Yes, this thread sounds like a joke, but I think that there are, in certain places, where the speed limit is set too high, for different reasons (yes, I am in favor of higher speed limits in most cases).
Example 1:
TX-35 through Alvin is posted at 55 mph, however, there is tons of traffic and traffic lights on this road, so the speed rarely gets up to 50. Honestly, 55 is a bit too generous.
Link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4019608,-95.2406322,3a,75y,97.46h,76.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFEueThJbDoFv64O_38IoGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Example 2:
I-35 just south of the SH-71 interchange is posted at 70 mph, in a work zone. I think 60 or 65 would be more appropriate. As a teen driver, driving in Austin on that stretch of freeway might have been the most challenging drive I've ever had because of those speeds.
Link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.204614,-97.7593036,3a,44y,215h,80.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYoNzwRVXvMzJ9rW5sXx9qw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Are there any roads y'all know, for whatever reason, have absurdly high speed limits?
Sticking with Texas...
I think the northernmost 9 miles of I-35 should be 70 mph, not 75.
Some sections of the Autobahn.. not because the speed limit is too high, but because there is none
Quote from: ozarkman417 on May 22, 2020, 03:28:50 PM
Some sections of the Autobahn.. not because the speed limit is too high, but because there is none
I think those are too low.
Near Douglassville, TX. 2-lane road with curves, no shoulder, and plenty of driveways/county roads intersecting it, signed at 70mph: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1888097,-94.3429889,3a,75y,123.83h,84.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSyKvUhd4V-LfmWEainR4VA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Not many in Massachusetts, but I encountered one today. MA-122 in Rutland is listed at 50 MPH. Near the Paxton border it doesn't have the sight lines to back a safe 50. Most anything else like that in the state would be 40 or 45.
Thread made about this already:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20198.0
New York has many two lane roads at 55 which are sketchy and would probably be lower elsewhere.
MN 210 in Jay Cooke state park has a fairly short 40 zone between the 30 zones at edge of the nearest city and when you reach the park entrances. You won't get up to 40 because it's too curvy. 30-35 would make more sense.
Quote from: debragga on May 22, 2020, 04:56:14 PM
Near Douglassville, TX. 2-lane road with curves, no shoulder, and plenty of driveways/county roads intersecting it, signed at 70mph: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1888097,-94.3429889,3a,75y,123.83h,84.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSyKvUhd4V-LfmWEainR4VA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
70, wow! Transplant that exact road to Massachusetts and it's 50.
How is a speed limit too high? Barring something ridiculous like 70mph on a residential street, if you don't feel comfortable doing the speed limit, then just drive slower.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 22, 2020, 06:08:38 PM
How is a speed limit too high? Barring something ridiculous like 70mph on a residential street, if you don't feel comfortable doing the speed limit, then just drive slower.
Take the example of Stage Rd. in Atkinson, NH (link (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8309347,-71.1395441,16.52z)). It's at 25 MPH, but if it had the same speed limit as NH 121, which it connects to on both ends, it might be too high.
I see a lot of State Roads in Kentucky that are 55 and should be like 45 even 35 will how narrow and curvy they are.
SM-G950U
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2020, 05:42:24 PM
New York has many two lane roads at 55 which are sketchy and would probably be lower elsewhere.
It's true that some of them would be lower in other states, but that doesn't mean they're sketchy.
I wish there were more 55 mph zones, not less, especially in suburban and exurban areas.
Quote from: 1 on May 22, 2020, 06:23:12 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 22, 2020, 06:08:38 PM
How is a speed limit too high? Barring something ridiculous like 70mph on a residential street, if you don't feel comfortable doing the speed limit, then just drive slower.
Take the example of Stage Rd. in Atkinson, NH (link (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8309347,-71.1395441,16.52z)). It's at 25 MPH, but if it had the same speed limit as NH 121, which it connects to on both ends, it might be too high.
Could you not just drive slower than the limit?
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 23, 2020, 01:33:16 AM
Quote from: 1 on May 22, 2020, 06:23:12 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 22, 2020, 06:08:38 PM
How is a speed limit too high? Barring something ridiculous like 70mph on a residential street, if you don't feel comfortable doing the speed limit, then just drive slower.
Take the example of Stage Rd. in Atkinson, NH (link (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8309347,-71.1395441,16.52z)). It's at 25 MPH, but if it had the same speed limit as NH 121, which it connects to on both ends, it might be too high.
Could you not just drive slower than the limit?
The reason it's at 25 MPH is to prevent people from using it as a shortcut. At 35 or 40 (not sure what NH 121's speed limit is), I could see people using it to bypass congestion, although I've never seen congestion on this road.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 22, 2020, 06:08:38 PM
How is a speed limit too high? Barring something ridiculous like 70mph on a residential street, if you don't feel comfortable doing the speed limit, then just drive slower.
There are almost always some drivers, no matter the limit, who see the sign as a minimum of how fast they should go. Even if the users here are smart enough to go slower than the limit when it's not safe, those drivers will tailgate and pass dangerously or rear-end us at high speed.
This ^
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2020, 05:46:21 PM
Quote from: debragga on May 22, 2020, 04:56:14 PM
Near Douglassville, TX. 2-lane road with curves, no shoulder, and plenty of driveways/county roads intersecting it, signed at 70mph: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1888097,-94.3429889,3a,75y,123.83h,84.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSyKvUhd4V-LfmWEainR4VA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
70, wow! Transplant that exact road to Massachusetts and it's 50.
Agreed. That road should definitely not be 70.
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on May 23, 2020, 01:26:13 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2020, 05:46:21 PM
Quote from: debragga on May 22, 2020, 04:56:14 PM
Near Douglassville, TX. 2-lane road with curves, no shoulder, and plenty of driveways/county roads intersecting it, signed at 70mph: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1888097,-94.3429889,3a,75y,123.83h,84.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSyKvUhd4V-LfmWEainR4VA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
70, wow! Transplant that exact road to Massachusetts and it's 50.
Agreed. That road should definitely not be 70.
Everything is bigger in Texas, including the speed limits.
70 mph is reasonable on those straight stretches, the curves have advisory speeds of 55 mph.
Add this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2053853,-76.8655625,3a,19.6y,81.6h,88.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH390JVqOM65XbmdNfLAkgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) and this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7371124,-77.0668647,3a,80y,15.32h,84.58t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIiksMX-qf4M_Pk0K7Z8cjw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DIiksMX-qf4M_Pk0K7Z8cjw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D73.467926%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) to the list of 2-lane roads where 70 mph would be appropriate.
On my commute cutting between Kent East Hill and Redmond, I would usually take back roads to avoid traffic. This curve (https://goo.gl/maps/LKGHN5YdBobikzKKA) is signed with a cautionary speed of 25 mph, and it means it. Any faster and you'll leave your lane. I'm used to taking cautionary speed limits at least 5 mph higher than posted.
Edit: Fixed GSV link.
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 22, 2020, 03:13:20 PM
Yes, this thread sounds like a joke, but I think that there are, in certain places, where the speed limit is set too high, for different reasons (yes, I am in favor of higher speed limits in most cases).
Example 1:
TX-35 through Alvin is posted at 55 mph, however, there is tons of traffic and traffic lights on this road, so the speed rarely gets up to 50. Honestly, 55 is a bit too generous.
Link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4019608,-95.2406322,3a,75y,97.46h,76.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFEueThJbDoFv64O_38IoGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Example 2:
I-35 just south of the SH-71 interchange is posted at 70 mph, in a work zone. I think 60 or 65 would be more appropriate. As a teen driver, driving in Austin on that stretch of freeway might have been the most challenging drive I've ever had because of those speeds.
Link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.204614,-97.7593036,3a,44y,215h,80.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYoNzwRVXvMzJ9rW5sXx9qw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Are there any roads y'all know, for whatever reason, have absurdly high speed limits?
There are plenty of sections of CASR-1 (especially between Carmel and Morro Bay) that are unposted 2-lane undivided and therefore nominally 55MPH without advisory speeds that are safe at nowhere near 55MPH. There are even a few GATJAs where there is an advisory speed, (say 20 or 25MPH) where, after the turns that are so advised, one would reasonably think that they could go back to 55MPH or something like it only to be hit by a turn advised down to 15MPH. Try it at night in the fog.
"ROAD NOT MAINTAINED AT NIGHT"
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on May 24, 2020, 11:53:19 PM
On my commute cutting between Kent East Hill and Redmond, I would usually take back roads to avoid traffic. This curve (https://goo.gl/maps/Kv13P3xD55P1gmSVA) is signed with a cautionary speed of 25 mph, and it means it. Any faster and you'll leave your lane. I'm used to taking cautionary speed limits at least 5 mph higher than posted.
You may want to check that link. I'm seeing an image of a toll gantry along the 520.
I can't think of any two lane roads in WA that are overposted. Virtually all are reasonable-minus-5, so everybody is speeding. There are plenty of two-lane roads that could support 70, but WSDOT does not post anything over 65 along two-lane roads.
As for freeways, there's nothing posted above 70, so it would be hard to justify anything as "too high" when most modern freeways can and/or should be able to support 70mph traffic. The
only situation I can think of, where the limit might be too high relative to the speed of traffic, would be the 705 through downtown Tacoma. It's an interstate, so it automatically gets 60mph, but there's very few stretches where you aren't dealing with lane changes, merging, or exits. Average speeds seem to have increased since I moved to the area around 2011, but for a while, most drivers were neither meeting nor exceeding 60. That's less of the case now, although I don't witness quite the same level of disobedience as I do along other Seattle-area freeways.
I don't use the road that often, so I'm cautious in suggesting it, but the stretch of
WA-518 eastbound between SeaTac airport and I-5 (https://goo.gl/maps/wBA4jSNymsoNPQh47) in Tukwila is posted (like all other freeways) at 60, despite the curves being pretty tight and there being two very busy merges that result in a
ton of weaving. There are times, especially when there's a lot of flights landing, where it can feel like a bit of a free-for-all, with drivers almost dodging each other. I don't think the limit is too high, but drivers not exercising caution could get themselves in trouble coming into those curves at 60 during parts of the day.
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2020, 03:26:14 PM
Sticking with Texas...
I think the northernmost 9 miles of I-35 should be 70 mph, not 75.
Parts of US 59 should be 65 or 70 that are posted 75. There are places that are not freeway with center turn lanes, driveways of homes and businesses, and intersections very frequent that are posted at 75 mph.
Quote from: roadman65 on May 25, 2020, 09:44:06 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2020, 03:26:14 PM
Sticking with Texas...
I think the northernmost 9 miles of I-35 should be 70 mph, not 75.
Parts of US 59 should be 65 or 70 that are posted 75. There are places that are not freeway with center turn lanes, driveways of homes and businesses, and intersections very frequent that are posted at 75 mph.
US-281 south of Marble Falls is like that, but it's 4 lanes without a center turn lane, posted at 75 mph. And south of Blanco it's like that but with only 2 lanes, posted at 70 mph.
South of Marble Falls (it narrows to undivided): https://www.google.com/maps/@30.5029061,-98.3012986,3a,75y,219.64h,84.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUtpcyQWMihLXWGjbJd8HrA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
Quote from: roadman65 on May 25, 2020, 09:44:06 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2020, 03:26:14 PM
Sticking with Texas...
I think the northernmost 9 miles of I-35 should be 70 mph, not 75.
Parts of US 59 should be 65 or 70 that are posted 75. There are places that are not freeway with center turn lanes, driveways of homes and businesses, and intersections very frequent that are posted at 75 mph.
Maybe 70 mph, but I've never really had a problem with 75 mph. What areas specifically are you referring to?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 22, 2020, 05:42:24 PM
Thread made about this already:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20198.0
New York has many two lane roads at 55 which are sketchy and would probably be lower elsewhere.
New York has many two lane roads at 55 which
are sketchy and would probably be lower elsewhere. is the statewide basic speed limit for unposted roads and the basic speed law still applies.
That's why you see "end xx limit" signs when leaving town centers on, say, US 9 or NY 22. The state either set a posted limit there or gave the town permission to set its own.
The only major one I can think of in Oregon (where usually it's the opposite problem), is I-84 over Cabbage Hill just east of Pendleton. It has a 70 MPH speed limit just like the rest of I-84 in Eastern Oregon, but it can be quite hard to hit that there. In both directions, you have some curves with advisory speeds as low as 45 (and taking them at 60 in a standard car, for example, is really pushing it). Downhill it's only 2 lanes so you have to contend with trucks taking it slow. with only 1 passing lane. If traffic is light, you can definitely maintain 70+ over good stretches of it, but you gotta be careful about it.
Uphill it's 3 lanes, but often in the right lane you have a truck going 15, then in the middle a truck going 45, then everyone else in the left lane which is sketchy. Plus you need to make sure not to turn a blind corner right into a slow truck. Uphill is curvier so it's hard to maintain a faster speed. And because it's pretty steep, many cars won't take it as fast as they otherwise would. Going uphill, I usually only maintain about 65 MPH on the straight sections because I don't want to downshift and rev my engine too hard. Of course, a car with more muscle wouldn't have that issue.
While I'm glad it's 70 (nice to take advantage of in light traffic) and wouldn't necessarily advocate for lowering it, I definitely wouldn't complain if it was lowered to 65 or 60. 55 would be a bummer.
In Idaho, ID-55 (Eagle Rd) in Meridian is 50 MPH south of Fairview and 55 MPH north of Fairview. While I wouldn't necessarily say it's too fast, it's definitely well above the flow of traffic, which is 45-50 on a good day (often 35-40 in moderate traffic). It's very suburban with stop lights every 0.5-1 mile and occasional driveways and side streets (though not constant like on a normal 35 MPH suburban street). It's really nice to cruise down from the city of Eagle to I-84 at 55 MPH late at night though. In most cities (even some others in Idaho like US-95 in Coeur d'Alene) this would definitely be 45. 45 would feel pretty slow in off hours, but fit in pretty well during the day. If it was me I'd set it all to 50 and call it a day.
Quote from: ari-s-drives on May 23, 2020, 09:35:32 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 22, 2020, 06:08:38 PM
How is a speed limit too high? Barring something ridiculous like 70mph on a residential street, if you don't feel comfortable doing the speed limit, then just drive slower.
There are almost always some drivers, no matter the limit, who see the sign as a minimum of how fast they should go. Even if the users here are smart enough to go slower than the limit when it's not safe, those drivers will tailgate and pass dangerously or rear-end us at high speed.
It's not just that. If a speed limit is supposed to be the maximum limit of how fast one can safely drive on a road under normal conditions, then it's perfectly reasonable that a driver would assume any speed up to that limit is safe to drive under such conditions. This thread is about roads where it could be argued that the speed limit
isn't quite as safe to drive under normal conditions as the speed limit might lead one to believe.
The opposite is also true. If you can drive the speed limit in the middle of the biggest snowstorm in a decade, then the speed limit is too low. This applies to many of the ridiculous 35 mph suburban roads in my area.
Quote from: doorknob60 on May 26, 2020, 05:27:47 PM
In Idaho, ID-55 (Eagle Rd) in Meridian is 50 MPH south of Fairview and 55 MPH north of Fairview. While I wouldn't necessarily say it's too fast, it's definitely well above the flow of traffic, which is 45-50 on a good day (often 35-40 in moderate traffic). It's very suburban with stop lights every 0.5-1 mile and occasional driveways and side streets (though not constant like on a normal 35 MPH suburban street). It's really nice to cruise down from the city of Eagle to I-84 at 55 MPH late at night though. In most cities (even some others in Idaho like US-95 in Coeur d'Alene) this would definitely be 45. 45 would feel pretty slow in off hours, but fit in pretty well during the day. If it was me I'd set it all to 50 and call it a day.
That's a great example. I think 55 is fine on that road, as it's a true limit (I doubt they do much policing along it), but it's definitely a bit uncharacteristic for most cities to sign what is ostensibly a suburban boulevard with a highway speed limit. I think WA would cap similar roads at 50mph.
The only place where such high limits are common along arterials would be in Orange County, California. Many boulevards, especially around Irvine, have some incredibly high speed limits. I believe there is one posted at 65, and
several (https://goo.gl/maps/29DDoLjfP7iiN3A58) posted (https://goo.gl/maps/deGdKG4Q8uQTuqUVA) at 60 and 55. These are roads with mostly RIROs, but plenty of signals.
EDIT: links.
A 55 mph road where the flow of traffic is always well below the speed limit?
Look no further (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6806175,-93.2515441,3a,75y,29.65h,77.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQo7XvAYO72dR4I0D4pO7yA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1). And, just for kicks, here's another one (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1849031,-77.4306772,3a,30.5y,4.27h,91.49t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sV8BflUpjhvA_pizudwanwQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DV8BflUpjhvA_pizudwanwQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D103.82628%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) a little closer to home.
Quote from: jakeroot on May 27, 2020, 11:40:36 PM
The only place where such high limits are common along arterials would be in Orange County, California. Many boulevards, especially around Irvine, have some incredibly high speed limits. I believe there is one posted at 65, and several (https://goo.gl/maps/29DDoLjfP7iiN3A58) posted (https://goo.gl/maps/deGdKG4Q8uQTuqUVA) at 60 and 55. These are roads with mostly RIROs, but plenty of signals.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5442238,-117.6287732,3a,49.4y,174.66h,82.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfw6NgYXjq8SS3rDnHCuCrQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) used to be 65 mph, but I guess they determined that was too high and lowered it to 60 mph.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:03:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 27, 2020, 11:40:36 PM
The only place where such high limits are common along arterials would be in Orange County, California. Many boulevards, especially around Irvine, have some incredibly high speed limits. I believe there is one posted at 65, and several (https://goo.gl/maps/29DDoLjfP7iiN3A58) posted (https://goo.gl/maps/deGdKG4Q8uQTuqUVA) at 60 and 55. These are roads with mostly RIROs, but plenty of signals.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5442238,-117.6287732,3a,49.4y,174.66h,82.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfw6NgYXjq8SS3rDnHCuCrQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) used to be 65 mph, but I guess they determined that was too high and lowered it to 60 mph.
Portola Parkway was
also posted at 65 (https://goo.gl/maps/15ZC5USNioxS49Li7). It's now 50 :-D
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:03:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 27, 2020, 11:40:36 PM
The only place where such high limits are common along arterials would be in Orange County, California. Many boulevards, especially around Irvine, have some incredibly high speed limits. I believe there is one posted at 65, and several (https://goo.gl/maps/29DDoLjfP7iiN3A58) posted (https://goo.gl/maps/deGdKG4Q8uQTuqUVA) at 60 and 55. These are roads with mostly RIROs, but plenty of signals.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5442238,-117.6287732,3a,49.4y,174.66h,82.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfw6NgYXjq8SS3rDnHCuCrQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) used to be 65 mph, but I guess they determined that was too high and lowered it to 60 mph.
Irvine, in particular, seems to post high speed limits without adjusting the traffic signal timing, so it's impossible to maintain the speed limit while getting more than 1 green light.
Quote from: michravera on May 25, 2020, 03:57:37 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 22, 2020, 03:13:20 PM
Yes, this thread sounds like a joke, but I think that there are, in certain places, where the speed limit is set too high, for different reasons (yes, I am in favor of higher speed limits in most cases).
Example 1:
TX-35 through Alvin is posted at 55 mph, however, there is tons of traffic and traffic lights on this road, so the speed rarely gets up to 50. Honestly, 55 is a bit too generous.
Link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4019608,-95.2406322,3a,75y,97.46h,76.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFEueThJbDoFv64O_38IoGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Example 2:
I-35 just south of the SH-71 interchange is posted at 70 mph, in a work zone. I think 60 or 65 would be more appropriate. As a teen driver, driving in Austin on that stretch of freeway might have been the most challenging drive I've ever had because of those speeds.
Link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.204614,-97.7593036,3a,44y,215h,80.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYoNzwRVXvMzJ9rW5sXx9qw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Are there any roads y'all know, for whatever reason, have absurdly high speed limits?
There are plenty of sections of CASR-1 (especially between Carmel and Morro Bay) that are unposted 2-lane undivided and therefore nominally 55MPH without advisory speeds that are safe at nowhere near 55MPH. There are even a few GATJAs where there is an advisory speed, (say 20 or 25MPH) where, after the turns that are so advised, one would reasonably think that they could go back to 55MPH or something like it only to be hit by a turn advised down to 15MPH. Try it at night in the fog.
"ROAD NOT MAINTAINED AT NIGHT"
Caltrans tends not to try to micromanage rural highways any more than necessary (except where local political pressure is brought to bear); CA 1 through Big Sur is a prime example of that; rather than post reduced speeds, which would have course vary widely depending upon specific curvature and lines of sight, they don't bother except for the tiny "business" zones and a couple of state park/beach turnoffs that see a lot of usage. With that highway it's simple -- there's a physical limit to how fast one can travel given said curvature and reduced sight lines. For the most part, those who hit the "63 miles of hell" zone with an eye toward gaming the system learn quickly that's likely not a good plan! But those that do seem to follow the NASCAR road course game plan: take the curves as tightly as possible given oncoming traffic and go like a bat out of hell on the few semi-straight stretches. At my advanced age I don't recommend doing what I did 50 years ago this summer: those 63 miles in 54 minutes. But at that time my vehicle was a Lotus Cortina with full racing suspension (I did a lot of rallies in '68-'71 until my then-GF/future wife #1 put the kibosh on that activity). BTW, that was northbound; I wouldn't even try it SB back when I was 20 (never been particularly suicidal!).
I don't complain too often about this...after all, you can go slower and there's no minimum posted. But I was kind of surprised this bit of TX 105 is posted at 70 mph, as there were a lot more driveways than I was expecting:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.1403625,-94.4300463,3a,48.7y,298.82h,86.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUAuL0lCQhykugDAzplv3yA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
This section of MA 140 in Shrewsbury is posted at 50, even though plenty of illegal passing occurs and trucks turning on and off US 20.
Most people I've seen go around 40 - 45 max.
https://goo.gl/maps/8hE4ZSNDob5V58JB7 (https://goo.gl/maps/8hE4ZSNDob5V58JB7)
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:03:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 27, 2020, 11:40:36 PM
The only place where such high limits are common along arterials would be in Orange County, California. Many boulevards, especially around Irvine, have some incredibly high speed limits. I believe there is one posted at 65, and several (https://goo.gl/maps/29DDoLjfP7iiN3A58) posted (https://goo.gl/maps/deGdKG4Q8uQTuqUVA) at 60 and 55. These are roads with mostly RIROs, but plenty of signals.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5442238,-117.6287732,3a,49.4y,174.66h,82.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfw6NgYXjq8SS3rDnHCuCrQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) used to be 65 mph, but I guess they determined that was too high and lowered it to 60 mph.
Portola Parkway was also posted at 65 (https://goo.gl/maps/15ZC5USNioxS49Li7). It's now 50 :-D
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
Interestingly, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7031016,-117.7241238,3a,75y,309.96h,79.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s--0mh-VZfLs_7dqeBQOjdA!2e0!5s20190301T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) one was
raised from 50 mph to 55 mph.
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4801813,-117.6088707,3a,42.7y,356.36h,87.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGjyqkG7RLfwnOnLkGeynQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is still posted at 65 mph, though it's only a 1 mile segment and there's an interchange in the middle with no at-grade intersections. It's practically a small freeway segment if anything.
I can think of several roads in the Missouri Ozarks that have a speed limit of 55 mph, but that have such a continuous series of low-speed curve advisories that it's all but impossible to ever actually get up to 55 mph. I've wondered why these roads aren't just lowered to 45 mph or something instead.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4801813,-117.6088707,3a,42.7y,356.36h,87.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGjyqkG7RLfwnOnLkGeynQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is still posted at 65 mph, though it's only a 1 mile segment and there's an interchange in the middle with no at-grade intersections. It's practically a small freeway segment if anything.
Another:
the 133, south of the 405 (https://goo.gl/maps/jqaU1sMVWJVBgaSL7). Its appearance is also very freeway-like, although it has a couple signals immediately south of the 405. It remains as 65 before it drops to 60
immediately prior (https://goo.gl/maps/9PVgrBKBYtbD9jPs9) (spin camera around) to the parclo interchange with the 73 Toll Road, several miles south.
I swear on my life that there's another somewhere, and a decidedly more suburban example at that, but I can't find it.
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 07:34:46 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4801813,-117.6088707,3a,42.7y,356.36h,87.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGjyqkG7RLfwnOnLkGeynQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is still posted at 65 mph, though it's only a 1 mile segment and there's an interchange in the middle with no at-grade intersections. It's practically a small freeway segment if anything.
Another: the 133, south of the 405 (https://goo.gl/maps/jqaU1sMVWJVBgaSL7). Its appearance is also very freeway-like, although it has a couple signals immediately south of the 405. It remains as 65 before it drops to 60 immediately prior (https://goo.gl/maps/9PVgrBKBYtbD9jPs9) (spin camera around) to the parclo interchange with the 73 Toll Road, several miles south.
I swear on my life that there's another somewhere, and a decidedly more suburban example at that, but I can't find it.
And route one north of Boston (non freeway part) can't get above 50...
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 28, 2020, 09:06:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 07:34:46 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4801813,-117.6088707,3a,42.7y,356.36h,87.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGjyqkG7RLfwnOnLkGeynQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is still posted at 65 mph, though it's only a 1 mile segment and there's an interchange in the middle with no at-grade intersections. It's practically a small freeway segment if anything.
Another: the 133, south of the 405 (https://goo.gl/maps/jqaU1sMVWJVBgaSL7). Its appearance is also very freeway-like, although it has a couple signals immediately south of the 405. It remains as 65 before it drops to 60 immediately prior (https://goo.gl/maps/9PVgrBKBYtbD9jPs9) (spin camera around) to the parclo interchange with the 73 Toll Road, several miles south.
I swear on my life that there's another somewhere, and a decidedly more suburban example at that, but I can't find it.
And route one north of Boston (non freeway part) can't get above 50...
Two big things (second thing being the most important):
1) these Orange County arterials are of extremely high quality, with good pavement, limited access, straightened curves, and wide lanes.
2) California has strict "speed trap" laws that prevent enforcement of speeds along roadways that have not had speed studies performed recently. These speed studies generally result in limits posted near the 85th percentile, which along many of these Orange County arterials, are pretty high. Some municipalities might have an arbitrary cap on limits within certain areas, or along certain types of roads. It's tougher to do this in California because posted limits are basically unenforceable if there isn't a speed study showing that limit to be appropriate.
As an example for number 2, look at the link I posted for the 133: the limit is 65, despite having signals and traditional right and left turn lanes. Some places might put a speed limit cap on roads like this (eg, "roads with signals cannot be higher than 55"), but California simply doesn't. If Orange County or Caltrans wanted to lower the limit, they certainly could. But it would not be enforceable (to a reasonable degree**) without a speed study showing something under 65 to be more appropriate.
** EDIT: California's Prima Facie limit is 65, so it's not like speed is entirely unenforceable. But, a non-freeway road with more than two lanes
and a limit of 45 without a speed study would have little enforcement below 65, for example.
I wish PA was like CA in this respect - well-maintained roads with high limits. Instead, we have trashy roads with low speed limits. :)
Combining CA's attitude to local limits with Texas' attitude to rural limits seems ideal in my book.
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 10:25:54 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 28, 2020, 09:06:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 07:34:46 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4801813,-117.6088707,3a,42.7y,356.36h,87.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGjyqkG7RLfwnOnLkGeynQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is still posted at 65 mph, though it's only a 1 mile segment and there's an interchange in the middle with no at-grade intersections. It's practically a small freeway segment if anything.
Another: the 133, south of the 405 (https://goo.gl/maps/jqaU1sMVWJVBgaSL7). Its appearance is also very freeway-like, although it has a couple signals immediately south of the 405. It remains as 65 before it drops to 60 immediately prior (https://goo.gl/maps/9PVgrBKBYtbD9jPs9) (spin camera around) to the parclo interchange with the 73 Toll Road, several miles south.
I swear on my life that there's another somewhere, and a decidedly more suburban example at that, but I can't find it.
And route one north of Boston (non freeway part) can't get above 50...
Two big things (second thing being the most important):
1) these Orange County arterials are of extremely high quality, with good pavement, limited access, straightened curves, and wide lanes.
2) California has strict "speed trap" laws that prevent enforcement of speeds along roadways that have not had speed studies performed recently. These speed studies generally result in limits posted near the 85th percentile, which along many of these Orange County arterials, are pretty high. Some municipalities might have an arbitrary cap on limits within certain areas, or along certain types of roads. It's tougher to do this in California because posted limits are basically unenforceable if there isn't a speed study showing that limit to be appropriate.
As an example for number 2, look at the link I posted for the 133: the limit is 65, despite having signals and traditional right and left turn lanes. Some places might put a speed limit cap on roads like this (eg, "roads with signals cannot be higher than 55"), but California simply doesn't. If Orange County or Caltrans wanted to lower the limit, they certainly could. But it would not be enforceable (to a reasonable degree**) without a speed study showing something under 65 to be more appropriate.
** EDIT: California's Prima Facie limit is 65, so it's not like speed is entirely unenforceable. But, a non-freeway road with more than two lanes and a limit of 45 without a speed study would have little enforcement below 65, for example.
California's
Statutory Maximum on Non-Freeways is 65MPH. The
Prima Facie limit is whatever lower limit might be posted. Tickets issued for violating PF speed limits in California may be overcome with "Competent Evidence" that the speed traveled was safe and reasonable. I have asked a (now former) Law Clerk for the California State Court of Appeals how strong "Competent Evidence" is. His answer was that CVC 22350 is the only place in the Statutes where it is used and that no case had ever come before the Court of Appeals causing the term to be defined, but, like me, he assumed that it would be sronger than that required to the inject "Reasonable Doubt" but far a far lower standard than "Preponderance of the Evidence".
Quote from: michravera on May 29, 2020, 03:24:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 10:25:54 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 28, 2020, 09:06:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 07:34:46 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4801813,-117.6088707,3a,42.7y,356.36h,87.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGjyqkG7RLfwnOnLkGeynQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is still posted at 65 mph, though it's only a 1 mile segment and there's an interchange in the middle with no at-grade intersections. It's practically a small freeway segment if anything.
Another: the 133, south of the 405 (https://goo.gl/maps/jqaU1sMVWJVBgaSL7). Its appearance is also very freeway-like, although it has a couple signals immediately south of the 405. It remains as 65 before it drops to 60 immediately prior (https://goo.gl/maps/9PVgrBKBYtbD9jPs9) (spin camera around) to the parclo interchange with the 73 Toll Road, several miles south.
I swear on my life that there's another somewhere, and a decidedly more suburban example at that, but I can't find it.
And route one north of Boston (non freeway part) can't get above 50...
Two big things (second thing being the most important):
1) these Orange County arterials are of extremely high quality, with good pavement, limited access, straightened curves, and wide lanes.
2) California has strict "speed trap" laws that prevent enforcement of speeds along roadways that have not had speed studies performed recently. These speed studies generally result in limits posted near the 85th percentile, which along many of these Orange County arterials, are pretty high. Some municipalities might have an arbitrary cap on limits within certain areas, or along certain types of roads. It's tougher to do this in California because posted limits are basically unenforceable if there isn't a speed study showing that limit to be appropriate.
As an example for number 2, look at the link I posted for the 133: the limit is 65, despite having signals and traditional right and left turn lanes. Some places might put a speed limit cap on roads like this (eg, "roads with signals cannot be higher than 55"), but California simply doesn't. If Orange County or Caltrans wanted to lower the limit, they certainly could. But it would not be enforceable (to a reasonable degree**) without a speed study showing something under 65 to be more appropriate.
** EDIT: California's Prima Facie limit is 65, so it's not like speed is entirely unenforceable. But, a non-freeway road with more than two lanes and a limit of 45 without a speed study would have little enforcement below 65, for example.
California's Statutory Maximum on Non-Freeways is 65MPH. The Prima Facie limit is whatever lower limit might be posted. Tickets issued for violating PF speed limits in California may be overcome with "Competent Evidence" that the speed traveled was safe and reasonable. I have asked a (now former) Law Clerk for the California State Court of Appeals how strong "Competent Evidence" is. His answer was that CVC 22350 is the only place in the Statutes where it is used and that no case had ever come before the Court of Appeals causing the term to be defined, but, like me, he assumed that it would be sronger than that required to the inject "Reasonable Doubt" but far a far lower standard than "Preponderance of the Evidence".
Surprised that California lets 65 on suburban 4 lane roads but doesn't allow 75 on rural freeways.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 29, 2020, 12:32:55 PM
Quote from: michravera on May 29, 2020, 03:24:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 10:25:54 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 28, 2020, 09:06:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 07:34:46 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4801813,-117.6088707,3a,42.7y,356.36h,87.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGjyqkG7RLfwnOnLkGeynQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is still posted at 65 mph, though it's only a 1 mile segment and there's an interchange in the middle with no at-grade intersections. It's practically a small freeway segment if anything.
Another: the 133, south of the 405 (https://goo.gl/maps/jqaU1sMVWJVBgaSL7). Its appearance is also very freeway-like, although it has a couple signals immediately south of the 405. It remains as 65 before it drops to 60 immediately prior (https://goo.gl/maps/9PVgrBKBYtbD9jPs9) (spin camera around) to the parclo interchange with the 73 Toll Road, several miles south.
I swear on my life that there's another somewhere, and a decidedly more suburban example at that, but I can't find it.
And route one north of Boston (non freeway part) can't get above 50...
Two big things (second thing being the most important):
1) these Orange County arterials are of extremely high quality, with good pavement, limited access, straightened curves, and wide lanes.
2) California has strict "speed trap" laws that prevent enforcement of speeds along roadways that have not had speed studies performed recently. These speed studies generally result in limits posted near the 85th percentile, which along many of these Orange County arterials, are pretty high. Some municipalities might have an arbitrary cap on limits within certain areas, or along certain types of roads. It's tougher to do this in California because posted limits are basically unenforceable if there isn't a speed study showing that limit to be appropriate.
As an example for number 2, look at the link I posted for the 133: the limit is 65, despite having signals and traditional right and left turn lanes. Some places might put a speed limit cap on roads like this (eg, "roads with signals cannot be higher than 55"), but California simply doesn't. If Orange County or Caltrans wanted to lower the limit, they certainly could. But it would not be enforceable (to a reasonable degree**) without a speed study showing something under 65 to be more appropriate.
** EDIT: California's Prima Facie limit is 65, so it's not like speed is entirely unenforceable. But, a non-freeway road with more than two lanes and a limit of 45 without a speed study would have little enforcement below 65, for example.
California's Statutory Maximum on Non-Freeways is 65MPH. The Prima Facie limit is whatever lower limit might be posted. Tickets issued for violating PF speed limits in California may be overcome with "Competent Evidence" that the speed traveled was safe and reasonable. I have asked a (now former) Law Clerk for the California State Court of Appeals how strong "Competent Evidence" is. His answer was that CVC 22350 is the only place in the Statutes where it is used and that no case had ever come before the Court of Appeals causing the term to be defined, but, like me, he assumed that it would be sronger than that required to the inject "Reasonable Doubt" but far a far lower standard than "Preponderance of the Evidence".
Surprised that California lets 65 on suburban 4 lane roads but doesn't allow 75 on rural freeways.
Statutory maximum of 70 mph on freeways, 65 mph on all other roads. No limits to what can go up to 65 mph, two-lane, four-lane divided highway, urban arterial, etc.
Seems like Caltrans (which posts great speed limits where they can) is in favor of high speed limits, while the Legislature (capping it at 70) is very much not.
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 29, 2020, 02:00:59 PM
Seems like Caltrans (which posts great speed limits where they can) is in favor of high speed limits, while the Legislature (capping it at 70) is very much not.
Not fully... many rural freeways are 65 mph that could easily be at least 70 mph.
Quote from: michravera on May 29, 2020, 03:24:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 10:25:54 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 28, 2020, 09:06:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 07:34:46 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4801813,-117.6088707,3a,42.7y,356.36h,87.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGjyqkG7RLfwnOnLkGeynQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is still posted at 65 mph, though it's only a 1 mile segment and there's an interchange in the middle with no at-grade intersections. It's practically a small freeway segment if anything.
Another: the 133, south of the 405 (https://goo.gl/maps/jqaU1sMVWJVBgaSL7). Its appearance is also very freeway-like, although it has a couple signals immediately south of the 405. It remains as 65 before it drops to 60 immediately prior (https://goo.gl/maps/9PVgrBKBYtbD9jPs9) (spin camera around) to the parclo interchange with the 73 Toll Road, several miles south.
I swear on my life that there's another somewhere, and a decidedly more suburban example at that, but I can't find it.
And route one north of Boston (non freeway part) can't get above 50...
Two big things (second thing being the most important):
1) these Orange County arterials are of extremely high quality, with good pavement, limited access, straightened curves, and wide lanes.
2) California has strict "speed trap" laws that prevent enforcement of speeds along roadways that have not had speed studies performed recently. These speed studies generally result in limits posted near the 85th percentile, which along many of these Orange County arterials, are pretty high. Some municipalities might have an arbitrary cap on limits within certain areas, or along certain types of roads. It's tougher to do this in California because posted limits are basically unenforceable if there isn't a speed study showing that limit to be appropriate.
As an example for number 2, look at the link I posted for the 133: the limit is 65, despite having signals and traditional right and left turn lanes. Some places might put a speed limit cap on roads like this (eg, "roads with signals cannot be higher than 55"), but California simply doesn't. If Orange County or Caltrans wanted to lower the limit, they certainly could. But it would not be enforceable (to a reasonable degree**) without a speed study showing something under 65 to be more appropriate.
** EDIT: California's Prima Facie limit is 65, so it's not like speed is entirely unenforceable. But, a non-freeway road with more than two lanes and a limit of 45 without a speed study would have little enforcement below 65, for example.
California's Statutory Maximum on Non-Freeways is 65MPH. The Prima Facie limit is whatever lower limit might be posted. Tickets issued for violating PF speed limits in California may be overcome with "Competent Evidence" that the speed traveled was safe and reasonable. I have asked a (now former) Law Clerk for the California State Court of Appeals how strong "Competent Evidence" is. His answer was that CVC 22350 is the only place in the Statutes where it is used and that no case had ever come before the Court of Appeals causing the term to be defined, but, like me, he assumed that it would be sronger than that required to the inject "Reasonable Doubt" but far a far lower standard than "Preponderance of the Evidence".
Thanks for the info.
Prima Facie speed rules confuse the hell out of me. I understood 65 to be the absolute limit for roads that A) weren't freeways, and B) weren't two-lane roads, but couldn't remember if that made it a
prima facie limit in that, exceeding that speed in all cases, unless it says otherwise, is evidence of speeding.
I believe all states have a "reasonable and prudent" (or equivalent) clause that can allow you to get out of a ticket, but California makes it a hair easier to get out of those tickets by having their speed-study laws. Once a speed study expires for a roadway, my understanding is that enforcing the limit along those roadways is a "speed trap" unto itself. There has been
bills in the past (https://cal.streetsblog.org/2020/02/07/first-bill-in-response-to-speed-limit-study-includes-small-reform-steps/) to dump the speed trap law for this exact reason. To do speed enforcement, LA (in a highly publicized move a few years ago)
raised its limits (https://la.streetsblog.org/2016/06/09/l-a-city-faces-devils-bargain-increase-limits-to-allow-speed-enforcement/), but I cannot figure out why raising the limits made them enforceable again, especially if speed studies are the root for enforcement in California.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 29, 2020, 01:30:34 PM
Statutory maximum of 70 mph on freeways, 65 mph on all other roads. No limits to what can go up to 65 mph, two-lane, four-lane divided highway, urban arterial, etc.
I believe 55 is the absolute limit for all two-lane roads.
Quote from: jakeroot on May 29, 2020, 02:10:54 PM
Quote from: michravera on May 29, 2020, 03:24:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 10:25:54 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 28, 2020, 09:06:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 07:34:46 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 28, 2020, 12:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 12:30:33 AM
I can't find it yet, but I'm 99% sure there's still an arterial posted at 65 somewhere in Orange County.
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4801813,-117.6088707,3a,42.7y,356.36h,87.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGjyqkG7RLfwnOnLkGeynQ!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) is still posted at 65 mph, though it's only a 1 mile segment and there's an interchange in the middle with no at-grade intersections. It's practically a small freeway segment if anything.
Another: the 133, south of the 405 (https://goo.gl/maps/jqaU1sMVWJVBgaSL7). Its appearance is also very freeway-like, although it has a couple signals immediately south of the 405. It remains as 65 before it drops to 60 immediately prior (https://goo.gl/maps/9PVgrBKBYtbD9jPs9) (spin camera around) to the parclo interchange with the 73 Toll Road, several miles south.
I swear on my life that there's another somewhere, and a decidedly more suburban example at that, but I can't find it.
And route one north of Boston (non freeway part) can't get above 50...
Two big things (second thing being the most important):
1) these Orange County arterials are of extremely high quality, with good pavement, limited access, straightened curves, and wide lanes.
2) California has strict "speed trap" laws that prevent enforcement of speeds along roadways that have not had speed studies performed recently. These speed studies generally result in limits posted near the 85th percentile, which along many of these Orange County arterials, are pretty high. Some municipalities might have an arbitrary cap on limits within certain areas, or along certain types of roads. It's tougher to do this in California because posted limits are basically unenforceable if there isn't a speed study showing that limit to be appropriate.
As an example for number 2, look at the link I posted for the 133: the limit is 65, despite having signals and traditional right and left turn lanes. Some places might put a speed limit cap on roads like this (eg, "roads with signals cannot be higher than 55"), but California simply doesn't. If Orange County or Caltrans wanted to lower the limit, they certainly could. But it would not be enforceable (to a reasonable degree**) without a speed study showing something under 65 to be more appropriate.
** EDIT: California's Prima Facie limit is 65, so it's not like speed is entirely unenforceable. But, a non-freeway road with more than two lanes and a limit of 45 without a speed study would have little enforcement below 65, for example.
California's Statutory Maximum on Non-Freeways is 65MPH. The Prima Facie limit is whatever lower limit might be posted. Tickets issued for violating PF speed limits in California may be overcome with "Competent Evidence" that the speed traveled was safe and reasonable. I have asked a (now former) Law Clerk for the California State Court of Appeals how strong "Competent Evidence" is. His answer was that CVC 22350 is the only place in the Statutes where it is used and that no case had ever come before the Court of Appeals causing the term to be defined, but, like me, he assumed that it would be sronger than that required to the inject "Reasonable Doubt" but far a far lower standard than "Preponderance of the Evidence".
Thanks for the info. Prima Facie speed rules confuse the hell out of me. I understood 65 to be the absolute limit for roads that A) weren't freeways, and B) weren't two-lane roads, but couldn't remember if that made it a prima facie limit in that, exceeding that speed in all cases, unless it says otherwise, is evidence of speeding.
I believe all states have a "reasonable and prudent" (or equivalent) clause that can allow you to get out of a ticket, but California makes it a hair easier to get out of those tickets by having their speed-study laws. Once a speed study expires for a roadway, my understanding is that enforcing the limit along those roadways is a "speed trap" unto itself. There has been bills in the past (https://cal.streetsblog.org/2020/02/07/first-bill-in-response-to-speed-limit-study-includes-small-reform-steps/) to dump the speed trap law for this exact reason. To do speed enforcement, LA (in a highly publicized move a few years ago) raised its limits (https://la.streetsblog.org/2016/06/09/l-a-city-faces-devils-bargain-increase-limits-to-allow-speed-enforcement/), but I cannot figure out why raising the limits made them enforceable again, especially if speed studies are the root for enforcement in California.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 29, 2020, 01:30:34 PM
Statutory maximum of 70 mph on freeways, 65 mph on all other roads. No limits to what can go up to 65 mph, two-lane, four-lane divided highway, urban arterial, etc.
I believe 55 is the absolute limit for all two-lane roads.
Nope, I've seen 60 and 65 on two lane roads in California.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 29, 2020, 02:14:55 PM
Nope, I've seen 60 and 65 on two lane roads in California.
Two lane undivided roads are capped at 55 per CVC
22349. Were you on one of those all-too-common two-lane divided highways? :-D
EDIT: wrong CVC
Quote from: jakeroot on May 29, 2020, 02:16:47 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 29, 2020, 02:14:55 PM
Nope, I've seen 60 and 65 on two lane roads in California.
Two lane undivided roads are capped at 55 per CVC 22350. Were you on one of those all-too-common two-lane divided highways? :-D
I've seen 2 lane roads in the death valley at 65 on GSV, as well as parts of US 95 and US 395.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 29, 2020, 02:24:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 29, 2020, 02:16:47 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 29, 2020, 02:14:55 PM
Nope, I've seen 60 and 65 on two lane roads in California.
Two lane undivided roads are capped at 55 per CVC 22350. Were you on one of those all-too-common two-lane divided highways? :-D
I've seen 2 lane roads in the death valley at 65 on GSV, as well as parts of US 95 and US 395.
So CVC
22349 (my bad) has an absolute limit for two-lane undivided roads of 55, but I see now that it does permit increases beyond that. It was my understanding that California simply never bothered to do so. California, almost religiously, will post two-lane roads at 55 whenever possible, but that's the most you get out of them. Other states are pickier about where they post higher limits, but will go higher with those limits (Oregon and Washington, for instance, who both post 65 along two-lane roads (70 as well in Oregon, remarkably) but are more "nanny states" in that limits get lowered for all sorts of reasons where they might not be in California (curvy section of road, for example).
I recall two-lane US-395 being mostly 65 mph between I-15 and SR-58 on my trip there a few years back.
Straight shot through the desert for 30 miles, though did have occasional passing lanes.
I was usually able to maintain 75 mph without any issues.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 25, 2020, 10:21:29 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 25, 2020, 09:44:06 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2020, 03:26:14 PM
Sticking with Texas...
I think the northernmost 9 miles of I-35 should be 70 mph, not 75.
Parts of US 59 should be 65 or 70 that are posted 75. There are places that are not freeway with center turn lanes, driveways of homes and businesses, and intersections very frequent that are posted at 75 mph.
Maybe 70 mph, but I've never really had a problem with 75 mph. What areas specifically are you referring to?
I can think of one stretch in particular on US 59, between Teneha and Timpson, has a 75 mph limit on its 4 lane "poor boy" section. IMHO, it should be set at 65 mph.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 29, 2020, 02:46:03 PM
I recall two-lane US-395 being mostly 65 mph between I-15 and SR-58 on my trip there a few years back.
Straight shot through the desert for 30 miles, though did have occasional passing lanes.
I was usually able to maintain 75 mph without any issues.
You recall it because it is!
GSV Link (https://goo.gl/maps/aoq8a7fYXdjC3UQ67). I never knew California did this. I mean, it's a textbook example of where 55 would be stupidly low.
Quote from: jakeroot on May 29, 2020, 03:08:21 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 29, 2020, 02:46:03 PM
I recall two-lane US-395 being mostly 65 mph between I-15 and SR-58 on my trip there a few years back.
Straight shot through the desert for 30 miles, though did have occasional passing lanes.
I was usually able to maintain 75 mph without any issues.
You recall it because it is! GSV Link (https://goo.gl/maps/aoq8a7fYXdjC3UQ67). I never knew California did this. I mean, it's a textbook example of where 55 would be stupidly low.
Yeah, there's quite a few others as well. Most of US-97 is 65 MPH (it was always a breath of fresh air after driving hundreds of miles through Oregon's 55 at the time). A lot of CA-139 is. CA-14 is one (only seen via GSV for me) and US-395 as mentioned (both north and south of the Nevada segment). Definitely plenty more if you look around on GSV, like CA-190 and CA-62 are two I tried now.
On the other hand, some highways switch between 55 and 65 when switching between 2 and 4 lanes, like US-101 and US-199 I believe.
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 29, 2020, 02:00:59 PM
Seems like Caltrans (which posts great speed limits where they can) is in favor of high speed limits, while the Legislature (capping it at 70) is very much not.
The Legislature doesn't often consider speed limit increases. In 1995, when the US congress gave states back the right to set their own speed limits, the California Legislature basically reinstated the pre-1974 laws (but made an additional provision that kept 55MPH as the default on some roads). There was barely a single dissenting vote in either house. I suspect that, if anyone introduced a bill to raise the maximum speed on freeways to 80MPH (and the maximum on other roads to 70MPH?) in the 44 (or 40 depending upon the precise definition***) counties that don't touch the Pacific Ocean, it would pass almost as unanimously as it did in 1995.
*** Alameda, Contra Costa, and Solano counties touch the San Francisco Bay, but not the open Pacific.
*** Sacramento county has a river that widens to touch San Francisco Bay. Whether one calls the body of water spanned by the Antioch Bridge an inlet of the bay or a wide part of a river is open to debate. Yolo county has a similar situation, but doesn't get quite as close as Sacramento does
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 10:25:54 PM
2) California has strict "speed trap" laws that prevent enforcement of speeds along roadways that have not had speed studies performed recently. These speed studies generally result in limits posted near the 85th percentile
God I'd LOVE this is New York. Every 30 mph zone would be raised to 45 overnight. Wish NYSDOT was more assertive about reviewing their own speed limits. As it stands, the request has to originate from the town/city/village board and convincing a 14-term village mayor to raise a speed limit is a nonstarter.
Quote from: crispy93 on June 05, 2020, 05:29:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 28, 2020, 10:25:54 PM
2) California has strict "speed trap" laws that prevent enforcement of speeds along roadways that have not had speed studies performed recently. These speed studies generally result in limits posted near the 85th percentile
God I'd LOVE this is New York. Every 30 mph zone would be raised to 45 overnight. Wish NYSDOT was more assertive about reviewing their own speed limits. As it stands, the request has to originate from the town/city/village board and convincing a 14-term village mayor to raise a speed limit is a nonstarter.
If you are interested in California's law, I would suggest moving to California :-D. Laws like these date to days when motorist lobbies were even stronger than they are now. Now, you'd be very hard-pressed to get a law passed like this in any other state. In fact, my guess is that the California law will be overturned before any other state would adopt a similar law*. Mostly because of the bad press that the law gets, often being cited as the reason motorists can basically drive as fast as they want without being bothered by police, and why California is so widely known for its high-paced, high-speed driving. Which sounds good, but not always on city streets. This works fine in and around Irvine, but you really don't want someone blowing down Sunset Blvd at 55 just because there's no speed study in place.
* there are probably states out there with speed trap laws, but California's is probably most infamous.
WV and KY have a bunch of narrow, 2-lane curvy and hilly roads that are signed at 55 MPH - too high. It's darn near impossible to get to 55 MPH even if one wants too on some of those roads.
Anyway, there are literally dozens of these, but the most memorable to me are:
(1) US-250 (WV) from Fairmount to Hundred.
(2) WV-7 from Hundred to New Martinsville.
(3) WV-82 from Birch River to Cowen.
(4) US-460 (KY) from Paris to Mount Sterling.
US-163 between Monument Valley and Mexican Hat. It's posted at 65, but there are a couple of places where the road has switchbacks where it really should be 45 or 50 because of the radii of the curves and because there are no shoulders.
US-41 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.1080473,-87.5540489,3a,25.8y,177.55h,96.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSdMVkKvI3wjNRLUiZ6SfUA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in northern suburbs of Evansville, IN. Speed limit is posted as 60mph, but the prevalence of traffic lights makes it difficult to actually go 60mph. I found myself letting off the gas when approaching green traffic lights in case they turned yellow.
I'm sure a search of my post history would show that I've mentioned this one before, but anyways, 60 mph on US 16A (Rapid City bypass) is impossibly high. I don't think I reached much less exceeded the limit even once on the entire route.
Quote from: webny99 on May 27, 2020, 11:47:18 PM
A 55 mph road where the flow of traffic is always well below the speed limit?
Look no further (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6806175,-93.2515441,3a,75y,29.65h,77.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQo7XvAYO72dR4I0D4pO7yA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1). And, just for kicks, here's another one (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1849031,-77.4306772,3a,30.5y,4.27h,91.49t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sV8BflUpjhvA_pizudwanwQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DV8BflUpjhvA_pizudwanwQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D103.82628%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) a little closer to home.
Sounds like M-84 in my area. North of Tittabawassee it goes to 50 mph and then to 55 mph just before Kochville and no one ever goes the speed limit. I do it if no one's holding me up from being able to do the speed limit though.
M-55 in Wellston is 60 mph and there was an article recently in the local paper that mentioned residents would like to see the speed limit reduced through there after a fatal accident. I thought the previous 55 mph limit was a little too fast and I was surprised to see MDOT raise the speed limit through Wellston when M-55 between Manistee and Cadillac was raised to 65 mph.
IMHO, M-55 in the Wellston area (Bosschem Rd to Tippy Dam Rd) should be 50 mph (or MAYBE 55 mph).
Quote from: ftballfan on June 14, 2020, 09:35:18 PM
M-55 in Wellston is 60 mph and there was an article recently in the local paper that mentioned residents would like to see the speed limit reduced through there after a fatal accident. I thought the previous 55 mph limit was a little too fast and I was surprised to see MDOT raise the speed limit through Wellston when M-55 between Manistee and Cadillac was raised to 65 mph.
IMHO, M-55 in the Wellston area (Bosschem Rd to Tippy Dam Rd) should be 50 mph (or MAYBE 55 mph).
Wow, had no idea MDOT raised it to 65 mph. I'll have to check it out when I go on the Pine River this weekend.
Quote from: webny99 on June 14, 2020, 05:42:24 PM
I'm sure a search of my post history would show that I've mentioned this one before, but anyways, 60 mph on US 16A (Rapid City bypass) is impossibly high. I don't think I reached much less exceeded the limit even once on the entire route.
I haven't driven it personally, but wouldn't that actually make it a good limit? If it's something that
most drivers don't exceed, that pretty much meets the definition of "85th percentile", assuming SD DOT is using those calculations to determine an appropriate limit.
There's a street not too far from me that has a speed limit of 35 it's a residential street where you would think that the speed limit would be 25.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 16, 2020, 04:16:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 14, 2020, 05:42:24 PM
I'm sure a search of my post history would show that I've mentioned this one before, but anyways, 60 mph on US 16A (Rapid City bypass) is impossibly high. I don't think I reached much less exceeded the limit even once on the entire route.
I haven't driven it personally, but wouldn't that actually make it a good limit? If it's something that most drivers don't exceed, that pretty much meets the definition of "85th percentile", assuming SD DOT is using those calculations to determine an appropriate limit.
Well, maybe, but it runs contrary to what I'm used to, and what's done in this part of the country. My mindset is to always go at least the speed limit so as not to obstruct other traffic, but between the curves, grades, and stoplights on 16A, 60 mph seems to usually be out of reach. It's not that you
can't reach that speed, it's just that it's usually impractical without excessive accelerating/braking. I guess I just don't see the advantage of setting it so high - at that point, what's the difference between an unsustainable limit and no limit at all?
Quote from: debragga on May 22, 2020, 04:56:14 PM
Near Douglassville, TX. 2-lane road with curves, no shoulder, and plenty of driveways/county roads intersecting it, signed at 70mph: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1888097,-94.3429889,3a,75y,123.83h,84.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSyKvUhd4V-LfmWEainR4VA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Just like the straighter FM Roads. Maybe 55 or 60 MPH between Douglassville & US59 but for sure west of SH8 70 MPH would be comensurate with the other roads. Some times a lower speed limit can cause more trouble than a high one. Especially when most of the drivers fail to follow it,
Sometimes speed limits are not about anything except fines. If the traffic regularly runs at 50 mph. If the limit is 50. There is no fine possible. If it is 40 you are ten above. If is 30 you are 20 above with the commensurately higher fine levels.
Single-track roads in the UK are all 60. Good luck hitting that.
At the risk of being ratio'd...
US 131 and I-196 in downtown Grand Rapids. The speed limit on US 131 through downtown GR stays at 70 mph, despite...
- An interchange with I-196 that requires left hand movements and turns that can be taken at no greater than 30 mph (personal experience talking), with traffic merging in on the left and inverted switches
- Heavy traffic
- An s-curve just south of the interchange that requires speeds no greater than 50 mph and requires drivers to stay in their lanes
You really can't stay at 70 mph until north of Leonard Street or south of Wealthy Street. They should consider a 60 mph zone for that area.
As for I-196, the speed limit is 65 mph, and then 70 south of Lake Michigan Drive, despite the narrow shoulders, left hand merges, left hand exits, and crazy tight curves between US 131 and Market Avenue. The speed zone should be 55-60 accordingly, but only for that section.
Huh. I didn't mind those speed limits last I was through there.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 06, 2020, 03:58:51 PM
* there are probably states out there with speed trap laws, but California's is probably most infamous.
Oklahoma has an anti-speed-trap law, but rather than operating on the basis of speed studies, it look at the percentage of a town's total revenue that is raised by traffic fines vs. that from taxes. If the fine percentage gets too high, the town loses the right to enforce traffic laws, which then become the jurisdiction of the county or the Oklahoma Highway Patrol. At least one town was forced to disincorporate when they triggered the law and the resulting loss in revenue made the town insolvent.
This was the brainchild of a pissed-off state rep that got pulled over and ticketed for going something like 1 over the speed limit in a town that was notorious for existing solely to write tickets. I want to say it was Big Cabin on US-69.
I would be fuming if I got pulled over for less than 10 mph over the speed limit, regardless of the state or town or what the speed limit was. What a waste of everyone's time.
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2020, 11:49:04 AM
I would be fuming if I got pulled over for less than 10 mph over the speed limit, regardless of the state or town or what the speed limit was. What a waste of everyone's time.
I think 10 over is pretty reasonable on roads with a 35+ limits, but probably too high for a school zone of 15 or 20. I would also guess that 6-10 over might get you stopped in quite a few areas in the country. Not in any area that I regularly drive through but I've heard stories.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 12, 2020, 05:00:35 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 06, 2020, 03:58:51 PM
* there are probably states out there with speed trap laws, but California's is probably most infamous.
Oklahoma has an anti-speed-trap law, but rather than operating on the basis of speed studies, it look at the percentage of a town's total revenue that is raised by traffic fines vs. that from taxes. If the fine percentage gets too high, the town loses the right to enforce traffic laws, which then become the jurisdiction of the county or the Oklahoma Highway Patrol. At least one town was forced to disincorporate when they triggered the law and the resulting loss in revenue made the town insolvent.
This was the brainchild of a pissed-off state rep that got pulled over and ticketed for going something like 1 over the speed limit in a town that was notorious for existing solely to write tickets. I want to say it was Big Cabin on US-69.
Looks like Big Cabin, yeah. According to
their Wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Cabin,_Oklahoma#Revenue_through_traffic_citations).
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2020, 04:52:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2020, 11:49:04 AM
I would be fuming if I got pulled over for less than 10 mph over the speed limit, regardless of the state or town or what the speed limit was. What a waste of everyone's time.
I think 10 over is pretty reasonable on roads with a 35+ limits, but probably too high for a school zone of 15 or 20. I would also guess that 6-10 over might get you stopped in quite a few areas in the country. Not in any area that I regularly drive through but I've heard stories.
Generally, I try not to exceed the speed limit if it's 25 or lower - that usually means school, neighborhood, or otherwise residential or densely populated. However, there are few local examples of through roads posted at 25 mph, like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1489872,-77.4996538,3a,75y,3.54h,85.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW4jsKRAG1USJ0n3oMftvtw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1), which makes this tough. 30 is the standard town/village speed limit around here... great in some cases, terrible in others. Generally, I try to keep it under 40 in 30 zones.
35 itself is absolutely out the window. There's such wild variation that I have lost all semblance of respect for it as a speed limit and just go as fast as I feel safe. Sometimes, that's with the cruise set at 55 mph (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1867444,-77.4432963,3a,75y,0.18h,87.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srhaVXVCv0B_1fkz0cGuCOw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1), and other times, 35 is about right (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2374249,-77.4916648,3a,75y,13.76h,82.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spsDRpfNPh1cwvM1mBRfvgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1). For anything above 35: generally speed limit +10 on surface streets, and speed limit +15 on expressways and freeways.
As far as getting stopped for less than 10 over, KRETP is the way forward, as cops tend to run their radar on the left lane.
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2020, 07:57:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2020, 04:52:31 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2020, 11:49:04 AM
I would be fuming if I got pulled over for less than 10 mph over the speed limit, regardless of the state or town or what the speed limit was. What a waste of everyone's time.
I think 10 over is pretty reasonable on roads with a 35+ limits, but probably too high for a school zone of 15 or 20. I would also guess that 6-10 over might get you stopped in quite a few areas in the country. Not in any area that I regularly drive through but I've heard stories.
Generally, I try not to exceed the speed limit if it's 25 or lower - that usually means school, neighborhood, or otherwise residential or densely populated. However, there are few local examples of through roads posted at 25 mph, like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1489872,-77.4996538,3a,75y,3.54h,85.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW4jsKRAG1USJ0n3oMftvtw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1), which makes this tough. 30 is the standard town/village speed limit around here... great in some cases, terrible in others. Generally, I try to keep it under 40 in 30 zones.
35 itself is absolutely out the window. There's such wild variation that I have lost all semblance of respect for it as a speed limit and just go as fast as I feel safe. Sometimes, that's with the cruise set at 55 mph (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1867444,-77.4432963,3a,75y,0.18h,87.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srhaVXVCv0B_1fkz0cGuCOw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1), and other times, 35 is about right (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2374249,-77.4916648,3a,75y,13.76h,82.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spsDRpfNPh1cwvM1mBRfvgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1). For anything above 35: generally speed limit +10 on surface streets, and speed limit +15 on expressways and freeways.
As far as getting stopped for less than 10 over, KRETP is the way forward, as cops tend to run their radar on the left lane.
15 above on freeways? So you would go 100 in 85 on TX 130?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 12, 2020, 09:52:23 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2020, 07:57:38 PM
... For anything above 35: generally speed limit +10 on surface streets, and speed limit +15 on expressways and freeways.
15 above on freeways? So you would go 100 in 85 on TX 130?
Not necessarily. 80 mph (on I-90 in SD) is the highest limit I've seen on the road. Also seen 75 mph in Michigan, Texas, and ND.
But I'm mostly thinking of 55, 65, and 70 mph limits. Those are the only ones we have here in the Northeast, haven't driven anything else often enough to have a SOP.
My general experience is usually 10 - 15 mph over in 55, 60, and 65 mph zones, about 7-10 mph over in 70 zones, 4-6 mph over in 75 mph zones, and 2-4 mph over in 80 and 85 mph zones.
The higher speed limits are usually set more appropriately, and the incentive to speed is lessened. Of course, some see it as an easy way to punch to 100 mph, especially on the 85 mph SH-130 stretch, but not the majority of people.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 13, 2020, 01:16:38 AM
The higher speed limits are usually set more appropriately, and the incentive to speed is lessened. Of course, some see it as an easy way to punch to 100 mph, especially on the 85 mph SH-130 stretch, but not the majority of people.
That's basically how I see it. Higher speeds are still less comfortable for most drivers. Automatically adding x-mph above every limit would imply that all limits are way off the 8th percentile; that's true in places but largely not the case everywhere.
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2020, 01:39:46 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 13, 2020, 01:16:38 AM
The higher speed limits are usually set more appropriately, and the incentive to speed is lessened. Of course, some see it as an easy way to punch to 100 mph, especially on the 85 mph SH-130 stretch, but not the majority of people.
That's basically how I see it. Higher speeds are still less comfortable for most drivers. Automatically adding x-mph above every limit would imply that all limits are way off the 8th percentile; that's true in places but largely not the case everywhere.
My examples were in general, of course there any a number of situations where a lower 55 mph or 60 mph speed limit may be appropriate for the road design and I wouldn't want to drive more than 5 mph over, though in many cases, it's artificially underposted and result in traffic flowing 10 - 15 mph over.
Another instance may be in more lenient state such as Michigan or Texas, where a 70 mph speed limit may be posted on an urban freeway. Again, this would be a type of situation where 5 - 8 mph over would be appropriate rather than 10 or 15 mph over.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 13, 2020, 01:51:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2020, 01:39:46 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 13, 2020, 01:16:38 AM
The higher speed limits are usually set more appropriately, and the incentive to speed is lessened. Of course, some see it as an easy way to punch to 100 mph, especially on the 85 mph SH-130 stretch, but not the majority of people.
That's basically how I see it. Higher speeds are still less comfortable for most drivers. Automatically adding x-mph above every limit would imply that all limits are way off the 8th percentile; that's true in places but largely not the case everywhere.
My examples were in general, of course there any a number of situations where a lower 55 mph or 60 mph speed limit may be appropriate for the road design and I wouldn't want to drive more than 5 mph over, though in many cases, it's artificially underposted and result in traffic flowing 10 - 15 mph over.
Another instance may be in more lenient state such as Michigan or Texas, where a 70 mph speed limit may be posted on an urban freeway. Again, this would be a type of situation where 5 - 8 mph over would be appropriate rather than 10 or 15 mph over.
I believe what happens in most places is that LE pretty consistently stops drivers for 10% over the 85th percentile speed. How much of a cushion that gives you depends upon how far underposted the road is. I'll bet that Texas Highway Patrol will grab you for 94MPH in the 85MPH zones (and probably for 88MPH in the 80MPH zones). You don't get much of a cushion for properly posted roads. But, they don't just stop everybody on badly underposted roads (like most 35MPH zones as an earlier poster mentioned).
I think having less tolerance for speeding (and, by extension, driving closer to the limit) the higher it is, is completely backwards.
Driving 45 in a 25 mph zone is very significant.
Driving 100 in an 80 mph zone is not that significant.
It should be done on a proportional basis, whether it's 10, or 15, or 20%. Using 10% as an example:
25 mph: tolerance of 2-3 mph over
45 mph: tolerance of 4-5 mph over
65 mph: tolerance of 6-7 mph over
85 mph: tolerance of 8-9 mph over
Right now, most of you are describing a bell curve: Stick close to the limits when they're low (25) or high (75+), but in the middle of that range, anything goes. Doesn't that mean that the speed limits in that middle range need to be increased, so we can at least be consistent?
Think of it this way: speed limits that are higher tend to be posted in places where the politicians and police do no subscribe to the "everybody will automatically drive X mph over the limit" belief, and so are they are more comfortable posting the limit at the speed they actually want traffic to drive rather than subtracting 15 mph like is common in the northeast.
The philosophy behind the raising of speed limits that we've seen in many states in recent years is NOT to make traffic faster. Rather, it's to bring the number on the sign closer to the number that's enforced, and in the process bring the people who actually follow the limit (or who only go a little bit faster) up to the existing prevailing speed of traffic.
Quote from: webny99 on June 16, 2020, 10:11:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 16, 2020, 04:16:14 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 14, 2020, 05:42:24 PM
I'm sure a search of my post history would show that I've mentioned this one before, but anyways, 60 mph on US 16A (Rapid City bypass) is impossibly high. I don't think I reached much less exceeded the limit even once on the entire route.
I haven't driven it personally, but wouldn't that actually make it a good limit? If it's something that most drivers don't exceed, that pretty much meets the definition of "85th percentile", assuming SD DOT is using those calculations to determine an appropriate limit.
Well, maybe, but it runs contrary to what I'm used to, and what's done in this part of the country. My mindset is to always go at least the speed limit so as not to obstruct other traffic, but between the curves, grades, and stoplights on 16A, 60 mph seems to usually be out of reach. It's not that you can't reach that speed, it's just that it's usually impractical without excessive accelerating/braking. I guess I just don't see the advantage of setting it so high - at that point, what's the difference between an unsustainable limit and no limit at all?
A limit like 55 or 60 is probably appropriate, although taking a look at GSV, Pennsylvania would have set it to 45. If it's a speed that one would have to be driving recklessly to exceed, it's a good limit. If you can be driving safely above it, the limit is too low.
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 14, 2020, 12:00:21 PM
If it's a speed that one would have to be driving recklessly to exceed, it's a good limit. If you can be driving safely above it, the limit is too low.
I disagree. If the limit is 55 and someone going 58 would be considered reckless, the limit is too high. If 58 is reckless, 55 probably isn't safe, and 55 is what most people are going to be driving if that's the posted limit. If 55 is on the edge between reckless and safe, probably 50 or 45 is a reasonable limit. I'm not commenting on any particular road here, just a general rule of thumb.
Quote from: doorknob60 on July 14, 2020, 04:08:50 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 14, 2020, 12:00:21 PM
If it's a speed that one would have to be driving recklessly to exceed, it's a good limit. If you can be driving safely above it, the limit is too low.
I disagree. If the limit is 55 and someone going 58 would be considered reckless, the limit is too high. If 58 is reckless, 55 probably isn't safe, and 55 is what most people are going to be driving if that's the posted limit. If 55 is on the edge between reckless and safe, probably 50 or 45 is a reasonable limit. I'm not commenting on any particular road here, just a general rule of thumb.
Should be maybe a 5 mph cushion between the posted speed limit and the maximum safe speed, based on an actual engineering assessment, not an artificial cap in some states that says above 55 mph or 60 mph on a non-freeway is dangerous.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 14, 2020, 04:34:09 PM
Quote from: doorknob60 on July 14, 2020, 04:08:50 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 14, 2020, 12:00:21 PM
If it's a speed that one would have to be driving recklessly to exceed, it's a good limit. If you can be driving safely above it, the limit is too low.
I disagree. If the limit is 55 and someone going 58 would be considered reckless, the limit is too high. If 58 is reckless, 55 probably isn't safe, and 55 is what most people are going to be driving if that's the posted limit. If 55 is on the edge between reckless and safe, probably 50 or 45 is a reasonable limit. I'm not commenting on any particular road here, just a general rule of thumb.
Should be maybe a 5 mph cushion between the posted speed limit and the maximum safe speed, based on an actual engineering assessment, not an artificial cap in some states that says above 55 mph or 60 mph on a non-freeway is dangerous.
Technically, that's how roadways are designed. If a roadway were to be built with the intention it'll be signed at 65 mph, the design of that roadway would safely support a limit of 70 or 75 mph.
Quote from: webny99 on July 13, 2020, 07:58:14 AM
I think having less tolerance for speeding (and, by extension, driving closer to the limit) the higher it is, is completely backwards.
Driving 45 in a 25 mph zone is very significant.
Driving 100 in an 80 mph zone is not that significant.
It should be done on a proportional basis, whether it's 10, or 15, or 20%. Using 10% as an example:
25 mph: tolerance of 2-3 mph over
45 mph: tolerance of 4-5 mph over
65 mph: tolerance of 6-7 mph over
85 mph: tolerance of 8-9 mph over
Right now, most of you are describing a bell curve: Stick close to the limits when they're low (25) or high (75+), but in the middle of that range, anything goes. Doesn't that mean that the speed limits in that middle range need to be increased, so we can at least be consistent?
What do people get pulled over for going on the 80-85 roads out west?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 14, 2020, 04:39:24 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 14, 2020, 04:34:09 PM
Quote from: doorknob60 on July 14, 2020, 04:08:50 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on July 14, 2020, 12:00:21 PM
If it's a speed that one would have to be driving recklessly to exceed, it's a good limit. If you can be driving safely above it, the limit is too low.
I disagree. If the limit is 55 and someone going 58 would be considered reckless, the limit is too high. If 58 is reckless, 55 probably isn't safe, and 55 is what most people are going to be driving if that's the posted limit. If 55 is on the edge between reckless and safe, probably 50 or 45 is a reasonable limit. I'm not commenting on any particular road here, just a general rule of thumb.
Should be maybe a 5 mph cushion between the posted speed limit and the maximum safe speed, based on an actual engineering assessment, not an artificial cap in some states that says above 55 mph or 60 mph on a non-freeway is dangerous.
Technically, that's how roadways are designed. If a roadway were to be built with the intention it'll be signed at 65 mph, the design of that roadway would safely support a limit of 70 or 75 mph.
The problem is I've seen instances of wide open highways with a "design speed" of only 60 mph, and a posted limit of 55 mph. Problem is, the reality is a safe speed could reasonably be as high as 65 or 70 mph. A design speed should be based on roadway characteristic, cross section, geometry, etc. not just automatically 60 mph since a statutory speed is 55 mph.
From my experience, here in Virginia, many roads with a 60 mph "design speed" have been increased from 55 to 60 mph, and are still perfectly safe driving 65 - 70 mph, or even slightly higher. Was 60 mph the true "design speed" based on geometry and other factors of that project, or was it merely a statutory limit imposed during planning phases?
On a straight roadway with good sightlines, technically the design speed could be unlimited. The design speed comes into play for curves, sightlines, etc. Design speeds also have to factor in all traffic. A tractor trailer, for example, needs to drive at a slower speed on curves than cars. They also needs a longer stopping distance, and with that comes into play the sightlines. So it's just not you and your little four-wheel chevy that engineers have to worry about. They need to consider all traffic on the roadway.
Back when the NMSL was 55 mph, some transportation departments figured why bother going higher than a 60 mph design speed. Faster roadways cost more. And there was really no reason to belive the limits would go back to pre-NMSL speeds, especially on non limited access roadways. The max design speed would've been on a department basis or state basis. And it still exists today. VA and every other state still has a top design speed limit. No sense designing something for 120 mph when 75 mph will do.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 14, 2020, 06:08:59 PM
On a straight roadway with good sightlines, technically the design speed could be unlimited. The design speed comes into play for curves, sightlines, etc. Design speeds also have to factor in all traffic. A tractor trailer, for example, needs to drive at a slower speed on curves than cars. They also needs a longer stopping distance, and with that comes into play the sightlines. So it's just not you and your little four-wheel chevy that engineers have to worry about. They need to consider all traffic on the roadway.
Back when the NMSL was 55 mph, some transportation departments figured why bother going higher than a 60 mph design speed. Faster roadways cost more. And there was really no reason to belive the limits would go back to pre-NMSL speeds, especially on non limited access roadways. The max design speed would've been on a department basis or state basis. And it still exists today. VA and every other state still has a top design speed limit. No sense designing something for 120 mph when 75 mph will do.
My point being is even though a road has a "design speed" of per-se 60 mph, the geometry of it including sightlines, curves, etc. can all safely handle 65 to 70 mph speeds, and that's looking at technical details such as radius, superelevation, length of ramps, etc.
Here is an example of what I'm referring to. I-664 in South Hampton Roads is posted at 60 mph, though it seems the prevailing speed is closer to or over 70 mph, including with most tractor trailers who have no problem keeping up with that speed. The interstate is relatively straight, has excellent sightlines, very little gentle curvature, and lengthy ramps & acceleration lanes. The road was originally posted at 55 mph, and I'm fairly certain the "design speed" is 60 mph. Realistically though, 65 mph (or 70 mph, but less realistic) would be a fairly reasonable speed limit with a 70 mph design speed based on current design. There is a speed differential of 10 - 15 mph between those who obey the posted speed limit of 60 mph and those who drive a reasonable speed for the road (70 - 75 mph).
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 14, 2020, 05:04:32 PM
What do people get pulled over for going on the 80-85 roads out west?
I've only driven TX-130 two times, but I personally never saw anyone driving more than 95 mph on it anyway.
Federal Blvd in Westminster in suburban Denver, between 104th and 120th Ave. 55 mph in a residential area.
A high school student was hit and killed trying to cross at the intersection with 112th a couple of years ago.
google.com.au/maps/@39.8980802,-105.0251731,3a,41.1y,196.99h,93.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRxHUoEwcviTP9bJQS5-gJw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0 (http://google.com.au/maps/@39.8980802,-105.0251731,3a,41.1y,196.99h,93.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRxHUoEwcviTP9bJQS5-gJw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0)
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 14, 2020, 05:04:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 13, 2020, 07:58:14 AM
I think having less tolerance for speeding (and, by extension, driving closer to the limit) the higher it is, is completely backwards.
Driving 45 in a 25 mph zone is very significant.
Driving 100 in an 80 mph zone is not that significant.
It should be done on a proportional basis, whether it's 10, or 15, or 20%. Using 10% as an example:
25 mph: tolerance of 2-3 mph over
45 mph: tolerance of 4-5 mph over
65 mph: tolerance of 6-7 mph over
85 mph: tolerance of 8-9 mph over
Right now, most of you are describing a bell curve: Stick close to the limits when they're low (25) or high (75+), but in the middle of that range, anything goes. Doesn't that mean that the speed limits in that middle range need to be increased, so we can at least be consistent?
What do people get pulled over for going on the 80-85 roads out west?
My experience in Texas and Arizona (and California and Nevada) is that very little speed enforcement is done on properly posted roads. There's just no point in it. Reasonable people behave reasonably. What happens in California, for instance between Utica Ave and Twisselmann Rd on I-5, where the limit is posted at the state maximum and there are no exits for over 30 km, is that CHP grabs the drivers for 100+ and don't really bother the 85/70 cars and the 70/55 trucks.
In California 100+ is a REAL ticket. You can lose your license and pay over $1000 in fines and taxes. 85/70, if you plead guilty on the second appearance when the cop shows up, gets you a fine of around $50. Now, the amount on the ticket will read a lot higher than that, but that's not the real fine, if you take it to court.
I never saw anyone pulled over for speeding on a freeway my entire time in Texas.
In Nevada, NHP often run speed enforcement on NB I-15 between Primm and Vegas (Posted 70MPH), but people blow by and aren't usually bothered. Once again, it seems that they target the 100+ drivers.
Quote from: keithvh on June 06, 2020, 09:17:38 PM
WV and KY have a bunch of narrow, 2-lane curvy and hilly roads that are signed at 55 MPH - too high. It's darn near impossible to get to 55 MPH even if one wants too on some of those roads.
Anyway, there are literally dozens of these, but the most memorable to me are:
(1) US-250 (WV) from Fairmount to Hundred.
(2) WV-7 from Hundred to New Martinsville.
(3) WV-82 from Birch River to Cowen.
(4) US-460 (KY) from Paris to Mount Sterling.
I expected this thread to have lots of people suggesting that a speed limit is too high or low for a road but didn't expect to see different ideas of what a speed limit is for. I grew up in Oregon and lived in CA/TN/IL/AK/NJ/NY and have been to every state but HI. And it's my belief and general experience that a speed limit defines (or should define) the fastest the DOT thinks it would be sensible to go on the least demanding stretches of the road bearing that limit. So a boring ass straight road with few driveways and at least a modest shoulder is probably posted too low at 55. But unless it's tail of the dragon curvy for EVERY single mile, even a very curvy road littered with a million advisory speeds would probably be posted as speed Limit 55. As others have mentioned, Massachusetts is one state that changes speed limits sometimes 3 or 4 times in a mile seemingly for the benefit of law enforcement. but in most of the US, thankfully, there are thousands of miles of roads with many curves that are posted at speeds no normal person in a normal car could or should maintain. That's the point of advisory signs.
The best showpiece for what I think is the wisdom and beauty of this approach is US-101 from Mendocino County to the OR border. Good stretches of it are 4 lanes and posted for 65. Almost none of it is flat, much of it is curvy and hilly at the same time and even some of THAT is 65 MPH and a lot of vehicles would be challenged to maintain 65 safely but the road is wide enough, lightly traveled enough and with sufficient visibility (on a clear day) that having a little more than normal speed differential seems acceptable between the people having fun in their sprightly cars and the very common motorhomes and some semi-trucks that also use that road. The worst example of the opposite is MA-2 which, while lovely, has so many rapidly changing speed limits coming into and out of each corner as to be somewhere between laughable and insulting.
Quote from: michravera on July 16, 2020, 06:24:07 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 14, 2020, 05:04:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 13, 2020, 07:58:14 AM
I think having less tolerance for speeding (and, by extension, driving closer to the limit) the higher it is, is completely backwards.
Driving 45 in a 25 mph zone is very significant.
Driving 100 in an 80 mph zone is not that significant.
It should be done on a proportional basis, whether it's 10, or 15, or 20%. Using 10% as an example:
25 mph: tolerance of 2-3 mph over
45 mph: tolerance of 4-5 mph over
65 mph: tolerance of 6-7 mph over
85 mph: tolerance of 8-9 mph over
Right now, most of you are describing a bell curve: Stick close to the limits when they're low (25) or high (75+), but in the middle of that range, anything goes. Doesn't that mean that the speed limits in that middle range need to be increased, so we can at least be consistent?
What do people get pulled over for going on the 80-85 roads out west?
My experience in Texas and Arizona (and California and Nevada) is that very little speed enforcement is done on properly posted roads. There's just no point in it. Reasonable people behave reasonably. What happens in California, for instance between Utica Ave and Twisselmann Rd on I-5, where the limit is posted at the state maximum and there are no exits for over 30 km, is that CHP grabs the drivers for 100+ and don't really bother the 85/70 cars and the 70/55 trucks.
In California 100+ is a REAL ticket. You can lose your license and pay over $1000 in fines and taxes. 85/70, if you plead guilty on the second appearance when the cop shows up, gets you a fine of around $50. Now, the amount on the ticket will read a lot higher than that, but that's not the real fine, if you take it to court.
I never saw anyone pulled over for speeding on a freeway my entire time in Texas.
In Nevada, NHP often run speed enforcement on NB I-15 between Primm and Vegas (Posted 70MPH), but people blow by and aren't usually bothered. Once again, it seems that they target the 100+ drivers.
I'm a pretty frequent traveler of I-20 between Terrell TX and Monroe LA, with a good bit of experience between Fort Worth and Dallas as well. In Texas the only place you need to be wary is Waskom (right next to the state line), and patrolling between there and DFW is VERY rare. In Louisiana, on the other hand, you could easily see 10-15 cop cars (mostly state troopers and some sheriff's deputies) in the ~100 miles between Bossier City and Monroe.
I was on NY 43 recently, and most of it was 55 even though the curves and turns made it physically impossible to go 55 most of the time.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2021, 10:24:45 PM
I was on NY 43 recently, and most of it was 55 even though the curves and turns made it physically impossible to go 55 most of the time.
NY defaults to the state limit of 55 mph on most rural state routes unless there's a reason to post a lower limit.
Quote from: webny99 on April 22, 2021, 11:26:16 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2021, 10:24:45 PM
I was on NY 43 recently, and most of it was 55 even though the curves and turns made it physically impossible to go 55 most of the time.
NY defaults to the state limit of 55 mph on most rural state routes unless there's a reason to post a lower limit.
I know, I do think in that case, a limit of 45 would be warranted.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2021, 10:24:45 PM
I was on NY 43 recently, and most of it was 55 even though the curves and turns made it physically impossible to go 55 most of the time.
You lack confidence in your vehicle. I've done 55 on that stretch right off I-90.
Quote from: Rothman on April 23, 2021, 12:34:35 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2021, 10:24:45 PM
I was on NY 43 recently, and most of it was 55 even though the curves and turns made it physically impossible to go 55 most of the time.
You lack confidence in your vehicle. I've done 55 on that stretch right off I-90.
I wasn't on that section, I was on the part east of Glass Lake (I also wasn't driving).
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 12:39:42 AM
Quote from: Rothman on April 23, 2021, 12:34:35 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2021, 10:24:45 PM
I was on NY 43 recently, and most of it was 55 even though the curves and turns made it physically impossible to go 55 most of the time.
You lack confidence in your vehicle. I've done 55 on that stretch right off I-90.
I wasn't on that section, I was on the part east of Glass Lake (I also wasn't driving).
If you weren't driving, how do you know that it was impossible?
Quote from: Rothman on April 23, 2021, 12:42:41 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 12:39:42 AM
Quote from: Rothman on April 23, 2021, 12:34:35 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2021, 10:24:45 PM
I was on NY 43 recently, and most of it was 55 even though the curves and turns made it physically impossible to go 55 most of the time.
You lack confidence in your vehicle. I've done 55 on that stretch right off I-90.
I wasn't on that section, I was on the part east of Glass Lake (I also wasn't driving).
If you weren't driving, how do you know that it was impossible?
My dad was barely hitting 45 in many parts. And he's not a slow driver.
The default speed limit for gravel roads in Québec is 70 km/h, which is often too fast considering how many of those roads are riddled with potholes.
Quote from: Rothman on April 23, 2021, 12:34:35 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2021, 10:24:45 PM
I was on NY 43 recently, and most of it was 55 even though the curves and turns made it physically impossible to go 55 most of the time.
You lack confidence in your vehicle. I've done 55 on that stretch right off I-90.
If you are in a modern passenger car, on a dry road with decent tires, your speed around curves is really only limited by your sight distance. If you know how to handle your vehicle properly you can take curves much, much faster than most drivers, even the more lead-footed ones who habitually slam on the brakes through curves.
SR 99 in Everett, WA has a section that is marked for 50 mph despite tons of driveways, unsignalized cross streets, and blind corners. I've seen some serious close calls with pedestrians crossing with the signal but drivers coming in too fast. It could probably use a road diet too, given how it doesn't need to be 7 lanes across.
Around this area, Santa Clara (city) has the most consistent & predictable speed limits. Neighborhood streets are the usual 25 mph; 2-lane arterials south of the Caltrain tracks are generally posted at 30; it goes up to 35 for 4 lanes, except for the main E-W streets (El Camino Real/CA 82, Homestead, and Stevens Creek), which are posted at 40 with some 35 sections near the shopping malls. North of the tracks is the "classic Silicon Valley"-type industrial/office complex area; 2 lanes posted at 35 and 4 lanes at 40. The only roads posted at 45 or more are the expressways -- San Tomas/Montague (posted county G4; the name changes at US 101) at 45, Central/G6 and Lawrence/G2 expressways at 50.* Generally an allowance of 5-10 mph is tolerated on the arterials south of the tracks, where there's primarily housing with businesses along those arterials, and 10-15 in the industrial areas (I've been told they tighten that up during commute times, though); that 10-15 seems to hold true for the expressways (again, during non-peak times). But during peak times one would be hard-pressed to average half to 2/3 of the limit at any given time in the direction of the commute. But the 800-pound gorilla of the area cities, San Jose, is all over the map (literally & figuratively) in terms of setting limits and terms of enforcement. Seeing as there's only about 1K cops for a city a trace over 1M -- and those are more often than not busy with non-traffic issues -- the chances are that speeders won't face any consequences unless they're just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Some of the newer industrial areas in San Jose have 50-55 limits on arterials; even when development -- and more driveways and crossing streets -- expands, which should be cause to reassess speed limits, San Jose doesn't appear to be in any hurry to do so unless complaints occur. Of course, the older downtown region has been the locale of many a "road diet", including the usual 5-10 drop of speed limits -- that's the planners' "test bed" for cracking down on car traffic -- but they leave the industrial and outlying areas alone in that regard. Suffice it to say that speeding in San Jose is a crapshoot -- but the "house" is hampered by chronic understaffing!
*Interestingly, there's more uninterrupted free movement on the lower-speed San Tomas than on the other two, which feature quite a few driveways and other potential problematic issues.
Quote from: Bruce on April 23, 2021, 05:58:39 PM
SR 99 in Everett, WA has a section that is marked for 50 mph despite tons of driveways, unsignalized cross streets, and blind corners. I've seen some serious close calls with pedestrians crossing with the signal but drivers coming in too fast. It could probably use a road diet too, given how it doesn't need to be 7 lanes across.
Reminds me of
WA 181 in Kent (https://goo.gl/maps/iJ2TjaGQsc1mPQeD6) which is also three lanes each direction with a limit of 50.
I'm not sure I can envision a road diet for Hwy 99 in Everett. The outer lanes are already bus-only, and less than two lanes each direction is inadequate in terms of providing an alternative to I-5, an important purpose that few if any other roads in the area provide.
Quote from: michravera on July 16, 2020, 06:24:07 PM
I never saw anyone pulled over for speeding on a freeway my entire time in Texas.
I was pulled over for the first time, and got my very first ticket, on I-40 in Wheeler County, Texas. Was doing something like 72 and got dinged for being over the night speed limit 65, despite the fact that it was still light out (I guess enough of the sun was under the horizon, or it was enough after the arbitrary time listed in the official almanac, for it to count as "night").
The fact you would even be pulled for 72 / 65 is sad to begin with.
Quote from: sprjus4 on April 24, 2021, 02:59:02 AM
The fact you would even be pulled for 72 / 65 is sad to begin with.
I agree. Anything less than 10 over is absurd.
Quote from: webny99 on April 24, 2021, 12:11:34 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on April 24, 2021, 02:59:02 AM
The fact you would even be pulled for 72 / 65 is sad to begin with.
I agree. Anything less than 10 over is absurd.
A lot of authorities outside the East who are less stupid with speed limits consider stricter enforcement as a trade-off for your ability to drive faster legally. Is it fair? Probably not. Scott was probably a victim of out-of-state profiling as well.
Quote from: webny99 on April 24, 2021, 12:11:34 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on April 24, 2021, 02:59:02 AM
The fact you would even be pulled for 72 / 65 is sad to begin with.
I agree. Anything less than 10 over is absurd.
In most cases, but 94 in 85 or 89 in 80 could be grounds to get pulled over, I would say 5 over if the speed limit is at least 80.
But that's not always ideal. If I'm going, say, 85 or 86 on I-10 in the middle of Texas, I'm really no danger to anyone.
For this thread, let's please not forget ADVISORY speed limits on roads with REGULATORY limits that are supposedly "too high". In my opinion, you can post a very high speed on a two lane road as long as you provide enough advance warning to slow down when it curves, to a safe speed or whatever speed is on the advisory sign. Just cause you can't go the speed limit for the entire length of a road doesn't necessarily make it "too high".
Quote from: webny99 on May 23, 2020, 05:26:21 PM
Add this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2053853,-76.8655625,3a,19.6y,81.6h,88.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH390JVqOM65XbmdNfLAkgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) and this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7371124,-77.0668647,3a,80y,15.32h,84.58t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIiksMX-qf4M_Pk0K7Z8cjw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DIiksMX-qf4M_Pk0K7Z8cjw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D73.467926%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) to the list of 2-lane roads where 70 mph would be appropriate.
If I'm not mistaken, I don't think there's anything legally precluding NYSDOT from posting 65 on those roads.
Quote from: debragga on July 17, 2020, 04:09:06 PM
Quote from: michravera on July 16, 2020, 06:24:07 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 14, 2020, 05:04:32 PM
Quote from: webny99 on July 13, 2020, 07:58:14 AM
I think having less tolerance for speeding (and, by extension, driving closer to the limit) the higher it is, is completely backwards.
Driving 45 in a 25 mph zone is very significant.
Driving 100 in an 80 mph zone is not that significant.
It should be done on a proportional basis, whether it's 10, or 15, or 20%. Using 10% as an example:
25 mph: tolerance of 2-3 mph over
45 mph: tolerance of 4-5 mph over
65 mph: tolerance of 6-7 mph over
85 mph: tolerance of 8-9 mph over
Right now, most of you are describing a bell curve: Stick close to the limits when they're low (25) or high (75+), but in the middle of that range, anything goes. Doesn't that mean that the speed limits in that middle range need to be increased, so we can at least be consistent?
What do people get pulled over for going on the 80-85 roads out west?
My experience in Texas and Arizona (and California and Nevada) is that very little speed enforcement is done on properly posted roads. There's just no point in it. Reasonable people behave reasonably. What happens in California, for instance between Utica Ave and Twisselmann Rd on I-5, where the limit is posted at the state maximum and there are no exits for over 30 km, is that CHP grabs the drivers for 100+ and don't really bother the 85/70 cars and the 70/55 trucks.
In California 100+ is a REAL ticket. You can lose your license and pay over $1000 in fines and taxes. 85/70, if you plead guilty on the second appearance when the cop shows up, gets you a fine of around $50. Now, the amount on the ticket will read a lot higher than that, but that's not the real fine, if you take it to court.
I never saw anyone pulled over for speeding on a freeway my entire time in Texas.
In Nevada, NHP often run speed enforcement on NB I-15 between Primm and Vegas (Posted 70MPH), but people blow by and aren't usually bothered. Once again, it seems that they target the 100+ drivers.
I'm a pretty frequent traveler of I-20 between Terrell TX and Monroe LA, with a good bit of experience between Fort Worth and Dallas as well. In Texas the only place you need to be wary is Waskom (right next to the state line), and patrolling between there and DFW is VERY rare. In Louisiana, on the other hand, you could easily see 10-15 cop cars (mostly state troopers and some sheriff's deputies) in the ~100 miles between Bossier City and Monroe.
I've always been a traveler of more of southeast Texas and down here I hardly ever see many people pulled over between Houston and San Antonio. Between Houston and Louisiana, the only place where one has to be careful is in chambers county which is just east of Houston. The speed limit there is always 5-10 mph lower than the counties on either side. Jefferson county is 75 and eastern harris county is 70, turning to 65 once inside Beltway 8. I think that is specifically so cops in chambers county can get people. I almost never see anyone stopped in Jefferson or orange counties but cross into Louisiana and there are state troopers and parish cops everywhere. All the way to Baton Rouge, then hardly any on IH 10 but tons of them on IH 12.
I think I've seen maybe three people pulled over on Ih 45 in all the years I've driven it.
Not sure if any of Harris County is posted above 65 mph.
The stretch in Chambers is an artificial joke. The lowered the speed limit from 75 mph to 65 mph for "safety reasons" a few years back, despite it being a long, flat, straight, wide open highway for miles, with traffic moving often in excess of 80 mph. Sounds like an intentional speed trap." with that alone combined with increased police presence.
The speed limits in the Houston and outer Houston area represent more of what eastern states are like, and not traditional, higher, Texas limits, largely due to environmental regulations imposed decades ago that have not been reversed with limits corrected. Then instances like I-10 where they were recently decreased for no good reason.
Tennessee has a habit of posting 55 MPH signs on rural roads just prior to a curve on the side of a hill/mountain. I nearly got into a wreck one late night on an unfamiliar to me at the time state road. As soon as the road left town the 55 MPH speed limit signs pop up. Guess what right afterward a steep snake curve pops up along with all the hairs on my back. No way to do 55 on that one.
Quote from: LilianaUwU on April 23, 2021, 12:58:45 AM
The default speed limit for gravel roads in Québec is 70 km/h, which is often too fast considering how many of those roads are riddled with potholes.
The Dalton Highway in Alaska still has gravel segments, yet the whole road is posted at 50 mph (80 km/h).
I think the gravel portion of VA 91 is posted at 35 mph but I'm not positive. The GSV imagery from the area is from 2007 so it's no help.
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on May 03, 2021, 04:27:02 PM
The Dalton Highway in Alaska still has gravel segments, yet the whole road is posted at 50 mph (80 km/h).
I think there are several states in which 55 mph is the default speed limit for gravel roads.
Never thought I'd have many additions to this collection, but here's one I encountered recently in Greenwood Lake, NY:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2131613,-74.30725,3a,17.7y,215.44h,88.52t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHq0NwxdUAOSBCrTqCM80IA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DHq0NwxdUAOSBCrTqCM80IA%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D211.7427%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 03, 2021, 08:01:01 PM
Never thought I'd have many additions to this collection, but here's one I encountered recently in Greenwood Lake, NY:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2131613,-74.30725,3a,17.7y,215.44h,88.52t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHq0NwxdUAOSBCrTqCM80IA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DHq0NwxdUAOSBCrTqCM80IA%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D211.7427%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Hard to say it's a "too high" of a limit. It just seems like an actual maximum that would cause a safety hazard to exceed that limit.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 03, 2021, 08:41:57 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 03, 2021, 08:01:01 PM
Never thought I'd have many additions to this collection, but here's one I encountered recently in Greenwood Lake, NY:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2131613,-74.30725,3a,17.7y,215.44h,88.52t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHq0NwxdUAOSBCrTqCM80IA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DHq0NwxdUAOSBCrTqCM80IA%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D211.7427%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Hard to say it's a "too high" of a limit. It just seems like an actual maximum that would cause a safety hazard to exceed that limit.
That looks like a 30 type of road.
40 mph is the maximum safe speed. If it were posted at 30, you would likely get a number of drivers going 35 - 40. With a 40 mph limit, you are setting that as the maximum safe speed, and few people would likely exceed it.
I suppose 40 is a reasonable limit for a road like that, if we're talking true limits. My sense of a reasonable limit has been warped to mean that anything fitting "I can drive a reasonable speed and still be under 10 over" is fine...
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 03, 2021, 08:50:19 PM
40 mph is the maximum safe speed. If it were posted at 30, you would likely get a number of drivers going 35 - 40. With a 40 mph limit, you are setting that as the maximum safe speed, and few people would likely exceed it.
Most drivers don't see speed limits as the maximum safe speed.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 04, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Most drivers don't see speed limits as the maximum safe speech.
:cheers:
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 04, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 03, 2021, 08:50:19 PM
40 mph is the maximum safe speed. If it were posted at 30, you would likely get a number of drivers going 35 - 40. With a 40 mph limit, you are setting that as the maximum safe speed, and few people would likely exceed it.
Most drivers don't see speed limits as the maximum safe speed.
Honestly, that's on aspect of American driving culture I don't like, especially as now as speed limits are often set lower with that in mind. It's frustrating as someone who is a rule follower to get stuck with the choice of either follow the rule and go artificially slow, or break the rule and go a more reasonable speed.
I think that every speed limit should be safe at least 5 mph over.
Quote from: vdeane on May 04, 2021, 12:53:54 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 04, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 03, 2021, 08:50:19 PM
40 mph is the maximum safe speed. If it were posted at 30, you would likely get a number of drivers going 35 - 40. With a 40 mph limit, you are setting that as the maximum safe speed, and few people would likely exceed it.
Most drivers don't see speed limits as the maximum safe speed.
Honestly, that's on aspect of American driving culture I don't like, especially as now as speed limits are often set lower with that in mind. It's frustrating as someone who is a rule follower to get stuck with the choice of either follow the rule and go artificially slow, or break the rule and go a more reasonable speed.
Agreed, and I often find myself in situations where I can easily be going 15 or even 20 mph over the posted limit simply to keep up with the flow of traffic. I'd rather be moving the same speed as opposed to being the "slow" one that is holding up traffic or creating dangerous situations between faster drivers, especially if I'm going to use the left lane to pass.
Urban areas with 55 mph or 60 mph limits around here often see 70-75 mph actual speeds, and rural 65 mph or 70 mph limits see often 80-85 mph actual speeds (except I-64 between Williamsburg and Richmond which sees 60-65 mph actual speeds in a 70 mph zone)
Ideally, urban area speed limits should be 65 or 70 mph, with 55 mph or 60 mph limited to the most urban, heavily congested, substandard portions, and rural speed limits either 75 mph or 80 mph.
VA-116 east of Roanoke's speed limit is 55. VA-116 is windy and should not be 55 mph.
Quote from: Angelo71 on May 04, 2021, 09:19:13 PM
VA-116 east of Roanoke's speed limit is 55. VA-116 is windy and should not be 55 mph.
That's why there's advisory speeds for curves where the speed limit can not be safely handled.
How about here? Why shouldn't I be able drive 55 mph here between curves?
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1997681,-79.8839063,3a,75y,200.01h,87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY-eOJDpqDd-YM915hRf13Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 04, 2021, 09:46:33 PM
Quote from: Angelo71 on May 04, 2021, 09:19:13 PM
VA-116 east of Roanoke's speed limit is 55. VA-116 is windy and should not be 55 mph.
That's why there's advisory speeds for curves where the speed limit can not be safely handled.
How about here? Why shouldn't I be able drive 55 mph here between curves?
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1997681,-79.8839063,3a,75y,200.01h,87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY-eOJDpqDd-YM915hRf13Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
You should, but in windy areas it should be 45 mph.
Quote from: Angelo71 on May 04, 2021, 09:19:13 PM
VA-116 east of Roanoke's speed limit is 55. VA-116 is windy and should not be 55 mph.
Quote from: Angelo71 on May 04, 2021, 09:47:12 PM
You should, but in windy areas it should be 45 mph.
Do you mean
winding instead? Windy means "marked by or exposed to strong winds".
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2021, 09:31:01 AM
Quote from: Angelo71 on May 04, 2021, 09:19:13 PM
VA-116 east of Roanoke's speed limit is 55. VA-116 is windy and should not be 55 mph.
Quote from: Angelo71 on May 04, 2021, 09:47:12 PM
You should, but in windy areas it should be 45 mph.
Do you mean winding instead? Windy means "marked by or exposed to strong winds".
Yes, I mean winding.
https://goo.gl/maps/qx5Bic7CDeRBXTQy7
The speed limit here was 50. After the death of a toddler, Andrew Cuomo lowered it to 30.
Quote from: Ricw24 on May 06, 2021, 11:50:39 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/qx5Bic7CDeRBXTQy7
The speed limit here was 50. After the death of a toddler, Andrew Cuomo lowered it to 30.
How many people has it actually slowed down? If an engineering study actually indicated a need for a lower limit, which it doesn't appear did, I'd imagine 45 mph would've been appropriate for that type of road. 30 mph seems well artificially low.
What was the cause of the accident?
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 06, 2021, 11:54:58 AM
How many people has it actually slowed down? If an engineering study actually indicated a need for a lower limit, which it doesn't appear did, I'd imagine 45 mph would've been appropriate for that type of road. 30 mph seems well artificially low.
What was the cause of the accident?
A driver fell asleep behind the wheel & veered off the road. There were no guard rail in place as seen here https://goo.gl/maps/v3cp8QKpdBHwNWjE9
There's also long opposition to the expressway as it runs right thru an Olmsted Park, so with some advocacy Andrew Cuomo wrote an executive order lowering the speed limit to 30 mph.
Quote from: Ricw24 on May 06, 2021, 12:46:39 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 06, 2021, 11:54:58 AM
How many people has it actually slowed down? If an engineering study actually indicated a need for a lower limit, which it doesn't appear did, I'd imagine 45 mph would've been appropriate for that type of road. 30 mph seems well artificially low.
What was the cause of the accident?
A driver fell asleep behind the wheel & veered off the road. There were no guard rail in place as seen here https://goo.gl/maps/v3cp8QKpdBHwNWjE9
There's also long opposition to the expressway as it runs right thru an Olmsted Park, so with some advocacy Andrew Cuomo wrote an executive order lowering the speed limit to 30 mph.
Sounds a bit like Route 53 in & around Glen Ellyn, IL. Except that highway manages to do OK with a 40-45mph speed limit.
Quote from: Ricw24 on May 06, 2021, 11:50:39 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/qx5Bic7CDeRBXTQy7
The speed limit here was 50. After the death of a toddler, Andrew Cuomo lowered it to 30.
How... how? 30? That might be the dumbest speed limit I've seen in my life. And why governors are setting speed limits by decree, I don't understand...
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 06, 2021, 04:34:43 PM
Quote from: Ricw24 on May 06, 2021, 11:50:39 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/qx5Bic7CDeRBXTQy7
The speed limit here was 50. After the death of a toddler, Andrew Cuomo lowered it to 30.
How... how? 30? That might be the dumbest speed limit I've seen in my life. And why governors are setting speed limits by decree, I don't understand...
Engineers should set speed limits, not politicians.
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 06, 2021, 04:34:43 PM
How... how? 30? That might be the dumbest speed limit I've seen in my life. And why governors are setting speed limits by decree, I don't understand...
Here's the letter from Cuomo to the DOT:
(https://www.buffalorising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/11391762_10153337056770505_6864090004355892217_n.jpg)
It's clearly a political move from the governor to gain support of progressive voters. He also promised a complete redesign of the expressway to convert it into a boulevard, but that never materialize. So Buffalonians are now stuck with a useless "expressway".
I love how the whole lower speed limits appeals to the progressive base apparently, but it makes me curious - how many of said advocates for low speed limits actually strictly follow them when they drive? :hmmm:
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 07, 2021, 09:53:23 AM
I love how the whole lower speed limits appeals to the progressive base apparently, but it makes me curious - how many of said advocates for low speed limits actually strictly follow them when they drive? :hmmm:
Not many I'm guessing.
If guardrails were to be installed, then what need was there for a lower speed limit?
Quote from: kphoger on May 07, 2021, 01:09:24 PM
If guardrails were to be installed, then what need was there for a lower speed limit?
They were installed. And there's no real engineering basis behind it - it's all to make people feel better or whatever.
If the governor calls it guard rail, then it is not guide rail.
Quote from: Big John on May 07, 2021, 04:40:23 PM
If the governor calls it guard rail, then it is not guide rail.
Good call!
Humph. Guiderail.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 07, 2021, 09:53:23 AM
I love how the whole lower speed limits appeals to the progressive base apparently, but it makes me curious - how many of said advocates for low speed limits actually strictly follow them when they drive? :hmmm:
The question that Progressives need to be prepared to answer is whether making something illegal makes it stop. Pointing out their hypocrisy doesn't work. The main Progressive idea is that certain people (pick a group) can't handle certain freedoms, so we must limit that freedom for them (and, by law, for everyone), but they don't expect to be hindered by the law.
The basic historical answer is "No" or at best "not really" or "probably not as much as we'd like to think".
Can you take away freedoms and not enforce those restrictions without force of arms? No
Can you take away property through confiscatory taxation? No those with sufficient means will run to somewhere less confiscatory or find a way not to declare the property as subject to taxation.
Reasonable people will follow reasonable laws that others also follow. Take away any part of that statement and it falls to pieces. Unreasonable people might not follow ANY laws. Reasonable people won't follow unreasonable laws. Reasonable people won't follow laws, no matter how reasonable, that they see everyone else violating without consequences. ... and so it goes ...
New Mexico
The speed limit on most of US 550 between Aztec and Bernalillo is posted at 70 mph. It's too high as the highway's design speed is 65 mph (perhaps lower it to 60 mph or 65 mph), and especially if you take into consideration that accidents are still quite common on the highway.
FYI that highway used to be NM 44, and most of it was just a two lane road; head-on collisions were really common during those days. But when NMDOT widened the highway from two to four lanes, it only included a 6-foot median with no barrier whatsoever.
Quote from: MattHanson939 on May 11, 2021, 01:02:28 AM
New Mexico
The speed limit on most of US 550 between Aztec and Bernalillo is posted at 70 mph. It's too high as the highway's design speed is 65 mph (perhaps lower it to 60 mph or 65 mph), and especially if you take into consideration that accidents are still quite common on the highway.
Not sure of the specific highway in question, but I'd rather have a speed limit (70 mph) that the vast majority of drivers are comfortable driving at or under with little non-compliance.
If you set the limit down to 65 mph or even 60 mph, how many drivers are now going to go 5-10 or more over? Now you're setting an artificial limit that will have less compliance and more of a variance in speed.
I can see how some people might think US 15 north of Williamsport is too high at 70 mph. I think it's reasonable, but I didn't think 65 mph was too low given the terrain and curves.
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2021, 07:49:33 AM
I can see how some people might think US 15 north of Williamsport is too high at 70 mph. I think it's reasonable, but I didn't think 65 mph was too low given the terrain and curves.
By Pennsylvania standards, I'd probably expect it to be posted at 65 like I-81 or I-84. But this is a rare instance of Pennsylvania posting an almost-reasonable speed limit. Personally, I have no issue going 77-78 and staying off police radar, but I can only really do that because of the 70 limit.
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 11, 2021, 08:55:41 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2021, 07:49:33 AM
I can see how some people might think US 15 north of Williamsport is too high at 70 mph. I think it's reasonable, but I didn't think 65 mph was too low given the terrain and curves.
By Pennsylvania standards, I'd probably expect it to be posted at 65 like I-81 or I-84. But this is a rare instance of Pennsylvania posting an almost-reasonable speed limit. Personally, I have no issue going 77-78 and staying off police radar, but I can only really do that because of the 70 limit.
PA should really sign 70 on I-81 and I-84. Maybe not I-78.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 10:16:43 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 11, 2021, 08:55:41 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2021, 07:49:33 AM
I can see how some people might think US 15 north of Williamsport is too high at 70 mph. I think it's reasonable, but I didn't think 65 mph was too low given the terrain and curves.
By Pennsylvania standards, I'd probably expect it to be posted at 65 like I-81 or I-84. But this is a rare instance of Pennsylvania posting an almost-reasonable speed limit. Personally, I have no issue going 77-78 and staying off police radar, but I can only really do that because of the 70 limit.
PA should really sign 70 on I-81 and I-84. Maybe not I-78.
If the narrow Pennsylvania Turnpike segments can be 70 mph, I-78 can also be 70 mph. It doesn't seem that unreasonable.
The mall parking lot one for 5 mph :spin: :popcorn:
Quote from: gr8daynegb on May 11, 2021, 11:09:46 AM
The mall parking lot one for 5 mph :spin: :popcorn:
I could probably run at 5mph.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 10:16:43 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 11, 2021, 08:55:41 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2021, 07:49:33 AM
I can see how some people might think US 15 north of Williamsport is too high at 70 mph. I think it's reasonable, but I didn't think 65 mph was too low given the terrain and curves.
By Pennsylvania standards, I'd probably expect it to be posted at 65 like I-81 or I-84. But this is a rare instance of Pennsylvania posting an almost-reasonable speed limit. Personally, I have no issue going 77-78 and staying off police radar, but I can only really do that because of the 70 limit.
PA should really sign 70 on I-81 and I-84. Maybe not I-78.
78 is probably fine at 70. I'll be honest: I can't think of a single rural freeway in Pennsylvania that shouldn't be posted at 70 or more, aside from the some of substandard part of I-70.
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 11, 2021, 12:20:31 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 10:16:43 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 11, 2021, 08:55:41 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2021, 07:49:33 AM
I can see how some people might think US 15 north of Williamsport is too high at 70 mph. I think it's reasonable, but I didn't think 65 mph was too low given the terrain and curves.
By Pennsylvania standards, I'd probably expect it to be posted at 65 like I-81 or I-84. But this is a rare instance of Pennsylvania posting an almost-reasonable speed limit. Personally, I have no issue going 77-78 and staying off police radar, but I can only really do that because of the 70 limit.
PA should really sign 70 on I-81 and I-84. Maybe not I-78.
78 is probably fine at 70. I'll be honest: I can't think of a single rural freeway in Pennsylvania that shouldn't be posted at 70 or more, aside from the some of substandard part of I-70.
Even I-95 near Philly could be 70. (except through downtown)
Quote from: gr8daynegb on May 11, 2021, 11:09:46 AM
The mall parking lot one for 5 mph :spin: :popcorn:
My guess is that it's not a legal limit.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 12:29:56 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 11, 2021, 12:20:31 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2021, 10:16:43 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on May 11, 2021, 08:55:41 AM
Quote from: webny99 on May 11, 2021, 07:49:33 AM
I can see how some people might think US 15 north of Williamsport is too high at 70 mph. I think it's reasonable, but I didn't think 65 mph was too low given the terrain and curves.
By Pennsylvania standards, I'd probably expect it to be posted at 65 like I-81 or I-84. But this is a rare instance of Pennsylvania posting an almost-reasonable speed limit. Personally, I have no issue going 77-78 and staying off police radar, but I can only really do that because of the 70 limit.
PA should really sign 70 on I-81 and I-84. Maybe not I-78.
78 is probably fine at 70. I'll be honest: I can't think of a single rural freeway in Pennsylvania that shouldn't be posted at 70 or more, aside from the some of substandard part of I-70.
Even I-95 near Philly could be 70. (except through downtown)
Technically 95 doesn't run thru downtown, but rather on the outskirts of downtown. Because of that, the section of 95 closest to downtown Philly is actually the nicest stretch of roadway in the area that could be 70! It's north of 676, and south of PHL airport, that would be an issue. A sharp curve just south of the Walt Whitman Bridge has taken out quite a number of vehicles also...
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 07, 2021, 09:53:23 AM
I love how the whole lower speed limits appeals to the progressive base apparently, but it makes me curious - how many of said advocates for low speed limits actually strictly follow them when they drive? :hmmm:
But most "progressives" are advocating for lower
default speed limits in urban areas. The kind based on road classification, not engineering judgement. There isn't enough staffing to "85th-percentile" every stretch of road, so you're left to set limits based on classification instead. In that case, are we really going to set a default limit of 35 or something? I wouldn't personally recommend a default limit of more than 25, and 20 is more than reasonable for neighborhood streets.
Because most speed limits are not engineering-judgement based, yes, you're going to have lower levels of adherence along roads where the classification is perhaps incorrect, or where an engineering assessment should be performed. But this ignorance of the limit is not a left/right problem; I don't think conservative-majority city councils are setting default limits of 35 or 40.
Quote from: jakeroot on May 12, 2021, 12:10:27 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 07, 2021, 09:53:23 AM
I love how the whole lower speed limits appeals to the progressive base apparently, but it makes me curious - how many of said advocates for low speed limits actually strictly follow them when they drive? :hmmm:
But most "progressives" are advocating for lower default speed limits in urban areas. The kind based on road classification, not engineering judgement. There isn't enough staffing to "85th-percentile" every stretch of road, so you're left to set limits based on classification instead. In that case, are we really going to set a default limit of 35 or something? I wouldn't personally recommend a default limit of more than 25, and 20 is more than reasonable for neighborhood streets.
Because most speed limits are not engineering-judgement based, yes, you're going to have lower levels of adherence along roads where the classification is perhaps incorrect, or where an engineering assessment should be performed. But this ignorance of the limit is not a left/right problem.
I would do 25 for small roads without a double yellow line and 30 for roads with a double yellow line.
I have no problem with people treating residential roads as minor collector roads and driving 35-40 MPH through them as shortcuts, as long as visibility is good. One 40-MPH car per 20 seconds or so is not enough to block access to and from driveways, and using alternate routes reduces congestion on the main roads.
Quote from: 1 on May 12, 2021, 12:16:48 PM
I have no problem with people treating residential roads as minor collector roads and driving 35-40 MPH through them as shortcuts, as long as visibility is good. One 40-MPH car per 20 seconds or so is not enough to block access to and from driveways, and using alternate routes reduces congestion on the main roads.
It could be an issue if there are people out, especially children who can just run into the road.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 12, 2021, 12:13:24 PM
I would do 25 for small roads without a double yellow line and 30 for roads with a double yellow line.
I'd probably opt for 20 and 30 if I had my way, but then I'd rather all roads were 20 default, and those roads specifically designed 25, 30, 35, etc be posted as such.
Quote from: 1 on May 12, 2021, 12:16:48 PM
I have no problem with people treating residential roads as minor collector roads and driving 35-40 MPH through them as shortcuts, as long as visibility is good. One 40-MPH car per 20 seconds or so is not enough to block access to and from driveways, and using alternate routes reduces congestion on the main roads.
35 to 40 is highly inappropriate for residential or neighborhood streets. Too many variables to go such a speed.
Roads where such speeds could be considered appropriate should be posted as such.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 12, 2021, 12:13:24 PM
I would do 25 for small roads without a double yellow line and 30 for roads with a double yellow line.
What does the presence or absence of a yellow line have to do with it?
I don't see why
this street (https://goo.gl/maps/B8vMyWH2vgxhJZxP8) necessarily deserves a higher speed limit than
this one (https://goo.gl/maps/AGvWis2tUpU2caXz9).
Quote from: jakeroot on May 12, 2021, 12:22:12 PM
Quote from: 1 on May 12, 2021, 12:16:48 PM
I have no problem with people treating residential roads as minor collector roads and driving 35-40 MPH through them as shortcuts, as long as visibility is good. One 40-MPH car per 20 seconds or so is not enough to block access to and from driveways, and using alternate routes reduces congestion on the main roads.
35 to 40 is highly inappropriate for residential or neighborhood streets. Too many variables to go such a speed.
Roads where such speeds could be considered appropriate should be posted as such.
It's probably because I'm used to suburban residential roads, not urban ones.
I'm mostly thinking of roads like this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7409901,-71.1305924,3a,75y,85.91h,85.25t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSavHdi0nCvkZaov4Wb3UQQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DSavHdi0nCvkZaov4Wb3UQQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D217.19151%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (although this particular one isn't an alternate route to anywhere). I wouldn't recommend going 35-40 on streets that are less than 1/4 mile long, as you'll just have to slow down again to turn.
I think 30 is too high for any residential street with uncontrolled intersections.
Quote from: kphoger on May 12, 2021, 12:25:26 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 12, 2021, 12:13:24 PM
I would do 25 for small roads without a double yellow line and 30 for roads with a double yellow line.
What does the presence or absence of a yellow line have to do with it?
I don't see why this street (https://goo.gl/maps/B8vMyWH2vgxhJZxP8) necessarily deserves a higher speed limit than this one (https://goo.gl/maps/AGvWis2tUpU2caXz9).
For setting limits, IMO, nothing.
For encouraging lower speeds, probably everything.
Example: a stretch of E. Aloha St in Seattle was lowered from
30 (https://goo.gl/maps/nN6ZP8YRMEYDxDd17) to
20 (https://goo.gl/maps/u41NM25Q38njJjtg8) a few years ago. To accomplish this, they removed the center line to make it at least appear more residential:
before (https://goo.gl/maps/93VZSY2kF6BH3ce49) /
after (https://goo.gl/maps/J9jV3MRSDbE8a9Ms7).
Quote from: 1 on May 12, 2021, 12:30:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 12, 2021, 12:22:12 PM
Quote from: 1 on May 12, 2021, 12:16:48 PM
I have no problem with people treating residential roads as minor collector roads and driving 35-40 MPH through them as shortcuts, as long as visibility is good. One 40-MPH car per 20 seconds or so is not enough to block access to and from driveways, and using alternate routes reduces congestion on the main roads.
35 to 40 is highly inappropriate for residential or neighborhood streets. Too many variables to go such a speed.
Roads where such speeds could be considered appropriate should be posted as such.
It's probably because I'm used to suburban residential roads, not urban ones.
I'm mostly thinking of roads like this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7409901,-71.1305924,3a,75y,85.91h,85.25t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSavHdi0nCvkZaov4Wb3UQQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DSavHdi0nCvkZaov4Wb3UQQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D217.19151%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (although this particular one isn't an alternate route to anywhere). I wouldn't recommend going 35-40 on streets that are less than 1/4 mile long, as you'll just have to slow down again to turn.
Suburban roads are a tough situation: not quite urban enough to warrant 20 across the board, but certainly not rural enough to permit default limits of 35+.
In the case of your example, I would need to see it in person, but 30 seems like about the fastest I'd be comfortable going: no center line, soft shoulder, adjacent housing, limited visibility from vegetation, etc.
Quote from: kphoger on May 12, 2021, 12:31:41 PM
I think 30 is too high for any residential street with uncontrolled intersections.
In the case of Seattle, all residential/neighborhood streets are 95% uncontrolled. These roads are default 20, posted only higher as necessary (but this being extremely rare).
In the Toronto area, most residential streets are 40 km/h, and there's a push to lower all residential streets to 30 km/h.
There is a suburb called Richmond Hill, where all the old streets have a limit of 50 km/h. (The new subdivisions are 40). I feel like 50 is a bit high for those streets.