Utah Speed Limit Increase Has No Effect On Speed Or Safety
By John Carr, NMA Activist
A year ago Utah became the second state in the modern era to post an 80 mile per hour speed limit. Since 1995 state law has specified a 75 mile per hour maximum speed limit. In 2008 that limit was lifted from part of I-15. Utah DOT could post any speed limit it wanted. Officials chose to post 80. The law directed DOT to report back in a year on the effects of speed limit changes.
The report is out. The effects were nil. The fastest 85th percentile speed was 85 mph before and 85 after. Accidents did not change significantly. Speed variance increased slightly without other effect.
This is all as expected. Numbers on signs do not control drivers’ speed. There aren’t enough police to run constant speed traps in the middle of nowhere, and that’s what it takes to slow traffic.
There was a major accident on I-15 shortly after the speed limit went up. It could have been anywhere. It happened not far outside the new 80 zone. Inside the 80 zone it would have been taken as proof that the speed limit increase was recklessly endangering drivers. In the 75 zone it was not taken as an indictment of the low speed limit.
That is how people think about speed limits. Ignore what they don’t want to believe, panic over what they do want to believe.
Next time a state considers raising a highway speed limit we’ll all hear how everybody will start driving faster and dying faster. This is false, of course, but facts are not welcome in this debate.
Media coverage:
http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=8401437
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705338447/UDOT-80-mph-limit-slows-speeders.html
Editorial:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705338984/Editorial-Find-natural-speed-limits.html
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.)
Quote from article above "There was a major accident on I-15 shortly after the speed limit went up. It could have been anywhere. It happened not far outside the new 80 zone. Inside the 80 zone it would have been taken as proof that the speed limit increase was recklessly endangering drivers. In the 75 zone it was not taken as an indictment of the low speed limit."
The crash was on a highway that experienced a speed liimit raise over certain portions. Allowing 80mph speeds on a portion of a roadway gives the false impression that those speeds are safe on the entire roadway. Likely the crash was a result of the driver NOT being able to discern where the 80mph speeds were appropriate and where they were not..
When the author of the article above wrote "The report is out. The effects were nil. The fastest 85th percentile speed was 85 mph before and 85 after. Accidents did not change significantly. Speed variance increased slightly without other effect." what did he mean when he said that accidents did not change significantly? If Accidents did not change he would have stated that, if accidents reduced he would have stated that. So that he said "accidents did not change significantly" implies that accident experience did change and it changed in a manner that was not supportive of the NMA's agenda, or he would have highlighted those changes to show that the higher speed limit was safer. The only logical conclusion to be drawn from this article is that Utah increased it's speed limits on certain highways which resulted in a slightly higher crash incidence on those highways.
Comparing the overall fatality rates and raising speed limits on selected roadways is apples to oranges. Did the crash rate and/or casualty crash rate(including both injury crashes and fatality crashes) go up or down on the roadways that experienced the speed limit raises? Additionally you can compare the other roadways with previous crash history to assertain if there is any spill over effect from the raised speed limit areas into the non raised speed limit areas.
When the author tells us this "There was a major accident on I-15 shortly after the speed limit went up. It could have been anywhere. It happened not far outside the new 80 zone. Inside the 80 zone it would have been taken as proof that the speed limit increase was recklessly endangering drivers. In the 75 zone it was not taken as an indictment of the low speed limit."
He implies that the speed limit being posted at 75mph had something to do with the crash. This is a common misconception among NMA members that faster is safer. it is not. The speed limits were raised on portions of the interstate that had 85th percentile speeds that supported a higher speed limit. That the section of roadway that experienced this crash was not included when the speed limits were raised implies that the 85th did not support raising this segment of the interstate. As such the speed limit of 75mph was likely correct for that area and the NMA once again is trying to portray faster as safer because a crash occurred in a lower speed limit area. This is intellectual dishonesty at it's best.
[...] environment. Also, here are some recent results from raising the speed limit in Indiana and Utah: Utah Speed Limit Increase Has No Effect On Speed Or Safety Study: Higher interstate speed limit proves safe for Indiana The problem is how the speeds are [...]
The only relation between speed and death rates on limited-access highway facilities is that as time has gone on, regardless of speed limit signs, the speed at which motorists are traveling is increasing, and the death rate is decreasing. There is an inverse relationship over the decades.
While the attempt to compress the speed range of traffic holds merit on roads designed for lower speeds in urbanized areas whose primary function are access, it becomes less and less useful, and if fact detrimental, to apply the same policy on limited-access roads designed for high-speed travel. In fact, on limited-access highways such as interstates, differential speed is merely a byproduct of a healthy, stable traffic flow. By attempting to compress the speed differential of traffic by enacting artificial speed limits on such roads merely disrupts and impedes the flow of traffic, resulting in traffic flow conflicts leading to increased tailgating, dangerous right-side passing maneuvers, weaving through traffic, and packs of traffic.
Focusing on maintaining a stable traffic flow and enforcing the keep-right-except-to-pass rule has proven to create and much safer, more flexible, and more efficient driving environment.
Interestingly enough, the German Autobahn actually enforces differential speed limits by law. For example, trucks are limited to only 50 mi/h (80 km/h) and some vehicles to even lower speeds of 37 mi/h (60 km/h). At the same time in most sections, normal passenger vehicles have no speed limit at all. Therefore, as a matter of policy, the Autobahn has the highest differential speeds of any highway in the world, including Utah’s, yet America’s interstate death rate is over 60 percent higher. The artificial capping of speed has no positive net safety effect on limited-access facilities, and may actually have a negative net effect.
Randy you are obviously the idiot here. No vehicle is going to get 15 mpg less from driving faster.
A five mile per hour increase in speed isn’t going noticeable to affect the severity of crashes.
Radar guns aren’t accurate enough to ticket for 1 mph over the speed limit. That’s why most states allow for some leeway.
The speed difference of a car going 50 mph and one doing 80 mph on an interstate is nowhere near the difference of two opposing cars doing 50 mph on a two lane road.
So you pretty much have to accept that raising the speed limit is probably a good thing and once again, you are an idiot.
Juan you are the idiot here. You did not read anything on this screen. Your stopping distance including reaction time at 80 mph is estimated at an average of 481 feet. There was no where that was talked about giving a ticket for 1 mph over the limit although it would be possible. I am sure they gave tickets for 5 mph over the limit though. In many areas the police wave at you when you go by at 10 mph over the limit and do not do anything unless you are 15 over the limit. I would bet that when they increased the speed limit to 80 mph that they did not do that.
I do like your safety observations. It kind of makes me think. You would be one to say that sky diving is very very safe because if you jumped out of an airplane without a parachute that is dangerous.
When I was talking about a 15 mpg drop in gas mileage I was talking about a fuel efficient vehicle not one that gets only 15 mpg in the first place. In a fuel efficent car you can easily drop your mileage by 15 mpg driving faster. In a gas hog you just drop you milage by 20 to 30 percent or more depending on how much faster you are driving.
In no where in this article or any comments did it say that people were driving 5 mph faster but a 5 mph change in speed in an accident can be a huge difference.
If people weren’t driving 5 mph faster due to an 80 mph speed limit, what’s the problem with it, Randy?
Henry one of the main reasons I am complaining about this article is because it does not tell the truth. It says speeds do not go up when they increase limits and at the same time leaving out that right after increasing limits they almost always have a speeding crackdown actually decreasing the speeds of some of the faster drivers.
They also say that accidents do not go up when you raise speed limits leaving out that the speeds that people are driving did not increase and sometimes even drops with the added enforcement right after the limit increase.
They also brought up that there was a major accident right after the increase but said an accident can happen on any road. That is true but an accident can happen a lot easier when the speed is increased and can be much more severe. This probably had nothing to do with the speed limit increase though because they were probably already driving about that fast before they raised the limit on the signs. I have said for months now that it does not matter what is on the signs it depends if the people read the signs and if the police make people slow down.
They also say it is fine to increase the speeds in any state leaving out the fact that the wide open country of a state like Utah has little traffic making faster speeds safer than in most other states.
[quote]The Utah Legislature passed a law in 2008 that permits speeds over 75 mph in low-population areas if UDOT studies traffic engineering and safety and reports its analyses to the Transportation Interim Committee. [/quote]
======================================
This is based on a study to determine which PSL would be safest for the given driving conditions. In the middle of “nowhere” a higher PSL may be more appropriate. People still need to drive in a responsible and considerate manner regardless of the PSL.
——————————————————
[quote]Although accidents and illegal speeding haven’t increased, “speed differentials” have increased. Speed differentials are the difference between the fastest and slowest vehicles. Almost all drivers have come up on a slow-moving vehicle or have been tailgated by a speeder. That can be unsafe, Braceras said.
“We’d like to keep speeds consistent as much as possible because that consistency does create, we believe, a safer condition,” he said.[/quote]
=======================================
A higher speed differential is a concern since this could lead to problems with inattentive drivers. IMO this could be caused by people who are not comfortable driving at higher speeds or not having vehicles that can be safely driven at higher speeds, or people that want to get better mpg at a lower speed.
—————————————————-
[quote]“Is it true that we’re more likely to get killed in a crash the faster we’re going?” she asked Braceras.
“It’s simple physics,” Braceras said. “Yes.”[/quote]
======================================
If an accident happens then it will be worse at higher speeds if everything else is equal.
People need to assess whether the risk of a possible accident is out weighed by the benefits of being able to travel at a higher speed.
On a good road with a good car and good traffic conditions I see no problem with traveling at 160km or faster. For long periods of time I am not comfortable traveling that fast, but that is just me. I will just keep right except when passing.
mithrandir your not being comfortable driving fast does not mean you are a worse driver than the ones that are comfortable driving fast. It means that you have more common sense than the others.
Randy,
I think it is important for all people to drive in a safe and considerate manner.
All people should stay right except to pass on the left. (reverse if you live in UK)
With the right car and road conditions, I could be fine driving above 160kph.
Most highways that I have driven in the east USA are only good for 110-130 kph. Too crowded to drive safely except late at night.
mithrandir we agree and disagree. You say it is fine to do 99 mph or 160 kph on the roadway. That may be true in the middle of no where with no other traffic but your idea of just stay right is not going to solve the problem on most of our highways. Most interstates are only two lanes. You come suddenly up to a slow truck driving 55 to 60 mph and you can not
immediatly switch lanes because of a car on your left. You then go to pass but are worried about someone in the left lane traveling 40 mph faster than you are and hitting you. There is traffic all around so you can not see 100s of feet behind you. I do not know about you but that happens all the time to me excpet for the person driving 100 mph in the left lane.
Randy,
It is fine if road conditions permit such travel. Even if road conditions were ideal, I still would not travel much more than 120kph.
Many of the highways around here (Northeast) are 3 lanes.
I have not seen crazy variations in speed. It may be a few per hundred that try to drive above 150 kph. Most people that I have observed travel between 100-130 kph on the highways. I am not concerned about people traveling more than 40 mph faster than me. it is very rare that people would travel faster than 160-180 kph in the Northeast.
I usually check to be sure the road is clear when I change lanes. When I pass a pass quickly and with purpose. I try not to block the left lane when possible. Rush hour is another story. ;)
If someone is traveling soo fast that they cannot safely react to the road conditions than they need to slow down.
mithrandir from what most say on this site, it is the slower cars that should get the H— out of the way. They want to go fast no matter what the traffic conditions. If someone is not doing well over the limit in the middle lane they get mad.
Randy I’m sorry but your scenario is just not a realistic scenario.
“Most interstates are only two lanes.”
More than two lanes is not a requirement for allowing high speed traffic. Most Autobahns I have driven on that had no speed limit were two lane highways. This is the norm for any rural highway. Increased lanes allow traffic to maintain free flow conditions with a higher number of vehicles. Building an extra lane without the regular heavy traffic to justify it is a waste of money.
Higher speeds with heavy traffic don’t mix because it is impossible. As traffic increases speed goes down. It happens every time, even on no speed limit highways. Almost every traffic engineering manual illustrates this with a speed vs. traffic density curve that looks like a sideways parabola. Speed limits are irrelevant in heavy traffic.
“You come suddenly up to a slow truck driving 55 to 60 mph and you can not immediately switch lanes because of a car on your left.”
This is an impossible scenario because of the design criteria for interstates. The stopping sight distance requirements are exceptionally long and therefore even at speeds well in excess of 100 mph traffic can be seen so far in advance, that even if the vehicle was not moving at all, the driver would have enough time to bring his/her vehicle to a complete stop, on wet pavement, using comfortable braking, and based on a reaction time that encompasses virtually all drivers expected to use the roadway, including older drivers. If trucks are suddenly popping up in front of you, you might be having narcoleptic episodes or intense daydreaming to the point it is becoming a safety hazard. There is no valid reason why you should ever approach traffic in front of you suddenly or unexpectedly on a rural interstate no matter what your speed.
“You then go to pass but are worried about someone in the left lane traveling 40 mph faster than you are and hitting you. There is traffic all around so you can not see 100s of feet behind you. I do not know about you but that happens all the time to me except for the person driving 100 mph in the left lane.”
Ok, first of all if the truck is going 55 to 60 mph and you “suddenly” approach the truck, and the guy who you are worried about that is going 40 mph faster than you is going 100, that means you are going 60, essentially the same speed as the truck. I’m sorry the numbers just don’t add up and I am sure this doesn’t happen to you all the time. Unless you are implying that you are going something like 80 and these people that are passing you all the time are going 120. What highway is this again?
Also your side view mirror does provide 100′s of feet of view behind you. If there is traffic all around you blocking your view of the left lane then there cannot be this speed demon you speak of because the left lane would be full of traffic.
The bottom line is that the faster you go, the sooner you prepare to pass a slower vehicle in front of you. There is no reason for you to wait to the last second to check if someone is in the left lane. If you are indeed traveling at a high rate of speed check early. It works every time and allows you plenty of time to either pass or slow down to the speed of the vehicle in front of you if necessary until you can pass.
Airplanes suck much more gas than cars and airplanes don’t have an 80 mph speed limit. Randy – why is this ?
jef if you can get the mile or more separation between cars like there is for planes you can drive as fast as you like. You guys are idiots.
As far as a plane sucking gas I am sure that a plane is more efficient flying across the US than a couple of hundred SUVs driving across the US.
You do realize that out in montana/utah/etc there often is more than a mile between cars…
Planes are less efficient if you have 5(+) people in a vehicle. But everything is not about efficiency.
James that is why they have an 80 mph speed limit James. Because there are few cars. Most here do not get it. They want to drive 80 mph in crowded city traffic.
Actually, I don’t think anyone’s pushed for 80mph limits on city streets yet, that’s your private delusion.
James I said nothing abut city streets, I was talking about the interstate type highways along, by and through the cities of which I call city traffic.
If the 85th % speed is 85mph, then the speed limit should be 85mph. Why didn’t Utah DOT post the correct speed limit?
Jef there are always 15 idiots out of 100. One of the main reasons to keep speeds lower is to limit the speed differences. The higher the speeds the less you look at the 85 percentile and the more you look at the median speed. Believe it or not some people do not want to get 10 to 15 mpg less by driving fast. At 85 mph and higher you are sucking gas no matter what you drive.
Randy -
You are living in a fantasy world if you think that cops have been patrolling the 80 mph stretch any more than they were when it was 75 mph. In state after state, every time there is a speed limit increase, you hear cops say the same thing. They stay on it for about a month and then things return to normal.
The solution to sucking gas Randy is to have nuclear powered cars and trucks.
Henry it is usually a requirement to increase enforcement for a given time after the speed limits are increased but you would not know anything about that because the facts and the numbers are ignored by you and NMA.
Sorry about that Henry, I reread your post and you were correct. You just said what I was trying to say a bit more elegantly.
No Randy (George) I was correct the first time. Henry and NMA do not have a clue. They leave the facts out.
Also in the broadcast, the trooper was heard stating:
“It’s making the speeds higher, which means when we do have a crash, the level of injuries will be higher and the potential for serious injuries and fatalities increases, even with seat belt usage,” Rhoades said.
Didn’t happen. Speeds did not appreciably change either.
80 is a more realistic speed limit. Wish I could do that on the Florida Turnpike.
Henry it shows that they are slowing down the fast drivers. It is the fast drivers that cause the huge difference in speeds that causes many accidents. It shows that now most people are keeping their speeds at the speed limit rather than 10 mph or more over the limit. From what they are saying in this report the speeds did not change it was the signs that changed. Remember this is in a low traffic area also. Higher speeds with heavy traffic is a bad thing.
Almost every time they increase the speed limits even 5 mph they have more enforcement to keep them to that limit. This site likes to leave those little details and facts out.
When are you idiots going to get a clue? Yes accident rates have not gone up and yes the average speed has not gone up. Why?
” Sgt. Kevin Rhoades with the Utah Highway Patrol warns the UHP is enforcing the 80 mile-per-hour limit, and drivers with the idea police won’t write you up unless you are going 10 over are wrong.
“People are a little more upset about the fact we are ticketing to the actual speed limit. Our advice to the public is: If you exceed the speed limit, you are in jeopardy of getting a speeding ticket,” Rhoades said. ”
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=5241169
Sorry, that was rude of me to call you all idiots. I was just distraught that this speed limit change didn’t turn out like I’d been predicting for years, and I overreacted, taking it out on you. Sorry ’bout that.
Thanks Randy(George) but what this says is what I have been saying all along. It does not matter what the sign says but what speed the police enforce. If the people are driving 5 or 10 mph over the limit and the signs are changed and increased 5 mph and the police enforce the new limit there is no speed change. It still does not mean that 80 mph is safer than 70 or 75 mph.
When I say it is not me impersonating you, what don’t you get?
You come here and slander people, insult them, and expect respect?