This article (http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2015/03/16/columbus-ohio-bill-amendment-would-raise-speed-limits-to-75-mph-in-ohio.html) suggests just that. Although not in this text, the provision brings back the 8,000lb dual speed limit setup.
I'm down with the plan in general and while I hate the dual speed limits, a good many trucks these days are governed to what seems like 64.9995. Another part of the bill would ban left lane driving except for exiting and passing. Not going to argue one ounce on that part.
That left lane ban would certainly be a radical change.
"drunks"?
Haha whoops. Trucks, not drunks
I'm impressed with Ohio. It wasn't all that long ago that they wouldn't budge from the 65/55 limit. In a relatively short period of time, they've gone up to 70, and at least are discussing 75.
People go 75 anyway, so it only makes sense. The 85th percentile speed barely budged when it went up to 70. Heck, I was on I-90 2 days ago and, heading EB at SR 44 (where the limit goes from 65 to 70), the speed of traffic remained constant at 76.
Again, don't like the dual speed limits, but it makes a little sense. Trucks typically aren't the particularly slow ones- it's the minivans and old people.
That is some news! And IIRC, would this be the easternmost state to have a 75 MPH speed limit? The reason I'm saying this is because you'd expect to see that limit in the Western states where the population is lower and congestion is not as bad.
Quote from: Henry on March 17, 2015, 12:29:12 PM
That is some news! And IIRC, would this be the easternmost state to have a 75 MPH speed limit? The reason I'm saying this is because you'd expect to see that limit in the Western states where the population is lower and congestion is not as bad.
Nope. Maine is 75, though mostly (if not entirely) in The County.
Quote from: cl94 on March 17, 2015, 12:32:41 PM
Quote from: Henry on March 17, 2015, 12:29:12 PM
That is some news! And IIRC, would this be the easternmost state to have a 75 MPH speed limit? The reason I'm saying this is because you'd expect to see that limit in the Western states where the population is lower and congestion is not as bad.
Nope. Maine is 75, though mostly (if not entirely) in The County.
I believe the statute they passed a year or two ago
allows 75-mph speed limits on all Interstates but that no new segments were posted at anything higher than 70 mph following enactment of that law (i.e., the 75-mph segment you mentioned remains the only one).
I think a bill in Florida failed to bump the speed limit from 70 to 75.
Quote from: swbrotha100 on March 17, 2015, 01:13:44 PM
I think a bill in Florida failed to bump the speed limit from 70 to 75.
Correct, the governor vetoed it.
I'm indifferent on 75 vs 70 MPH. Most of my rural freeway driving is for work, and we're limited (by rule, not governor) to 70 MPH anyway. Maybe I'd like to go faster in my personal car, but 70 doesn't seem too slow.
The bit about split limits worries me, though. When trucks were limited to 55, the nobody but the truckers used the right lane. If there were only two lanes, that meant everyone else was stuck in the left lane at whatever speed was preferred by the slow driver in the front of the pack, usually a few MPH below the (then 65 MPH) limit. Now, those slower drivers actually use the right lane and let others pass, because the trucks aren't slowing down the whole right lane.
Quote from: vtk on March 17, 2015, 05:22:47 PM
I'm indifferent on 75 vs 70 MPH. Most of my rural freeway driving is for work, and we're limited (by rule, not governor) to 70 MPH anyway. Maybe I'd like to go faster in my personal car, but 70 doesn't seem too slow.
The bit about split limits worries me, though. When trucks were limited to 55, the nobody but the truckers used the right lane. If there were only two lanes, that meant everyone else was stuck in the left lane at whatever speed was preferred by the slow driver in the front of the pack, usually a few MPH below the (then 65 MPH) limit. Now, those slower drivers actually use the right lane and let others pass, because the trucks aren't slowing down the whole right lane.
Exactly, the split speed limit has got to go. It's good that Texas and most of Illinois has gotten rid of them.
Quote from: Sykotyk on March 17, 2015, 09:16:32 PM
Quote from: vtk on March 17, 2015, 05:22:47 PM
I'm indifferent on 75 vs 70 MPH. Most of my rural freeway driving is for work, and we're limited (by rule, not governor) to 70 MPH anyway. Maybe I'd like to go faster in my personal car, but 70 doesn't seem too slow.
The bit about split limits worries me, though. When trucks were limited to 55, the nobody but the truckers used the right lane. If there were only two lanes, that meant everyone else was stuck in the left lane at whatever speed was preferred by the slow driver in the front of the pack, usually a few MPH below the (then 65 MPH) limit. Now, those slower drivers actually use the right lane and let others pass, because the trucks aren't slowing down the whole right lane.
Exactly, the split speed limit has got to go. It's good that Texas and most of Illinois has gotten rid of them.
I agree with that assessment.
:clap:75 mph passed the Senate with no dissenting votes.😊
I like the idea of going up to 75, but I agree that it shouldn't come at the expense of going back to the split limits, especially when it's only a few years after finally getting rid of them.
As I understand it, split speeds were not included. 75 for everyone!
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 18, 2015, 05:07:38 PM
:clap:75 mph passed the Senate with no dissenting votes.😊
It still has to go back to the House, right? I believe I read the Senate bill was an amended version of what the House passed and the speed limit increase wasn't in the House bill?
To be fair, I'm not sure split limits would be as bad at 75/70 as they were at 65/55. But I'd rather not have to find out.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 18, 2015, 05:22:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 18, 2015, 05:07:38 PM
:clap:75 mph passed the Senate with no dissenting votes.😊
It still has to go back to the House, right? I believe I read the Senate bill was an amended version of what the House passed and the speed limit increase wasn't in the House bill?
It'll now go to a conference committee to work out the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill.
Quote from: vtk on March 18, 2015, 05:23:38 PM
To be fair, I'm not sure split limits would be as bad at 75/70 as they were at 65/55. But I'd rather not have to find out.
Yeah, with so many semis governed to 60something, I suppose it wouldn't have made a huge difference anyway. But I'm still glad the split limit idea was removed.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 18, 2015, 05:22:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 18, 2015, 05:07:38 PM
:clap:75 mph passed the Senate with no dissenting votes.[emoji4]
It still has to go back to the House, right? I believe I read the Senate bill was an amended version of what the House passed and the speed limit increase wasn't in the House bill?
Yeah, the House Speaker is getting cold feet about the idea but said something like "let's see the Senate's info."
Quote from: Buck87 on March 18, 2015, 05:43:43 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 18, 2015, 05:22:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on March 18, 2015, 05:07:38 PM
:clap:75 mph passed the Senate with no dissenting votes.😊
It still has to go back to the House, right? I believe I read the Senate bill was an amended version of what the House passed and the speed limit increase wasn't in the House bill?
It'll now go to a conference committee to work out the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill.
....
So if it's like Congress, both houses will then have to vote again on the compromise bill. Thanks.
Yep, and they can't amend it any further.
Also, once it gets to the governor, he has line item veto power.
I suppose it was wishful thinking, but the provision got pulled from the budget bill today.
After being approved unanimously in the Senate?
Oh well. I guess it was probably too much too soon.
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/03/75_mph_speed_limit_proposal_to.html
This article points out that while 75 mph was removed from this bill, "a legislative study committee will examine the merits of raising the speed limit"
Wonder if that will go anywhere.
Oh god above, the comments on that article...
Well at least there is a new left lane usage law added to that bill.
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/03/lane_hogs_beware_ohio_lawmaker.html
^ Though it for some reason only applies when there are at least 3 lanes in each direction :-/
Actually, according to this the left lane thing got axed as well. This article also provides some explanation about why 75 mph was shot down.
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/03/heres_why_ohio_lawmakers_scrap.html#incart_m-rpt-1
Though I did see one bit of good news in there:
QuoteSeveral lawmakers noted that they kept language in the transportation budget requiring ODOT to set up "Keep right except to pass" signs along freeways.
Legislators will take some time to see whether those signs help keep slowpokes out of the left lane, said state Rep. Ryan Smith, a Gallia County Republican who served on the conference committee.
If the signs don't work, Smith said, lawmakers will consider taking additional action.
re: the 75 MPH limit -- It was only to be a 5 MPH jump in existing 70 MPH zones. No biggie there.
re: the left lane restrictions -- "officially" declaring the retention of the KRETP signs is total Bullshiat. ODOT has had those signs in some form along highways for decades, it is a state law already, and it hasn't worked! It's a fake compromise.
Law enforcement is really saying they are either too lazy to pull over the left lane slowpokes, or they somewhat support having the road hogs do what the police are supposed to do -- keep the traffic as close to or below the posted limit.
What they should have done is at least prohibit trucks and other large commercial vehicles & RVs from using the left lane if there is more than two thru lanes, except where posted. That is something that is easily enforceable and could improve traffic flow a bit.
Quote from: thenetwork on March 30, 2015, 12:36:35 PM
What they should have done is at least prohibit trucks and other large commercial vehicles & RVs from using the left lane if there is more than two thru lanes, except where posted. That is something that is easily enforceable and could improve traffic flow a bit.
That's what New York does. Can be a pain approaching our few left exits and after left entrances as there's a wall of trucks, but things flow pretty smoothly.
A few places in Ontario also ban trucks from the left lane, but only where signed as such.