Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation

Montana Lawmakers Propose 85 Mph Speed Limit On Interstates 525

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Montana Lawmakers Propose 85 Mph Speed Limit On Interstates

Comments Filter:
  • Is Montana prepared to go without any federal highway funding? That's the usual string attached that scuttles these plans. Or has the US DOT had a change in policy?

    • by jvp ( 27996 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:13AM (#48496445)

      Or has the US DOT had a change in policy?

      Repealed as of 1995 with the passage of the National Highway System Designation Act.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • by Richy_T ( 111409 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @10:45AM (#48497679) Homepage

          To the third power actually.

          • by electrosoccertux ( 874415 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2014 @12:46AM (#48504321)

            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.

        • 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.

    • by zenyu ( 248067 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:28AM (#48496507)

      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.

      • It's Montana. What are they going to hit, an elk? It's not like there are any people there.

        • 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.

      • by Balthisar ( 649688 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:58AM (#48496727) Homepage

        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.

        • by dave420 ( 699308 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @09:37AM (#48497035)

          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 :)

          • 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.

        • by mlts ( 1038732 )

          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.

      • 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.

        • by turbidostato ( 878842 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @10:38AM (#48497605)

          "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.

          • by Teancum ( 67324 )

            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 a

      • 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, genera
  • 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.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:39AM (#48496589)

      When the feds mandated a speed limit Montana complied in order to get the funding but limited fines to $5 which could be paid to the officer on the spot. It was a pretty good system because it gave the overlords something to feel good about but didn't incentivise ticketing for the police and friends.

    • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @09:35AM (#48497017)

      Out of interest, how well is the speed limit in somewhere like Montana policed? Do the cops actually pull people for doing 1mph over the current limit?

      The reason I ask is that here in the UK the official speed limit on motorways is 70mph, but police can't pull you unless you're doing 10% + 2mph over the limit, so 79mph on a 70mph limit road. This is to ensure that there are no arguments about poor calibration or rounding errors as it's determined to be enough of a margin to rule out that kind of thing making prosecutions easy because it leaves little room for argument that you weren't in fact speeding. That coupled with the fact that all car speedometers actually underestimate and typically by a couple of mph means people are often going around 80 - 82mph or so on their speedometer anyway (though in practice probably more like 77 - 79mph).

      I've never seen or heard of anyone in the UK get pulled doing that and only really seen cops pull people once they start hitting 85mph+.

      Is it similar in the US? So would people be left alone at 80mph when the current limit is 70mph? what if the limit is raised to 85mph, would the cops then give leeway like they do in the UK letting people do 95mph? Or could you get pulled doing 86mph in the US on an 85mph limit road?

      • by Registered Coward v2 ( 447531 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @09:52AM (#48497149)

        Is it similar in the US? So would people be left alone at 80mph when the current limit is 70mph? what if the limit is raised to 85mph, would the cops then give leeway like they do in the UK letting people do 95mph? Or could you get pulled doing 86mph in the US on an 85mph limit road?

        You are generally safe at 10 over on US Interstates. Most cops won't bother you of that except where a local jurisdiction has control over a short portion and uses it for revenue enhancement. In addition, there are usually plenty of drivers doing 15 or more over that are much better targets anyway so as long a you are flowing with traffic you are pretty safe form being pulled over.

      • by dtmos ( 447842 ) * on Monday December 01, 2014 @10:09AM (#48497301)

        Is it similar in the US?

        It's a little more insidious in the US, because there is an informal speed buffer of something like "10% + 2mph over the limit," but it is not codified into law anywhere, at least AFAIK. In general, people are not harassed for slightly excessive speed, but if the officer doesn't like you, or is having a bad day, or is behind in his quota (excuse me, "performance guideline") for the month, he is perfectly within his authority to write you a ticket for doing 71 in a 70 zone.

        Now, there are reasons for him not to do so; a rational judge would probably look critically on an officer that submitted several such citations, for example, but that would require one to contest the ticket in court, something one may be loath to do if one is far from home. A good attorney could probably make the calibration argument in front of the judge and win, but that would require not only contesting the ticket but hiring an attorney, which may cost more than paying a simple speeding ticket in the first place. One would also hope that a high rate of contested citations would reflect negatively on the performance of the officer in his performance review, but that's assuming a lot (including that there actually is a high rate of contested citations, and it's not just you).

        When speeding in the US, therefore, one counts on the largesse of the officer, something not guaranteed to be available.

        • In the State of Georgia, USA, it is actually codified that campus police (read security guards, College Police, or Board of Education Police forces), Municipal police (city Police), and Sheriffs (County Police), cannot issue an arrest (aka write an actual ticket) on anyone traveling 10mph or less above the posted speed limit. This is regardless of Construction or School Zones. This is not to say that they cannot pull you over for going above the posted speed limit and performing a spot check on insurance c

  • humans (Score:2, Insightful)

    by polar red ( 215081 )

    'our roads are engineered wel' that's possible. But humans are still a bunch of idiots.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:16AM (#48496453)

    ...if they raised the speed limit to eighty-eight, scott could save *years*...

  • by Virtucon ( 127420 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:16AM (#48496457)

    Montana used to have no speed limit during the daytime but that was overturned for being too "vague" by the Montana Supreme Court. [nytimes.com] 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.

    • 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 .

      • As long as the accident doesn't involve another innocent driver, I don't really have a problem with it. If Joe Dipshit (or anyone dumb enough to ride with Joe Dipshit) wants to do 100 mph on a road prone to deer crossing, that's just fine with me. I do feel sorry for the poor coroner who has to mop him up, though.

      • by quetwo ( 1203948 )

        Most of the highways have short field on both sides of the road. No trees, buildings, or other obstructions for the critters to hide behind. In most cases you can see a deer or cow well over a mile away along the side of the road...

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

      I think I'd prefer a hard limit just so that I didn't have to argue it with a court if a cop decided I wasn't driving safely. With a hard limit I can have a camera or GPS logger (encrypted, of course) in my car to prove I was under it, case closed.

    • Of course it wasn't an issue before.

      1) Montana is largely still a land of self-reliant, independent people with substantial foundations of common sense, and
      2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... [wikipedia.org] - being 48th on that list (and WAAAY 48th: the density of 2.7 (persons/km2) is barely 3% of the average US value, which is itself low for developed countries) might also have something to do with it.

  • German cars (Score:5, Informative)

    by cazzazullu ( 645423 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:21AM (#48496483)

    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...)

    • by zaax ( 637433 )
      Most politicians are very afraid of getting rid of laws as they know that we really don’t need most of the laws they make, which means we don’t really need politicians, and they would all be out of the job.
    • by slart42 ( 694765 )

      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.

      This is true. But I doubt that the US has a high rate of dangerous traffic accidents caused by failing cars. I have always felt that the technical inspections we have serve more to subsidize the car industry (by making sure old cars are taken off the road due to some rust or whatever they will come up with), and as a self-service to the inspection agencies to keep them in business. I guess regular brake & light checkups would make sense, but beyond that, I really doubt that there is much actual improvem

      • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

        The main thing that disqualifies older cars is the condition of the suspension typically. Not brakes.

        And at high speeds, it's the suspension that matters most. If you car cannot hold on to the road at high speeds with all the vibration going on, you're the moment you need to avoid something.

      • We had annual inspections here in Florida in the 70s and maybe even the early 80s. They checked function of all lights, turn signals, wipers, and braking system (ie, accelerate hard until this line then slam on brakes). Also did a visual on tires. Took about 10 minutes, and honestly anything that can't pass that kind of test really shouldn't be on the road.

    • 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...)

      That came across me as well - this senator is making a comparison, but has no idea of how things actually work over here. Having visited the United States frequently, I cannot begin to describe how horrible driving over there is. You have people cutting you off, people who turn without signals, people who will drive so incredibly close behind you that a rear end accident is inevitable. This kind of driving is highly frowned upon over here, and just violating one of these would come with a heavy price. And

    • 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...)

      I've driven on the autobahn in Germany. I came back to the US and I couldn't stand to drive for months. The average US driver does not have a good enough understanding of courtesy and physics to drive safely on the autobahn.

  • IL tollway needs to be 70 or more and most people are doing that right now and the cops let it go as well.

  • The speed limit on highways varies from 50MPH to 65MPH. And the actual speed people do on the highway, 70MPH to 85MPH. Seriously.

    And of course they just repaved part of I-95 as you get south out of Providence. It's a beautiful stretch on which to do ludicrous speed!

    I recall back in the late 1960's the original speed limit on I-95 even in Providence was 70MPH. Then the gas crunch came around and to save gas they implemented 55MPH. Then the focus changed from saving gas to safety which of course is bovi
    • Then the gas crunch came around and to save gas they implemented 55MPH.

      Thank god Sammy Hagar saved us from that nightmare era.

  • Tailgating (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gnasher719 ( 869701 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:33AM (#48496543)
    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.
    • Re:Tailgating (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Greyfox ( 87712 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:44AM (#48496617) Homepage Journal
      Everyone does 80-85 out in Montana anyway. You don't have a problem with tailgating out there, but there are a few places where you start to think that if you broke down you could die before help arrives. I've gone 2-3 hours out there on major interstates without ever seeing another car in either direction.
    • by ledow ( 319597 )

      German driving laws are quite strict all over.

      I once had a carful of screaming Germans because I did a U-turn in the middle of an empty road where nothing said you couldn't do that.

      They label their roads as "broken road" on street signs if there's a single pothole.

      Flashing another driver (admittedly a UK thing, but we use it to say thank you and let people out, officially it's "making other drivers aware of your presence") is something that could see you pulled over - I kinda guessed this so never did it, b

  • Either the senator is bad at math or it would mean that he lived 8.5 hours away from his place of work. Perhaps as a European my perception of the amount of time commuting is supposed to take is somewhat skewed, but that seems excessive.

    • Re: Saving an hour? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by LDAPMAN ( 930041 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:45AM (#48496631)

      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.

    • Re:Saving an hour? (Score:4, Informative)

      by __aaltlg1547 ( 2541114 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @09:09AM (#48496799)

      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.

      • 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 d
  • Its 70 but if your driving less than 10 mph over the speed limit, the state troopers wont bother. I think 75 is fast enough on the east coast. In Montana where there is noone for miles I can see 85. My grand marquis would cruise nicely at 80 whether the speed limit is 75 or 85.

  • Sure he would save an hour, and he would probably also burn a lot more gas. Engines are optimized to get maximum efficiency at certain speeds. Even if you optimized them for higher speeds, there's still the problem of air resistance which goes up as a function of the cube of the speed.
    • by Ihlosi ( 895663 )
      Sure he would save an hour, and he would probably also burn a lot more gas.

      He was working for an oil company. Burning more gas means more profit for oil companies.

  • by coldmist ( 154493 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @08:59AM (#48496733) Homepage

    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.

  • 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."

    Apparently you don't need to know math to become a Senator. Montana isn't big enough to save you "an hour" by going an extra 10mph end to end, let alone Bakken to Bozeman.
    • Re:Maths (Score:4, Informative)

      by Winter ( 87716 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @10:09AM (#48497303)

      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.

  • by ocularsinister ( 774024 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @09:42AM (#48497077)

    I just think our roads are engineered well

    Umm... American's infrastructure is not in good shape. [theweek.com]

  • by Khomar ( 529552 ) on Monday December 01, 2014 @10:25AM (#48497457) Journal

    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.

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]

Working...