Texas Opens Fastest US Highway With 85 MPH Limit 992
Hugh Pickens writes "Most highways in the U.S. top out at 75 mph, while some highways in rural West Texas and Utah have 80 mph speed limits. All that is about to change as Texas opens a stretch of highway with the highest speed limit in the country, giving eager drivers a chance to rip through a trip between two of the state's largest metropolitan areas at 85 mph for a 41-mile toll road between Austin and San Antonio. While some drivers will want to test their horsepower and radar detectors, others are asking if safety is taking a backseat. A 2009 report in the American Journal of Public Health found that more than 12,500 deaths were attributable to increases in speed limits on all kinds of roads and that rural highways showed a 9.1 percent increase in fatalities on roads where speed limits were raised. 'If you're looking at an 85 mph speed limit, we could possibly see drivers going 95 up to 100 miles per hour,' says Sandra Helin, president of the Southwestern Insurance Information Service. 'When you get to those speeds, your accidents are going to be a lot worse. You're going to have a lot more fatalities.'"
Autobahn (Score:5, Interesting)
The German Autobahn's have no speed limits in rural areas. I have driven at 160 Kph (i.e., 100 mph) and been routinely passed by faster vehicles. In fact, if you are in the left lane at that speed, they may get pretty annoyed with you if you don't get over immediately.
My understanding is that the German Auto Club serves a function much like the US NRA. Touch the speed limit, and your political career will be limited.
Welcome (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Nothing new (Score:3, Interesting)
and a 79mph in a 55mph zone nets you a ticket of...about $70. Been there, done that, paid the ticket. Would have been far more expensive in Oregon (again, done that...)
$70 ticket, but when your insurance company gets wind of it ... bit more, I s'pect
Re:Nothing new (Score:1, Interesting)
Perhaps we should eliminate speed limits all together. The only thing speed limits serve to do is generate a victimless crime that puts revenue in the governments pockets. Hold people liable for the damage they do and let peoples fear of high insurance rates keep them conservative. I would venture than 90% of all speeding tickets are issued to drivers who were being perfectly safe (going 10-20 MPH over the limit on an empty highway is safe).
Eliminate right-of-way and remove all 'stop signs' and drivers will be forced to 'make eye contact' with other drivers instead of 'assuming' that the other guy will stop simply because 'its the law' and 'there is a sign'.
It has been demonstrated in towns in Europe that when most road signs are removed the 'spontaneous order' results in fewer accidents.
Re:Rest of the world already ahead (Score:0, Interesting)
I understand this is just culturally insecure America bashing, but since when was Germany considered the 'rest of the world'?
Re:Rest of the world already ahead (Score:3, Interesting)
ROTFL yeah that ehow article is really accurate NOT...
Let's start taking the arguments apart:
The speed cameras are not impossible to spot. Actually dead easy and with trapster even easier. You just have to know what you are looking for.
Drivers follow a strict... ROTFL, yeah right! Drivers tend to follow the rules, but not always. In fact the biggest problem right now is that everybody drives in the left lane even though you are supposed to let faster traffic through.
You are required to put on a yellow vest: Really? News for me. I have yet to see anybody carrying that. I know in Italy they will fine you if you don't have one. But in nearly 20 years of driving I can honestly say I don't have a yellow vest. The triangle, yeah that is common.
You can stop on the side of the autobahn, and people do stop on the side of the autobahn if they have to.
Germans take pride in their car. Let's rephrase this. Some Germans take pride in their car. While there are no clunkers or whitetrash cars, there are cars that are very old. Though I do have agree European cars have better maintenance records since it is required by law.
Re:Autobahn (Score:5, Interesting)
If you can't safely keep up with traffic you need to switch to a road where you can. If your work truck can't reach the speed limit, take a different route. IMO, there should be an implied minimum speed of 5 under the posted limit with very few exceptions. I'd be willing to bet that you'd see fewer accidents if that were the case.
Re:Apples and Oranges (Score:3, Interesting)
I've seen Autobahn drivers - they're mostly courtious, follow the rules, and usually don't do anything stupid.
Here we're talking about Americans - specifically Texans. Expect to see many many shoot outs, accidents, law suits and fatalities.
In Texas you will see beat up old 1970's pickup trucks trying to do 100 mph. Things weren't geared for it and generally don't have speed rated tires. Probably more fatalities from blow-outs at speed than any other non-alcohol/drug related incidents.
Re:Nothing new (Score:2, Interesting)
I agree that it increases the potential for Darwinism,>
I think if you look at the whole situation, it is complete Darwinism. This is a toll road, no one is making you use it, and there are other ways (although perhaps not as desirable) to get from Austin to San Antonio. There are also well published statistics about how fatalities increase as a result of going at a higher speed (which should be pretty obvious if you give it more than a few minutes of thought). This all adds up to the drivers on that road (all of them) basically accepting the increased risk in exchange for going faster. If you want to preserve yourself (and the others in your car) you will take a different route. Natural selection, plain and simple.
Re:Apples and Oranges (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not saying you're wrong, but look at it from the other car's perspective. They're gaining on the truck at 40 KPH, which is fairly quick, and they check their mirror and see nothing so they go for the pass. Before they get around the truck you've shown up gaining on them at 130 KPH. Before they can accelerate out of the way you have to slow down to avoid rear-ending them.
No one is at fault for this - it's just the nature of a road system that allows such diverse speeds. In the US on roads which allow high speeds, typically greater than 60mph, there is also a minimum speed not more than 30mph below the maximum. If you don't have a maximum speed designated for the road it's much harder to manage a minimum speed.
One thought I've had is to have speed ranges defined per lane. It works best on roads with 3 or more lanes. Lane 1 would be 50-100 KPH, lane 2 would be 80 - 150 KPH, lane 3 would be 130 - 200 KPH, lane 4 would be 180 - unlimited KPH.
The predicted carnage numbers don't add up. (Score:5, Interesting)
AAA reported that over eighty percent of injury accidents occur at speeds under forty miles per hour and within a few miles of home. This was in their monthly magazine.
At the same time it was widely reported that half of all traffic fatalities were the result of intoxicated drivers. (Alcohol, drugs.)
Those two stats leave very little room for accidents on high speed freeways where speed is the sole factor in the accident.
Not just safety... (Score:2, Interesting)
It's not just safety that is taking a back seat, but evidently fuel efficiency must not be too important, either. People may argue at what speed point fuel efficiency drops off, but it is definitely well below 85mph. Then also, just as money must not be an issue for Texans, neither is it for the state. Road repairs are significantly higher the higher the speed limit.
So, let's see, pay to use the road, pay higher insurance because higher speeds lead to more accidents, pay more at the pump because you are burning more gas and pay more in taxes because the pavement wears out sooner. Yeah, that sounds like a really good decision. Then again, Texas is a red state.
Wrong, does not always happen (Score:5, Interesting)
That happens anytime you raise the speed limit. from 55 to 65.
Accident rates in Colorado lowered when they raised the speed limit from 65 to 75.
One good reason you are not accounting for is that no matter what the speed limit is, drivers drive at a speed they consider comfortable on a highway. That means that people like you imperil everyone else by sticking close to an old and arbitrary speed limit. Once you raise the limits there is a much greater equalization of people driving around the same speed, making the whole road safer.
Re:There's nothing Darwin about it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Thing is, this isn't a politician, scientists, or institution saying this, it is the insurance companies. They tend to do a pretty good job of cutting through the BS since their profits are directly connected to actually things right.
On the other hand the insurance companies would benefit if we all went 20 MPH everywhere and never had a major accident. Actually getting to a destination in a reasonable amount of time is of no benefit to them. So maybe they aren't the most objective.
Re:There's nothing Darwin about it. (Score:3, Interesting)
We should always strive to limit the freedom of the good and responsible people to protect the stupid, the evil and the ignorant.
It has worked well so far. Look at the number of hairdryer in the shower deaths we have prevented. Also. People who can not legally own a gun are unable to commit gun crimes.
Life is good and fair.
Re:Yeah but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:There's nothing Darwin about it. (Score:5, Interesting)
most of us are driving 70-80mph anyways when the limits are 55-65mph...and arbitrarily enforced. Why not just make the limits 85mph...
The safety freaks will say people will start going 95-105mph if you raise the speed limit to 85, and people listen to them.
I can guarantee you that unless it's a steep downhill, there's no way I would've done so with the $500 cars I used to drive or the much nicer vehicle that I drive now. (which is an SUV -- I'm not often motivated to go 90) The only time I ever hit 100 was going downhill on Nevada's highway 6 (I think that's it, it's near 50 which is the "lonliest road in America"), which has no other traffic whatsoever and is generally a long straightaway. Yeah, you have your performance freaks who are already frequently going 90 and weaving in and out of traffic who might gain the confidence to make 100 their average, but that fringe does not represent the majority.
I sure hope safety is taking a back seat. We've gone WAY too far in terms of safety to the point where it's become some kind of mortality derangement. Life is a fatal disease, and there's no way to prevent driver fatalities unless we all go 10mph and prevent the physically infirm from driving. Frankly I find the chaos of Mexico's highways more appealing than the excessively proactive, taxation-masquerading-as-safety scheme we have on American highways today.
Re:There's nothing Darwin about it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Citation needed.
This has been documented repeatedly in the Stapp Car Crash Conference Proceedings over the past 50 years. You could also look in the Engineering Index.
Nils Bohlin demonstrated that if you stay below the magical 55mph limit, and wear a 3-point seat belt, you will survive in accidents like the 28,000 accidents they studied in Sweden.
This was confirmed in the entire auto safety literature.
I don't know of any peer-reviewed studies that found fewer fatalities over 55mph. There were some studies of single states that didn't control for variables like the weather, and/or didn't have the statistical power to prove their conclusions, but they weren't published in peer-reviewed journals where people who understood auto safety engineering could check them over.