55 MPH: No Blood for Oil

If the cost-accounting and life-saving claims for a 55-MPH speed limit
are to be honest, then the alleged life-saving must be balanced by the
life-time *costs* of time wasted because of driving 55. Measured in
terms of wasted life-span, the TSA is already more deadly every year
than 9/11; a 55-MPH speed limit is worse than the Vietnam War.

Well, it seems to be accepted wisdom that speeds over 70 mph increase fuel consumption significantly. My own research indicates that my wife's Buick le Sabre does best at 60 mph. So, I would suggest that the best course of action would be for traffic cops to actually enforce the existing 65 mph speed limit.

Besides, it is an irritant to not know the de facto speed limit--the one that will be enforced. Depending on the whim of the jurisdiction, or the mood of a particular cop it could be anywhere from the posted limit to 10+ mph over that limit. That does not support healthy respect for the law.

Bob G - You nailed it.

Why create a new speed limit, when they don't come close to enforcing the existing ones?

Good Lord, they are idiots. When are we going to toss these morons out?
Do they have a single original idea? Do these politicians get some sexual thrill from making us miserable? I despised the 55 mph speed limit. It was nothing more than a revenue source for the greedy states.
Wake up people, in the UK they are now telling you to clean your plate like Mommy used to do.
Is this the world we want?

In both of my family cars, (2003 Ford Expedition, 2005 Volvo XC70) according to my onboard fuel/trip computer, I have found absolutly no difference in my mpg at 55 vs 65. Indeed since good gas milage revolves around the priciple of conservation of energy (inertia), I trust Mr Warner will see the light and propose elimination of all stop signs and traffic lights.

Studies have shown humans are most comfortable and alert at around 72 MPH. Anything less than this creates distraction as people are constantly having to look down at their speedometer to see if they have glided back up to their confort zone

It sounds like most of you are too young to have lived through the 70's 55mph experiment. I am 66 and experienced it. To put it mildly, it was a disaster, and not many people actually obeyed it. I own a 2007 Lexus ES 350 and I get the best gas mileage at speeds in excess of 75. The speed limit in NM is 75 on the interstates, so I can set cruise for about 80 and not get tickets. I get 32 MPG at this speed ,but If I slow down to 70 it drops to 28 MPG. I make several trips a year to OKC and also to LA; both places where my kids live, these results are consistent over many trips both ways. I think the newer cars are optimized for the faster speeds. I have also checked the results of my trip computer in the car with the actual gallons of gas I fill up with,and the trip computer is very accurate.

No Tommy K UPS has done a study showing that turning right at stop lights and signs reduced gas consuption. Therefore the next logical step is to make it mandatory to only turn right. I can picture right only intersections.

The inertia idea wont stick in congress cause they have no idea of these priniples due to their law backgrounds. So they will use previous studies to make future laws not actual science.

This is a shallow article at best regarding safety. We all know during the early "55" ERA, cars were going smaller and safety was not a concern like it is now. This likely offset any increase in safety from the lower speed.

I'm willing to bet the 0.18% gas savings stat is equally bogus. My car has an onboard computer that tells me my mileage. There is a clear savings at 55 mph vs. 65 mph.

I guess some of the other commentors here have cars that don't need to push through increased air resistance at the higher speeds, thus their mileage actually gets better or stays the same the faster they go.

"East bounders are there any smokies over your shoulder? Watch for the county Mountie in the grass with the Kodak at mile marker 111"

I thinking about buying stocks in CB companies. :-)

Notice how congress always wants to solve a problem by limiting freedoms.

Keven, I had the exact same response: safety improved during the period after the 55 mph limit was lifted because car manufacturers had to include many more safety features in their products. Obviously, driving more slowly will decrease fatalities. But BobG makes a solid point: a 55 mph limit will not make people drive more slowly. The law will be largely ignored, just as the 65 mph limits on most highways are ignored now.

55mph is to slow.It consumes to much time. On the other hand 75 is to fast because most people drive 79 because they think law enforcement will overlook a few mph. The high speeds are to fast for most drivers. Reaction time is to short when people are talking on phones, putting on lipstick, combing their hair, smoking a cig, or all four at once which I have seen being done, or turning around argueing with the kids in the back seat. All while they are trying to drive.
My own experience is that cars will get good mileage in the 65 range and still get you there in reasonably good time. We also have trucks to consider and it is too costly for them to be puttsing down the highway at 55. 55 was just another example of one of Carters boneheaded or should I say peanut headed ideas.
J Rich from up north

Seems to me that this misses (and may of the comments left miss) a few good points:
- freedom to make the choice as to what is best for your own car and gas mileage and pocketbook.
- useless speed limits which we all look at and add 5 or 10 to to figure out how fast we're really going to go.
- using arbitrary criminalization of random people to gain revenue for local governments.

I like what they do in Germany with the Autobahn. They have variable speed limits. In the middle of the night when no one is around - it doesn't matter how fast you go. Just drive in your comfort zone and keep left. when the weather is inclimate or there's traffic up ahead they give you warnings and impose a reasonable speed limit. So, in that situation, instead of looking at the sign and adding 5 or 10 to it to figure what speed you're really going to drive, you take it upon yourself to drive what is natural and then when you do see a sign saying 'slow down' you know it's for real and, thus, take it seriously.

Here in the U.S. it's setup as a constant cat and mouse game between the police and the travelers. When we see a cop on the side of the road we don't think, "Wow - I really feel safe here." Instead we hit the brakes, look down at our speedometer, and try to figure out, "Ok, was I speeding? What is the speed limit here? Is it still 65? I was doing 70 so if it's still 65 I'm ok but if it bumped down to 55 over that last hilled and I missed it..."

It's dumb.

Aside from all of that I've already noticed people slowing down to try to get a little more mile

Seems to me that this misses (and may of the comments left miss) a few good points:
- freedom to make the choice as to what is best for your own car and gas mileage and pocketbook.
- useless speed limits which we all look at and add 5 or 10 to to figure out how fast we're really going to go.
- using arbitrary criminalization of random people to gain revenue for local governments.

I like what they do in Germany with the Autobahn. They have variable speed limits. In the middle of the night when no one is around - it doesn't matter how fast you go. Just drive in your comfort zone and keep left. when the weather is inclimate or there's traffic up ahead they give you warnings and impose a reasonable speed limit. So, in that situation, instead of looking at the sign and adding 5 or 10 to it to figure what speed you're really going to drive, you take it upon yourself to drive what is natural and then when you do see a sign saying 'slow down' you know it's for real and, thus, take it seriously.

Here in the U.S. it's setup as a constant cat and mouse game between the police and the travelers. When we see a cop on the side of the road we don't think, "Wow - I really feel safe here." Instead we hit the brakes, look down at our speedometer, and try to figure out, "Ok, was I speeding? What is the speed limit here? Is it still 65? I was doing 70 so if it's still 65 I'm ok but if it bumped down to 55 over that last hilled and I missed it..."

It's dumb.

Aside from all of that I've already noticed people slowing down to try to get a little more mileage.

Also interesting - the lengths our (mis)representatives will go through in order not to drill, build refineries, and nuclear power plants. Why burn oil for electricity?

Beyond all of that, if you were an oil company, even if Washington said, "Drill wherever you'd like," why would you? All you've gotten from them constant harassment (inquiries, senate hearings, lawsuits, windfall profits tax (even though it's not one), etc.) plus the endless lawsuits by the environmental-extremist groups who are never happy and never will be. If I were leading an oil company I'd never drill in the U.S. just because of the constant hostility.

Carlie Coats:

I remember an article in an issue of the Wall Street Journal at the time of the national 55 speed limit that claimed that effectively 109 people were condemned to ride the highways forever because of the lower limit.

I recall back in the late 70's when I was a poor college student, I owned a gem of a Ford Pinto which actually could not reliably go over 55mph for any period of time. So one time I am driving back to college from Dickinson ND to Fargo. At 55mph I was able to read the entire novel of JAWS.... so could this be a conspiracy to get us to read more? The "Books on Tape" industry better watch out!

Quite right. As in all circumstances we must have government dictating the speeds we are allowed to travel.

Credential time: As a former traffic enforcement (actually revenue generation) officer I was incessantly hectored by government officials to write more tickets. The reason? REVENUE.

All speed limits are nothing more nor less than an arbitrary method for government seizure of private property and are therefore a tax on the unwary. Anyone unable to use common sense in adjusting their driving to existing traffic conditions and thus endangering others, should either be arrested for reckless driving or prohibited from driving. Most traffic officers know this but would be fired for admitting it. This is the reason that the traffic flow on highway stretches posted with a limit of 45 mph is routinely 60+ mph.

I traveled probably 200,000 miles on the mid-western (mostly MO, AR, KS, OK, IL) interstates in the 1980s and early 90s. The unspoken speed limit was 65; I traveled about 63 and never was pulled over, nor was anyone else I knew that did the same. However, my wife got a ticket in 1975 in MO for going exactly 65 on an interstate. Most people DID obey the limit (or the scoff-law limit I should say). After the repeal of 55 MPH, I found that drivers in my area (rural MO) increased their speed on 2 lane serpentine, hilly state highways increasing the danger.
The oil companies will fight 55 MPH tooth and nail. They want you to drive faster and use more gas. High speed limits play right into their hands.
If Americans are unwilling to make any kind of sacrifice in the time of a national emergency, we're in for rough seas ahead.

I've been driving slower for about a year now - 65 instead of 75 (or 80 ... 5 mph over the speed limit is a natural urge). I always use the cruise control on the highway (which is most of my driving). That one change adds a few minutes to my schedule, but it increases my fuel efficiency by 35%. It has nothing to do with funding new technology, research, re-tooling, new laws ... nada ... it's something *I* can do RIGHT NOW to affect my own reality.

I am 44 years old, and I remember the National Speed Limit of 55 mph from my childhood in the 1970's. I wrote a website a year ago about the experience. Check out:

http://www.JustSlowDown.com

SAVE GAS -- DON'T PASS
JUSTSLOWDOWN.COM

Pikers . . . the national speed limit should be 25 mph. Very few fatalities, much less gas use, people will move back to urban areas, bicycle use will go up and waist lines will go down, electric car range won't be a problem because most people will use mass transit, no more traffic jams, the list of positives go on and on. Of course we'll be giving up a sense of freedom we all love.

Pssh.. when did politicians let real science dictate law making? I mean, just look at all the supposed "Green" legislation being passed. The problem is not the inanity of our elected officials; it is the sheep-like stupidity of the electorate that keeps these self-absorbed, self-interested fatcats in office. People that think reducing the speed limit will save gas, that mankind contributes a significant amount to global warming, and that it was a good idea to make drinking liquor a mandatory fuel additive, probably buy Enzyte... it has all the glamourous sell-pitching, and just as much scientific backing as all three of those.

Interestingly, I went to the TRB report sited (http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?ID=2721) and found this: "Recommendations of the committee are that the 55 mph speed limit should be retained on almost all of the nation's highways and that the federal government should measure state compliance with the speed limit through a point system that attaches more significance to high-speed violations than to violations just above the speed limit."
That doesn't seem to agree with Mr. Birdnow's reading.
The TRB's figures are a quarter-century out of date; we have many more cars driving many, many more miles now so the 167,000 barrels of oil saved daily back in the '70s would be minuscule compared to our savings today. And how in the world could slower driving cost MORE lives?
Your "freedom" to drive fast and waste gas comes at the cost of funding terrorists who are killing American service men and women, so how free do you need to feel before national security becomes a real issue for you too?

Speed limits should be set by engineers using empirical data from traffic studies, not by politicians. Are we still the land of the free and the home of the brave, or are we going to allow power hungry politicians to dictate every element of our lives?
Stop the madness!

55 mph means driving times increase...the longer you are awake the more fatigued you become...... but that doesn't mean more people pushing it and driving fatigued.....it means utopia and no POSSIBLE way safety could go down.

Regarding the entry "Pikers . . . the national speed limit should be 25 mph." I agree 100%. In my home state of California, we squander billions of dollars each year for congestion relief on freeways. When we lower the speed limit to 25 MPH, congestion will increase exponentially, but the previously mentioned benefits -- ...few fatalities, much less gas use, people will move back to urban areas, bicycle use will go up and waist lines will go down, ... most people will use mass transit -- will more than make up for this minor inconvenience. Ordinary Americans must learn to consume less and travel much less, and 25 MPH is the only logical national strategy to enforce what is good for us. With sustained enforcement, our leaders can train the masses to obey, for our own good.

Exemptions must be provided for politicians, sports figures, those in the mainstream media, and members of the Screen Actors Guild. It wouldn't be right to slow them down, since their roles in society are vital. To state the obvious, "Twenty-Five Nation-Wide" would only apply to us ordinary folks who bitterly cling to the silly, outdated notion of individual freedom.

According to Mr. Baxter "...keeping the 55 MPH speed limit, versus allowing the states to raise the limit to 65 MPH, would result in a 0.18 percent." However, with today's gas prices, speeding costs. Gas mileage usually decreases rapidly above 60 mph. Each five miles per hour over 60 mph is like paying an additional 20 cents per gallon for gas. You guys should also try checking out the Drive $marter Challenge (http://www.drivesmarterchallenge.org) for additional money-saving gas tips. You can enter your specific vehicle data and figure out how much money you can save my taking six fuel-efficiency steps. - Kat, Alliance to Save Energy

55MPH will be very detrimental to the economy. Yes, many vehicles do get up to 27% better gas mileage at 55 MPH as compared to 75 MPH. However you are also driving 28% slower at 55 MPH. A 100 mile trip takes all most 30 minutes longer at 55MPH as compared to 75MPH.
The added labor costs to business paying for employees being on the road 28% longer is far above the savings in gas. That added expense will ultimately result in increased prices of all goods and services.
For the sake of discussion, let's use the your math for the 100 mile trip: A car that gets 25 MPG would get 31.75 MPG at 55 MPH (27%) - Gas at $4.00 per gallon - Employee labor cost of $15 per hour.
Driving at 75MPH will take 80 minutes and cost a total of $36.00 in gas and labor costs
( use 4 gallons of gas at a cost of $16.00 and the labor cost would be $20 (1.3 hours x $15/hour))
Driving at 55MPH will take over 109 minutes and cost a total of $39.87 in gas and labor costs
( use 3.15 gallons of gas at a cost of $12.60 and the labor cost would be $27.27 (1.8 hours x $15/hour))
THAT'S AN 11% INCREASE IN COSTS BY SLOWING DOWN TO 55MPH. The burden labor rate for many service industries is actually $25 to $ 35 and more and therefore the problem is even worse.
The saving lives argument has also be very exaggerated. The chances of being involved in an accident on the highway increase the longer you are actually exposed to the risk. In other words, if you are on the highway an additional 30 minutes per day, your exposure to potential risk has been increase 30 more minutes. Being on the road longer also greatly increases driver fatigue. Driving while sleepy is as dangerous as driving drunk.
The claims that the National Highway death toll went down around 1974 due to the 55 MPH limit imposed after the 1973 Oil crisis has often been disputed. It has been suggested that this drop was actually due to new enforcement of seat belt laws and people driving less because of high gas prices.
As a business owner of a service industry, the interference by the Federal Government to make me inefficient will cost me thousands of dollars. Those who want to drive at 55 are more than welcome to drive 55. Just don't make everyone else along with the economy slow down with you!

I was alive and well during the 55 era , but it was still 65 and 70 on the super slab no one did 55 on the slab , it went mostly ignored so their little poll sample and stat taking was flawed very much because no one I knew went 55 but they drove 65 and 70. it is but another thing to put out there to indicate that congress is wise and doing something ,I feel that most people understand the elite position they are taking on the energy is in line with the Al Gore's and the Ted rotten Turners of this world who would like to see a genocide of people so that there would be more for them to use and not feel guilty over it . Why can we not see this as a way of control and a way to tax the heck out of us and not have a revolt . Write your congress and tell them that they are the problem and they need to get out of our way. Drilling now is not a cure all but it makes sense to increase the supply and it also would get us off foreign oil. using our own oil is the best reason to drill now and we need to tell congress they are the immediate problem and they can be voted out. I had a gas hog a 1969 Thunder bird, it would get 15 doing 55 and almost 20 doing 70 ,it had a 429 cid engine and the idea behind the gas mileage was to get it rolling and let the hills allow you to take advantage of the down slopes . the truckers were always doing that to increase their mileage by getting up to speed down a hill so they could get over the next hill with out down shifting in to a lower gear. 55 is nothing but a scam as global warming is .