National speed limit
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: oregon
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
National speed limit
I read yesterday on cnn that a senator is going to ask that the national speed limit be lowered back down like it was back in 1975. The study said that with it lowered back down people saved an average of .30 cents a gallon. I think it should be lowered but don't know what speed. right now the national speed limit is 70. So What is everyone elses thought
#2
I read yesterday on cnn that a senator is going to ask that the national speed limit be lowered back down like it was back in 1975. The study said that with it lowered back down people saved an average of .30 cents a gallon. I think it should be lowered but don't know what speed. right now the national speed limit is 70. So What is everyone elses thought
#5
Paint it black
why? better yet, i dont want to know, an f150 isnt a race car...
honestly it isnt a big deal, i normally do about 65, and if it was 55, id prob drop it down to 60 or so....if would be safer also in my opinion
#6
Senior Member
The old national speed limit in the 1970s was 55, or double-nickel in CBers jargon. Felt like you were just creeping on down the interstate.
Would like to see the proponents of such a measure demonstrate to what degree the savings will be, then to describe how that savings will more than offset the costs of increased time and additional crowding on the roadways.
If the speed limit were lowered from 70 to 55, then one would spend 70/55, or 27% more time traveling from point A to point B. With people spending 27% more time on the roads, they're bound to become more crowded.
IMO, speed limits should be set for safety reasons, as many don't have the common sense to travel at speeds befitting conditions. Setting a speed limit for fuel conservation goals is the wrong solution to the problem.
In the words of that famous philosopher, Murphy, "every solution creates another problem".
Would like to see the proponents of such a measure demonstrate to what degree the savings will be, then to describe how that savings will more than offset the costs of increased time and additional crowding on the roadways.
If the speed limit were lowered from 70 to 55, then one would spend 70/55, or 27% more time traveling from point A to point B. With people spending 27% more time on the roads, they're bound to become more crowded.
IMO, speed limits should be set for safety reasons, as many don't have the common sense to travel at speeds befitting conditions. Setting a speed limit for fuel conservation goals is the wrong solution to the problem.
In the words of that famous philosopher, Murphy, "every solution creates another problem".
Trending Topics
#8
Cowgirl Up
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I say thats stupid. If we want to save fuel, like someone already said, we'll slow down on our own. Just dont do 55 in the fast lane. But also I think 55 is really slow for the interstate with our citys getting bigger and bigger and people having to travel farther to and from point a to point b. I say if they lower it that 60 should be the lowest they go.
#9
I Voted For Bill and Opus
Try driving the distances in Wyoming at 55 mph. It is not like the east where distances between towns and cities is short. In Wyoming we think trips of 200 miles are not thought of as far. Why don't these butt Munch politicians let us drill for our own oil, and build some new refineries so we have more capacity.