15 replies to this topic

[eastsider]

The speed limit for 521 miles of Interstates 10 and 20 in rural west Texas has been raised from 75 mph to 80 mph. The speed limit for trucks will be 70 mph and the night time speed limit for all vehicles will be 65 mph.

Quote

The 5 mph increase could theoretically reduce travel by 90 minutes between Kerrville, northwest of San Antonio, and Fabens, east of El Paso.

State officials say it's safe for drivers to travel up to 80 mph in the sparse, 10-county region where Texas plains turn to Chihuahuan desert.

Fort Worth Star-Telegram: 80 mph speed limit gets the green light

[bigboyz05]

That's very interesting. I wonder how it will work out? I hope it doesn't lead to more accidents.

[johnnydr87]

whoa....thats cool

[fyatuk]

bigboyz05, on May 26 2006, 10:50 PM, said:

That's very interesting. I wonder how it will work out? I hope it doesn't lead to more accidents.

Theoretically it will result in less accidents.  Apparently in the type of area they are talking about, most accidents are caused by people going slower than the speed of traffic.  Since most people already travel faster than 80 mph through the region, speeding up the slower traffic (the ones that stick to the speed limit) should decrease accidents.

That's part of the thinking behind it anyway.

[FromCityToRural]

That's too bad...I NEVER drive 80 on the freeway anymore, in fact I hardly ever break 65 no matter what the speed limit. Saves me gas. And when somebody glares at me, I don't care. They don't pay to fill my tank.

[crossroad]

Bad for the environment - it consumes much more gas when speed exceeds 60 miles per hours

Dumb regulation, sounds to me

[dgreco]

doesn't montana have the same thing, but I thought they have no limit enforced.  Environmentally it may not be the best, but if it reduces accidents, and honestly driving through the desert is probably pretty boring, it makes it go by faster.  More gas stations now too?

[FromCityToRural]

Hmm...come to find out, it may not always waste gas to go faster. My van gets about 17mpg at 70mph, for instance, where at 55-60 it gets only 15-15.5mpg, and at 65mph it struggels to break 16mpg. Why? I think the previous owners wore a "sweet spot" into the engine at 70mph.

Strange but true. I could hardly believe it myself...

[dgreco]

FromCityToRural, on Apr 3 2007, 11:04 AM, said:

Hmm...come to find out, it may not always waste gas to go faster. My van gets about 17mpg at 70mph, for instance, where at 55-60 it gets only 15-15.5mpg, and at 65mph it struggels to break 16mpg. Why? I think the previous owners wore a "sweet spot" into the engine at 70mph.

Strange but true. I could hardly believe it myself...

I know it has to do with RPM's so maybe your car uses less rpms crusing at 70- rather than 65, maybe its almost at the threshold for shifting that it runs the RPM's high.  I do think the ideal speed is 45mph though.

[FromCityToRural]

No...shifts into 4th at 35mph and the torque converter locks at 40mph. 65mph I'm pulling right at 1900 rpm, 70 gets me about 2100 or so IIRC. It has to do either with it getting a better vacuum reading at the higher RPM's, or the engine has a "sweet spot" worn into it at that speed, where the harmonics, etc. are the most tamed. 45 isn't a good speed for my van, it has to kick the torque converter lock off all the time, 50 is better, and probably equivalent to 70mph in terms of fuel economy.

[dgreco]

FromCityToRural, on Apr 3 2007, 05:03 PM, said:

No...shifts into 4th at 35mph and the torque converter locks at 40mph. 65mph I'm pulling right at 1900 rpm, 70 gets me about 2100 or so IIRC. It has to do either with it getting a better vacuum reading at the higher RPM's, or the engine has a "sweet spot" worn into it at that speed, where the harmonics, etc. are the most tamed. 45 isn't a good speed for my van, it has to kick the torque converter lock off all the time, 50 is better, and probably equivalent to 70mph in terms of fuel economy.

interesting... to bad we can't find a way of better fuel economy huh?

[FromCityToRural]

Bad fuel economy doesn't bother me a lick so long as I enjoy what I'm driving. I don't enjoy my van that much. Would much rather have a '56 Olds or a '53 hudson Hornet for the same fuel consumption.

[radiostatic102]

I think it's a good thing, because people are going over the speed limits anyway.  And having lived in Midland before, it takes a LONG time to get to San Antonio when you're going under 80.  It takes a long time when you're going over 80.  It hurts just thinking about it.

Edited by radiostatic102, 05 April 2007 - 10:47 AM.

[dgreco]

do you think with 80mph speed limit, people will still go over?  Or do you think that is a speed where people say ok, i am going fast enough.

[radiostatic102]

dgreco, on Apr 5 2007, 07:29 PM, said:

do you think with 80mph speed limit, people will still go over?  Or do you think that is a speed where people say ok, i am going fast enough.

My experience is that there is a significant number of people who will go as fast as they can if they can get away with it.  I honestly do not feel in control at 80, 65 is usually where I like to keep it.  But it seems to me I'm in the minority, even when I've gone 80 before and I've had people come up behind me, tailing me as if I'm not going fast enough.  I pull out of the fast lane only to find that I've got a whole line of cars I've been irritating by my "low" speed.  
I really don't know what it's like most other places, I drive mostly on I-4 and I-95 in Florida.

[dgreco]

MY experience is that really anything past 80 is you are feeling the car moving, and you feel like you have less control, so that would "control" speeding.  I just can't imagine many people saying i need to go 95 instead of 80, but idk.  My mother still thinks the highway is 50mph, so i don't think she will ever adjust to 65 let alone 80.