.
That said, every other state in the continental US has 2 lane roads posted at 55 or better. Including MA, NH, and VT, which while they all post it very sparingly do have a nonzero number of 55 zones on 2 lane roads.
Quote from: Duke87 on November 06, 2017, 10:37:58 PM
Quote from: froggie on November 06, 2017, 04:44:15 PM
Rhode Island also has rural areas...basically anything beyond about 10 miles west of Providence. But I'm hard pressed to think of any RI surface roads with a 55 limit.
I've clinched Rhode Island and I don't recall there being any. RI pretty much copies CT on speed limits - rural 2 lane roads are typically 40 or 45, with the occasional 50 if the road is improved to the highest standards the state will improve a 2 lane road to. But no 55s.
That said, every other state in the continental US has 2 lane roads posted at 55 or better. Including MA, NH, and VT, which while they all post it very sparingly do have a nonzero number of 55 zones on 2 lane roads.
VT is almost certainly in single digits. I can only recall a handful. The only non-Super 2 55 zones in MA I can think of are west of I-91. There's one on SR 43 that's a continuation of NY's 55 zone, a couple on US 7 between Great Barrington and the CT border, and at least one on SR 9 in the Berkshires.
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 11:02:13 PM
The only non-Super 2 55 zones in MA I can think of are west of I-91. There's one on SR 43 that's a continuation of NY's 55 zone, a couple on US 7 between Great Barrington and the CT border, and at least one on SR 9 in the Berkshires.
I believe US 1 between MA 133 and MA 113 in northeastern Massachusetts is 55 mph.
Quote from: 1 on November 07, 2017, 07:26:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 11:02:13 PM
The only non-Super 2 55 zones in MA I can think of are west of I-91. There's one on SR 43 that's a continuation of NY's 55 zone, a couple on US 7 between Great Barrington and the CT border, and at least one on SR 9 in the Berkshires.
I believe US 1 between MA 133 and MA 113 in northeastern Massachusetts is 55 mph.
There's plenty of 55mph surface zones across the state.
Quote from: Duke87 on November 06, 2017, 10:37:58 PM
That said, every other state in the continental US has 2 lane roads posted at 55 or better. Including MA, NH, and VT, which while they all post it very sparingly do have a nonzero number of 55 zones on 2 lane roads.
Even Maryland has a few 2 lane arterial highways with posted 55 MPH limits, though I can only name two offhand - MD-234 (Budds Creek Road) in Charles and St. Mary's Counties and U.S. 15 (Catoctin Mountain Highway) south of U.S. 340 in Frederick County.
^ Also MD 67, a stretch of MD 23 north of Bel Air, and US 113 (the remaining 2-lane portion of the latter).
Quote from: froggie on November 08, 2017, 03:32:29 PM
^ Also MD 67, a stretch of MD 23 north of Bel Air, and US 113 (the remaining 2-lane portion of the latter).
US-219 south of I-68 is another, or at least it was the last time I was through that way (Street View confirms this). I don't remember whether it was posted at 55 all the way down to Accident.
US-220 heading north from I-68 towards Bedford was posted at 55 in Maryland on our most recent trip to the Omni Bedford Springs.
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 04, 2017, 02:58:42 PM
CT was also one of the last states to allow right turn on red.
When was this?
Other states need to be aware of these kinds of discrepancies... when I took my permit test in 1994 in New York, the drivers' manual taught as though right on red was allowed throughout the known universe unless there was a "no turn on red" sign. Other things had caveats, e.g., "If the speed limit is not posted on any road <i>in New York State</i>, the speed limit is 55." (emphasis added by me).
Not that someone who has a learner's permit from NYS is going to go driving out of state until they have a driver's license... But when I transferred my drivers' license between states (NY -> MA, then MA -> NH, then NH -> MA, then MA -> VA, and finally VA -> MD), no state gave me ANY information about subtle "gotchas" of differences in their state's driving laws. No Turn On Red statewide would definitely have caught me off guard. I've done right on red many times in Connecticut and never have been pulled over.
In fact, I've never been pulled over for anything that was different in driving laws between the state/province I was driving in and New York State (where I learned to drive, took my permit test, and road test). I took my motorcycle permit test and subsequent road test in Massachusetts -- the only difference there was that MA seemed to focus on rotaries for their test (I get it, they have a lot of rotaries, but the rules there for navigating them are no different than in other states), whereas NY seemed overly concerned with my ability to calculate a blood alcohol content based on weight, time, and number of drinks, a skill I have never actually needed.
Anyway... I'm going off on a tangent here.
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
when I took my permit test in 1994 in New York, the drivers' manual taught as though right on red was allowed throughout the known universe unless there was a "no turn on red" sign.
Wow, that's pretty bad, considering that it's not even allowed throughout the entire state much less the known universe thanks to NYC.
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 04, 2017, 02:58:42 PM
CT was also one of the last states to allow right turn on red.
When was this?
Mid 1970's...so you probably weren't even born yet.
QuoteOther states need to be aware of these kinds of discrepancies... when I took my permit test in 1994 in New York, the drivers' manual taught as though right on red was allowed throughout the known universe unless there was a "no turn on red" sign...
...No Turn On Red statewide would definitely have caught me off guard. I've done right on red many times in Connecticut and never have been pulled over.
While you've exaggerated (other countries do things differently, and don't expect right turns on red to be permitted in countries where you drive on the left), the fact that you took your drivers' test about 20 years after Connecticut permitted Right Turns On Red is probably why New York or any other state didn't make you aware of such a discrepancy, and why you have never been pulled over for such.
QuoteBut when I transferred my drivers' license between states (NY -> MA, then MA -> NH, then NH -> MA, then MA -> VA, and finally VA -> MD), no state gave me ANY information about subtle "gotchas" of differences in their state's driving laws.
This is actually a big issue. NJ used to require a test from people moving into the state, but people constantly complained they have driven for 10, 20, 30, 40 whatever years, and are failing the test. NJ should've said...well good, then you need a refresher because your driving sucks, but instead they eliminated the test. I'm quite sure many of the poor drivers with NJ tags originally lived out of NJ, moved here, and never learned or relearned the proper way to drive.
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
....
Not that someone who has a learner's permit from NYS is going to go driving out of state until they have a driver's license... ....
Why not? When I had my learner's permit (Virginia), I drove most of the way to New York on a family trip during spring break. My father had me pull off at the last service area we passed on the Jersey Turnpike and he then drove the rest of the way across Staten Island and into Brooklyn. I believe on the way home he pulled off at the first service area we reached and then I drove the rest of the way.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 13, 2017, 01:17:34 PM
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on November 04, 2017, 02:58:42 PM
CT was also one of the last states to allow right turn on red.
When was this?
Mid 1970's...so you probably weren't even born yet.
Massachusetts didn't allow
RIGHT ON RED until 1978. At the time, it was reported that it was the last
state to enact such... supposedly for energy conservation reasons (less idling at at light = less gas being burned).
Quote from: vdeane on November 13, 2017, 12:59:43 PM
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
when I took my permit test in 1994 in New York, the drivers' manual taught as though right on red was allowed throughout the known universe unless there was a "no turn on red" sign.
Wow, that's pretty bad, considering that it's not even allowed throughout the entire state much less the known universe thanks to NYC.
I think that was done when NY State to get upstate and Long Island to have RTOR status they enacted a law stating that a municipality with a population of over 2 million people was not allowed to have that privilege.
Anyway, NYC is a wide enough universe to be said that No Turns on Red still exist in the United States and that MA was the last to go along with it all.
However, was it not NJ and CT that were last in abolishing the 55 max on freeways? If I remember correctly Christine Whitman was the holdout why NJ would not get it sooner and the reason why NJ has the double fines in the 65 zones because that was a bargaining chip that she reluctantly went along with to for the rest of Trenton to get her to allow it (that is if that was finally implemented when she was still in office)?
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 13, 2017, 02:03:37 PM
Massachusetts didn't allow RIGHT ON RED until 1978. At the time, it was reported that it was the last state to enact such... supposedly for energy conservation reasons (less idling at at light = less gas being burned).
The District of Columbia retained a
de-facto ban on right-turn-on-red well into the 1980's. D.C. did not ban the turn, but installed a NO TURN ON RED sign at
every movement at every intersection in D.C. (except those under jurisdiction of the National Park Service or the Architect of the Capitol) where traffic could
possibly turn right on red.
There was a threat by Congress to pass a law forbidding the D.C. municipal government from installing or maintaining
any such signage (Congress had and has the power to do that), so many of them were removed, and others were replaced by NO TURN ON RED 7AM TO 7PM signs.
I believe that PA allows left turns on red from one-way streets into one-way streets. Does any other state or commonwealth permit this movement?
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 13, 2017, 03:33:11 PM
I believe that PA allows left turns on red from one-way streets into one-way streets. Does any other state or commonwealth permit this movement?
Most of them do.
Quote from: roadman65 on November 13, 2017, 02:48:59 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 13, 2017, 12:59:43 PM
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
when I took my permit test in 1994 in New York, the drivers' manual taught as though right on red was allowed throughout the known universe unless there was a "no turn on red" sign.
Wow, that's pretty bad, considering that it's not even allowed throughout the entire state much less the known universe thanks to NYC.
I think that was done when NY State to get upstate and Long Island to have RTOR status they enacted a law stating that a municipality with a population of over 2 million people was not allowed to have that privilege.
Anyway, NYC is a wide enough universe to be said that No Turns on Red still exist in the United States and that MA was the last to go along with it all.
However, was it not NJ and CT that were last in abolishing the 55 max on freeways? If I remember correctly Christine Whitman was the holdout why NJ would not get it sooner and the reason why NJ has the double fines in the 65 zones because that was a bargaining chip that she reluctantly went along with to for the rest of Trenton to get her to allow it (that is if that was finally implemented when she was still in office)?
Pretty much true, although it should be pointed out that Whitman was the one that finally enacted it. Since the NMSL was modified a decade prior, Governors Kean and Florio were holdouts as well.
The 'Double Fines' was an unfortunate compromise, but oddly enough probably works in our favor today. It's also an oddly worded law. At the time, it really did keep people driving close to the speed limit. The doubled fines in 65 mph zones for speeding don't kick in until you're cited for 10 mph or more over the limit. However, on 55 mph and lower roadways, there's still doubled fines when cited for going 20 mph or greater over the limit. (There's no regular 60 mph zones in the state)
If you're cited for speeding 74 mph or less in a 65 zone, the fine is only $85, and some cops will reduce your actual violation to that zone. If you are cited for speeding in the 20 - 24 mph range (when the 'doubled fine' is automatic), the fine is *only* $200. In some other states, they'll throw the book at you. And there's no surcharges (I don't believe), unlike other states where a $25 fine is really 4 times that once that surcharges are added.
Here's NJ's violation schedule: https://www.njcourts.gov/attorneys/assets/violations/part1bc.pdf
Quote from: cpzilliacus on November 13, 2017, 03:27:58 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 13, 2017, 02:03:37 PM
Massachusetts didn't allow RIGHT ON RED until 1978. At the time, it was reported that it was the last state to enact such... supposedly for energy conservation reasons (less idling at at light = less gas being burned).
The District of Columbia retained a de-facto ban on right-turn-on-red well into the 1980's. D.C. did not ban the turn, but installed a NO TURN ON RED sign at every movement at every intersection in D.C. (except those under jurisdiction of the National Park Service or the Architect of the Capitol) where traffic could possibly turn right on red.
Similarly, when MA first allowed
RIGHT ON RED, a whole bunch of
NO TURN ON RED signs were posted at almost every traffic signal as well. Within a couple of years, a few of them were later taken down.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 13, 2017, 03:33:11 PM
I believe that PA allows left turns on red from one-way streets into one-way streets. Does any other state or commonwealth permit this movement?
45 states do in total.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 13, 2017, 04:27:59 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 13, 2017, 03:33:11 PM
I believe that PA allows left turns on red from one-way streets into one-way streets. Does any other state or commonwealth permit this movement?
45 states do in total.
Only states that ban it are CT, ME, MO, NH, NJ, NC, RI, and SD, plus DC. Allowed everywhere else.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 13, 2017, 01:41:47 PM
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
....
Not that someone who has a learner's permit from NYS is going to go driving out of state until they have a driver's license... ....
Why not? When I had my learner's permit (Virginia), I drove most of the way to New York on a family trip during spring break. My father had me pull off at the last service area we passed on the Jersey Turnpike and he then drove the rest of the way across Staten Island and into Brooklyn. I believe on the way home he pulled off at the first service area we reached and then I drove the rest of the way.
Out of state permit holders aren't allowed to drive within the limits of NYC or on surrounding parkways.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 13, 2017, 03:38:20 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 13, 2017, 03:33:11 PM
I believe that PA allows left turns on red from one-way streets into one-way streets. Does any other state or commonwealth permit this movement?
Most of them do.
Heck, in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington it is legal to turn left from a two way street onto a one way street on red! Though most drivers don't realize this.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on November 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 13, 2017, 01:41:47 PM
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
....
Not that someone who has a learner's permit from NYS is going to go driving out of state until they have a driver's license... ....
Why not? When I had my learner's permit (Virginia), I drove most of the way to New York on a family trip during spring break. My father had me pull off at the last service area we passed on the Jersey Turnpike and he then drove the rest of the way across Staten Island and into Brooklyn. I believe on the way home he pulled off at the first service area we reached and then I drove the rest of the way.
Out of state permit holders aren't allowed to drive within the limits of NYC or on surrounding parkways.
I know. That's one reason why we switched, plus having to parallel park in Brooklyn (parallel parking is not part of the road test in Virginia and I didn't learn how to do it until I taught myself some two years later). But that's not the point I was making. He said someone with a New York learner's permit will not be driving out-of-state until after obtaining a license and I asked why not, citing my own experience as an example.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 13, 2017, 01:41:47 PM
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
....
Not that someone who has a learner's permit from NYS is going to go driving out of state until they have a driver's license... ....
Why not? When I had my learner's permit (Virginia), I drove most of the way to New York on a family trip during spring break. My father had me pull off at the last service area we passed on the Jersey Turnpike and he then drove the rest of the way across Staten Island and into Brooklyn. I believe on the way home he pulled off at the first service area we reached and then I drove the rest of the way.
Yeah, I'm stumped by that too. I grew up 12 miles from one state line and 55 miles from another one–in a part of Kansas where towns are 30 miles apart. Just going to orthodontist appointments required driving out of state. Shoot, we drove out of state in driver's education just to experience "city driving" in a town of 7800 people (incidentally, our car was rear-ended at a stop sign there). I drove in Denver rush hour on a learner's permit with my parents also, because that's where the malls were. Plus a camping trip with my dad to Big Bend, Texas.
NYC bans ALL permit-holders from driving in the city on freeways and when not in a driver's ed car with an instructor 21 years or older. Doesn't matter where the permit came from. It's just NYC being NYC.
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 12:50:40 PM
NYC bans ALL permit-holders from driving in the city on freeways and when not in a driver's ed car with an instructor 21 years or older. Doesn't matter where the permit came from. It's just NYC being NYC.
We know that. It doesn't answer the question about why a New York permit-holder would not drive out-of-state prior to getting a license (assuming, of course, he's properly accompanied as required by the permit).
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 14, 2017, 01:04:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 12:50:40 PM
NYC bans ALL permit-holders from driving in the city on freeways and when not in a driver's ed car with an instructor 21 years or older. Doesn't matter where the permit came from. It's just NYC being NYC.
We know that.
RobbieL2415 doesn't.
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 01:08:07 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 14, 2017, 01:04:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 12:50:40 PM
NYC bans ALL permit-holders from driving in the city on freeways and when not in a driver's ed car with an instructor 21 years or older. Doesn't matter where the permit came from. It's just NYC being NYC.
We know that.
RobbieL2415 doesn't.
None of us know for sure what RobbieL2415 does or does not know unless he chimes in. I believe he's just under the assumption that no one with a learner's permit will drive out of state until obtaining a license, regardless of the state that issued said permit. IMO, that's a fair assumption. I did not drive outside of my home state of NJ until I obtained a driver's license. I believe many, if not most fall into this category.
Quote from: signalman on November 14, 2017, 01:58:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 01:08:07 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 14, 2017, 01:04:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 12:50:40 PM
NYC bans ALL permit-holders from driving in the city on freeways and when not in a driver's ed car with an instructor 21 years or older. Doesn't matter where the permit came from. It's just NYC being NYC.
We know that.
RobbieL2415 doesn't.
None of us know for sure what RobbieL2415 does or does not know unless he chimes in. I believe he's just under the assumption that no one with a learner's permit will drive out of state until obtaining a license, regardless of the state that issued said permit. IMO, that's a fair assumption. I did not drive outside of my home state of NJ until I obtained a driver's license. I believe many, if not most fall into this category.
Well,
1995hoo and I certainly drove out of state with learner's permits, and I'm sure there must be others on the forum like us. It never even occurred to me that someone would
avoid driving out of state on a learner's permit–until someone told me once that some states don't honor out-of-state permits as a valid license, that is.
Quote from: signalman on November 14, 2017, 01:58:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 01:08:07 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 14, 2017, 01:04:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 12:50:40 PM
NYC bans ALL permit-holders from driving in the city on freeways and when not in a driver's ed car with an instructor 21 years or older. Doesn't matter where the permit came from. It's just NYC being NYC.
We know that.
RobbieL2415 doesn't.
None of us know for sure what RobbieL2415 does or does not know unless he chimes in. I believe he's just under the assumption that no one with a learner's permit will drive out of state until obtaining a license, regardless of the state that issued said permit. IMO, that's a fair assumption. I did not drive outside of my home state of NJ until I obtained a driver's license. I believe many, if not most fall into this category.
Neither did I, and I could've sworn at the time (26 years ago...sigh...) that I wasn't permitted to drive out of state with just a permit anyway.
Then again, my mom especially was pretty freaked out of the thought of me driving, so I think my parents desperately wanted to limit my driving anyway. Even the day I went for my test - my 17th Birthday (which is the first day you could get a license in NJ), and passed the test perfectly, my mom simply wanted to go home to make dinner, rather than go to the DMV with me to get my license. Most parents are very happy to see their kids move on to this next stage in life. My mom greatly struggled with that.
I don't remember all my driving permit driving...and I have a feeling I did more with my dad than my mom...but I know I never drove out of state with the permit.
Quote from: kphoger on November 14, 2017, 02:11:28 PM
Well, 1995hoo and I certainly drove out of state with learner's permits, and I'm sure there must be others on the forum like us. It never even occurred to me that someone would avoid driving out of state on a learner's permit–until someone told me once that some states don't honor out-of-state permits as a valid license, that is.
I never said I avoided driving out of state while I had my permit, nor did I express or try to imply that others refrain from doing so. In fact, that was not the case, as I recall. This was over 20 years ago, but to the best of my memory, the need just never arose. You and 1995hoo are merely a small sample of the roadgeeking community and an ever smaller piece of the entire driving population. I'm sure there are others besides you two (both roadgeeks and not) who have driven across state lines with a learner's permit, but I'm sticking to my belief that the vast majority do not.
Quote from: signalman on November 14, 2017, 02:21:08 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 14, 2017, 02:11:28 PM
Well, 1995hoo and I certainly drove out of state with learner's permits, and I'm sure there must be others on the forum like us. It never even occurred to me that someone would avoid driving out of state on a learner's permit–until someone told me once that some states don't honor out-of-state permits as a valid license, that is.
I never said I avoided driving out of state while I had my permit, nor did I express or try to imply that others refrain from doing so. In fact, that was not the case, as I recall. This was over 20 years ago, but to the best of my memory, the need just never arose. You and 1995hoo are merely a small sample of the roadgeeking community and an ever smaller piece of the entire driving population. I'm sure there are others besides you two (both roadgeeks and not) who have driven across state lines with a learner's permit, but I'm sticking to my belief that the vast majority do not.
I'm sure part of that depends on where you live. I grew up in Northern Virginia about 20 minutes from where I live now, and around here it's pretty routine that you'd drive into the District of Columbia or Maryland at some point on a learner's permit. If I had grown up in, I don't know, I'll pick a more extreme example here, say Bangor in Maine, it might be a very different situation because it's much further from a state line. I didn't mean to say it's routine that someone with a permit would drive from Virginia to the New York area (my father felt it was good experience for me in terms of highway driving), but at the same time, as I said before, I was responding to the specific wording tckma used:
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
Not that someone who has a learner's permit from NYS is going to go driving out of state until they have a driver's license... ....
This implies to me that someone with a learner's permit either cannot or should not drive out of his home state until he has a regular license, and my question was simply "why not?" In other words, my point was not to say something like, "Everyone does that," or something like, "Because I did that everyone has to have done it." My point was simply to ask why one would assume people with learner's permits would not drive out of state.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 14, 2017, 02:20:40 PM
I could've sworn at the time (26 years ago...sigh...) that I wasn't permitted to drive out of state with just a permit anyway.
I don't remember all my driving permit driving...and I have a feeling I did more with my dad than my mom...but I know I never drove out of state with the permit.
That could have been a stipulation of a NJ learner's permit, I honestly don't remember. It wouldn't surprise me, it is NJ after all :-D
One thing I have wondered....Does NJ honor out of state licenses if the license holder is under the legal driving age by NJ's standards? I suppose the same could be asked about out of state permit holders. Although since this came up, I had honestly never considered that one would drive out of state with only a learner's permit. I know NYC doesn't allow anyone under 18 to drive, even if you're licensed.
Quote from: signalman on November 14, 2017, 02:35:25 PM
I know NYC doesn't allow anyone under 18 to drive, even if you're licensed.
NYC is 17 AND full license. Only way to get a full license at 17 in NY is by taking driver's ed, else it's 18.
Quote from: signalman on November 14, 2017, 02:35:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 14, 2017, 02:20:40 PM
I could've sworn at the time (26 years ago...sigh...) that I wasn't permitted to drive out of state with just a permit anyway.
I don't remember all my driving permit driving...and I have a feeling I did more with my dad than my mom...but I know I never drove out of state with the permit.
That could have been a stipulation of a NJ learner's permit, I honestly don't remember. It wouldn't surprise me, it is NJ after all :-D
One thing I have wondered....Does NJ honor out of state licenses if the license holder is under the legal driving age by NJ's standards? I suppose the same could be asked about out of state permit holders. Although since this came up, I had honestly never considered that one would drive out of state with only a learner's permit. I know NYC doesn't allow anyone under 18 to drive, even if you're licensed.
I've never heard of that being an issue, and especially in the summer, 16 year olds from PA drove to the Jersey shore all the time. I think you simply need to be a licensed driver to drive in the state regardless of age.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 14, 2017, 02:31:22 PM
I'm sure part of that depends on where you live. I grew up in Northern Virginia about 20 minutes from where I live now, and around here it's pretty routine that you'd drive into the District of Columbia or Maryland at some point on a learner's permit. If I had grown up in, I don't know, I'll pick a more extreme example here, say Bangor in Maine, it might be a very different situation because it's much further from a state line. I didn't mean to say it's routine that someone with a permit would drive from Virginia to the New York area (my father felt it was good experience for me in terms of highway driving), but at the same time, as I said before, I was responding to the specific wording tckma used:
Quote from: tckma on November 13, 2017, 11:03:28 AM
Not that someone who has a learner's permit from NYS is going to go driving out of state until they have a driver's license... ....
This implies to me that someone with a learner's permit either cannot or should not drive out of his home state until he has a regular license, and my question was simply "why not?" In other words, my point was not to say something like, "Everyone does that," or something like, "Because I did that everyone has to have done it." My point was simply to ask why one would assume people with learner's permits would not drive out of state.
I hadn't considered those that live close to the border of their state. I suppose there's plenty who frequently cross state borders for various reasons. I also assumed that a permit was only valid in the state it was issued. I suppose that too varies from state to state. I'm sure it also varies what other states will honor said permit. As long as it was legal, I agree that the highway driving (VA to NY and back) was an excellent opportunity for you to get experience with that. I wasn't so lucky in that regard. My family rarely went out of state aside from vacation or perhaps for a toy train show (my dad and I are both into trains). If we did go out of state while I had a permit, I doubt my dad would've let me drive anyway. I honestly don't remember if we did though.
Quote from: cl94NYC is 17 AND full license.
My mistake. I thought it was a blanket 18 in the city.
For what it's worth, when I went to drivers' ed in CT we were explicitly told that we're not supposed to drive out of state with our learners' permits.
Quote from: signalman on November 14, 2017, 01:58:55 PM
None of us know for sure what RobbieL2415 does or does not know unless he chimes in. I believe he's just under the assumption that no one with a learner's permit will drive out of state until obtaining a license, regardless of the state that issued said permit. IMO, that's a fair assumption. I did not drive outside of my home state of NJ until I obtained a driver's license. I believe many, if not most fall into this category.
His post
specifically mentioned NYC. Plus I resent 1995hoo's implication that there was only one legitimate thing to reply/comment on in the entire thread and his condescending "we know that".
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on November 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Out of state permit holders aren't allowed to drive within the limits of NYC or on surrounding parkways.
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 09:37:19 PM
Quote from: signalman on November 14, 2017, 01:58:55 PM
None of us know for sure what RobbieL2415 does or does not know unless he chimes in. I believe he's just under the assumption that no one with a learner's permit will drive out of state until obtaining a license, regardless of the state that issued said permit. IMO, that's a fair assumption. I did not drive outside of my home state of NJ until I obtained a driver's license. I believe many, if not most fall into this category.
His post specifically mentioned NYC. Plus I resent 1995hoo's implication that there was only one legitimate thing to reply/comment on in the entire thread and his condescending "we know that".
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on November 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Out of state permit holders aren't allowed to drive within the limits of NYC or on surrounding parkways.
I take no offense.
I drove in MA, VA and NC with my permit following my state's rules for passengers. All states except AZ, HI, NH, PA, SC, VT and DC accept OOS permits under either the issuing state's laws or both the issuing state and the driving state's laws.
http://www.oprfhs.org/driver-education/documents/State_Permit_Restrictions.pdf (http://www.oprfhs.org/driver-education/documents/State_Permit_Restrictions.pdf)
Quote from: vdeane on November 14, 2017, 09:37:19 PM
Quote from: signalman on November 14, 2017, 01:58:55 PM
None of us know for sure what RobbieL2415 does or does not know unless he chimes in. I believe he's just under the assumption that no one with a learner's permit will drive out of state until obtaining a license, regardless of the state that issued said permit. IMO, that's a fair assumption. I did not drive outside of my home state of NJ until I obtained a driver's license. I believe many, if not most fall into this category.
His post specifically mentioned NYC. Plus I resent 1995hoo's implication that there was only one legitimate thing to reply/comment on in the entire thread and his condescending "we know that".
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on November 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Out of state permit holders aren't allowed to drive within the limits of NYC or on surrounding parkways.
I'm not going to apologize to you because it wasn't clear you were responding to RobbieL2415–you didn't quote his post, nor anyone else's for that matter, and your comment could just as easily have been a reply to kphoger's reply to me that appears in the post directly before your comment in question (which is how I interpreted it when I read it and made the reply that's apparently bothered you).
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on November 14, 2017, 11:46:40 PM
I drove in MA, VA and NC with my permit following my state's rules for passengers. All states except AZ, HI, NH, PA, SC, VT and DC accept OOS permits under either the issuing state's laws or both the issuing state and the driving state's laws.
http://www.oprfhs.org/driver-education/documents/State_Permit_Restrictions.pdf (http://www.oprfhs.org/driver-education/documents/State_Permit_Restrictions.pdf)
Never knew such a list existed. Thank you for that! For me, when I was 16, the most likely state I would've driven in would have been PA (Philly, specifically), so I wouldn't have been permitted to do so anyway.
That list is not correct when it comes to Vermont. Per Vermont DMV (http://dmv.vermont.gov/content/can-i-drive-vermont-if-i-have-learners-permit-another-state), an out of state permit is allowable in Vermont for "a period of 30 days for vacation purposes." In other words, if you're vacationing or just passing through, you can use an out of state drivers permit in Vermont, provided of course that you have a licensed driver in the passenger seat.
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 15, 2017, 07:22:19 AM
your comment could just as easily have been a reply to kphoger's reply to me that appears in the post directly before your comment in question
Well, let's all just assume that's true. So I should be the only one offended. Since I'm not offended in the slightest, then we're all good here.
I was shocked when I saw 1995hoo's comment. I thought that it was rude and uncalled for.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 15, 2017, 02:07:53 PM
I was shocked when I saw 1995hoo's comment. I thought that it was rude and uncalled for.
Agreed. I'm not PC in the slightest, but there's no reason to be uncivil.
Can't we all just get along?
Quote from: cl94 on November 15, 2017, 02:11:41 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 15, 2017, 02:07:53 PM
I was shocked when I saw 1995hoo's comment. I thought that it was rude and uncalled for.
Agreed. I'm not PC in the slightest, but there's no reason to be uncivil.
This thread is so off topic now that it might as well just be locked.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 15, 2017, 02:34:29 PM
This thread is so off topic now that it might as well just be locked.
In Alanland, only threads that have stayed on topic can be loc/me slaps himself. Hard. In the face.
Quote from: kphoger on November 15, 2017, 02:45:26 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on November 15, 2017, 02:34:29 PM
This thread is so off topic now that it might as well just be locked.
In Alanland, only threads that have stayed on topic can be loc
/me slaps himself. Hard. In the face.
You tired of alanland? Or not?
Quote from: cl94 on November 06, 2017, 02:44:14 PM
Heck, coming across a surface road signed at 50 in CT is like finding a unicorn. If NY would post 55, CT typically posts 45 or less. Granted, few people follow the limits, but if you get stuck behind a person going the speed limit in one of those ridiculous 35-45 zones, it's painful. And 55? CT is the ONLY state that won't post a road with at-grades at 55 (unless there's one I'm missing somewhere) under any circumstances (even though the law allows it).
I did 55 just to see how it was.. holy crap it's slow.. good thing the CSP is not really strict like say VA state police.
For NJ Interstate highways that can go 75-80 mph are I-78 NJ PA Border to Bergen Street Overpass Newark, NJ 56 miles Eastbound but 54 miles westbound since at mp 2 I-78 west is 55 mph towards Easton,PA toll plaza where the PA 65-70 mph speed limit starts after exit 75
I-287 Morristown area
I-95 NJ Turnpike
I-295 Camden to Delaware Border
Atlantic City Expressway
https://www.nj.com/data/2018/08/should_the_speed_limit_on_njs_highways_be_higher_we_used_a_radar_gun_to_find_the_answer.html (https://www.nj.com/data/2018/08/should_the_speed_limit_on_njs_highways_be_higher_we_used_a_radar_gun_to_find_the_answer.html)
Other interstate grade freeways such as RT-18 Exit 30 US-9 to RT-138 I-195 can go 75 mph provided that Declan'O Scanlon can get his engineering speed limit bill proposal to be a
approved by the Legislature
https://www.senatenj.com/index.php/oscanlon/oscanlon-introduces-fact-based-speed-limit-bill/39427 (https://www.senatenj.com/index.php/oscanlon/oscanlon-introduces-fact-based-speed-limit-bill/39427)
Quote from: Interstatefan78 on October 17, 2018, 01:38:11 AM
For NJ Interstate highways that can go 75-80 mph are...
What about I-80 from Exit 4 through I-287? That road goes through a metric crapton of Absolutely Nothing
TM.
Quote from: tckma on October 17, 2018, 08:56:01 AM
Quote from: Interstatefan78 on October 17, 2018, 01:38:11 AM
For NJ Interstate highways that can go 75-80 mph are...
What about I-80 from Exit 4 through I-287? That road goes through a metric crapton of Absolutely NothingTM.
A lot of curvature in there - the design speed may actually be no greater than 70 mph in many stretches. BTW, from NJ 15 (exit 34) through I-287, it is not going through nothing by any stretch of the imagination.
In terms of 75 mph, I'd start with NJ Turnpike, GSP Express Lanes, I-80 Express Lanes, western I-78, and I-195.
Quote from: Alps on October 17, 2018, 06:10:01 PM
Quote from: tckma on October 17, 2018, 08:56:01 AM
Quote from: Interstatefan78 on October 17, 2018, 01:38:11 AM
For NJ Interstate highways that can go 75-80 mph are...
What about I-80 from Exit 4 through I-287? That road goes through a metric crapton of Absolutely NothingTM.
A lot of curvature in there - the design speed may actually be no greater than 70 mph in many stretches. BTW, from NJ 15 (exit 34) through I-287, it is not going through nothing by any stretch of the imagination.
In terms of 75 mph, I'd start with NJ Turnpike, GSP Express Lanes, I-80 Express Lanes, western I-78, and I-195.
Please, they could make the Turnpike 80 and still get people for speeding.
I'd limit 80 to 70 as well, honestly, due to curvature.
Quote from: Duke87 on November 06, 2017, 10:37:58 PM
I've clinched Rhode Island and I don't recall there being any. RI pretty much copies CT on speed limits - rural 2 lane roads are typically 40 or 45, with the occasional 50 if the road is improved to the highest standards the state will improve a 2 lane road to. But no 55s.
That said, every other state in the continental US has 2 lane roads posted at 55 or better. Including MA, NH, and VT, which while they all post it very sparingly do have a nonzero number of 55 zones on 2 lane roads.
Can't think of a single two-lane road in Delaware that has a speed limit over 50 (and I spend a lot of time at work looking at Street View/looking for speed limit signs for certain roads), plus its the statutory limit on a rural two-lane (yes I know the limit for "divided highways" was exceeded on 95/495 but that is a separate case anyway).
Quote from: cl94 on October 17, 2018, 06:37:50 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 17, 2018, 06:10:01 PM
Quote from: tckma on October 17, 2018, 08:56:01 AM
Quote from: Interstatefan78 on October 17, 2018, 01:38:11 AM
For NJ Interstate highways that can go 75-80 mph are...
What about I-80 from Exit 4 through I-287? That road goes through a metric crapton of Absolutely NothingTM.
A lot of curvature in there - the design speed may actually be no greater than 70 mph in many stretches. BTW, from NJ 15 (exit 34) through I-287, it is not going through nothing by any stretch of the imagination.
In terms of 75 mph, I'd start with NJ Turnpike, GSP Express Lanes, I-80 Express Lanes, western I-78, and I-195.
Please, they could make the Turnpike 80 and still get people for speeding.
I'd limit 80 to 70 as well, honestly, due to curvature.
They could make the speed limit 80 on any NJ highway and it would easily be exceeded by many.
Quote from: Duke87 on November 06, 2017, 10:37:58 PM
That said, every other state in the continental US has 2 lane roads posted at 55 or better. Including MA, NH, and VT, which while they all post it very sparingly do have a nonzero number of 55 zones on 2 lane roads.
There are NO two-lane (non-Super-2) roads I can think of in Massachusetts posted higher than 50. That includes, believe it or not, MA-2 and MA-9 as well as US-20. 55 or higher in Mass requires four lanes or more. The ONLY exception I can think of is the Super-2 section of the MA-2/US-202 concurrency between Leominster and I-91, which I believe is only posted at 55.
Granted, I haven't lived in Mass in ten years, returning in 2009 for a few days when my house finally sold, and I went to the Big E once since then... but I doubt very highly that MA has raised any speed limits in the intervening years.
Quote from: tckma on October 18, 2018, 11:52:55 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 06, 2017, 10:37:58 PM
That said, every other state in the continental US has 2 lane roads posted at 55 or better. Including MA, NH, and VT, which while they all post it very sparingly do have a nonzero number of 55 zones on 2 lane roads.
There are NO two-lane roads I can think of in Massachusetts posted higher than 50. That includes, believe it or not, MA-2 and MA-9 as well as US-20. 55 or higher in Mass requires four lanes or more. The ONLY exception I can think of is the Super-2 section of the MA-2/US-202 concurrency between Leominster and I-91, which I believe is only posted at 55.
Granted, I haven't lived in Mass in ten years, returning in 2009 for a few days when my house finally sold, and I went to the Big E once since then... but I doubt very highly that MA has raised any speed limits in the intervening years.
US 1 between Newburyport and Ipswich is posted at 55. It's almost perfectly straight.
Quote from: 1 on October 18, 2018, 11:53:58 AM
Quote from: tckma on October 18, 2018, 11:52:55 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 06, 2017, 10:37:58 PM
That said, every other state in the continental US has 2 lane roads posted at 55 or better. Including MA, NH, and VT, which while they all post it very sparingly do have a nonzero number of 55 zones on 2 lane roads.
There are NO two-lane roads I can think of in Massachusetts posted higher than 50. That includes, believe it or not, MA-2 and MA-9 as well as US-20. 55 or higher in Mass requires four lanes or more. The ONLY exception I can think of is the Super-2 section of the MA-2/US-202 concurrency between Leominster and I-91, which I believe is only posted at 55.
Granted, I haven't lived in Mass in ten years, returning in 2009 for a few days when my house finally sold, and I went to the Big E once since then... but I doubt very highly that MA has raised any speed limits in the intervening years.
US 1 between Newburyport and Ipswich is posted at 55. It's almost perfectly straight.
MA 49 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1310146,-72.0489047,3a,75y,25.7h,82.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFyJ2F5NRJvie7jx1ihQWJA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) says
"Hello." as well.
^ As does MA 119. I want to say I've seen a 55 stretch along MA 68 northwest of Holden, but I'm not 100% on that.
I believe there's a section or two of US 7 with 55 in MA as well.
Quote from: froggie on October 18, 2018, 12:10:54 PM
^ As does MA 119.
NH 119 has but if this Sept. 2008 GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7053157,-71.9189449,3a,75y,134.85h,76.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKq-KJne9UulqpcUeWoLUyg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664) of MA 119 east of the NH border is still true & current; it only has a posted speed of 50.
Quote from: froggie on October 18, 2018, 12:10:54 PM
I want to say I've seen a 55 stretch along MA 68 northwest of Holden, but I'm not 100% on that.
As of Aug. 2011, MA 68 in Rutland has/had a posted speed of 50 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3859708,-71.9054238,3a,75y,16.25h,67.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVMpvfwuLTj1Jozx1SFqDmg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
FYI: in MA, the
assumed speed limit (i.e. no signs present) along a two-lane road that's not in a thickly-settled district is 40... unless posted otherwise.
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 18, 2018, 02:09:08 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 18, 2018, 12:10:54 PM
^ As does MA 119.
NH 119 has but if this Sept. 2008 GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7053157,-71.9189449,3a,75y,134.85h,76.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKq-KJne9UulqpcUeWoLUyg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664) of MA 119 east of the NH border is still true & current; it only has a posted speed of 50.
Earlier this year is when I saw 55 along MA 119. I don't remember offhand where but it was definitely BEFORE I got to the New Hampshire line.
Quote from: vdeane on October 18, 2018, 12:57:44 PM
I believe there's a section or two of US 7 with 55 in MA as well.
There is.
55 zones on two-lane roads in MA are uncommon, but they do exist.
Quote from: Duke87 on October 19, 2018, 12:51:34 AM
Quote from: vdeane on October 18, 2018, 12:57:44 PM
I believe there's a section or two of US 7 with 55 in MA as well.
There is.
55 zones on two-lane roads in MA are uncommon, but they do exist.
If we disregard short reductions to 45-50 for curves/intersections, there are four 55 zones along US 7 in MA. Ashley Falls bypass, Sheffield-Great Barrington, Lenox bypass (4 lanes), and Lanesborough-Williamstown. US 7 may have more undivided 55 sections than any other 2-lane road in the state (3).
Quote from: froggie on October 18, 2018, 03:15:16 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 18, 2018, 02:09:08 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 18, 2018, 12:10:54 PM
^ As does MA 119.
NH 119 has but if this Sept. 2008 GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7053157,-71.9189449,3a,75y,134.85h,76.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKq-KJne9UulqpcUeWoLUyg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664) of MA 119 east of the NH border is still true & current; it only has a posted speed of 50.
Earlier this year is when I saw 55 along MA 119. I don't remember offhand where but it was definitely BEFORE I got to the New Hampshire line.
The westernmost mile of MA 119 is 55 per GIS. I wish MassDOT's GIS viewer had a speed limit layer. That would make this task easy.
MA 8 is also 55 MPH at it's southernmost end. I want to say maybe the first two or three miles in Massachusetts is 55.
Quote from: upstatenyroads on October 19, 2018, 06:17:43 PM
MA 8 is also 55 MPH at it's southernmost end. I want to say maybe the first two or three miles in Massachusetts is 55.
3.5 miles. Which is weird, because the CT side sure as hell isn't 55.
MassDOT's GIS viewer (http://gis.massdot.state.ma.us/maptemplate/roadinventory/) is here if anyone wants to take a look. Toggle between the various layers and use the "query" tool to select a segment you want to learn more about. The most interesting feature isn't the speed limits, but how little of the network is actually under MassDOT jurisdiction (we can discuss that more in the MA thread).
Since I'm at my in-laws tonight who live near it, most of MA 88 is 2 lanes and also 55 MPH. The southern end across the drawbridge to Horseneck Beach isn't, nor are the traffic signal intersections (along the lines of what cl94 mentioned), but everything else in between is 55.
Quote from: Duke87 on October 19, 2018, 12:51:34 AM
Quote from: vdeane on October 18, 2018, 12:57:44 PM
I believe there's a section or two of US 7 with 55 in MA as well.
There is.
55 zones on two-lane roads in MA are uncommon, but they do exist.
Williamstown to Pittsfield is 55.
Quote from: kphoger on November 14, 2017, 02:11:28 PM
Well, 1995hoo and I certainly drove out of state with learner's permits, and I'm sure there must be others on the forum like us. It never even occurred to me that someone would avoid driving out of state on a learner's permit–until someone told me once that some states don't honor out-of-state permits as a valid license, that is.
I know this an old post, but since the thread got revived, I figured I might as well add that I drove in both Pennsylvania and Ohio, and possibly Michigan, on just a learner's permit. With a licensed adult in the vehicle, of course.
I never drove in Canada with just a learner's permit, as I'm pretty sure that's illegal, plus at that age, I would have been a nervous wreck crossing the border as the driver.
Quote from: tckma on October 18, 2018, 11:52:55 AM
There are NO two-lane (non-Super-2) roads I can think of in Massachusetts posted higher than 50. That includes, believe it or not, MA-2 and MA-9 as well as US-20. 55 or higher in Mass requires four lanes or more. The ONLY exception I can think of is the Super-2 section of the MA-2/US-202 concurrency between Leominster and I-91, which I believe is only posted at 55.
MA 10 between I-91 and MA 63 (Bernardston/Northfield) has been posted 55 for at least the last 30 years.
Quote from: tckma on October 18, 2018, 11:52:55 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 06, 2017, 10:37:58 PM
That said, every other state in the continental US has 2 lane roads posted at 55 or better. Including MA, NH, and VT, which while they all post it very sparingly do have a nonzero number of 55 zones on 2 lane roads.
There are NO two-lane (non-Super-2) roads I can think of in Massachusetts posted higher than 50. That includes, believe it or not, MA-2 and MA-9 as well as US-20. 55 or higher in Mass requires four lanes or more. The ONLY exception I can think of is the Super-2 section of the MA-2/US-202 concurrency between Leominster and I-91, which I believe is only posted at 55.
Granted, I haven't lived in Mass in ten years, returning in 2009 for a few days when my house finally sold, and I went to the Big E once since then... but I doubt very highly that MA has raised any speed limits in the intervening years.
You're forgetting MA 49. US 6 from Dennis to Orleans used to be 55 before they added that half-assed median and lowered it to 50.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on October 28, 2018, 07:37:04 PMYou're forgetting MA 49.
Already mentioned; see Reply #161.
The default in PA should be 70, but there's definitely several straight stretches that could be 75, at least with some reconstruction to modern standards (e.g. I-78 between I-81 and US 22).
I can see 70 MPH in Southeast Massachusetts on I-495 and I-195, but I think that Route 3 and Route 24 would need major safety and windening overhauls, people drive like maniacs on those roads.
Parts of upstate NY should be next to raise their speed limit to 70. I-84 in CT and maybe part of MA should also raise their speed limits since this road is mainly rural until you reach cities like Waterbury and Hartford.
Quote from: WR of USA on January 17, 2019, 12:00:11 PM
I can see 70 MPH in Southeast Massachusetts on I-495 and I-195, but I think that Route 3 and Route 24 would need major safety and windening overhauls, people drive like maniacs on those roads.
24 is already 65 and people drive 70 already.
Quote from: Alps on October 17, 2018, 06:10:01 PM
Quote from: tckma on October 17, 2018, 08:56:01 AM
Quote from: Interstatefan78 on October 17, 2018, 01:38:11 AM
For NJ Interstate highways that can go 75-80 mph are...
What about I-80 from Exit 4 through I-287? That road goes through a metric crapton of Absolutely NothingTM.
A lot of curvature in there - the design speed may actually be no greater than 70 mph in many stretches. BTW, from NJ 15 (exit 34) through I-287, it is not going through nothing by any stretch of the imagination.
In terms of 75 mph, I'd start with NJ Turnpike, GSP Express Lanes, I-80 Express Lanes, western I-78, and I-195.
Correct Steve it's actually curvy from exits 19-25 since I've driven on that stretch of I-80 Bayshore Fwy ZH Confair HWY Bergen-Passaic Expressway and for I-78 western segment, you might be referring to PA border to Bernards Township Exit 33 CR-525 to I-287 US-22.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 18, 2019, 08:34:10 AM
Quote from: WR of USA on January 17, 2019, 12:00:11 PM
I can see 70 MPH in Southeast Massachusetts on I-495 and I-195, but I think that Route 3 and Route 24 would need major safety and windening overhauls, people drive like maniacs on those roads.
24 is already 65 and people drive 70 already.
I-495 can definitely go 70 or even 75, maybe stay 65 or up to 70 south of MA 24.
Welp, Massachusetts is considering raising the speed limit to 70 mph from 65 mph...
http://www.landlinemag.com/story.aspx?storyid=74033#.XK15NJhKhPY
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on April 10, 2019, 01:01:37 AM
Massachusetts is considering raising the speed limit to 70 mph from 65 mph...
http://www.landlinemag.com/story.aspx?storyid=74033#.XK15NJhKhPY
Not to be a Doubting-Thomas on this one but I'll believe it when I see it. If such were to become reality; it'll be the highest speed limit
ever posted in the Bay State.