News:

Finished coding the back end of the AARoads main site using object-orientated programming. One major step closer to moving away from Wordpress!

Main Menu

What states in general do not need higher speed limits?

Started by Roadgeekteen, September 27, 2025, 12:15:19 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Roadgeekteen

I think most of us agree that most states could probably bump interstate state speed limits up 5-10 MPH. But not all states need to be increased. I think that Texas doesn't really need many increases. Neither do Montana and Nevada. For many of the other 80 MPH states, like Utah and South Dakota, some of their 2-lane roads could use a bump to 70.
My username has been outdated since August 2023 but I'm too lazy to change it


ElishaGOtis

#1
I'd say California except for where it caps out (I.e. 65 on 4 lane roads, cap of 70 on freeways). Any speed limit lower than the default must be justified by the 85th percentile (in general). While there are many exceptions (especially freeways), I'd say they're mostly good.

For other states, Arkansas and some of Texas is relatively good on the rural freeways, especially given their design. Not all parts of these states are good per se, but this is what I could come up with lol

Edit: California in most suburban/built up areas. Rural areas are still ridiculously low for the most part...
I can drive 55 ONLY when it makes sense.

NOTE: Opinions expressed here on AARoads are solely my own and do not represent or reflect the statements, opinions, or decisions of any agency. Any official information I share will be quoted from another source.

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: ElishaGOtis on September 27, 2025, 01:12:25 AMI'd say California except for where it caps out (I.e. 65 on 4 lane roads, cap of 70 on freeways). Any speed limit lower than the default must be justified by the 85th percentile (in general). While there are many exceptions (especially freeways), I'd say they're mostly good.

For other states, Arkansas and some of Texas is relatively good on the rural freeways, especially given their design. Not all parts of these states are good per se, but this is what I could come up with lol

Are you kidding?  There is so much 55 MPH two lane roads that could be bumped up to 65 MPH.  CA 43, 145 and 41 near me could all be switched tomorrow and it would just match the existing traffic flow. 

JayhawkCO

I'd say Idaho is good. 80 on rural interstates. 70 on rural divided highways. 65 on rural two lane.

ElishaGOtis

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 27, 2025, 08:58:43 AM
Quote from: ElishaGOtis on September 27, 2025, 01:12:25 AMI'd say California except for where it caps out (I.e. 65 on 4 lane roads, cap of 70 on freeways). Any speed limit lower than the default must be justified by the 85th percentile (in general). While there are many exceptions (especially freeways), I'd say they're mostly good.

For other states, Arkansas and some of Texas is relatively good on the rural freeways, especially given their design. Not all parts of these states are good per se, but this is what I could come up with lol

Are you kidding?  There is so much 55 MPH two lane roads that could be bumped up to 65 MPH.  CA 43, 145 and 41 near me could all be switched tomorrow and it would just match the existing traffic flow. 

I am stupid, I completely forgot about some of the more-rural 2-lane roads.

Point changed to: California in more built-up / suburban areas. Rural areas still need a ton of work... maybe if the default was 10-15 higher?

Thanks for the catch
I can drive 55 ONLY when it makes sense.

NOTE: Opinions expressed here on AARoads are solely my own and do not represent or reflect the statements, opinions, or decisions of any agency. Any official information I share will be quoted from another source.

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: ElishaGOtis on September 27, 2025, 10:24:21 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 27, 2025, 08:58:43 AM
Quote from: ElishaGOtis on September 27, 2025, 01:12:25 AMI'd say California except for where it caps out (I.e. 65 on 4 lane roads, cap of 70 on freeways). Any speed limit lower than the default must be justified by the 85th percentile (in general). While there are many exceptions (especially freeways), I'd say they're mostly good.

For other states, Arkansas and some of Texas is relatively good on the rural freeways, especially given their design. Not all parts of these states are good per se, but this is what I could come up with lol

Are you kidding?  There is so much 55 MPH two lane roads that could be bumped up to 65 MPH.  CA 43, 145 and 41 near me could all be switched tomorrow and it would just match the existing traffic flow. 

I am stupid, I completely forgot about some of the more-rural 2-lane roads.

Point changed to: California in more built-up / suburban areas. Rural areas still need a ton of work... maybe if the default was 10-15 higher?

Thanks for the catch

FWIW I've been trying to crack what exactly the code or standards Caltrans goes by for classifying two lane roads for 65 MPH speed limits.  North of Sacramento and in the desert regions they fairly common.  All the same some of them don't really make a lot of sense like the 65 MPH portion of CA 99 near Red Bluff.  I thought that it might have something to do with two lane expressway classification, but that seemingly isn't the case. 

SP Cook

There is not a state that would not benefit from the wonderful practice of raising the speed limit.  It saves lives, it makes people's lives better, and it diverts police to serious useful work.