Reinstating "55," Are They Crazy?!
By James Baxter, NMA President
The same forces that resisted the use of fire many thousands of years ago are still with us, only now they are advocating the return of the national maximum speed limit of 55 miles per hour.
Anyone who endured the last 22 year long “experiment” with the “folly of 55” knows that this proposal goes beyond being absurd.
The only likely beneficiaries are insurance companies (ticket surcharges), local governments that live off speed traps, P.R. firms (the genius creators of public service ads like “Save Gas Save Lives, Drive 55”) and perhaps the radar detector industry. In return, the driving public is treated to aggravation, maddening traffic flow, tickets, bloated insurance premiums, and billions of hours of lost time.
As in 1973, the justification for a snail’s pace speed limit on major highways is that it will save gasoline (and now reduce global warming).
It didn’t work then and it won’t work now. The reasons are many.
For starters only two percent of the four million miles of streets, roads and highways in the US have speed limits in excess of 55 miles per hour (approximate numbers). Of those there are many that suffer congestion and construction on a regular basis such that traffic is lucky to maintain a 40 MPH pace, let alone 55 miles per hour.
It’s true that our Interstate system carries about one third of our daily traffic volume, but here too congestion, construction, and bad weather frequently limits traffic to sub 55 speeds. In many urban areas the Interstates are already posted at 55. Granted, when conditions allow the actual speeds might be 70 or 75 MPH, but clearly the speed limit is not the controlling factor.
That brings us to point #2, public compliance.
After 22 years of propaganda, millions of tickets, and billions in insurance surcharges, actual motorist compliance on Interstate type highways ranged between five and ten percent. Those in compliance were typically mechanically unable to exceed 55.
Did it save fuel? In 1984, in what started out to be a promotional “study” of the “Benefits of the 55 MPH National Maximum Speed Limit” the Transportation Research Board (Part of the National Academy of Science) determined that keeping the 55 MPH speed limit, versus allowing the states to raise the limit to 65 MPH, would result in a 0.18 percent (less than two tenths of one percent) fuel savings (Source: TRB Report, 55: A Decade of Experience; page 176)
This is not an amount that will devastate the oil economy of the Middle East. The same study did determine that the 55 MPH national speed limit was wasting approximately one billion man hours a year (page 123). This did not include state trooper man hours being burned up enforcing an arbitrary speed limit on the safest highways in the nation.
Along with misallocating enforcement resources, the federal law forced the states to play games with their highway monitoring data, gaming the numbers so it appeared that traffic was moving slower than it really was. The states were supposed to maintain 50 percent compliance with the federal limit, they couldn’t come close, at least not honestly.
Safety? Today the national and the interstate highway fatality rate is far lower than at any time during the “55 era.” In fact, the last time the fatality rate increased from year to year was in the mid 1970’s when compliance and enforcement were at their highest levels (see chart below).
High fuel costs are certainly a burden. As individuals we can drive less, use more fuel efficient vehicles, and even drive slower, if we wish. But no sane person should wish another 55 MPH speed limit on the country. We already have a dysfunctional aviation system, let’s not allow the same thing to happen to our highways.
Source: NHTSA 2006 Traffic Facts (page 16)
Other Related Articles
To change the picture next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com. Each picture is associated with a particular email address. (This is a third-party service not affiliated with NMA.)
To laughing cop:
First: Your name is very arrogant. Indicative of a real zero who slipped through the cracks and got power, (albeit, undeserved).
Second: Safe driving is a matter of interpretation. If the speed limit is 65 and a person drives 65, you consider that person a safe driver. If the speed is reduced to 55, that same driver, on the same road, under the same conditions, drives 65, that same driver is considered by you to be driving unsafely and should be ticketed. How stupid. (It figures)
Third: When you and your brother cops sit around and laugh, how come you don’t ticket your brothers for speeding? Through many years with an impeccable driving record, I have painfully found that some of your most dangerous drivers are cops. We hire police to protect us from dangerous drivers. Who do we have to protect us from cops that are dangerous drivers? And don’t tell me there are avenues to take to complain about cops who are dangerous drivers. That’s a joke without a laugh.
55,65, 75 it does not make a different you not saving time like you can take and put in a bank. Manage your time you will not have to rush. In our America we have been trick by fast food complex we got have it know. We are told on tv time after time you got to have that fast care that travel the speed of sound. Once you are brain washed there is only one way more speed. Next time you are watching tv and you see that commercal saying you need more power in the car you drive ask yourself why?
Dear Laughing Cop,
I’d be more than happy to obey the law — just as soon as someone tells me what it is.
Clearly the speed limit isn’t 65 like the signs say. I’ve driven past cops with radar guns a dozen or more times in the past few months, and every time I was exceeding the posted limit. Do you know how many times I was pulled over? Zero. Do you know how many times cars traveling near me were pulled over? Zero. The cops stayed where they were, obviously looking for someone going even faster. Or maybe playing games. Or perhaps sleeping. Doesn’t matter what they were doing. The point is that they weren’t enforcing the law.
If you want to continue making the claim that what’s on the sign is the law, then you have the responsibility to enforce it – you need to pull over every car you see going over the limit – not the fastest car, not the sportiest, but the first car you see disobeying the law. Issue the ticket, reset the radar gun, and again grab the first car traveling above the posted limit. Before long, word will spread that the law is being enforced and everyone will travel at the posted limit. Will I enjoy traveling slower? Of course not. But at least then I’d know the rules of the game.
You indicated that speeding endangers the public? Well then maybe it’s time I filed a lawsuit against the police for failing to enforce the laws that are intended to keep us safe. How can it be that such a well respected group could have such disregard for my safety and for the safety of those around me? For the frequency with which cops have seen me speed, I should’ve been arrested long ago. Could it be that speeding isn’t actually all that dangerous?
I’m sure you’ve heard the phrase “actions speak louder than words.” If the police don’t pull over speeders, then we’ll keep speeding – ignoring the words on the signs. And if I’m ticketed, my excuse will be that I didn’t know the rules – and there will be nothing asinine about it.
People DO repeat Do have a right to speed!
When traveling on a one lane road and the other person is driving 5 mph slower you absolutely do have a right to pass to the extent necessary to get safely past!
Also when in S. Cal. and the group, of traffic is exceeding the speed limit you have an obligation to maintain cohesion with the group.(reasonable&Prudent)
A legal 80 in Texas is incompatable with 55 in Chicago. Cops are like wolves in that they merely glean the least of the group to make the whole more exefective and help the fittist survive.
You may laugh but it is the insurance co. that laughs loudest all the way to the bank for your “work”. For many years “reasonable&prudent” was law in this land. “HA,HA,hahhhhhahhhhahhhh
Edge wrote:
“I see a future where all govt’s stay out of one’s life and focuses on roadway maintenance.”
Dude, you’re dreamin’! In the past eight years conservatives created the two biggest big-government agencies, TSA & DHS. (They also created the biggest debt in US history to finance them.)
Both those agencies exist for one reason and one reason only; to generally erode your rights as an American citizen and specifically to interfere with your rights to travel freely.
They tell us it’s to “keep America safe” but the reality is the law & order types want to shred the Constitution to make way for even bigger and more intrusive government.
Conservatives won’t be satisfied until everyone is under house arrest and a cop is in your bedroom.
Laughing cop sez the law is the law and must be obeyed. No questions, just blind obedience. Gotta love them law & order types; don’t think, just OBEY!
What laughing cop will not admit though is that even unwavering adherence to the letter of the law will not prevent a cop from jacking you up whenever and whenever he feels like it.
The bottom line is that police in this country have WAY too much power and the big-government conservatives have given them free rein to abuse it.
Your absolutely right Mr. police. I totally agree. I thought 65 wasn’t speeding, and the discussion is lowering it to 55 from 65. The fact is you have to keep the limit at a point where “phycho” drivers won’t go “overboard.” 55 is a little too slow,… really now. It should just remain at 65.
I noticed that a lot of the people whining about how “unfair” it is to receive a ticket for speeding (or any other moving violation) are the same ones that probably can’t graps the simplest of concepts:
Obey the damn law.
You don’t have a “right” to speed. You don’t have a “right” to decide which laws are able to be flaunted or ignored. And you sure as hell don’t have the right to endanger the rest of the public just because you want to be stupid and speed.
Obey the law. It’s really simple. Or don’t, it keep me and thousands of other cops like me happily employed. And yes, in fact we DO get together and laugh at how assinine the excuses are which most of you crybabies give us when we catch you.
Traffic enforcement – life in the fast lane!
See you soon =)
The 55 mph speed limit is about control over you and your rights as an educated motorist. I mean, I know all of us blogging here are NOT your average stupid joe who doesn’t take their driving as serious as we do.
I favor an American Autobahn. I see a future where new drivers are educated on the virtues of paying attention to the road at all times and at all costs. I see a future where all govt’s stay out of one’s life and focuses on roadway maintenance.
I for one will not tolerate being labeled a criminal simply because I choose to exercise my sound judgement that will allow me to drive SAFELY at high speeds. To deny me that right is to personally attack me. The real criminals are those who are stupid on our roadways. How dare any government associate me with the likes of THEM!
RE: John G,
Thanks for the links, good info.
I have seen peak [steadystate] mileage of 45mpg@45mph.
The transmission can/will upshift to top [4th] gear if you are going over 35mph.
The torque converter will not lock up until 40mph though (no continuous slip function for partial lockup at lower vehicle speeds), and the eEGR (external exhaust gas recirculation) will not start operating until speeds greater than 40mph.
So the mileage of this V6 [3.2 liters] peaks at 45mph, drops to 40mpg@50mph, 30@75, 20@100.
So best mileage/time is basically 75mph.
This respects the fixed time constraint http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_people) and science (BSFC)
http://autospeed.com/cms/A_110216/article.html
If only the car had a 5 or 6 speed automatic, or variable intake/exhaust valve timing, or direct injection…
The curve would be pushed up, 35mpg@75 would be a nice improvement.
We need to fight Draconian rules and laws like this. My time and enjoyment is way to valuable to wate my life driving 55 on rual highways. This goes count to keeping the driving population engaged wile driving. Fuel ecoomy needs to be address through technolegy. If the government is mandating how fast we drive for economy reasons why not just mandate how much we can drive each year (that would help out fuel usage as well).
55 is WAY too slow on wide open highways. But some of you that are trying to say that slower speeds don’t save gas are the ignorant ones. Every car is a little different, but in general your most efficient speed is the lowest speed at which you are in high gear (typically 30-40mph). That is also the point above which air drag becomes exponentially greater. Below about 30mph, air drag is negligible. Now, it would obviously be absurd to drive 35mph on any open highway. I always drive at least 60-65 (traffic permitting). On long trips 70-75 (and I record lower MPG on trips than in suburban commuting, because faster is less efficient). This is not a theory; this is proven scientific FACT! Having said that, driving a STEADY 70mph is probably just as efficient as an erratic 55.
Now as to the speed limits, it really does come down to personal choices. When gas is $10 a gallon, many more people are going to stop driving 80-100mph unless you like to throw money away or are really in that huge of a hurry.
Our whole society wants to arrive 5 minutes before they leave the house. On my 12 mile, 15 minute commute, the time savings of driving 80 instead of 60 would only be about 2 minutes, hardly noticeable, but I get 30+mpg in a V6 car because I CHOOSE not to drive 80mph.
I have never advocated going back to 55mph mandated speed limits. In fact most of the 55mph highways need to be raised to the 85% level, so that everyone going 10-20mph over will no longer be considered criminals.
But do realize that speed does have a very noticeable effect on mileage. I laugh at the idiots that claim they can never achieve the mileage ratings on the window sticker; perhaps if you accelerate smoothly, coast to a stop as long as possible, and stop driving 90mph weaving in and out of traffic, you would be able to get the expected efficiency! I have exceeded the highway rating in every car I have owned (going ABOVE the speed limit). So the government has to keep dumbing down the ratings to the lowest commin denominator for those that have no clue why their mileage sucks (it is the driver!).
ALL ABOUT THE BENJAMINS, ANY WAY YOU WANT TO LOOK AT IT! YEAH LETS JUSTIFY THE GAS HIKE BY REDUCING THE SPEED LIMIT,…..
GREAT IDEA!!! LETS FURTHUR SCREW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
My mistake I meant to say billions of gallons. Sorry about that.
I don’t know why people think they can manipulate the world price of oil with speed limits. The speed you drive on the highway is insignificant in the grand scheme. The real reason why oil is going up is because our own oil production is in massive decline and yet our government refuses to allow more drilling. We are starving ourselves of oil. See for yourself.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec5_6.pdf
Our fuel consumption increase has actually been quite constant over the years and actually has gone down from 2004-2006 especially amongst passenger vehicles. The repeal of 55 had no effect on the curve. Also interesting is the amount of fuel wasted by congestion.
http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_04_27.html
It is literally in the trillions of gallons!
Lowering speed limits will only increase congestion and create it where it didn’t use to exist. Poke around these websites they have very interesting stats.
If they really want to reduce fuel use and lower carbon emissions, then drive thrus and mistimed traffic lights should be outlawed.
in the east where they make up these stupid laws have hy ways that are 2 miles long, but out here in the west it can be 50 to 100 miles of dead straight hi way..55 is laughable no one will do it … they cant put enough cops on the road to stop speeding.. here in arizona. we have highway patrol up the waazoo more enforcement than any other state and they still can not keep us from speeding..
Dave Lawrence, i got that ticket in ohio back in ’93. it was a ticket for going 55 in a 35 mph zone. I was 18 at the time. On the highway in rural areas the speed limit is 65 mph so after my ticket i decided that i would only go 5 over. 70 is a great speed to hold with out persecution.
Now I live in Colorado and the rural speed limit is 60-65 mph on two lane and 75 mph on four lane so driving 65-80 is fine by me and when you can hold that speed for great distances you really do get somewhere.
I guess when it comes to slowing down for small towns i don’t mind because i know that there is a place that the speed limit is higher.
I do have to say that places like Chicago should have higher interstate speed limits because every time i go through, the speed limit drops to 55 and everyone cranks it to 90!
I do agree that there are a lot of crummy speed taps about, but I do think the US is a better place now that states can set there own speed limits. I would be sad to see that taken a way. So Dave tell us what speed limits are like where you live.
New refineries are needed. Oil companies won’t invest in them because the increased supply will lower the price per gallon at retail. Simple math. I would rather see us (EVERY US CITIZEN) donate $10 each per year to build a couple of new super-refineries and thus increase the supply of gas available to meet demand. The oil is available, they just can’t (won’t) process enough to meet the demand. I remember 55MPH very well. God, I hope they are not that stupid again. Obama looks the type, though.
The people behind this is drive55.org last year they dressed up like the statue of liberty in red white and blue holding a banner over a California freeway that says drive 55 it caused a traffic backup for miles the California Highway Patrol had to ask them to leave.
I Emailed them and asked them how much fuel they wasted causeing that traffic backup on the freeway down below a lot more than driveing 75 I would think they Emailed me back and belligerently called me an oil and speed addict most of the newer cars get about the same gas mileage at 70mph as they do at 55mph the OBDII computer system and the electronic fuel injection system does a real good job of fuel management the older cars had carburetors and no computer controls the carburetor did little more than just pour the fuel into the engine.
Oil is NOT a “fossil fuel”.. That is it is not the end product of decomposing dinosaurs. THat has been pretty well accepted after discovering huge oil deposits at 40,00 feet and below. THere weren’t no dinosaur compost piles 8 miles beneath the surface.
Theory is tha oil is abiogenic not biogenic. That is it is created not from an existing biomass (dinosaur)although SOME oil deposits, mostly early finds, were fossil fuels. Newer finds are evidence that oil is formed thru the massive heating and compression energies of the earth itself (yeah ols Mama Earth is making new oil every day for us to use). There are finding oil at 40,000 ft and below nearly EVERYWHERE. That’s what the latest discovery in Brazil and other in the Gulf represent.
Botton line – aren’t likely to run out of oil EVER. We just need the testicular fortitude on the part of out legislatuive class to tell the eviros who prefer to lead us back into the 12th century t get the out of the way as we’re digging for oil HERE in the USA.
You have been duped if you still belive the “peak oil” canard. It just ain’t so.
For those who still don’t believe answer this. HOw do oil deposits get formed 8 miles underground? There ae NO fossil remains at this depth.
Drill now & drill everywhere. I for one don’t want to live like a 14th century peasant with a 40 yr life expectancy
I have two problems with slow drivers and unreasonable speed limits.
First, regarding gas mileage, driving 55mph versus 70mph in the same car will use less fuel, but this does not mean it’s more fuel efficient. As someone else mentioned, why not drive 1mph? You won’t use a lot of gas but your *gas mileage*—there is a difference—will be close to zero. People who think driving slower is automatically more fuel efficient are ignorant. Driving slower typically means driving in a lower gear which, by definition, is LESS fuel efficient. To maximize fuel efficiency, drivers should get into high gear as soon as possible.
Second, slow drivers tend to think they’re making things safer. In reality the opposite is true. Slow drivers are inherently inconsiderate of other motorists as they’re not only limiting their own speed but the speed of EVERYONE ELSE behind them. This leads to frustrated drivers; frustrated drivers lead to carelessness, road rage, dangerous lane changing, et c., all of which contribute to car accidents. I witness this on a regular basis.
It is all political pandering and junk science.
Just like the millions of variables on the science of predicting the weather, which at best is done in hack percentages. You know a prediction of 5% rain, and it is actually raining as you read that prediction.
Yet, predicting the weather as it is presented more accurate than predicting the speed of a vehicle and the cost savings related to that speed. Take a look below.
Fuel consumption is a highly involved science of multiple and complex variables. Speed is only one part of that equation.
It is too simplistic to equate speed with fuel consumption and then further dreadfully equate that to monetary savings.
The variable that determines the cost of the fuel with consumption is the price of the fuel itself. The scale of the price to the speed reduction is on a geometric scale. This is what really is hurting everyone.
For example, fuel cost has increased 40% since December of last year.
As in the article the fuel consumption reduction is 0.2%. With 40% price increase in cost and a .2% reduction in consumption due to speed results in a in relationship to where the price is 200 times greater than the consumptive savings.
Inversely the cost savings related to speed reduction is only 0.5% of the price of the fuel.
The supposed speed change does not correlate to saving money. Therefore, reducing the driving speed does not produce any statistical meaningful results.
Let me put in a disclaimer since it is hypocritical for me to use a simple algebraic argument to disprove an argument using the same simplistic rules and harp on how great the results are.
Point is speed, price, and consumption are in very complex relationships that like the weather. it is never possible to predict with absolute or even 1% certainty.
Re: matthew, who said, “well i haven’t got a speeding ticket since 1993! thats because speed limits have been reasonable since then.”
You live in an unusually blessed area. Unreasonable speed limits abound in many areas of the nation, with plenty of enforcement thereof.
Please tell us where you live so that we may admire the driving nirvana you have found.