Study: 70 Mph Safe As 65

[jonney38]

On the Montana "study". Seat belt use went up, fatalities went down. Makes sense.

[rpvitiello]

dude do you have ANY facts to back up the mis-information you are spewing. Did you read ANY of the things JUST quoited from government studies, and pretty legitimate sources. I also used Montana, its NOT an EU country, it is a US state that had NO speed limit at ALL, and the "inferior" US driver training, and ACCIDENT RATES STILL WENT DOWN IN THE United States, WITH NO SPEED LIMITS, AND WITH NO FURTHER DRIVER TRAINING.

[rpvitiello]

Originally Posted by jonney38

On the Montana "study". Seat belt use went up, fatalities went down. Makes sense.

yes seat belt use went up, with NO enforcement. When you let people make their own reason decisions over what is "safe" they actually do what is safe. With low speed limits, people get a false sense of security that is is not dangerous and they dont wear seat belts.

So you still think paying billions of dollars to make the US a nanny state makes more sense to FORCE people to do what is safe, rather than just let people act in a reasonable manor, and do what is safe on their own.

despite a TONE of studies on the subject that prove BEYOND a reasonable doubt that speed limits do not improve safety, you keep beating your drum with absolutely NO facts or data to back up the mis-information you keep spreading. You have not posted ONE SINGLE fact on this site to support ANY of the stuff you are saying...

Everything you are posting is based on your OWN theory with no testing to support it, no actual studies or facts at ALL support what you are saying...

The most effective measure for highway safety is not SPEED control but FLOW controll. You want to keep traffic free flowing at all time, and limit the time cars spend close to each other. You want nice safe following distances, with more distance between cars with bigger speed differences. That is why it is ingrained in peoples heads in germany to MOVE RIGHT when a car comes flying up behind them. If they are not doing 70mph in front of a car doing 90mph they CAN'T get rear ended. It is safer to be to the right with a car doing 65mph behind you.

The key is flow, you don't want HUGE variations in traffic speed in the same lane, with faster traffic pulling up on slower traffic. You want to get the faster drivers infornt of the slower drivers in the safest, most efficent manor possable. So you have cars keep right, pass left, and you want to maintain safe following distances at all time. Once you interfear with the flow (artifical speed limits, slow traffic in the left lane) you redice a highways designed capasity, you redice following distances, and you have large speed differentials in the same lane which lead to accidents.

So back to your simple physics. We can either lower the speed limits, and jam up the highways and have crashes, but not many fatal ones...

Or we can move the slower cars out of the way of faster cars, so it is not possable for the 2 cars to crash in the first place.

I think all the studies show that the latter option is much more realistic, and useful in the real world, and the former is all but useless and unenforceable in the rear world.

[jonney38]

On the MT. seat belt use--the article obviously was not written in the style of an academic study, but is in the style of propaganda. It implies, but does not state directly, that seat belt use went up BECAUSE of speed limits were eliminated. I have my doubts that somehow people reasoned that, "Because gov't is now watching over me, I need to wear my seat belt." Do you know for a fact that there was no "Wear your seatbelt" promotion at the same time. Then, what about DUI enforcement. Was there any increase in DUI enforcement. I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, about 50% of accidents involve alcohol. So, half the accidents will be unaffected by "traffic flow" or made "safer" by driving faster. The thing is, my friend, in real academic research, you cannot change several variables at the same time and then be free to pick and choose the one you want to label as "cause" and "effect". Ya gotta be honest.

[ProjectFocusFast]

Originally Posted by jinstall

Come live in Europe for a while and you will change your mind. Education it where it's at.

VERY VERY true. It's close to a YEAR of education and driver training before you can even THINK about getting your license, not to mention the extremely tough driving test.

Why do you think Germany, with the Autobahn, has one of the world's lowest fatal crash (and overall accident) rates in the world? Train people to drive properly, not like here in the US.

The one thing I don't agree with overseas is the strict vehicle inspections though. I love my old cars. But really, they are necessary to keep clapped-out beaters off the road. Face it, a rusty '79 Caprice may be able to go as fast as a Focus on the freeway, but it's not nearly as safe.

[rpvitiello]

Originally Posted by jonney38

On the MT. seat belt use--the article obviously was not written in the style of an academic study, but is in the style of propaganda. It implies, but does not state directly, that seat belt use went up BECAUSE of speed limits were eliminated. I have my doubts that somehow people reasoned that, "Because gov't is now watching over me, I need to wear my seat belt." Do you know for a fact that there was no "Wear your seatbelt" promotion at the same time. Then, what about DUI enforcement. Was there any increase in DUI enforcement. I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, about 50% of accidents involve alcohol. So, half the accidents will be unaffected by "traffic flow" or made "safer" by driving faster. The thing is, my friend, in real academic research, you cannot change several variables at the same time and then be free to pick and choose the one you want to label as "cause" and "effect". Ya gotta be honest.

ok and what about the tests the federal NHTSA did that concluded that the 85% was the safest speed, Explain why my STATES WEB SITE states that the 85% speed is the safest speed. Why does almost every single EU country use the 85% speed to set speed limits, and why do many states (Such as California) MANDATE that speed limits be set at the 85% speed. I take it these places just pulled that % out of their ass?

Humans follow a bell curve of ability, Intelligence, weight, size, if you look at statistics most people are pretty close to everyone else. If you set a speed limit at 85% it groups the majority of people close together. Their may be a VERY small portion of the population that can exceed the 85% speed limit safely, but most people who are exceeding it are acting beyond reasonable human ability. When you pass a speed limit law where greater than 50% of the population is violating it, you lose that differentiation. Cops can no longer easily pick out the people who are really going too fast from the people who are actually driving reasonably for a human. You wind up with cops becoming overwhelmed by enforcing JUST speed limits because such a large number of people are doing it.

Yes in theory is people were good little mindless drowns that did what ever the government told them to do without question, because the nanny state knows best, and must protect them from making adult decisions, and deciding what is too risky for them, then sure accidents MIGHT go down...

We don't live in a socialist nation though, and Americans have being forced to do something just because "big brother" said so. Even the dam EU countries don't try and mingle this way with driving (well except maybe Briton)

So unless you plan to install GPS speed restriction in all cars, where the car knows what road you are on by GPS, and knows the speed limit, and adjusts the speed limiter in the car to the current speed limit, their is NO way to enforce speed limits in their current form in the US. A law is only useful if it can be ENFORCED. if you cant enforce a law, the paper it is written on is as useful as the roll of paper you have in your bathroom to wipe your ass with.

[MrBirdman330]

Another problem throwing in my voice here because I am a Truck Driver, is with many states they increase the speed limits of cars but lower the speed limits of trucks. For instance California has a speed limit of 70 mph for cars and normal trucks, but any Semi's must go 55 mph. The same with other states like Illinois, cars 65 mph while trucks must go 55 mph. This one of two examples that are very concerning because California proclaims that a rolling road block becoming a standing road block is actually safe. Yet when you ask for their proof they have it stashed somewhere and can't access it. I know nobody likes to be behind us but if you let us actually try and go with the flow of cars we aren't that bad at all. Ohio is bad with cars going 70 but trucks must go 55 except on the Ohio Turnpike then it is all 65 mph. What's interesting is that many states do not get much federal funding because of this for their highways which is why Illinois is mostly toll. Almost if anything I would be in favor of lowing car speed limits because while we are going slower and slower cars are going faster and faster. If we get rear ended it will be our fault for going so slow. Don't laugh it actually happened in Arizona, a truck driver got rear ended and caused a seven car pile up because his truck was restricted at 52 mph when the speed limit was 75 mph. He got fined for going too slow and the trucking company he worked for nearly got shut down because they were refusing to up their speed governing on the trucks. They were forced to put them at 60. I'm all for speed in many ways but you have to see it from my stand point, I drive a vehicle that several state gov't think me going upwards of 20 mph slower than cars is safe when it isn't. It's asking for trouble and it brings trouble especially in California which is known as Truckers Hell. If anything make a speed limit that is reasonable for both Semi and Car.

[jonney38]

Birdman--Great post. You and all the other posters point out that the problem is very, very complex. A vast variety of vehicles, conditions & driving skills. The story gets even more complex when one looks at the maze of government which determines highway policy. In states, you have "transportation departments". They have a vested interest in keeping numbers up on the highways. Thus, they tend to have "studies" which are designed to steer things toward that end. Instead of hiring social scientists study things, whose background is human behavior, they tend to stick with their own, civil engineers. Next come state legistlators, who pass the actual laws. Every state capital is packed with lobbyests from every corner of highway intersts. Then, there is the Fed. Gov't and US Congress. Saftey hardly comes up, except to justify some special interests goals. It could enter the picture in a more honest way if a state's public health/safety departments were asked to start from scratch to design the laws for highway use. If such departments said, "We are going to set a goal of reducing to a minimum deaths on the highways," we might see many of the ideas posted here come to pass--better spacing, more training, more DUI enforce, etc. We currently have little peer reviewed academic research about how to improve highway safety and no political will on the horizon to collect it. That is why I'm stuck on what little information we actually have, crash dummy tests. Drive my Focus faster, I die younger.

[jinstall]

Trucks(LKW) are limited to 100kph(62mph) in Germany and get along wiht other car just fine. Buses are limitied to this speed as well. Towing a trailer is limited to this speed also. Anything over 8 tons has to abide by this regulation. The fines are heavy when they are broken. It has been this way since the 30's I believe.

[MattZTS]

i agree trucks should drive slower and in the right lane only. a semi is def one of the most unsafe vehicles on the road no offense to any truck drivers on here. the simple fact is if a truck makes a mistake or causes an accident its gonna be alot more severe.

[jinstall]

Originally Posted by ProjectFocusFast

The one thing I don't agree with overseas is the strict vehicle inspections though. I love my old cars. But really, they are necessary to keep clapped-out beaters off the road. Face it, a rusty '79 Caprice may be able to go as fast as a Focus on the freeway, but it's not nearly as safe.

I am very fond of this as it keeps the roads nice and clean, of debris!

[MrBirdman330]

But in Germany you guys have a Truck only lane, we do not and in many states its very difficult for us to drive because of this problem one of them is California. Another note is in Georgia, if a trucker EVEN looks at the accident its his fault immediately. Trucks going slower than cars really is an issue when most of the time the driver of the car is not paying attention to what they're doing. You people will not believe some of the idiots I face out there daily on the interstate that tailgate and hide where I can not see them then yak on their phone and nearly hit me. Maybe some of you should come out and try driving what the hell I drive and then you'll understand more. Making us a standing roadblock isn't the answer and it causes way more problems maybe if we had two lanes just for us maybe but when the interstate is only four lanes two on each side and not all truckers go the same speed you have a problem when trying to pass. Speeding up cars makes the problem more when we're restricted and drivers don't pay attention to us. We truckers are "Professional" for what we do in one reason or another, otherwise we wouldn't have been given our Commerical Licenses in the first place.

[rpvitiello]

Originally Posted by MrBirdman330

Yet when you ask for their proof they have it stashed somewhere and can't access it.

freedom of information act If you give them a formal written request they HAVE to give you the information now. It is completely illegal to withhold that stuff at this point.

What's interesting is that many states do not get much federal funding because of this for their highways which is why Illinois is mostly toll.

not true either anymore. The Feds completely dropped that. Once a highway has a speed limit over 55mph they no longer have to report speed compliance to the feds for funding. My state may lose federal funding because they have NOT raised the speed limit on many highways over 55mph, where they still have to report compliance, and they have almost 90% non compliance. The ONLY finding states may lose, is funding for SPEED ENFORCEMENT because a larger % of the population would be doing what they are suppose to, they do not lose any finding AT ALL for raising the speed limits anymore, if anything they lose funding by NOT raising limits above 55mph.

Originally Posted by MrBirdman330

But in Germany you guys have a Truck only lane, we do not and in many states its very difficult for us to drive because of this problem one of them is California. Another note is in Georgia, if a trucker EVEN looks at the accident its his fault immediately.

Georgia is ass backwards in most ways when it comes to safety, they just want money from the fines.

Also if people "keep right, pass left" the "special lanes" are not an issue. Up here trucks usually only have a 5mph lower speed limit, or the same speed limit. On 3+ lane highways trucks are not allowed in the left hand lane, they are allowed only in the right and middle lane.

On 2 lane highways NOONE is allowed to drive in the left hand lane AT ALL. It is ONLY for passing. As soon as you pass you are suppose to move right IMMEDIATELY to let other vehicles pass.

Also in my state you are REQUIRED BY LAW to drive "as far right as practical" Even if you are on a road with no lane markings, and just a yellow line, you are suppose to drive close to the curb, and leave room to the left for cars to pass. Also even though our speed limits are really low, the minimum on surface roads is 10mph under the speed limit, and on highways the minimum is usually posted as well. It is usually 10-15mph less than the speed limit. If you can't maintain that speed, you or your car is not road worthy and you get ticketed for going too slow.

Raise speed limits to the 85% and set the minimum at the 15% speed, that way most people are going really slow, and you get the too fast, and too slow people off the road.

[MrBirdman330]

In every state all slower traffic is to keep to the right but nobody follows it. In Illinois it is LAW you have to stay in the right line you are only allowed in the left lane to pass and have a distance restriction of a mile at most to pass. Is the law enforced? No it isn't, as I said you people have no idea what it like for us out there on the road. I've trucked in nearly forty states already, it is very difficult to drive when you have people that ride your blind spot, think its absolutely funny to speed out get infront of you and then slow down to ten below the speedlimit for no reason. I sit seven feet off the ground I can over every car. The right lanes only for trucks tend to be a joke when people know you need to be in that lane then match your speeds no matter how much you speed up or slow down so you can't get in that lane. The main problem with all of this, its called a very lousy drivers education program and the fact that nobody enforces proper traffic laws. As I said give us two lanes that is for us and US only on the interstates and there wouldn't be issues. If there can be lanes for cars ONLY then there can be lanes for trucks ONLY. Will it happen? The answer is no, why because its more fun to bust the trucker for a violation than a regular driver because we are the "Professionals" on the road other than the police and it is our duty to help maintain safe roads for everybody. Does it happen? No, why because when the "Professional" tries to do his job and the idiot doesn't want to listen or understand then his job has failed and it is his fault. Making trucks slower without doing what is necessary to help ensure a safer interstate only creates problems. Making a law and not enforcing isn't the answer it only creates the problems we have today. I'm sure CT may try to enforce such a law but its a small state so its easy to do that. When you have larger states like Montana, Illinois, and Washington its nearly impossible to enforce such a law.

[rpvitiello]

Well not EVERY state has a mandatory keep right law. Many states require you to "keep right" ONLY if you are going below the posted speed limit. As long as you stay right at the speed limit many states allow you to stay in the far left lane.

CT does enforce the keep right laws to a degree. I know people who have been pulled over before for driving a passenger car in the left hand lane for no reason, and ticketed for it. As for interstate if it is 3+ lanes, trucks are almost always restricted to the right 2 lanes. That applies to big rigs, buses, motor homes, or trailers even a car with a tiny 200lb trailer. Unless you are a passenger car or motorcycle, you can NOT use anything but the right 2 lanes here. Just way too much traffic and it would get WAY too chaotic to have those vehicles driving in the left hand lane. I see restricted vehicles illegally in the left lane of a highway (or on a restricted highway) maybe once or twice a year. Cars will start flashing you, other truckers will tell you on the CB to get out of the left lane, and people will call the police on you (which they do respond to) trucker in the left lane = BIG no no here. Most of the time it is either some tool from out of state towing a trailer with their pick up truck, or someone in a U-hall or something that drive illegally in the left lane, I could not tell you the last time I saw an 18wheeler drive in the left lane.

It is still idiots on cruise control in the middle that slow things down. What winds up happening is the center lane is the travel lane, the left lane is the "car" passing lane, and the right lane is the "truck" passing lane on 3 lane highways. because of this they have lately been adding SUPER long acceleration/deceleration lanes that go all the way from one exit to the next exit to the far right of the highway so cars can speed up and wait for trucks to finish their pass before they get over into the "center" travel lane. Because of this we are winding up with some “exit” lanes that are a few kilometers long and go past 2 exits before they finally “exit” the highway.

as for trucks they are more concerned that the truck is in good working order than the trucker speeding. We had a few horrific crashes over the last few years where trucks had a major brake failure or something like that, turning into 20+ car accident with 10 fatalities. They are pushing for safety inspections to make sure the trucks here are safe to drive not so much pull them over for "speeding."

I don’t know if you ever drove in CT, but it is a major cross road for the northeast, the amount of truck traffic is crazy here, mixed with a huge number of commuters. At certain times the center lane can have a line of 200+ trucks all in a row. You just better hope you don’t need to get off the highway any time soon I you are in the left hand lane, your only hope is to speed up and try and pass a few hundred trucks and find a “break” in the traffic before you have to get off.

They are not complete bastards to truckers though. They are actually planning on tearing down almost all the current rest stops, rebuilding the restaurants etc as an elevated platform OVER the highway, and using the land from the old ones for truck parking so truckers can easily get a good rest and comply with federal sleep regulations.

[MrBirdman330]

Very FEW states are kind to truckers about five to be exact. Most states would just see us all go to hell like everybody else out there but all I say is this. Everything you own was shipped at one point on a truck think about that. But the answer isn't trucks going slower and cars going faster, a speed limit that is both suitible for trucks and cars is the answer. Oh in response to your Right of Information Act, us truckers continue to demand for California's statistics with the same answer all the time. "We can not access it at this time." The main reason they do it because the amount of money they make off of us because it is written into their budget they have to write us so many tickets and fines a year. California is its own country no offense to the people there. Always has believed it's above federal law.

[rpvitiello]

Originally Posted by MrBirdman330

Very FEW states are kind to truckers about five to be exact. Most states would just see us all go to hell like everybody else out there but all I say is this. Everything you own was shipped at one point on a truck think about that. But the answer isn't trucks going slower and cars going faster, a speed limit that is both suitible for trucks and cars is the answer. Oh in response to your Right of Information Act, us truckers continue to demand for California's statistics with the same answer all the time. "We can not access it at this time." The main reason they do it because the amount of money they make off of us because it is written into their budget they have to write us so many tickets and fines a year. California is its own country no offense to the people there. Always has believed it's above federal law.

so they need a lawyer to submit a formal request for the information. If they don't do it file a lawsuit in federal court for withholding the information, and have a fed judge order them to release the information.

[MrBirdman330]

California will never give it up, plain and simple because it doesn't exist.

[jinstall]

Originally Posted by MrBirdman330

But in Germany you guys have a Truck only lane, we do not and in many states its very difficult for us to drive because of this problem one of them is California.
THERE IS? WHERE? I HAVE BEEN HERE 12 YEARS AND I HAVE NEVER SEEN IT.

Another note is in Georgia, if a trucker EVEN looks at the accident its his fault immediately. Trucks going slower than cars really is an issue when most of the time the driver of the car is not paying attention to what they're doing.
SO YOU WOULD RATHER HAVE 40 TONS TRAVELING AT A HIGHER RATE OF SPEED?

You people will not believe some of the idiots I face out there daily on the interstate that tailgate and hide where I can not see them then yak on their phone and nearly hit me.
IT IS A WORLD WIDE ISSUE EXCEPT IN EUROPE THE FINES ARE MUCH HIGHER

Maybe some of you should come out and try driving what the hell I drive and then you'll understand more. Making us a standing roadblock isn't the answer and it causes way more problems maybe if we had two lanes just for us maybe but when the interstate is only four lanes two on each side and not all truckers go the same speed you have a problem when trying to pass.
IT HAS BEEN GOING ON IN EUROPE FOR YEARS AND THEY STILL SEEM TO BE ABLE TO GET WHERE THEY NEED TO GO AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED.

Speeding up cars makes the problem more when we're restricted and drivers don't pay attention to us. We truckers are "Professional" for what we do in one reason or another, otherwise we wouldn't have been given our Commerical Licenses in the first place.
CDL'S ARE NOT "GIVEN" THEY ARE EARNED FOR LOTS OF HARD WORK AND STUDYING. YOU THINK A US CDL IS HARD TRY A GERMAN ONE AND THAT HAZMAT CERT (ADR) THAT GOES WITH IT.

Not sure where you are getting your european driving info from but you need to find another source.

[MrBirdman330]

There's a bad problem here, CDL's just like regular licenses are being handed out by the dozen now to anybody. My state is one of the FEW actually strict on getting a CDL and I was lucky to get mine in one try. The same company that caused the massive car pile up in Arizona is also in trouble yet again for hiring illegal mexicans and getting them US A Class CDL's with Hazmat Endorsements when none of them knew how to speak english. One of them caused a severe accident causing several fatalities.