Smile.....

[topnotchtouch]

Making yourself an obstacle is not the answer. People seem to think they're on some higher moral ground if they're causing traffic around them to slow down. Statistics aside, this is common sense. Forcing faster-moving traffic to slow down, then accelerate again and change lanes is NOT safe, and in my opinion it's more likely to cause an accident than simply going above 65. There's my $.02.

Now who said anything about trying to force faster moving traffic to slow down? I NEVER said that and I don't do that. I typically get out of the way of people who drive like that as quickly as possible. Lets not make assumptions and read things into these posts that are not there.



I would be more than willing to listen to anyone who can come up with a logical reason to speed. Seems to me the only ones complaining about speed traps are the ones being ticketed. What is the purpose of doing 80 in a 65? All you are gonna save is a few minutes at best.

 

[thinksnow]

PrinzII, I may have you beat!



On the George Washington Memorial Parkway coming back from the DC detailing get-together today (THANKS ROD!!).

In case you are wondering, I only know what Photoshop *is*--this is real.

 

[EricZ]

Now who said anything about trying to force faster moving traffic to slow down? I NEVER said that and I don't do that. I typically get out of the way of people who drive like that as quickly as possible. Lets not make assumptions and read things into these posts that are not there.

Sorry, I guess I am reading too much into this. You're right, not all slower drivers cause these problems. There seems to be a correlation between the two to me, and I should've made that more clear.

 

[Iconoclast]

It is a common mistake to think that there are no speed limits on the Autobahn. There are speed limits posted on a good bit of it and in general the limit is 130KM (81MPH) but, it is not enforced.



So you are advocating that our speed limits should be raised or removed and that will lower the death tolls on US roads? Frankly that is recidulous.

.

If you reread my post (also in your quote) what I said is MUCH of the autobahn doesn't (effectively) have speed limits. I did not make this "common" mistake. I understand there are speed limits around the cities and other areas.



I agree that blindly raising the speed limit will not lower death rates. What I meant to say (and I thought I did) was that many US highways have speed limits lower than could be safely possible (much of which is dictated by fundraising by governments under the vail of safety) with more empasis on other aspects of safe driving , i.e. driving styles based on weather conditions, size of your vehicle, and other laws than speeding laws commonly enforced in europe (see laws llisted in the link below).



I used the autobahn as an example to back up that this IS possible and that you can (common sense dictating) have speed limits in the 80's.



From the above link:



"Despite the general high speeds, the accident and death rate on the Autobahn is relatively low. Autobahn crashes account for only 10% of national traffic fatalities and, in fact, the fatality rate is lower on the Autobahn than on US Interstates."



So there it is with a link and reference. Is having higher speed limits that "rediculous"?



I'm all for safe driving, I just don't like governments using speed limits as a cure-all and/or for fundraising. If safety is what they are after why have unmarked police car speed traps or worse yet speed cameras that only slow down one or two people at a time? I don't know about you, but if I SEE (visible marked car with lights on) police presence, I respect that and slow down.

 

[topnotchtouch]

If you reread my post (also in your quote) what I said is MUCH of the autobahn doesn't (effectively) have speed limits. I did not make this "common" mistake. I understand there are speed limits around the cities and other areas.

Actually the German government "suggests" a maximum speed on the Autobahn of 130KMph (81mph) even in non-posted areas, it is just not enforced. That may change though as there is a very strong movement in the German government to limit the speed on the Autobahn.

I agree that blindly raising the speed limit will not lower death rates. What I meant to say (and I thought I did) was that many US highways have speed limits lower than could be safely possible (much of which is dictated by fundraising by governments under the vail of safety) with more empasis on other aspects of safe driving , i.e. driving styles based on weather conditions, size of your vehicle, and other laws than speeding laws commonly enforced in europe (see laws llisted in the link below).



I used the autobahn as an example to back up that this IS possible and that you can (common sense dictating) have speed limits in the 80's.



From the above link:



"Despite the general high speeds, the accident and death rate on the Autobahn is relatively low. Autobahn crashes account for only 10% of national traffic fatalities and, in fact, the fatality rate is lower on the Autobahn than on US Interstates."



So there it is with a link and reference. Is having higher speed limits that "rediculous"?

The problem is you are comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare the Autobahn to any American road. German drivers are typically have much more training as well as recurring training than do American drivers. German cars are typically designed to be driven at those speeds. Consider the fact that over 50% of all vehicles sold in the US are either trucks or SUVs.

I'm all for safe driving, I just don't like governments using speed limits as a cure-all and/or for fundraising. If safety is what they are after why have unmarked police car speed traps or worse yet speed cameras that only slow down one or two people at a time? I don't know about you, but if I SEE (visible marked car with lights on) police presence, I respect that and slow down.

I am sure there are times when law enforcement takes advantage of areas where it is easy to snag people speeding but, you make it sound like a nationwide conspiracy. Sorry but, I just don't buy that. Just got back from a 1500 mile trip through three states and can honestly say I didn't see a single speed trap. I drive 2-2.5 hours a day and can say the same about my daily commute.

 

[Rlockyer]

idea on paper, but it can easily be fought in court as there is no way to ensure the driver's identity.

For the redlight cameras in California, the photo is run through the DMV database. The matching photo reveals the driver's name. If the name matches the name registered to the plate, the citation is issued.

 

[TortoiseAWD]

"Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed Limits"



Report No. FHWA-RD-92-084

October 1992



Sponsoring Agency Name and Address:

Office of Safety and Traffic Operations R&D

Federal Highway Administration

6300 Georgetown Pike

McLean, Virginia 22101-2296



Abstract and Findings: http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html



*******************

Based on the sites examined in 22 States, it is apparent that the majority of highway agencies set speed limits below the average speed of traffic as opposed to setting limits in the upper region of the minimum accident risk band or about 85th percentile speed. This practice means that more than one-half of the motorist are in technical violation of the speed limits laws. (emphasis mine)

The 85th percentile speed on most open interstates is in the 80-85 mph range. This is also, statistically, the speed at which the fewest accidents occur.



So, Bob, there may not be a conspiracy, but tell me: why do politicians continue to set slow speeds that go against the recommendations of traffic engineers? According to the study linked above, raising and lowering the posted limit has little effect on the speeds that motorists travel. If that is, indeed, that case (and the science supports it), then why are speed limits set so as to define those traveling at the safest speeds (85th percentile) as criminals?



It couldn't be the money. No. Politicians and bureaucrats are never swayed by the money . . . </sarcasm>



Tort

 

[topnotchtouch]

It is rather easy to pick and choose studies and selectively pull supporting data from studies to prove either point.



Here is a quote from your link. They give some reasoning why the speed limits are set below the 85th percentile speed and also that the 85th percentile speed is itself just an estimate based on a small sample of the total volume of traffic.

Although the 85th percentile speed is used as the major guideline in setting speed limits, other factors such as land use, pedestrian activity, accident history, etc., are often subjectively considered in the decision making process. Together, these factors can account for sped limits that are set 10 mi/h (16 km/h) below the 85th percentile speed. In addition, the 85th percentile speed is often estimated based on a minimum of 200 vehicles or 2 h sample. This process does not take into account the wide hourly fluctuations in the 85th percentile speed over a 24-h period. Furthermore, the vehicle selection process use of radar which is detected by motorist contribute to a bias sample, i.e., usually lower then the average 24-h 85th percentile speed.

The kind of logic you are using baffles me. The 12 year old study you are quoting does not say that those speeds are safer, it simply states that no matter what the speed limit is people will continue to speed, hence changing the speed limit did not have an affect on safety. You are proposing that since people are going to speed anyway, lets just make it legal.

 

[Iconoclast]

The problem is you are comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare the Autobahn to any American road. German drivers are typically have much more training as well as recurring training than do American drivers. German cars are typically designed to be driven at those speeds. Consider the fact that over 50% of all vehicles sold in the US are either trucks or SUVs.

Not exactly apples and oranges. I think there are trucks and SUVs in Germany also. From my previous link, trucks have a different speed limit than cars; which I think is an excellent idea. What you are saying is part of my thought process. I believe greater training of US drivers, different laws, speed limits based on vehilcle class and weather conditions would do much more to lower the risk of accidents than our low speed limits.



Look this isn't some great conspiracy(as mentioned by Tortiose) , just speed traps are often easiest way to generate funds. (Two things you can count on: laziness and greed). The fact that private companies now can also benefit (i.e. profit) through speed and red light cameras just makes it worse.



We just use the references to back up what we see every day commuting and our gut feeling; and to prove that what we do here in the US isn't always that best or safest system. Where do you see the most speed traps? On the four lane divided highway with onramps, superelevated curves, etc.; or in your 15 mph speed limit plan of homes with children and people walking dogs? Get my point?



Many of the US highways that have a Level of Service (LOS) of A or B (as traffic engineers say) could safely maintain the aforementioned speed limits.

 

[spotter]

The speed limit here is 70 except on the downtown interloop and I usually drive about 78-79 during the day and about 77-78 at night. Although I am technically speeding almost all of the time I will put my $.02 in here as well. IMO, the biggest danger in speeding is twofold.



First of all the big 18 wheel rigs have no business driving 70 MPH through urban traffic, much less a construction area, due to many inexperienced drivers and the lack of maneuverability and stopping ability in emergency situations. If the big rigs are slowed down then I don't believe the flow of traffic can safely drive 15-20 MPH faster than the 18 wheelers.



Second of all, and the biggest safety concern of all IMHO, is that drivers in general today are too "busy" to be driving safely at 80 MPH. It is unbelievable how many people are screwing up traffic with their inattention due to cell phones, pets, eating, reading the newspaper, putting on makeup, changing clothes, and who the hell knows what else. It only takes one of these idiots on a busy highway to mess up a whole lot of peoples lives and the percentage of driver's on the highway with these unnecessary distractions is astounding.



This doesn't even take into consideration that at least 1-2%, strictly based on my own opinion, of the people on the highway aren't even qualified to drive due to either inexperience or senility. It is a war zone and you have to be ready or you will become a victim.

 

[topnotchtouch]

Not exactly apples and oranges. I think there are trucks and SUVs in Germany also.

Actually when I say trucks and SUVs I mean pickup trucks and SUVs. Yes Germany does have trucks but, they are nothing like ours and they have their own lane as well as a max speed. Over half of all vehicles sold in the US are SUVs (pickups lumped in) and the gap continues to grow. Maybe its just me but, the thought of an SUV barrelling down on me at 80-85 mph is not a good thought.



I just keep going back to the fact that the difference between the posted limits and the "85th percentile speed" is not as significant as some keep making it out to be. Sit down and do the math. How much time would you actually save on your daily commute?



:wavey

 

[Iconoclast]

I calculated, for a 10 mph increase, approximately 150 DAYS (24-hr) over the course of my commuting lifetime before I retire.





150 Days.





Where's that dead horse smiley?

 

[TortoiseAWD]

Bob,



I specifically mentioned open interstate, in which case most of the factors in lowering the limit do not apply. The 85th percentile heuristic is not based just on this study; a number of studies have observed that the fewest accidents occur when speed limits are are set at or near the 85th percentile. It's definitely a "rule of thumb", but one that traffic engineers have been using for decades.



And it's not my logic, it's the logic of the NHTSA, DOT, FWHA, and the traffic engineers that do the research for them. Here's the abstract from yet another government report on speed limits:

This study recommends a method to establish maximum speed limits based on the 85th percentile of travel speeds. The conclusion is supported by an extensive literature search and analysis of traffic flow data collected by a unique Computer-Sensor System. Such data indicate that risk increases with deviation from mean speed. Such increase is minimal until approximately the 85th percentile, when the slope of the risk curve starts to rise sharply.

Taken from "A Study for the Selection of Maximum Speed Limits." October 1970. Four (4) volumes, prepared for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S. Dept. of Transportation, by the Indiana University's Institute for Research in Public Safety. IRPS report number FH-11-7275; Volume I is also federally numbered as PB 197 373, and DOD HS-800 378.



The guideline to set speeds at the 85th percentile is also outlined in the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). This is the Federal Highway Administration document that defines the standards used by road managers nationwide to install and maintain traffic control devices on all streets and highways. From Chapter 2B, Section 2B.13, "Speed Limit Sign (R2-1)":

Standard:

After an engineering study has been made in accordance with established traffic engineering practices, the Speed Limit (R2-1) sign (see Figure 2B-1) shall display the limit established by law, ordinance, regulation, or as adopted by the authorized agency. The speed limits shown shall be in multiples of 10 km/h or 5 mph.



Guidance:

At least once every 5 years, States and local agencies should reevaluate non-statutory speed limits on segments of their roadways that have undergone a significant change in roadway characteristics or surrounding land use since the last review.



No more than three speed limits should be displayed on any one Speed Limit sign or assembly.



When a speed limit is to be posted, it should be within 10 km/h or 5 mph of the 85th-percentile speed of free-flowing traffic. (emphasis mine)

Just so the terminology is clear, "Standards" are required by the MUTCD, whereas "Guidance" is just that. Now, the guideline, based on the recommendations of traffic engineers, states that the 85th percentile rule should be used in determining speed limits. The standard, though, allows politicians to set the limit as they damn well please. What I want to see is the standard in 2B.13 modfied to incorporate the engineers' guidelines, so that corrupt politicians seeking to line city or state coffers with speed limit fines have no choice but to implement the safest speed limit on the roads. I want limits determined by scientific and statistical principles and traffic surveys done by engineers, not determined by "officials" seeking the most profitable, or the most politically expedient limits.



Who knows more about how traffic flows? Traffic engineers, or bureaucrats and politicians? I know who I trust more . . .

Originally posted by rjstaaf:

You are proposing that since people are going to speed anyway, lets just make it legal.

Um, no. I'm proposing that speed limits be set based on the recommendations of engineers who have determined that, statistically, the 85th percentile speed is where the fewest accidents occur.



Tort

 

[topnotchtouch]

The 85th percentile speed is not some fixed target. It is influenced by the fact that speeding is such an epidemic problem on US roads.



Sure, going significantly slower or faster than the flow of traffic is dangerous but, going 80-90 is NOT safer than going 65-75. There is no study anywhere that will support that argument. Again, just because everyone else is speeding doesn't make it right or safe.



I think we are going to have to just agree to disagree here. There ain't a snowballs chance in heck of anyone convincing me that raising the speed limit with the nuts we already have on the road would be a good thing. And some of you obviously aren't going to change your mind either.



I am moving on



:bounce

 

[boywonder]

I also forgot to mention that there are quite a few red light cameras around the City of Chicago.

 

[THERUSE]

you guys do know how easy it is to "blind" the camera using IR or other methods, right?



just saying

 

[boywonder]

Well, they have not set up the cameras in IL (yet) but they now have signs that say "Hit a construction worker, $10,000 fine, 14 years jail"



They may not be the original subject of this thread but they are enough.

 

[Rlockyer]

Well, they have not set up the cameras in IL (yet) but they now have signs that say "Hit a construction worker, $10,000 fine, 14 years jail"



They may not be the original subject of this thread but they are enough.

Wish we'd see more of this. Here, they double fines in a construction zone, but the problem is that it needs to be signed, meaning that it's a long-term project, usually involving the state.

For my projects where I'm out there one day after a contractor stands an intersection, all we have is (if I'm lucky) a proper taper with cones.

I see a lot of pekkerheads doing really stupid things, just because they're impatient.

 

[topnotchtouch]

You know what would probably be a good sentence for people caught speeding through constuction zones? Make them work a highway construction zone as community service. Let them dodge the idiots for a while and see what it is like.

 

[Rlockyer]

You used to be able to work off infraction and misdemeanor traffic-related convictions (DUI, Reckless, etc...) by doing that.

It appears that now they are only using jail labor. The state is so strapped for cash that they are now demanding that the fines be paid.

They'll even cut you a deal if you pay sooner... a relative (a real screw-up) had three FTAs and unpaid fines for driving w/o a license, insurance, and current registration (she didn't appear because she was SURE they'd lock her up... ya, that makes sense, so put it off ).

After hitting her tax refund for two years, she still owed $2,000, and in April she got a notice that her license would be suspended on May 15th if she didn't appear.



The judge (actually a county commissioner) refused to allow her to do community service, but made her an offer... $400 down and $200/month for 8 months (the full $2k), or $900 cash out the door she's done.