Current state speed limit increase proposals

[ukfan758]

I for one would like to see some of the rural interstates and parkways in the western Kentucky increased to 75 or 80mph, that is if the roads are safe enough.

Georgia's I-75 could also use a speed increase to 75 or 80 while keeping the 85mph Super Speeder law in place . That way, drivers won't just go to 90+ and will instead close the speed gap between law abiders and speeders. Currently, you have a small amount of law abiders going 70 and lots of speeders going between 80-85.

5 mph is too small of a cushion. That falls within faulty speedometer range. A reckless law has to be at least 10 above or you'd be giving every person with a speeding ticket a ticket for reckless driving.

Would an increase to 75 be sufficient/work for the faulty speedometer range and 85mph Super Speeder law? Doing that would still close the gap to 10mph instead of the current 15 which would make it safer.

[Pink Jazz]

Agree that such a change would put Georgia in the same club as Arizona and Virginia, and would even be worse if Georgia were to raise their speed limit to 80 mph without changing the Super Speeder law, since 5 mph is far too small of a buffer.  This is what has killed every effort in Arizona to raise the speed limit to 80 mph, and the state's lawmakers refuse to change the criminal speeding threshold.

[jakeroot]

85 isn't that fast (it is, in fact, the speed limit in at least one part of the country). I'd be in favor of changing the law to 110 or something outrageous, with increasing penalties up to that point. Why so high? To prevent incriminating commuters who just happen to be travelling in a pack of cars going relatively fast.

Not to incriminate myself, but I've driven at 100 miles/hour for a few hundred yards in Southwest Washington on occasion. It sounds fast but it really isn't. Or to put it another way, it's fast on paper -- in the real world? Not so much.

[cl94]

85 isn't that fast (it is, in fact, the speed limit in at least one part of the country). I'd be in favor of changing the law to 110 or something outrageous, with increasing penalties up to that point. Why so high? To prevent incriminating commuters who just happen to be travelling in a pack of cars going relatively fast.

Not to incriminate myself, but I've driven at 100 miles/hour for a few hundred yards in Southwest Washington on occasion. It sounds fast but it really isn't. Or to put it another way, it's fast on paper -- in the real world? Not so much.

The left lane travel speed in the lower Hudson Valley and on parts of Long Island approaches 100 on a regular basis. There are several places in this country where that isn't out of the range of what is common.

[jakeroot]

85 isn't that fast (it is, in fact, the speed limit in at least one part of the country). I'd be in favor of changing the law to 110 or something outrageous, with increasing penalties up to that point. Why so high? To prevent incriminating commuters who just happen to be travelling in a pack of cars going relatively fast.

Not to incriminate myself, but I've driven at 100 miles/hour for a few hundred yards in Southwest Washington on occasion. It sounds fast but it really isn't. Or to put it another way, it's fast on paper -- in the real world? Not so much.

The left lane travel speed in the lower Hudson Valley and on parts of Long Island approaches 100 on a regular basis. There are several places in this country where that isn't out of the range of what is common.

(I seem to recall travelling near that speed the last time I was in the NE, but such high speeds are fairly irregular in the Seattle area -- 85 is usually the upper end of speeds, if only because traffic is so miserable)

That's exactly my point. 85 is downright paltry in some parts of the country, and I certainly don't have any reason to believe that Georgia has substandard roads incapable of speeds beyond 85. So, in short, change the law, not the limits.

[Brandon]

85 isn't that fast (it is, in fact, the speed limit in at least one part of the country). I'd be in favor of changing the law to 110 or something outrageous, with increasing penalties up to that point. Why so high? To prevent incriminating commuters who just happen to be travelling in a pack of cars going relatively fast.

Not to incriminate myself, but I've driven at 100 miles/hour for a few hundred yards in Southwest Washington on occasion. It sounds fast but it really isn't. Or to put it another way, it's fast on paper -- in the real world? Not so much.

The left lane travel speed in the lower Hudson Valley and on parts of Long Island approaches 100 on a regular basis. There are several places in this country where that isn't out of the range of what is common.

Likewise on I-96 between Howell and Farmington, Michigan.  I've been caught in 95 mph flows there and been passed while going 90-95.

[jakeroot]

85 isn't that fast (it is, in fact, the speed limit in at least one part of the country). I'd be in favor of changing the law to 110 or something outrageous, with increasing penalties up to that point. Why so high? To prevent incriminating commuters who just happen to be travelling in a pack of cars going relatively fast.

Not to incriminate myself, but I've driven at 100 miles/hour for a few hundred yards in Southwest Washington on occasion. It sounds fast but it really isn't. Or to put it another way, it's fast on paper -- in the real world? Not so much.

The left lane travel speed in the lower Hudson Valley and on parts of Long Island approaches 100 on a regular basis. There are several places in this country where that isn't out of the range of what is common.

Likewise on I-96 between Howell and Farmington, Michigan.  I've been caught in 95 mph flows there and been passed while going 90-95.

Actually, that reminds me....

On one occasion, I was driving between Edmonton and Calgary, Alberta, on Highway 2, in July of 2014. It was the last day of a holiday weekend, and there was plenty of traffic filtering between the two cities. Traffic was peaking at 100 MPH for much of the journey. I even pulled off the freeway for a bite to eat, and when I rejoined, traffic was still going near 100, so it wasn't an anomaly. When I met up with some family in Calgary, they informed that the Alberta RCMP is pretty lax with speed enforcement on holiday weekends.

During my only trip to England, I was going about 80 on the motorways, but I was being passed a lot. At one point, between Dover and London, I was going 100+ easy, and I was still being passed. Must have been a bunch of continental traffic? Lol.

[cl94]

85 isn't that fast (it is, in fact, the speed limit in at least one part of the country). I'd be in favor of changing the law to 110 or something outrageous, with increasing penalties up to that point. Why so high? To prevent incriminating commuters who just happen to be travelling in a pack of cars going relatively fast.

Not to incriminate myself, but I've driven at 100 miles/hour for a few hundred yards in Southwest Washington on occasion. It sounds fast but it really isn't. Or to put it another way, it's fast on paper -- in the real world? Not so much.

The left lane travel speed in the lower Hudson Valley and on parts of Long Island approaches 100 on a regular basis. There are several places in this country where that isn't out of the range of what is common.

Likewise on I-96 between Howell and Farmington, Michigan.  I've been caught in 95 mph flows there and been passed while going 90-95.

Actually, that reminds me....

On one occasion, I was driving between Edmonton and Calgary, Alberta, on Highway 2, in July of 2014. It was the last day of a holiday weekend, and there was plenty of traffic filtering between the two cities. Traffic was peaking at 100 MPH for much of the journey. I even pulled off the freeway for a bite to eat, and when I rejoined, traffic was still going near 100, so it wasn't an anomaly. When I met up with some family in Calgary, they informed that the Alberta RCMP is pretty lax with speed enforcement on holiday weekends.

During my only trip to England, I was going about 80 on the motorways, but I was being passed a lot. At one point, between Dover and London, I was going 100+ easy, and I was still being passed. Must have been a bunch of continental traffic? Lol.

Sticking to Canada, the QEW doesn't have a speed limit. Ontario Provincial Police doesn't do much enforcement and traffic often exceeds 85-90 MPH. Keep in mind that reckless driving there is 50 km/h over and they can take your car when they pull you over.

[cpzilliacus]

The left lane travel speed in the lower Hudson Valley and on parts of Long Island approaches 100 on a regular basis. There are several places in this country where that isn't out of the range of what is common.

Though when I visited Suffolk County, N.Y. for the first time, I saw a fair amount of speed limit enforcement with radar by (marked) county police cars on I-495 (Long Island Expressway).

Now it is possible that they have pretty fixed locations for doing radar speed limit enforcement and most of the speeders know where to refrain from too much speed over the posted limit.,

[cpzilliacus]

Keep in mind that reckless driving there is 50 km/h over and they can take your car when they pull you over.

Virginia law apparently allows police to at least impound cars driven by persons charged under the Commonwealth's reckless driving laws.

[cl94]

The left lane travel speed in the lower Hudson Valley and on parts of Long Island approaches 100 on a regular basis. There are several places in this country where that isn't out of the range of what is common.

Though when I visited Suffolk County, N.Y. for the first time, I saw a fair amount of speed limit enforcement with radar by (marked) county police cars on I-495 (Long Island Expressway).

Now it is possible that they have pretty fixed locations for doing radar speed limit enforcement and most of the speeders know where to refrain from too much speed over the posted limit.,

They have fixed locations and times. A lot of locals avoid the LIE for that reason and because of truck traffic.

[Ingsoc75]

I don't see any state east of the Mississippi going to 80 mph at this time (including Michigan's current attempt).

Rather I could see some states states upping the speed limit to 75 on certain sections like Maine and Louisiana have done (even though Louisiana is west of the river). There are plenty of rural interstate highways in the east that could adopt such a limit (I-16 in Georgia for example).

[cl94]

I don't see any state east of the Mississippi going to 80 mph at this time (including Michigan's current attempt).

Rather I could see some states states upping the speed limit to 75 on certain sections like Maine and Louisiana have done (even though Louisiana is west of the river). There are plenty of rural interstate highways in the east that could adopt such a limit (I-16 in Georgia for example).

New York has had proposals for 75. Most of the Thruway and I-81 could handle it.

[Pink Jazz]

Rather I could see some states states upping the speed limit to 75 on certain sections like Maine and Louisiana have done (even though Louisiana is west of the river). There are plenty of rural interstate highways in the east that could adopt such a limit (I-16 in Georgia for example).

That probably excludes Virginia if I would guess.  The 10 mph buffer for reckless driving is already controversial, and there is already a bill to raise it to 85 mph to have a 15 mph buffer.  Raising the speed limit to 75 would put Virginia back in the situation they are in now if the current reckless driving bill passes unless the absolute limit is raised again to at least 90 mph.

Interestingly, not as many people seem to be aware of Arizona's equivalent law for criminal speeding, except for out-of-state drivers who actually get nailed.  I wonder if there is a difference in enforcement rate between Virginia and Arizona, as well as between in-state vs. out-of-state drivers.

[Ingsoc75]

I don't see any state east of the Mississippi going to 80 mph at this time (including Michigan's current attempt).

Rather I could see some states states upping the speed limit to 75 on certain sections like Maine and Louisiana have done (even though Louisiana is west of the river). There are plenty of rural interstate highways in the east that could adopt such a limit (I-16 in Georgia for example).

New York has had proposals for 75. Most of the Thruway and I-81 could handle it.

NY and anything above 65, I just can't picture it. 

[cl94]

I don't see any state east of the Mississippi going to 80 mph at this time (including Michigan's current attempt).

Rather I could see some states states upping the speed limit to 75 on certain sections like Maine and Louisiana have done (even though Louisiana is west of the river). There are plenty of rural interstate highways in the east that could adopt such a limit (I-16 in Georgia for example).

New York has had proposals for 75. Most of the Thruway and I-81 could handle it.

NY and anything above 65, I just can't picture it. 

Before NMSL, it was 70 here.

[Ingsoc75]

Before NMSL, it was 70 here.

It was 65 right before the 1973 oil embargo began. I remember hearing that NYDOT put the 65 signs into storage and put them back up when they raised the limit in 1995.

[jeffandnicole]

Before NMSL, it was 70 here.

It was 65 right before the 1973 oil embargo began. I remember hearing that NYDOT put the 65 signs into storage and put them back up when they raised the limit in 1995.

The same ones?  Wouldn't they have been, well, old?  And without updated reflectivity standards?

[cl94]

Before NMSL, it was 70 here.

It was 65 right before the 1973 oil embargo began. I remember hearing that NYDOT put the 65 signs into storage and put them back up when they raised the limit in 1995.

Thruway was 70 for a very short time, not necessarily right before the embargo

[TXtoNJ]

85 isn't that fast (it is, in fact, the speed limit in at least one part of the country). I'd be in favor of changing the law to 110 or something outrageous, with increasing penalties up to that point. Why so high? To prevent incriminating commuters who just happen to be travelling in a pack of cars going relatively fast.

Not to incriminate myself, but I've driven at 100 miles/hour for a few hundred yards in Southwest Washington on occasion. It sounds fast but it really isn't. Or to put it another way, it's fast on paper -- in the real world? Not so much.

The left lane travel speed in the lower Hudson Valley and on parts of Long Island approaches 100 on a regular basis. There are several places in this country where that isn't out of the range of what is common.

(I seem to recall travelling near that speed the last time I was in the NE, but such high speeds are fairly irregular in the Seattle area -- 85 is usually the upper end of speeds, if only because traffic is so miserable)

That's exactly my point. 85 is downright paltry in some parts of the country, and I certainly don't have any reason to believe that Georgia has substandard roads incapable of speeds beyond 85. So, in short, change the law, not the limits.

85 is fine and feels controllable in modern cars with traction control. In, say, a 1972 Buick LeSabre, it absolutely was a reckless speed, and that was around the last time these laws were closely examined. Highway deaths per 100MM vehicle-miles are only a quarter what they were 40 years ago.

[Ingsoc75]

Thruway was 70 for a very short time, not necessarily right before the embargo

You sure about that? There is a site on the history of the NY Thruway and 65 is the maximum limit ever listed (April 1962).

[roadman65]

NJ actually increased it when they raised it back up from 55.  The Parkway used to be 60 from Toms River to the NY Border and only 65 south of Toms River.

  I do not know if the Driscoll and Great Egg Bridges were the 45 they are now, nor if NJ let cars do 65 through the former at grade part in Cape May CH, however from 100 to around MP 124 where the 65 is now in Ocean and Monmouth Counties is went up 5 mph from the pre embargo days.  Of course in Essex County it went down some as its either 50 or 55 through Irvington and East Orange now as it was 60 there.  Plus in Bergen north of the Paramus area where it is now 65, it was indeed 60 then which also gave an increase.

So in retrospect it was an indirect increase proposal.  I believe that also I-80 was 60 in Morris County between Netcong and Denville which, I believe now is 65 that was an increase and Route 78 was 60 mph west of Watchung where its now 65 from Newark to the Delaware River.  Of course I-78 east of Watchung opened up all of its three built stages post embargo so were 55 from opening day.

I do not know how accurate this is or not, but I saw once on a publication in my dad's old maps as a youngster that the ACE was posted at 70 mph.  Then finally the NJT, I believe was only 65 south of Bordentown only but was 60 north of Bordentown. 

[cl94]

Thruway was 70 for a very short time, not necessarily right before the embargo

You sure about that? There is a site on the history of the NY Thruway and 65 is the maximum limit ever listed (April 1962).

I've seen in a couple of places that it was 70. May have been one of the Thruway annual reports. I may be incorrect.

[Pink Jazz]

Looks like Michigan's bill has stalled in the House:
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/02/17/michigan-speed-limits-increase/80522924/

[machias]

Before NMSL, it was 70 here.

It was 65 right before the 1973 oil embargo began. I remember hearing that NYDOT put the 65 signs into storage and put them back up when they raised the limit in 1995.

The same ones?  Wouldn't they have been, well, old?  And without updated reflectivity standards?

NYSDOT Region 3 put up a number of pre-1973 Speed Limit 65 signs when the speed limit was increased back in 1995; they could easily be found by the older "Lehay" type 6.