On part of I-93. This naturally does not include Franconia Notch, which the article notes will remain 55, even though the speed limit is actually 45.
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20130418/NEWS06/130418978
i wonder if this is contagious, 75mph across I-80 in PA would be nice
The northeast is always behind the rest of the country on such things, but after Maine broke the ice it seems the idea of speed limits higher than 65 may slowly creep their way into this part of the country.
Practically speaking, I can see Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland eventually following through and going to 70 (Pennsylvania will be the last of those four to do so). Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey will not be so keen to follow suit because they are more built up but may eventually.
Illinois and Oregon, of course, will raise their speed limits above 65 right before armageddon.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PM
The northeast is always behind the rest of the country on such things, but after Maine broke the ice it seems the idea of speed limits higher than 65 may slowly creep their way into this part of the country.
Practically speaking, I can see Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland eventually following through and going to 70 (Pennsylvania will be the last of those four to do so). Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey will not be so keen to follow suit because they are more built up but may eventually.
Illinois and Oregon, of course, will raise their speed limits above 65 right before armageddon.
NJ's roads most suited for 70-75 MPH are the Turnpike and Parkway (southern areas). All I'll say is, the part of the Turnpike Authority responsible for speed limits is also responsible for reducing crashes and especially fatalities, so it will be a very, very tough sell. (Note that State Police tend to enforce at 75-80+, though, so it's not like it would really affect much other than perception.)
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PM
Illinois and Oregon, of course, will raise their speed limits above 65 right before armageddon.
And Wisconsin after armageddon
Quote from: Big John on April 21, 2013, 09:09:14 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PM
Illinois and Oregon, of course, will raise their speed limits above 65 right before armageddon.
And Wisconsin after armageddon
But before Hawaii (still stuck at 60).
Quote from: oscar on April 21, 2013, 09:52:26 PM
Quote from: Big John on April 21, 2013, 09:09:14 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PM
Illinois and Oregon, of course, will raise their speed limits above 65 right before armageddon.
And Wisconsin after armageddon
But before Hawaii (still stuck at 60).
Much less the District of Columbia (there's a smidgen of 55 mph on that tiny piece of the Beltway and I'm pretty sure nothing else is higher than 50).
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PM
The northeast is always behind the rest of the country on such things, but after Maine broke the ice it seems the idea of speed limits higher than 65 may slowly creep their way into this part of the country.
Practically speaking, I can see Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland eventually following through and going to 70 (Pennsylvania will be the last of those four to do so). Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey will not be so keen to follow suit because they are more built up but may eventually.
Stretches I could see going to 70 or 75 New England and eastern NY State:
NH: I-93 north of Concord to Franconia Notch, I-89 outside of Concord to just before Lebanon
VT: I-91 from north of Brattleboro to Canada with the exception of White River Junction
MA: I-90: West Stockbridge toll barrier to Exit 3, I-84 CT Line-Exit 2 (continuity w/ CT)
CT: I-84 Exit 65-MA Line, I-395 from CT 2-MA line
NY: Thruway Exits 17-23, I-88-Williamsville (65 through Syracuse area), Northway from Lake George-Plattsburgh
Quote from: Steve on April 21, 2013, 08:24:40 PM
(Note that State Police tend to enforce at 75-80+, though, so it's not like it would really affect much other than perception.)
Does anyone know off the top of their heads how speed limits affect average speeds when all else is equal? Public perception would seem to me to mean something in this regard, even though in NJ congestion probably dictates a fair amount of speed anyway.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 21, 2013, 11:41:38 PM
NH: I-93 north of Concord to Franconia Notch, I-89 outside of Concord to just before Lebanon
I would be interested in whether NH will raise speeding fines concurrently. I assume that like other places I've had the displeasure of finding out about, fines are based on mph above the limit. A 70-mph limit on the road above, for example, would raise each next severity level by 5mph as well. That not only costs NH money, but lessens deterence to go that much faster.
The only place I specifically know of this happening was NJ, which doubled its fines where it raised the limit to 65.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 22, 2013, 04:08:38 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 21, 2013, 11:41:38 PM
NH: I-93 north of Concord to Franconia Notch, I-89 outside of Concord to just before Lebanon
I would be interested in whether NH will raise speeding fines concurrently. I assume that like other places I've had the displeasure of finding out about, fines are based on mph above the limit. A 70-mph limit on the road above, for example, would raise each next severity level by 5mph as well. That not only costs NH money, but lessens deterence to go that much faster.
The only place I specifically know of this happening was NJ, which doubled its fines where it raised the limit to 65.
CT has a modified version of that. If you're stopped doing 80 in a 65 zone, it's the same fine as if it were 80 in a 55 zone; the fine for 25 over is more severe than 15 over.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PMConnecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey will not be so keen to follow suit because they are more built up but may eventually.
If memory serves, those four states
never had a posted speed limit above 65 prior to the implementation of the National Speed Limit (NSL). IIRC, the CT Turnpike never had a posted speed limit higher than 60 pre-NSL.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PM
The northeast is always behind the rest of the country on such things, but after Maine broke the ice it seems the idea of speed limits higher than 65 may slowly creep their way into this part of the country.
Practically speaking, I can see Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland eventually following through and going to 70 (Pennsylvania will be the last of those four to do so). Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey will not be so keen to follow suit because they are more built up but may eventually.
Illinois and Oregon, of course, will raise their speed limits above 65 right before armageddon.
PA had the bill to raise the Turnpike to 70 a while back. CT had the 75 mph bill oddly enough (not that it ever had a chance of really happening). CT and RI don't really have much reason for 70. I could see 70 on the MassPike west of Boston.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PM
Illinois and Oregon, of course, will raise their speed limits above 65 right before armageddon.
Sorry Duke, but Oregon may be on the slow road to armageddon with CT, MA, RI, DE and (yes) WI, but probably not with Illinois.
IL has a proposal working its way through the legislature to raise the rural speed limit to 70 - with the 6 county Chicago metropolitan area excepted. It would be nice (and smart, and realistic....) to raise the speed limits on many of the IL Tollways to 65 or 70, which would still be slower than the average speed.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to hit a moose at 70 mph.
Quote from: papaT10932 on April 22, 2013, 04:05:09 PM
I sure as hell wouldn't want to hit a moose at 70 mph.
I don't think there have been many more problems on the Maine Turnpike.
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 22, 2013, 11:08:37 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PMConnecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey will not be so keen to follow suit because they are more built up but may eventually.
If memory serves, those four states never had a posted speed limit above 65 prior to the implementation of the National Speed Limit (NSL). IIRC, the CT Turnpike never had a posted speed limit higher than 60 pre-NSL.
NJ Turnpike might have been at 70 originally in the southern parts. I forget where I saw old photos of speed limit signs that would give the definitive answer, but I believe said photos exist.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 22, 2013, 03:57:57 AM
Quote from: Steve on April 21, 2013, 08:24:40 PM
(Note that State Police tend to enforce at 75-80+, though, so it's not like it would really affect much other than perception.)
Does anyone know off the top of their heads how speed limits affect average speeds when all else is equal? Public perception would seem to me to mean something in this regard, even though in NJ congestion probably dictates a fair amount of speed anyway.
Depends on the situation. Raising 35 to 45 on a road where everyone does 35 due to strict enforcement? You'll get a 10 mph increase. Livingston, NJ had Shrewsbury Dr. (a county road) raised from 25 mph to 35 mph, and average speeds actually dropped from 40-45 mph to 30-35 mph because the new speed limit made more sense, so people stopped ignoring it. On the other hand, people routinely go 70-80 on NJ's freeways with posted limits of 55-65 mph, so raising a 55 to a 65 or a 65 to a 75 would have very little overall effect - only speeding up the slower drivers, but the faster drivers not doing a whole lot, or even reducing speed if enforcement is stepped up.
Quote from: papaT10932 on April 22, 2013, 04:05:09 PM
I sure as hell wouldn't want to hit a moose at 70 mph.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 22, 2013, 04:19:23 PM
I don't think there have been many more problems on the Maine Turnpike.
If you're making reference to the 75 mph section of I-95, it's north of where the Maine Turnpike ends.
Quote from: Steve on April 21, 2013, 08:24:40 PM
Depends on the situation. Raising 35 to 45 on a road where everyone does 35 due to strict enforcement? You'll get a 10 mph increase. Livingston, NJ had Shrewsbury Dr. (a county road) raised from 25 mph to 35 mph, and average speeds actually dropped from 40-45 mph to 30-35 mph because the new speed limit made more sense, so people stopped ignoring it. On the other hand, people routinely go 70-80 on NJ's freeways with posted limits of 55-65 mph, so raising a 55 to a 65 or a 65 to a 75 would have very little overall effect - only speeding up the slower drivers, but the faster drivers not doing a whole lot, or even reducing speed if enforcement is stepped up.
This would help make New Jersey's highways a bit safer by closing off big speed differences. It is my understanding that is why Maine raised the limit on the northern section of I-95 to 75. After finishing my clinch of I-95 back in October I can attest that traffic north of Bangor (where the limit increases to 75) tends to move with little differences in speeds of vehicles. I set my cruise to 75 for fuel consumption reasons, not because I'm afraid to speed. In all honesty, in the entire 105 mile section that's 75 mph, I was only passed by a hand full of cars. Only one went roaring by me, all the rest that passed me I'd guess to be doing about 80. I only passed a few cars that were going slightly under the limit.
Granted, it's a lightly traveled section (about 5000 AADT). But my point is that give or take 5 mph, traffic seemed to move at the speed limit.
Quote from: papaT10932 on April 22, 2013, 04:05:09 PM
I sure as hell wouldn't want to hit a moose at 70 mph.
But it would be OK to hit it at 65?
Quote from: Steve on April 22, 2013, 06:08:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 22, 2013, 11:08:37 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PMConnecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey will not be so keen to follow suit because they are more built up but may eventually.
If memory serves, those four states never had a posted speed limit above 65 prior to the implementation of the National Speed Limit (NSL). IIRC, the CT Turnpike never had a posted speed limit higher than 60 pre-NSL.
NJ Turnpike might have been at 70 originally in the southern parts. I forget where I saw old photos of speed limit signs that would give the definitive answer, but I believe said photos exist.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 22, 2013, 03:57:57 AM
Quote from: Steve on April 21, 2013, 08:24:40 PM
(Note that State Police tend to enforce at 75-80+, though, so it's not like it would really affect much other than perception.)
Does anyone know off the top of their heads how speed limits affect average speeds when all else is equal? Public perception would seem to me to mean something in this regard, even though in NJ congestion probably dictates a fair amount of speed anyway.
Depends on the situation. Raising 35 to 45 on a road where everyone does 35 due to strict enforcement? You'll get a 10 mph increase. Livingston, NJ had Shrewsbury Dr. (a county road) raised from 25 mph to 35 mph, and average speeds actually dropped from 40-45 mph to 30-35 mph because the new speed limit made more sense, so people stopped ignoring it. On the other hand, people routinely go 70-80 on NJ's freeways with posted limits of 55-65 mph, so raising a 55 to a 65 or a 65 to a 75 would have very little overall effect - only speeding up the slower drivers, but the faster drivers not doing a whole lot, or even reducing speed if enforcement is stepped up.
That's pretty much what the Michigan State Police and MDOT found when the limit was raised to 70 on many Detroit freeways. MATT HELMS: Speed limit rises to match habits (http://www.motorists.org/ma/michigan.html)
QuotePolice say drivers are more likely to obey realistic speed limits, so raising the limits reduces the speed differences between those who obey low limits and those who drive faster. Reducing the differences in turn decreases the likelihood that faster drivers will change lanes, brake suddenly, tailgate slower drivers or otherwise engage in behaviors that can lead to crashes, State Police say.
Rather than expecting faster traffic with the higher speed limit, "our experience shows us that the fastest traffic on the road might drive slightly slower when we post a more appropriate speed limit," says 1st Lt. Thad Peterson, commander of the State Police traffic services section.
An example is I-69 near Flint, which went from 55 to 70 m.p.h. in 2005.
In addition to the list that jp posted, I can also reasonably see I-91 go to 70 MPH from north of Northampton to Brattleboro, I-93 between MA 28 and I-89 (outside the tollbooth area), and the unnumbered part of the Everett north of Nashua.
Because I-95 goes through a lot of major metropolitan areas (Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington), I wouldn't bet on it going 70 MPH, even if the other Interstates do.
I've never been to New Hampshire, but this is really good news. Any time a domino falls, it means there's a chance another and another will fall.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PM
The northeast is always behind the rest of the country on such things, but after Maine broke the ice it seems the idea of speed limits higher than 65 may slowly creep their way into this part of the country.
Practically speaking, I can see Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland eventually following through and going to 70 (Pennsylvania will be the last of those four to do so). Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey will not be so keen to follow suit because they are more built up but may eventually.
To be fair, NJ actually had a higher truck speed limit than many states. NJ's top speed limit is 65 mph for all vehicles, while several states limited trucks to 55 mph. So as crowded and congested as NJ is, their truck limit was higher. (I believe most states have done away with the split speed limits though.)
And some states limit non-interstate freeways to 55 mph, whereas NJ permits non-interstate freeways to be signed at 65 mph as well. That would especially affect the state's 3 toll roads, 2.5 of which are not interstate highways.
Quote from: Steve on April 22, 2013, 06:08:56 PM
NJ Turnpike might have been at 70 originally in the southern parts. I forget where I saw old photos of speed limit signs that would give the definitive answer, but I believe said photos exist.
I think the NJ Turnpike's pre-NMSL speed limit was 60 mph.
I was on I-93 north of Littleton last week. Still 65.
Quote from: froggie on November 20, 2013, 10:12:56 AM
I was on I-93 north of Littleton last week. Still 65.
I read somewhere the new statute is effective January 1.
Will I-89 also be 70 mph?
Quote from: 1 on November 20, 2013, 03:38:37 PM
Will I-89 also be 70 mph?
Quote from: vdeane on April 20, 2013, 12:38:21 PM
On part of I-93. This naturally does not include Franconia Notch, which the article notes will remain 55, even though the speed limit is actually 45.
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20130418/NEWS06/130418978
If you actually read the article in the OP, it would clearly answer your question, 1. The law pertains specifically to 80 miles of I-93, nothing else. That's not to say NHDOT won't still raise other roads to 70 in the future, just not right now.
Nice to see another state go to 70
Any news on when the signs are going up?
Meaghan (my better half for those who didn't know) had reason to go down to UNH in Durham today for a robotics competition. She mentioned that 70 MPH signs are posted now.
Drove I-93 between Lincoln NH and St Johnsbury VT this past Wednesday. I can assure y'all that it is indeed posted as 70 MPH in NH through that entire area, EXCEPT on the Franconia Notch Parkway, where NB, the speed first drops to 55, then to 45. No pics, as it was dark during the passage through. I was driving my friend's van and it was weird going 70 mph legally.
As for signage, Exits 32-33, Exits 36-39, and Exits 43-44 still retain older signage (outlined state shield vs cutout). Also noticed a large permanent overhead mounted VMS on the SB approach to the parkway, near Exit 37.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PMPractically speaking, I can see Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland eventually following through and going to 70 (Pennsylvania will be the last of those four to do so).
Pennsylvania will actually be the
first (http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2013/11/70_mph_speed_limits_coming_to.html) of the four to do so, when speed limits are raised to 70 later this year.
Quote from: Gnutella on March 07, 2014, 11:12:10 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 21, 2013, 08:16:21 PMPractically speaking, I can see Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland eventually following through and going to 70 (Pennsylvania will be the last of those four to do so).
Pennsylvania will actually be the first (http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2013/11/70_mph_speed_limits_coming_to.html) of the four to do so, when speed limits are raised to 70 later this year.
Check the date of the post you quoted ;) Also, it's not know what, if any, segments will be raised. It won't be a general thing. In fact, PennDOT could yet pull and Oregon and raise no segments. PennDOT is known to be very conservative when it comes to setting speed limits and this law doesn't change that.
Maryland is on the way to increasing to 70 and NY has a bill for 75 (which likely will just be stalled). Vermont has taken no action. NY and VT are both conservative states when it comes to speed limits as well.
New Hampshire is now considering 70 on I-89 and NH 101.
Quote from: vdeane on March 08, 2014, 02:53:09 PM
NY and VT are both conservative states when it comes to speed limits as well.
NY isn't conservative about speed limits. They're broke and need the revenues from speeding fines. There's a difference. :)
I wonder how a 70 limit will impact enforcement on 89. I see a lot of pullovers there. I think New Hampshire police are aware of how many yahoos careen up trying to get to Vermont as fast as possible. When 65 first reappeared in the 90s, a lot of places turned up the enforcement, reminding people this wasn't (yet) tacit permission to do 80.