85 mph speed limit in Texas!

[TooManyWheels]

Originally Posted By: robertjhoag

Many states already have "keep right" laws on the books just like on the autobahns, but the problem is that LEO's fail to enforce. Most drivers and LEO's are unaware of the fact that impeding traffic flow is not only discourteous but also unsafe and illegal. Check your state here: http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html

....

The slowest drivers I see on the roads are the ones distracted by their cellphones - don't try to tell me they are safer just because they are driving 10 under the limit. Legislation needs to catch up with technology in a big way.


Working on those two areas would take a big chunk of the problem away.

 

[ottotheclown]

IMHO I just think people are trying to get out asap!

 

[SteveSRT8]

Despite the safety nazis squealing the accident rate per mile driven has steadily declined for ages.

Frankly, with the drivers I see on the roads every day, this is a massive testament to the cars of today having great brakes and handling! People sure don't pay much attention anymore.

And of course the 85th percentile rule is consistently ignored by traffic planners. Sometimes it's a pure revenue thing. But selective law enforcement always reduces compliance.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Despite the safety nazis squealing the accident rate per mile driven has steadily declined for ages.


Also, with respect to your mention of technology, the fatality rate has certainly gone down, too, steadily and for ages.

 

[Shannow]

Australia is following/leading he trend, fatalities down over half since I was a kid.

Next "trick" is the "holiday weekend" road-toll, and the holiday tally board.

Then they double the fines and demerit points on holiday weekends.

Our first "double demerits" weekend, the road toll dropped from 6 to 3, proving it's success.

Statistically, it's halved.

Statistically, it means nothing, except to people who use statistics to tell lies.

A single head on car accident can have from 1(or2) to 10 fatalities depending on occupancy, so 6 one year to 3 the next is noise.

Next year, it tripled (still noise, as the result was still achievable with two legally loaded vehicles).

So we get harder and tougher every time, and the long weekends grow to include the night before the weekend, and the morning after.

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: robertjhoag
When Montana instituted speed limits, the fatality rate doubled.

The 85th percentile has long been established by the NHTSA as the absolute safest way to set speed limits resulting in the lowest rate of accidents and fatalities. I'd venture a guess that the NHTSA knows more about speed limits and their affect on traffic safety than any single member here. By lowering speed limits below the 85th percentile, it makes the roads less safe - increasing accidents and fatalities. But the insurance companies have been so successful with their "speed kills" propoganda (that allows them to raise their rates and revenues) that the general public now actually lobbies for lower, less safe speed limits.

The majority of drivers are sane and smart enough to be able to determine what a reasonable speed is for their car and the road conditions. Self preservation is a powerful motivator. The few that are not are the ones we need to focus on getting off the road, instead of limiting the majority.

Many states already have "keep right" laws on the books just like on the autobahns, but the problem is that LEO's fail to enforce. Most drivers and LEO's are unaware of the fact that impeding traffic flow is not only discourteous but also unsafe and illegal. Check your state here: http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html

Driving is a privilege, not a right. I've long been a supporter of 5 year licence renewal retesting including night vision testing, reaction time testing, panic braking testing, accident avoidance and slalom, as well as knowledge of driving laws and etiquette including keep right laws. I would also favor an annual inspection for vehicle registration renewal to prove road worthiness.

I would willingly pay $100 for each vehicle and drivers licence renewal annually which is way more than what they are getting from me in traffic citation fines. This would fatten the coffers of local and state government in exchange for getting unsafe vehicles and drivers off the roads and would more than offset the revenue they lose from speeding tickets. Factor in the savings from officers on traffic patrol, and from a budget perspective it's a no brainer.

When you drive fast enough that the task of driving demands your full attention, you put other tasks to the side - like cellphones and texting, eating, applying makeup, etc. The slowest drivers I see on the roads are the ones distracted by their cellphones - don't try to tell me they are safer just because they are driving 10 under the limit. Legislation needs to catch up with technology in a big way. I personally would like to see vehicles equipped with cellphone jammers to prevent any use while driving.

Telling me I can't drive a certain speed because your vehicle or skills aren't up to the challenge is like telling me I can't have a doughnut because you're on a diet.


The mayor of New York thinks he can take away your donut.

 

[Tdbo]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: robertjhoag
When Montana instituted speed limits, the fatality rate doubled.

The 85th percentile has long been established by the NHTSA as the absolute safest way to set speed limits resulting in the lowest rate of accidents and fatalities. I'd venture a guess that the NHTSA knows more about speed limits and their affect on traffic safety than any single member here. By lowering speed limits below the 85th percentile, it makes the roads less safe - increasing accidents and fatalities. But the insurance companies have been so successful with their "speed kills" propoganda (that allows them to raise their rates and revenues) that the general public now actually lobbies for lower, less safe speed limits.

The majority of drivers are sane and smart enough to be able to determine what a reasonable speed is for their car and the road conditions. Self preservation is a powerful motivator. The few that are not are the ones we need to focus on getting off the road, instead of limiting the majority.

Many states already have "keep right" laws on the books just like on the autobahns, but the problem is that LEO's fail to enforce. Most drivers and LEO's are unaware of the fact that impeding traffic flow is not only discourteous but also unsafe and illegal. Check your state here: http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html

Driving is a privilege, not a right. I've long been a supporter of 5 year licence renewal retesting including night vision testing, reaction time testing, panic braking testing, accident avoidance and slalom, as well as knowledge of driving laws and etiquette including keep right laws. I would also favor an annual inspection for vehicle registration renewal to prove road worthiness.

I would willingly pay $100 for each vehicle and drivers licence renewal annually which is way more than what they are getting from me in traffic citation fines. This would fatten the coffers of local and state government in exchange for getting unsafe vehicles and drivers off the roads and would more than offset the revenue they lose from speeding tickets. Factor in the savings from officers on traffic patrol, and from a budget perspective it's a no brainer.

When you drive fast enough that the task of driving demands your full attention, you put other tasks to the side - like cellphones and texting, eating, applying makeup, etc. The slowest drivers I see on the roads are the ones distracted by their cellphones - don't try to tell me they are safer just because they are driving 10 under the limit. Legislation needs to catch up with technology in a big way. I personally would like to see vehicles equipped with cellphone jammers to prevent any use while driving.

Telling me I can't drive a certain speed because your vehicle or skills aren't up to the challenge is like telling me I can't have a doughnut because you're on a diet.


The mayor of New York thinks he can take away your donut.


He may as well. He wants to take away your Big Gulp too, so you won't have anything to wash your donut down with anyway.

 

[HerrStig]

At some point, if speed limits are raised, we might get comatose car buyers to look at something other than how many TV screens the new wallowing SUV has.

 

[accent2012]

If you have speeds this high on multi-lane freeways, you need to strictly enforce the slow-to-the-right law and have a designated truck route. Keep the semis separated from passenger vehicles. It's just stupid to have semis go 65mph when most everybody else is doing 70+. Then you have the jerk-offs who get in the fast lane doing 65mph.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: accent2012

If you have speeds this high on multi-lane freeways, you need to strictly enforce the slow-to-the-right law and have a designated truck route. Keep the semis separated from passenger vehicles. It's just stupid to have semis go 65mph when most everybody else is doing 70+. Then you have the jerk-offs who get in the fast lane doing 65mph.

This happens now, so I fully agree with you. The trucks almost need their own lanes (freeways) that are "protected" so the four wheelers do not cause them to wreck and the four wheelers DEFINITELY need to have a fast-to-slow staggered lane orientation. There are many of them who drive in the left lane no matter what their speed in ignorant bliss (I emphasize the word "ignorant").

 

[HerrStig]

On the Autobahn, expensive tickets are given to those who hold up traffic. Those drivers are often NOT German, but from countries where the ONLY thought given to driving safety is bwaaaaaaaaana, don't "speed". (But drive like a moron otherwise because anything else you do is OK)

 

[Roscoe10]

I'm in favor of removing all speed limits and replacing them with a reckless driving law. The current system of speed limits are all about raising revenue and it's easy to raise a bunch of it. Reckless driving could involve excessive speed but there would need to be other elements of proof, such as driving too slow in the passing lane, weaving in and out of traffic, unsafe speed in congested areas, etc. These are just a few. There could and should be many other situations where reckless driving would apply.

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: Roscoe10
I'm in favor of removing all speed limits and replacing them with a reckless driving law. The current system of speed limits are all about raising revenue and it's easy to raise a bunch of it. Reckless driving could involve excessive speed but there would need to be other elements of proof, such as driving too slow in the passing lane, weaving in and out of traffic, unsafe speed in congested areas, etc. These are just a few. There could and should be many other situations where reckless driving would apply.

Sounds good to me, but it's hard on law enforcement who would have to come out from behind the bush where they hide with the radar gun.

 

[wog]

stig u forget don t use signals the enemy[other drivers] will see them and try and cut you off, that is the cardinal sin here in mass.oh and don t make eye contact with driver trying to get out of side streets,that is means pull out in front of you .thejoy!

 

[jdawg89]

85 mph actually dosent killl your gas mileage. Just got done a 600+mile roadtrip doing 80-85 the whole way. 2006 chrysler town/country 3.3 v6 using 87 octane with michelin interceptor tires 3 occupants blah blah blah anyways got 20.1 mpg

 

[OVERKILL]

It really isn't that fast. The hammer lane on the 401 up here routinely is 85Mph.

 

[GearheadTool]

When I used to drive regularly, I found 75MPH to 80MPH to be the "normal" speed on major highways. Of course, 80MPH past the State police was always risky. Got in the habit of setting the cruise at 75 and taking it up to 80MPH on long stretches in between Trooper Sit spots. You could usually tell just by looking at the road where they would be. I feel that if its the first time on a road.. DONT speed. It is a game. They can get you for doing 70MPH if they wanted, if the speed limit is 65. However, usually it takes 75MPH+ to get them to come out, and majority of the time whoever is doing 80MPH+ in the left lane right past them will cause them to come out. Never did figure out how they dont get in 80MPH rear-end collossions pulling out from the spots they back their bumper up to the bridge at. A Ford Crown Vic may be quick but come on, thats 80MPH traffic BLIND pulling out in..

I have seen someone to the left of me in a Ford Mustang (conspiracy theorists: There was a Mustang decal emblazoned across the back window, a Blue 95 or so) and they were pulled over doing 80MPH and passed me on my left; I was going 75MPH in an early 90s family sedan. We did both pass the roadway going under a bridge at the same time, a Trooper sit spot, one of them, they had multiple locations to choose. The Mustang slowed speed, got over two lanes. 45 seconds later, the State Police snaked through traffic, found the car, and lit it up. I usually drive 75MPH however if you are the ONLY car on the road, or slow traffic, I do in fact glide from 75MPH back down to 70MPH as I watch my rearview mirror for signs of police car movement from the median. Who knows how long he has been sitting there, just waiting, and how many tickets he must write. I know, I know.. "QUOTAS? WHAT?" - Well, they sure act that way.

I have also noticed that most areas have jokes about how any other area drives, and if the areas are reversed the same observations play out. NYC drivers are crazy/cant drive; You should see how they drive in Philadelphia. Now Boston, or Mass. Its everywhere. Philly drivers in New York appear to "cant drive" etc etc etc, it goes everywhere someone is from somewhere else. Just remember: In some down south states, doing 50MPH int he left lane (or slower) all day is fine, and some people grow up driving that way. Get around those people. There probably isnt anyone around to make revenue for their State anyway (this is true, its less about safety than it is revenue) and if you can do it without causing an accident, its fine by me. Yes, higher speed vehicles coming up on a 45MPH car is a problem and I am sure has caused quite a few accidents, perhaps even a fatality and that is unfortunate.

 

[chiks]

"Never did figure out how they dont get in 80MPH rear-end collossions pulling out from the spots they back their bumper up to the bridge at. A Ford Crown Vic may be quick but come on, thats 80MPH traffic BLIND pulling out in.. "

The lights and the wail causes everybody and their mothers to slow down to 60 ASAP.

 

[chiks]

Originally Posted By: Roscoe10
I'm in favor of removing all speed limits and replacing them with a reckless driving law. The current system of speed limits are all about raising revenue and it's easy to raise a bunch of it. Reckless driving could involve excessive speed but there would need to be other elements of proof, such as driving too slow in the passing lane, weaving in and out of traffic, unsafe speed in congested areas, etc. These are just a few. There could and should be many other situations where reckless driving would apply.


you mean make it a capitalist roadway

 

[GearheadTool]

Originally Posted By: chiks
"Never did figure out how they dont get in 80MPH rear-end collossions pulling out from the spots they back their bumper up to the bridge at. A Ford Crown Vic may be quick but come on, thats 80MPH traffic BLIND pulling out in.. "

The lights and the wail causes everybody and their mothers to slow down to 60 ASAP.


Ok. Now please descbe the high-speed merge from left lane from blind blocking structure with frequent NO lefthand shoulder. Thank you.

And no, Ive never had one pull out in front of me like that. Chased/overtaken? Yes. Pulled out in front of me to stop their mark? No...