Miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles.

went to ut-austin and also worked there a number of years before moving up to the northeast.

i recognize that texas has probably the best maintained interstate highways in the nation, partly due to their political pull, partly due to the kinder weather, and partly due to the comparatively simple geography (flat in most places). as a consequence, the roads are much better suited to higher speeds than the roads in the northeast, for instance.

however, sorry, i've never felt a "need" to go faster than 55mph, ever.

certainly not 85mph. that's just nuts. the many costs (borne not just by the driver) don't come close to justifying the time savings.

The rest of us who aren't terrified of high speed driving thank you

i'm not terrified of high speed driving at all. in fact, i used to race cars. lotsa fun.

i just don't think it's at all safe on public roads, and the statistics back me up.

If you used to race cars, then let me ask you a question;

If you are on a straightaway that is wide enough for 3 abreast and you are the slowest car on the track, the leaders are coming up behind you and the course workers are waving the blue flag at you vigorously, is the safest place to be in the middle? Or the left? Or the right? Unless you were a roundy round racing driver then it was at the bottom of the track, NOT in the middle.

SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT, FOR FUCKS SAKE!

Applied when you were racing and it applies to the highway.

As far as "the statistics" backing you up, bollocks.

It isn't speed that is the danger, it is the disparity in speeds in highway driving that causes the overwhelming number of accidents. If you are not following the 75% rule, then YOU are the dangerous one, not the guy going as fast as the vast majority of traffic.

Nothing fucks up traffic flow on multi lane interstates more than the assholes that run down the middle lane of a 3 lane roadway and REFUSE to ever change lanes to the right.

If you don't think it is safe to run faster the 55 MPH on public roads, stay on the secondary routes then. Hell, find a tractor on a farm road and stay behind him.

blocking the road are a menace. In Germany lane discipline is taken Very Seriously Indeed. Block the left lane on the Autobahn and you will be looking at a massive fine even if you manage to get out of the way of that S-Class Benz closing on you at 160+.

much bigger problems include alcohol, fatigue, distractions (cell phone in particular), vehicle/tire breakdowns, backing up because you missed the exit(!), tailgating, dangerous lane changes, and of course, speeding.

speed disparity really only matters when a car comes to a dead stop on the highway. THAT, of course, is extremely dangerous. but a disparity of 10, 20, or even 30 mph? get real. basically, you're saying you couldn't even share a neighborhood road with bicycles if you can't handle that kind of speed disparity.

and as i said, the only time i hang out in the middle lane is if there's already a line of cars driving like me. when that's the case, me driving alongside in the right lane only serves to block more traffic.

so your statement regarding sharing neighborhood roads is spurious.

I've held a commercial drivers license since 1977. I had an operators license for about 6 months and upgraded. I have held the modern CDL since they came out in the late 1980's (got mine in 1989 in Michigan), have over 25 years operating tractor trailers, have been driving automobiles and motorcycles since 1976 and have well over 1.75 million accident free miles in all weather conditions in every one of the lower 48 states and 3 Canadian Provinces and several hundred each in Hawaii, Australia and England, just to include them all. I'm willing to put my driving experience up against anyone on this message board, including former race car drivers. Hell, I've put another 52,000 miles in my back pocket since the first of the year.

I'm pretty sure I am familiar with what causes the majority of accidents, though I am REALLY curious which statistics you are referring to. There are lies, damned lies and statistics, no?

Those "problems" you mention are not all causes of accidents and some raise the hazard level only minimally. While I am no fan of anyone driving impaired, there are millions of Americans that do it every single day and manage to do so safely. Being impaired is in and of itself, not a cause of accidents. Its the mistake the impaired driver makes that causes the accident, whatever that might be. (The point I want to make here is that if I come up on a guy driving straight and smooth in the right lane, he could have a BAC of .03 and I wouldn't know it and neither would you. It's just that the higher the level of impairment, the harder it is to drive straight and generally operate the vehicle in a safe manner) Ditto fatigue, distractions, tailgating, vehicle/tire breakdowns, lane changes and speeding. And in all my years of driving, I can say with confidence that the number of drivers I have seen backing up because they missed an exit is small and while it can be a cause of an accident, I am willing to bet it is a tiny fraction of accidents nationwide. Speeding and 'dangerous lane changes' go to my point I make below regarding the 75th percentile rule.


This statement is complete and utter nonsense. It takes MUCH less than a complete stop to create the hazard, particularly in slick conditions.



Here's your reality for ya; There is a basic safety rule called the 75th percentile rule. The safest speed to travel at, regardless of the posted speed limit is that speed which 75% of the traffic is flowing. If the speed limit is 65 and 75% of the traffic is flowing at 75mph, the safest speed to travel is 75. Conversely, if the speed limit is 80 and 75% of the traffic is doing your favorite 55mph, the safest speed to travel is 55. Where speed disparity has the greatest effect and therefore causes accidents (regularly, I should add) is when someone is traveling outside that 75th percentile, either well higher or lower, and yes, 10 mph is enough to pose a greater risk. Most certainly 20 or 30 mph. These disparities are what cause dramatic lane changes and tailgaiting, for that matter and while speeding is, as I said above, not inherently dangerous, if the speeder is outside the 75th percentile, then yes, he is a hazard. The most common cause for accidents I see on highways is when a faster driver comes up on a much slower one and either does not have the skill to properly negotiate the situation or other factors come into play (like for instance you and your rear view watching causing you to change lanes to avoid the guy coming up on you and he doesn't anticipate it). Most rear end accidents on freeways are caused by the "accordion effect" where people will change lanes, typically to the left, and each successive lane change slows that lane down to the point it is going much slower than it was before. People tend to not look far enough forward and wait too late to brake, causing a rear end accident.

If you are in that line you mentioned, running 55 down the middle lane and a group comes up behind you that is running the speed limit of 10 mph or more faster than you, then YOU are now the hazard, not the larger group. You and your compatriots are now a rolling chicane, forcing people to pass you on both the right AND the left, and being passed on the right is inherently dangerous. You are the hazard. This can not be stressed enough. BTW, from the point of view of a trucker, more and more miles of 3 lane freeway in the USA have restrictions for the truck to use the left lane, which means if you are running down the center lane, you are holding up MY PASSING LANE. I don't speed in my 18 wheeler. But I do follow the 75th percentile rule to the best of my and my trucks ability and I stay in the right lane until I need to pass someone. As soon as I have completed that pass and it is safe to do so, I GET THE FUCK BACK IN THE RIGHT LANE!

It's fine with me if you want to drive any speed above the posted minimum, as long as it is in the right hand lane where you belong. But once you move over to the left, it is your obligation to do your best to flow with traffic, long line of others notwithstanding.


The fact of the matter is, most Americans have had virtually ZERO decent driver education and the drivers ed system in this country as a whole is a fucking joke. American drivers as a group have horrible lane discipline as well. Getting a drivers license in Germany, for example is tantamount to getting a private pilots license in this country. That's how it should be. And as Hifiguy pointed out above, it is a bigger fine in Germany to pass on the right than it is to speed on the highway. But those tickets are rare because German drivers are taught lane discipline a he also mentioned.

Please, please, stay in the right lane. Lead by example and let the rest of us get on with it.

"Endeavor to never be passed on the right" is a motto that would make us all safer.

Maybe it's just the way you tried to describe it.

"The safest speed to travel at, regardless of the posted speed limit is that speed which 75% of the traffic is flowing."

But you will never get 75% of traffic travelling at one speed.

"Where speed disparity has the greatest effect and therefore causes accidents (regularly, I should add) is when someone is traveling outside that 75th percentile, either well higher or lower, and yes, 10 mph is enough to pose a greater risk."

99% of people drive "outside that 75th percentile", by definition. You can measure a speed which one quarter is driving faster than, and three quarters slower than. But when you try to make it a 'rule' to drive at that speed, which much of your post seems to say, then you will inevitably be asking more people to speed up than slow down, which is more likely to increase speeds - including that target speed. However you came up with your 'rule', I cannot see it as decent advice to others.

I do agree with you about people staying in the right lane whenever possible (or, for me in the UK, the left lane - the rules of driving are clear about it here, and most drivers are a lot better at following them than in the USA - I hated passing someone on the left of a 3 lane highway, trying to pull back in front of the car I had just overtaken, only to find someone who had just 'undertaken' them on the right trying to pull into the same space I was going for - when I couldn't see them because they were hidden by the car I was overtaking).

That 75% of the traffic is flowing within a blanket, if you will, of just a few miles per hour variant of that target. It is my experience driving on freeways (or motorways, if that makes you more comfortable(!) that the vast majority of drivers do travel within a 4 or 5 MPH average and that range makes up the 75th percentile. If the speed limit is 70 and the conditions are fine, 75% of the cars on the roadway will be within just a few MPH of that speed generally. I drove up I 95 today from Melbourne, FL to Jacksonville (speed limit - 70 MPH almost the whole way), a trip of about 185 miles. The drive took me through varying bands of rain, some of it torrential. The vast majority of traffic seemed to flow within a few MPH of each other and that varied by as much as 30 MPH depending on how hard the rain was coming down. The point I am trying to make is that the drivers who pose the greatest risk were those that were either driving way above that 4 or 5 MPH blanket average or way below it.

I understand the point you make;

But I think you are trying to be too specific. Yes, of course 75% of drivers will not cover the same amount of ground at the exact same rate. But for the most part, it is certainly true that of those drivers that made the same trip I did, I arrived at my destination within just a few minutes of 75% of them.

I am not "try(ing) to make it a rule to drive at that speed", rather I am positing that it is much safer to drive at the average of the larger group, give or take 4 or 5 mph, not 10 or 20 or 30 MPH.

Is that perhaps a bit better?

As far as your use of the word in quotes 'undertaken', I had actually included that as a reference in my post re: my experience driving in England, but elected to edit it out. It's nice to know there are readers on DU who get that point.

I thought you really did mean "drive so that you are faster than three quarters of vehicles, and slower than the other quarter" - that's what the use of 'percentile' seemed to mean.

Perhaps "percent" would have been better.

Travel that speed which 75 % of cars are traveling, give or take 4 or 5 MPH.

In other words, 'most'.


Better?

between Houston/Austin/Dallas ... you just have to slow down in the small towns.

That is illegal and pretty rude to the other drivers.

if it's 55 i won't go over, period.

if it's 65 i'll go between about 63 and 65, just to stay with traffic. unless there's zero traffic, in which case i'll go 55 until i see another car.

if it's over 65 i'll go 65. my experience is that when the speed limit is 55, people drive about 63.
when the speed limit is 65, people will drive about 70.
when the speed limit is 70, people will drive about 73.

so the differential between my speed and traffic is never more than 8 mph, which is hardly a concern for anyone.

also, i drive with one eye on the rear view mirror, i'm quick with the hazard lights if need be and i make it easy for people to pass me.


next time i go back to austin and drive down to san marcos, i'll be happy to take i-35 and let the speed demons take the new toll road.

is a bigger threat than everyone going a few miles an hour faster.

20 cars on the road 19 of which are going 75 and 1 going 65 will be more of an issue than 20 cars on the road where 20 are going 85.

And impeding the flow of traffic is illegal. It originally sounded like you drove 55 on a highway that was set at 70. That would have been a ticketable offense. Often they don't do that, but technically it is a crime.

remember that you shouldn't drive over 50 with certain types of spare tires, and those are certainly legal on all highways.

plus, remember, people can pass, you know, so it's not impeding traffic.

impeding traffic is more when people drive side-by-side and prevent passing.

Once, when driving there with a nephew, I slowed down to 55 mph to show him how ridiculously slow our speed limit used to be.

It felt like we were driving a golf cart with a defective engine, and that's no exaggeration. Miles and miles of straight road with the horizon visible on at least two sides.

I know people who fell asleep behind the wheel and died from driving that slowly there back then.

for most traveling, you only save a few minutes. even on longer drives maybe speeding saves you upwards of an hour.
big deal. i'd rather save gas money, and get there in one piece, and avoid any worry about speeding tickets. people often overestimate the time savings in part because they don't take into account the fact that even if your "norm" is 85, traffic and construction often keeps you from driving any faster than people like me.

my family and i often drive from connecticut to austin for vacation. mrs. unblock drives like the rest of the world, and i drive like grandpa.

but she got a speeding ticket in tennessee and i haven't gotten one in maybe a couple decades.



maybe we got there 2 or 3 hours sooner because of her speeding. whoopie. worth a speeding ticket?
not remotely.

Many people travel that fast regularly on various highways around the country.

We also have the largest population of uninsured motorists.

I can hardly wait.

I drive IH-35 between San Antonio and Austin quite often and 85 is already about the norm. If you don't drive with the flow, you will get run over.

Ricky just wants to make us pay for it!

If it works like most other highway speed limits.

They will pull right out in front of you with no signal and never think twice about it.

but the feds made them change it a few years ago.

Or the feds were going to withdraw matching DOT funds.

Montana said, all right, we give up, you guys win...and set the fine for anything over the posted limit at $5.00.

That's been a while back, though.

at well over 120 in parts of that state, Wyoming and Montana. He's been to racing school and knows what he's doing. And let's just say that his cars were built to handle that and much more.

undoubtedly thought they could easily handle 85-100 mph

http://life.nationalpost.com/2011/12/05/4m-car-crash-in-japan-takes-out-eight-ferraris-one-lamborghini/

my friend drives fast. The southern half of Utah is pretty empty.

PA's looking to pop parts of the turnpike up to 70, but I've rarely seen traffic moving at less than that as it is. As long as there's a steady flow the cops really don't do much. They can't pull EVERYONE over. It's the ones out-pacing everyone else that get picked off.

There are just some places where you kick into overdrive and crank up the stereo.

You could be traveling at 80 and you will still be tail-gated.

There are too many cars that cannot safely exceed 75.

It is the drivers that *think* that they can safely operate a motor vehicle at those speeds.

Most people vastly over-estimate their driving skills.

I used to own a professional racing license, and let me tell you, most people have no clue as to how to properly drive a vehicle at speed.

and you're probably going to be OK.

Not a real world experience, however.

It's all well and good till you hit a bad patch of road, or lose a tire or swerve for a deer or swerve for an accident.

There was a particularly dangerous spot on I-55 near my in-law's that I encountered more than once. It was a buckle in the road just over the crest of a bridge where the road started to curve. Twice I hit that thing doing about 70 and my truck "hopped" and jerked. Any faster and I might have been in trouble. It's fixed now but not before I saw the remnants of an accident I'm almost certain was caused by that defect in the road.

and so many people have the tendacy to let their attention wander when on long, dull stretches of highway, not to mention they don't account for stopping distance, and situational awareness of cars around them...

There's only one true opinion that unites all Americans from every socio-economic/political/religious demographic: We all believe in our hearts that we're in that 95th percentile of driving ability and that other guy is a reckless teen/senior citizen/immigrant/soccer mom

Perfect!

disregard the fact that other drivers can screw up enough to make those skills irrelevant.

The little Ford Focus we just purchased can probably handle the higher speeds but we haven't tested it out yet.

I would prefer some sort of touring/sport suspension for 80 plus speeds.

and highway 8 in Arizona between Tucson & the California state line had no speed limit at all. Maintaining control of your vehicle was the only criteria.

it hurts the sensationalism that drives pop news.

to the scene in the fantasy that so many imagine.

I did not know that had been repealed.

It was that before the oil embargo and the national 55 limit and they returned to it in the 1990's for a short time. Look up Wikipedia for Montana speed limit for more detail. On edit to add that even during the 55 limit days, Montana HP would usually only issue tickets for "wasting fuel" and it was like a $5 fine

it didn't last long...

I can understand why you'd want to get out of it as quickly as possible.

---
Seriously though, some of it is miles and miles of boring road with nothing interesting to keep your attention. Thing is though, if you ever meet a Texan driver out of their state, beware... In one day, I saw three Texas plates in the East, and each time, that driver almost got me killed. They are beyond reckless and think they own the road.

But Americans have got to go faster and faster

and they have a far greater population density than Texas.

Nothing like being passed on The Dan Ryan by some kid in a $300 dollar Geo with $1500 dollar worth of TV screens hanging down in the back seat with no passengers doing 95 miles an hour with the car floating all over the shocks.

Any idiot here can get a driver's license but there it is a very big and quite expensive, too. Their roads are much better built and better maintained.

Dead straightaways in most areas. Very little elevation change and low traffic.


Other states (montana for instance) have had this before.

This is a big deal because it's Texas. If it were say Wyoming, that no one really had an opinion about, it wouldn't be news.

Many, many of the vehicles on American roads would fail (and fail miserably) the TÜV Rheinland inspections. Also, licensing regs are much stricter, and a license much harder to get, than the good 'ol USA. If we had inspection and licensing regulations like the Germans, that would be one thing, but we don't. Not by a long shot.

mikey_the_rat

You would think this would be happening in California or Michigan.......but Texas? A lot of people here do drive really fast, but.......

to ahem, absorb the energy of the crash... as in break into pieces... YAY for the clean up crews!

What do you mean you lost your tire because we lost a piece of fiberglass from the LAST crash? Oh sorry.

Good on 'em!

There's nothing worse than driving 55 past a bunch of cacti on roads that can easily handle 90 mph.

The safety problem isn't speed, it's people who insist on driving slowly in the left lane and then obnoxiously ignore you when you signal them to move over. If we only used the left for passing and trained drivers to be more aware of the cars around them, German-style, we'd have a lot fewer accidents.

Compare the yearly figures:

Country [font color=white]vvv[/font]- Fatalities/100,000 inhabitants - Fatalities/100,000 vehicles
Germany[font color=white]vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv[/font]4.5[font color=white]vvvvvvvvvvvvvvv[/font]7.2
United States of America[font color=white]vvv[/font]12.3[font color=white]vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv[/font]15

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

And have no real desire to actually learn to drive.

All we're concerned about is getting that license and then getting that big car - with the great stereo.

If your state is like mine, if you get a ticket in Texas for say driving 95 on that road, it will be treated like you did that in your state in regards to points. That is like you drove 95 in a 70 zone.

I realize this is a toll road that will barely be used and not I-35 but 85 is fucking insane. Even for Texas it's insane. Anyone who drives that fast is fucking insane. And spare me the bullshit about how good a driver you are. Even if you are, other people will be driving 85 and talking on the phone at the same time and you will not be able to avoid them.

Aside from the risk, when gas is $4 a gallon, it is economically stupid. I know my car gets much better gas mileage at 60 than at 75 or 80. It is just Texas' way of thumbing their noses at environmentalists.

Yes, talking on that cell phone at 85......driving up on your ass.........drinking and driving>>>.......One way to look at it in a somewhat positive way is that there will no longer be a shortage of body part doners. Texas does not care about what environment they leave for their children and grandchildren, so why would they care if they kill themselves and someone else (not to mention the waste of fuel) going 85mph.

That was pretty much what everyone drove.

I seem to remember that driving through Wyoming. I might be wrong though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_the_United_States#Montana

How generous of them

I mean like Massachusetts, who are they kidding on the interstate highways? Everybody is driving 85mph anyway and the roads need all the throughput they can get.

Texans already drive too fast, on your bumper, they drink too much and then drive 85 mph?? For such a religeous evangelical state, Texans sure like to kill each other, especially on the highways. Want to buy my house cheap, so I can leave??

Unfortunately, I'm not looking to buy a house right now.

I share your dislike of fast driving and tailgating.

Strangely enough, I can't wait until computers control our cars and make us drive sensibly! Save the speeding for the race track.