Slashdot Mirror
Montana Lawmakers Propose 85 Mph Speed Limit On Interstates
HughPickens.com writes AP reports that Montana lawmakers are drafting bills that would raise the daytime speed limit on Montana interstate highways from 75 to 80 and possibly as high as 85 mph. "I just think our roads are engineered well, and technology is such we can drive those roads safely," says Art Wittich. He notes that Utah, Wyoming, and Idaho have raised their speed limits above 75, and they haven't had any problems. Drivers on German autobahns average about 84 mph. State Senator Scott Sales says he spent seven months working in the Bakken oil patch, driving back and forth to Bozeman regularly. "If I could drive 85 mph on the interstate, it would save an hour," says Sales. "Eighty-five would be fine with me."
A few years ago Texas opened a 40 mile stretch on part of a toll road called the Pickle Parkway between Austin and San Antonio. The tolled bypass was supposed to help relieve the bottleneck around Austin but the highway was built so far to the east that practically nobody used it. In desperation, the state raised the toll road speed limit to 85 mph, the fastest in the nation. "The idea was that drivers could drop the top, drop the hammer, crank the music and fly right past Austin," says Wade Goodyn. "It's a beautiful, wide-open highway — but it's empty, and the builders are nearly bankrupt."
Back in the 90's Montana didn't have a speed limit on the Interstates. "Reasonable and prudent" speed for the conditions was the rule. I do remember there being a night-time speed limit of 65 or 70, though.
Or has the US DOT had a change in policy?
Repealed as of 1995 with the passage of the National Highway System Designation Act.
Jason Van Patten
...if they raised the speed limit to eighty-eight, scott could save *years*...
Montana used to have no speed limit during the daytime but that was overturned for being too "vague" by the Montana Supreme Court. People actually drove reasonably well and there weren't any major issues with it. The major issue was the Susie safety nuts who felt that without telling people how fast was reasonable that it would confuse people, the court agreed.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Have you compared the average car in Germany with the ones in the USA? Furthermore, in Germany there are mandatory periodic technical inspections, and these are no joke. Half the cars I see in the USA would never pass these inspections. Also, getting a driver license in Germany is HARD, and the average Autobahn driver is very well disciplined compared to his USA counterpart (exceptions exist, I know I know...)
int main(void) {while(1) fork(); return 0;}
Does Montana have wildlife fencing along it's interstate? This would be my main concern, not other drivers. It doesn't matter how "well engineered" your roadway is if a deer can leap out into it and you have no time to react since you are going 85mph... this can be disastrous not only for you but other motorists as your car goes out of control .
The national maximum speed limit was repealed under Bill Clinton so federal funding is not an issue.
Safety is an issue. Crashes on highways are no more frequent at higher speeds so long as they are designed for it, they are however more deadly. In Germany you have two additional things that make it possible to have high or no speed limit on intercity highways. First, the driver training is of much higher quality, you will never see anyone changing lanes without signalling on the autobahn. Second, there is generally a parallel slower road. If an 85 mph road is the only option then you will have people who are little tired or had a glass of wine with dinner on it. Not a recipe for success.
The German Autobahns are unrestricted. You can literally go as fast as you want on them (your insurance may blame you in an accident if you're the only one doing over 100mph, but it's not "illegal").
Strict lane control is the saviour. You can be arrested for dawdling in the inner lanes (the "fast" - actually "overtaking" - lanes) unnecessarily. It works well because the old grannies do get too scared to be in anything but the first lane, so they actually stick to it, rather than hog the middle lane as they do in my country (the UK).
I see no problem with a rise in speed limits (and would vastly prefer that to people campaigning to scrap speed cameras etc.), but basic driving etiquette must be enforced. In Germany, I believe it's actually written on the road signs and road markings - this lane below 55, these lane over 55 ONLY.
Enforce that strictly, it becomes much safer.
Since US and German driving were compared, German police is really tough on tailgating. You will see cameras on motorways, they don't measure speed but the distance between cars. The correct distance is speed in km/h, divided by 2, as meters. Less than half that can get you a ticket (25 mtrs and 100 km/h = 62mph). Even less distance gives serious fines and can be a criminal offence.
It's Montana. What are they going to hit, an elk? It's not like there are any people there.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Your perception is skewed. The commute he mentions is indeed that long. It's a vast empty area and there is no option other than driving.
Let me tell you. When I was stationed in Germany from 1991 to 1993, you were correct. Then the EU and open borders and the Eurozone and all that stuff happened. I've been back to Germany several times (no longer as poor soldier) in the 2000's, and I can say that there are a lot of foreigners on them there Autobahns (nouns are cap'd in German), and the rules ain't that strictly followed. (Not sure why I'm writing in that tone of voice.)
There's still pretty good discipline in the leftmost lane. But out of five or six lanes, it's not quite good enough. And of course in cities and urban areas there have always been speed limits. In fact the speed limits in these areas are programmed based on traffic flow and peak times.
Intercity is where the safe and prudent really works in Germany, especially because the left-most lane (not all lanes!) discipline works fairly well. Note that as early as 1991, though, there is certain liability for causing an accident in the left lane, even if there's a slow driver.
I guess my point is, Germany isn't the speed-limitless-wonderland that so many people think it is.
--Jim (me)
Idaho changed the major interstates, outside of major towns, to 80MPH already this summer. It definitely helps.
Truck speed limit is 70. Some cars/trucks still go 65. No major problems I'm aware of, and in these more sparsely populated states, I think a valid change.
For my pickup, my MPG goes way down if I go above 70MPH, so I usually stay around 68-69MPH.
Don't steal. The government hates competition.
To those two also add rather strict rules on testing and what's allowed to be mounted on / modified etc...
The Autobahns are also built to higher standards in terms of thicker roadbeds, better maintenance, and more gradual curves that are designed to be used at higher speeds. Admittedly you can restrict speed limits for just parts of a highway where curves are more common and raise limits on straight stretches of the road, but the smaller roadbed is a major concern and something that needs to be considered.
The reason for the lower standards on the American Interstate Highways is in part due to the huge scale of the whole project being a continent spanning system as opposed to something that simply runs through a much smaller country. Distances are huge in America and the higher standards used for the Autobahn would have been prohibitive in terms of how much it cost to build those highways... especially in rural America.
Interstate Highways are not the Autobahn, even though there are some superficial common features. If Interstate Highways had their construction standards raised and roadbeds rebuilt to those higher standards to accommodate these higher speeds, I would be more inclined to support some higher speeds.
The Bakken formation is in northeastern Montana and northwestern North Dakota and extends up into Saskatchewan. If working there you might be housed in a place like Bainville. From there you would drive about 360 miles on I-90 and I-94 to Bozeman before getting off at Glendale. At 75MPH, that's 4 hours, 40 minutes. At 85MPH, that's 4 hours, 14 minutes. So the speed limit difference could cut 26 minutes off your drive. If you were counting the round-trip difference, it's about 52 minutes, so close to what he was saying. You might do that every week or two if you were working in the oil patch and "living" in Bozeman.
However, I don't think it's realistic to drive all that way at 85MPH. You'd have to slow down at times.
What are they going to hit, an elk?
Or a cow. In spite of fences and other attempts to keep wildlife off of major roads, it still is a major problem. Avoiding wildlife while traveling at 55 mph is much easier to do than at 80 mph.
That accident occured in Belgium. Their drivers are known all over Europe to be... Belgians. That really says it all.
I live in Italy not exactly what you would think about as a model of driving culture (especially if seen from far away) but anyway... According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... these are the values for Road fatalities per 100 000 inhabitants per year and Road fatalities per 100 000 motor vehicles:
Germany, no limit on highways: 4.3, 6.9
Italy, 130 km/h (81.25 mph): 6.2, 7.6
USA: 11.6, 13.6
So yes, there seem to be something wrong in the American approach to driving. Maybe it's time to fix it so you can eventually raise the limit and save a lot of time. I had to crawl at 55 on the South West interstates many years ago and it's not the fondest memory I have of that vacation.
Somewhat true, but the Germans are much better trained than US drivers, including basic medical training and required safety equipment, should anything go wrong, and so on. Their vehicles are also more highly maintained. Also, let's not forget that the Autobahns are usually engineered to a very high standard.
I live in Germany, and so I might have seen a bit more of the Autobahn than you have in recent years, and I've not had the impression of dangerous foreigners driving all over the place. I'm not saying you're wrong, but the problem doesn't seem as bad as your post painted it.
I shudder to think what would happen if US drivers were let loose on roads such as the Autobahn in their cars, with their proficiency, and their respect for the rules of the road - it'd make some great TV :)
I believe the poster was talking about the B-roads which generally run in similar routes to the A-roads (the Autobahns). The B-roads are for slower traffic, and offer a respite for people not wishing to share the road with people thundering past.
I just think our roads are engineered well
Umm... American's infrastructure is not in good shape.
So Bozeman to Bakken Oil fields is >400 miles. there and back is >800 miles.
800 miles @ 75MPH is 10h 40min. 800miles @ 85MPH is 9h 24min.
Savings of 1 hour 15 minutes, if you managed to keep average speed close to speed limit, which surprisingly is not horribly hard around that area. I live in South Dakota, and there really is not a problem. Almost no traffic and fairly flat and straight roads.
main(i){putchar(177663314>>6*(i-1)&63|!!(i<5)<<6)&&main(++i);}
I clumsily meant if, over night, the speed limits on US roads were raised to those of the Autobahn, with nothing else done. So the answer would be "all of them" (and "all of them"), and result in incredible TV.
EPA will get it re-instated via CO2 reduction policy. Overcoming drag is exponential in requiring more HP at higher speeds. So yeah, expect this level of bullshit.
Life is not for the lazy.
I have driven that stretch in eastern Montana many times, and I have also driven that stretch of road in Texas. One thing the article doesn't mention about that toll road in Texas is that it was very expensive -- over $5 if I remember correctly. I tried it once not knowing the cost, and it was a lot of fun to drive on. But for that price, I can see why so few people use it, especially since you have to go out of your way. I was on my way from San Antonio to Dallas, so I didn't mind skipping Austin.
As for eastern Montana, the countryside is very open with gently rolling hills and long stretches of mostly straight sections of Interstate. Very often, you will not be able to see a vehicle in either direction (and just as often, no more than one or two buildings either), so the temptation to cruise is very high. Any wildlife can be seen from miles away, and there are very few trees. My only concern would be raising the speed limit on the western side of the state where there are more mountains and forests. There are some highways with 70 mph limits with limited visibility (both on the road and in the underbrush around) that makes for dangerous driving. As long as they take these things into account, it makes perfect sense. Montana already takes over a day's driving. just to get across.
I believe in de-evolution. God made the world perfect, man fell, and its been going downhill ever since!
This is only likely to reduce the number of speeding tickets.
I live in kansas where the speed limit is 75mph on the open highway but where the trafic is sparse, the road is straight, and flat many drivers already do 85mph. I would imagine Montana is the same way, I know Nebraska is I just drove through there.
Then there are the people with economy cars and cross overs with small engines that end up doing 65-70mph because they have trouble maintaining 75mph if there are any hills. {I used to have an older ford taurus with a 4 cylinder engine that was one of those cars}
"The reason for the lower standards on the American Interstate Highways is in part due to the huge scale of the whole project being a continent spanning system as opposed to something that simply runs through a much smaller country."
Good argument, except basically all the EU shares the same standards regarding highway engineering so you end up comparing apples to apples.
European Route E90, for instance, covers 4770Km (almost 3000 miles) from Portugal to Turkey, which happens to be a bit longer than Los Angeles to New York.
To the third power actually.
Usually German cars keep to the right until they have to move over to pass someone, which they only do when no-one faster is in the next lane coming up on them. To sit in the left lane when there is no need to is highly frowned upon, and rather stupid, as people can fly up on you doing over 200, forcing you to merge back over in short notice, when you should have been there anyway.
I can attest to this as well. I have a German car, and it performs exactly as you state. Although I have also noticed that my wife's Japanese car also does the same thing when I am driving it.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Good thing most cars that feel safe at that speed have the technology to still get 30 MPG at that speed. Or, at least, mine does and it's a 2008 model year.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
If you're truly in the right lane doing 45, how are you being passed on the right? They blowing past you on the shoulder? That's already illegal.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Germany has better traffic laws than here in the US. Someone in the left lane slams their brakes on to make a left and they get rear-ended... it is their fault. A car going slow in the left lane? Citable offense. Running out of fuel? A ticket. Someone swooping in too narrow a gap and causing a rear-ender, fault isn't automatically the person behind.
The fact that it is a law that vehicles have first aid kits and blankets is a good thing as well.
I used to work as a Geologist across the Western US, and I lived in Washington State. I did a stint in North Dakota and I drove through Montana several times. 85 would save a TON of time. I generally drove 5 miles over any given speed limit anywhere (depending on which state I was going to, it was anywhere between 800-1000 miles for the drive). 5 MPH wasn't enough to have the cops pull me over and I would easily save an hour of driving. It doesn't seem like much, but an 11-hour drive changing to a 10-hour drive is AMAZING. Those last hours suck balls. But anyways, I told this story because your point is correct. You have to drive a LONG distance before the speed limit makes a significant difference in time. One takeaway I learned from that driving is that speeding on a short drive makes no sense at all! :)
Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. But light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
I would prefer to see more people ticketed for failure to use the turn signal than for speeding. Communication is key. Unfortunately, it's a bit harder to catch the former than the latter.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
You can check the road safety statistics to see just how dangerous it is on US roads compared to German ones.
Except the accident rates for the U.S. were often worse when the speed limit was lower (before it used to be 55). One pretty obvious reason for that is that some people would drive very fast anyway, so you had a greater discrepancy between speed of drivers on the road - after a lot of driving experience I'd say that's probably the biggest reason accidents happen, a slow driver does something suddenly and a fast driver cannot respond quickly enough.
In Germany things works out because multiple lanes are much more separate and slow drivers actually move right.
Comparing German accident rates to U.S. rates with very different driving situations makes no sense when arguing a speed limit should be raised or not, because it says nothing about how accident rates for U.S. drivers change at different speed limits.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
After moving to Belgium, I took drivers-lessons, just to be sure I caught the main differences (legal etc) between back home and Belgium.
By the 2nd session, I was getting nervous because of the comments made by the instructors (there were 2, alternating) about how I was doing things in traffic, that they completely had forgotten, like checking blind spots before turning...
Yeah, even their instructors are incompetent, no wonder the drivers are dangerous.
They blowing past you on the shoulder? That's already illegal.
Not in texas, and I think in other states.
If someone where going 45 in a 75MPH zone, I'd pass them on the shoulder... but then they should really be the ones driving there at that speed.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The difference in gas miliage between 45-50 MPH and 70-75 seems to be far more influenced by traffic conditions
Yes.... perhaps we have been measuring the wrong thing all along. Miles driven are not fungible.
We could take a standardized mile, but it would not reflect the real world.
Instead we should say...
The total fuel consumption rate accelerating from 0 to 65, maintaining speed at 65 and driving a distance from point A to point B is X.
X forms a "baseline"
Next you need to add realistic random traffic to the road, and an intelligent agent which attempts to maintain 65 while it is safe to do so.
And you obtain a "second baseline"; real-world gas consumption.
Then if you want to decide whether a different speed limit other than 65 is beneficial or not, you need to make the adjustment, and compare the results against the second baseline over a few thousand trials with a representative sample of travelers.
The ideal circumstances on a road by yourself does not reflect this complex system, and simple physics cannot even solve the N body problem, let alone this one; the only way to come at a decent answer is to experiment and gather the statistics.
Or perhaps we should just have animals do driver's-ed and drive to their destination instead of wandering all over the road.
My State is doing a big tailgating enforcement thing right now, it is very popular.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Interstate Highways are much older than even the European Union although they were designed after concepts introduced in Germany with the Autobahn. I should point out that the E-roads that you are talking about were originally conceived as emulating the Interstate Highway system (at least that is what the wiki claims) and was something instituted in the 1970's.... about when construction of the Interstate Highway system was wrapping up.
It should also be pointed out that the E-90 road that you are talking about also happens to cross over a major part of the Mediterranean Sea (I presume that is by ferry) on its route.
If you want at least one source of information on the difference between the Autobahn vs. Interstate Highways, at least read this article:
http://gizmodo.com/5857416/why-american-roads-are-so-bad
I would hope that Europe didn't follow everything that happened on the Interstate Highway System, as there were definitely some corners that were cut on the 40,000 mile system as it was being built. U.S. highways definitely don't follow Autobahn standards, even though at this point I feel that any repaving/rebuilding of interstate highways likely should be following those standards when practical.
Actually, I was thinking the same thing... how much of Montana has enforced speed limits? I've driven at "high speeds" on MT interstates. And I know many others that have as well. Yes, the roads are good, and there are rather few other drivers on them. (no, I'm not driving 90mph on snow/ice covered roads. 'tho I have driven ~100 at night, in the rain, at VIR :-))
I lived in Montana during their infamous 'Safe and Reasonable' speed limit era. For those who don't know what that is; for a period during the 90's Montana's speed limit on the Interstate Highways was, in theory, unlimited during the day, and 85mph at night. The posted speed at the borders was "Safe and Reasonable. Night 85mph" This lasted for a number of years, until finally they capped it back down (apparently to 70). The story I heard most often that the reason for the change was due to accidents, generally involving out of state drivers. The locals knew the roads and conditions, and would self regulate for most part, but travelers from out of state (some probably seeking the 'no speed limit' thrill) would exceed the conditions, resulting in accidents. Now, because i've lived there, I can tell you, almost everywhere it is safe to drive 85mph on the Interstate, there is an alternative 'frontage' road that would be a 65/70mph road. I can't say I care one way or another if they change it back to 85mph, but I think the same problem will persist, of out of staters(and the occasional natural born idiot) exceeding the capabilities of their skill/vehicle/road conditions and wrecking.
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
Texas covers snow safety precisely "not enough." let me explain to you how snow works in Texas. They flipped a sand truck (for sanding the roads in bad weather) in my county once, with about 1/4th an inch of snow on the ground. If it snows, everyone freaks out, and then goes out and drives around and gets in wrecks.
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
When moving across country (California to Florida) in 2005, I averaged 32 MPG for two consecutive tanks of gas (calculated by actual gas used at time of fill up) while driving through AZ and NM. Cruising speed was 85. Car was a '99 Grand Am (170hp 3.4L V6), EPA highway rating was 30 MPG. There was probably a tailwind.
More recently, while returning to Chicago from vacation in Colorado, I managed to average 30 MPG for a single continuous 400-mile nonstop leg while averaging 76 MPH. This car is a '05 Pontiac G6 (200hp 3.5L V6), rated at 28 MPG highway by the EPA.
Obviously, both these trips are idealized - fill up, accelerate directly to cruising speed, maintain until next fuel stop - so not representative of how the EPA tests highway mileage. Typically the G6 gets 25-28 on the highway (yes, these GM engines are woefully inefficient). Now, I know the plural of anecdote is not data, but the fact is it's possible for cars to achieve mileage better than the EPA ratings - depending on lots of things including traffic, power curve, gearing, wind, etc.
my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
Their vehicles are also more highly maintained.
I don't live in Germany, but my closest friend since about the age of 18 does, and I can say with absolute certainty, based upon the pictures she sends me of there, and her own personal vehicle, that my anecdote would not match yours.
My guess is that's more a function of affluence, which is in fact one of the few metrics we do win in.
That's damn good even for a Civic!
On a good day, I can get between 24 and 26 MPG @ 75Mph (in cruise control mode) with my 2010 V6 RAV4. Though I can get that up to 30 - 32 @ 60Mph Not bad actually. Dual VVT-i (Variable Valve timing) is nice. One cam profile for power when needed, the other for fuel efficiency while cruising along.
Life is not for the lazy.
To the third power actually.
Someone didn't take thermodynamics.
I've been tracking the data myself with torque. Fuel consumption per unit time increases with the square of speed because after 65mph drag does.
But since you get there faster it's just linear increase in consumption per unit distance.
Personally, I discovered my AFR drops from 14.1 to as low as 11.5 any time the engine produces over 400 grams CO2/mile for more than about 3 seconds. On a completely flat road this works out to about 85mph or so, I can do slight inclines at 80, and if I don't ever want to have to touch the cruise control, 75-76mph.
at 55mph I get 34mpg, at 70 I get 32, at 75 I get 29.5 and at 80 I get about 27.
If I want to get there I go 75.
If I kinda want to get there I go 65.
If I don't really care or I'm feeling cheap I go 55.