Should a 55 MPH Speed Limit Become Law?

Reader Comments
Back to article

I see many misinformed comments about speed vs fuel economy.
The fuel economy difference from 55 MPH to 65 MPH was recently tested (2009 Consumer Reports) and it was found that the fuel economy dropped by 11-15% with the increased speed. The difference going from 55 MPH to 75 MPH was even greater, with a corresponding 20-30% drop in mileage. Proof the laws of physics that govern wind resistance hasn't changed.
If fuel consumption didn't change in 1974 when 55 MPH was enacted, it more likely had to do with lack of compliance. Indeed, I recall enforcement being quite lax back in the day (something that modern technology could easily change).
The irony is that we spend trillions of dollars and thousands of lives to secure global oil resources (and will cheerfully tap "strategic" reserves) while there is never talk of lowering the speed limit. I suppose it boils down to how we define "freedom."

Charles of CA 3:50PM July 11, 2011

IMHO, the problem with the 65 mph limit is that it's largely unobserved, and drivers on the FWY, at least out here in Southern California seem, for the most part, to prefer to drive about 5-10 mph beyond the legal limit. So it follows that if one wants drivers to observe a 65 mph speed limit then dropping the speed limit to 55 mph just makes good sense. Not, of course because a 55 mph limit will be observed by drivers, but to take into account the common place flaunting of speed laws that inevitably occurs.

Ty of CA 7:13PM July 09, 2011

55 MPH on a US Interstate Highway is dumb. These highways were designed for 90 MPH. As for saving fuel it doesn't. My car is rated 27mpg 45 MPH by the EPA...At 70 Mph it gets 33-35 mpg, so where is the savings. If the speed limit was lowered back to 55, most people would be driving 70+ MPH. The only good in a 55 speed limit is the sale of cb radios and radar detectors would go up...Repeal the RADAR Detector Ban in Virginia!!!

Snickers of VA 9:11PM April 27, 2010

Anyone who wants to drive 55 MPH in a 70 or 80 MPH zone is free to do so as long as that person keeps to the right, although I think driving so slowly other than under exigent circumstances is a sign that you're a masochist. (Some states have the good sense to post minimum permissible speeds which are usually no more than 20 MPH below the posted maximum.) Better yet, why don't you try driving 60 MPH, which would still give good fuel efficiency while allowing you to move at exactly one mile per minute while being somewhat less offensive to traffic on the freeway.
Additionally, despite not having speed limits on rural sections, the German freeways' (autobahns) fatality rates are similar to US freeways, so your safety argument is hogwash. There is no absolutely safe or unsafe speed; speed must match conditions, which of course, vary from place to place. The real problem is that Americans are arrogant idiots on the road, and it is this idiocy that needs to be addressed and punished as necessary. Any thought that US motorists will want, let alone obey a 55 MPH speed limit is mental masturbation.
Want safer highways? Require all motorists on freeways and divided highways to cede the passing lane to faster traffic regardless of the speed limit, and forbid passing on the right, which has become necessary (and is actually legal) because of US motorists' refusal to keep right except to pass. Increase the severity of criminal penalties for repeat (especially three-time & more) DWI offenders.
Keeping speed limits posted as they are is fine too, but they should be prima facie - up to the posted limit, your speed is legally presumed to be safe unless the prosecution proves it violated the basic speed law; over the posted limit, your speed is presumed unsafe unless you prove it didn't violate the basic speed law under the conditions then existing. THAT IS FAIR.
Want to actually enforce - read that to coerce compliance with the speed limits? There should be a federal (highway funds to be withheld for refusal to comply) law which requires police to post signs that read as follows:
'SPEED CHECKED BY RADAR/LIDAR NEXT 10 MILES - YOU GUESS WHICH MILE.' (In cities, replace 'MILES/MILE' with 'BLOCKS/BLOCK'.)
Of course, speed limits should be the result of engineering and traffic surveys that set the limits at the 85th percentile. But we all know that most speed limits are motivated by a desire for money now, DON'T WE?!
So, go ahead and drive 55 so long as you don't impede my progress. Keep right except to pass, and please, accelerate when you pass, move back right and then resume your speed. Yes, as much as you probably HATE thinking of this, whenever you're driving on a two-lane highway, pull off onto the shoulder or into a turnout; you have NO RIGHT to impose your sloth upon others! May you be summonsed (preferably electrocuted) if you don't!
A national referendum on the above proposals would pass by a landslide.

John in SFO of CA 4:16PM March 24, 2010

55 is a lie out of the pits of hell!! IT NEEDS TO BE BURIED ALONGSIDE NIXON'S ROTTING CORPSE!!!

steve kiefer of CT 9:29PM March 04, 2010

Me drive 55?? NOT IF THEY SHOO ME ALONGSIDE OF THE ROAD, HAUL THE REST OF MY FAMILY OFF TO A CONCENTRATION CAMP AND SEND THEM TO THE "SHOWERS"!!!

steve kiefer of CT 7:53AM March 01, 2010

Don’t try and have any kind of civil debate with the guy. Tim Castleman is pretty insulting. Here is what I wrote to him and his replies.
________________________________________________
My question to him:
If you really believe in the value in slowing down then why
are you not promoting driving 40 mph? If you did that then I
would guess you would have fewer supporters for many of the
reasons that people who drive 65 do not support you at 55.
His reply:
55 is a compromise between speed and efficiency.
My reply back:
If this were an official debate you would lose your argument on the basis of being subjective. You feel that 55 is a compromise, I feel that 65 is a compromise, someone else may feel that 75 is a compromise, and another at 45. The fact, that you state on your website, is that 40 is the most efficient speed to save fuel.
His attack back:
Man, I have been losing this argument since 9/11/01. I sort of feel sorry for petroleum addicts and would have more pity and tolerance except that your behavior is impacting my life. OUR air, water, and security are all compromised because of your unwillingness to moderate. People are hijacking jets to wage war on us because our military is in their homeland protecting your supply of petroleum. It is unsafe to walk or ride a bike on public roadways and people hire a plumber that lives 50 miles away rather than the one next door because gas is so heavily subsidized by my tax dollars.
But none of this seems to penetrate a thick membrane of selfishness and seemingly deliberate ignorance. Honestly, I would be delighted to not have to share this place with you at all, but alas we are stuck with each other and I'm just asking for a bit of moderation and sanity. For that I regularly get death threats from clowns that can't spell and people convinced their vehicle gets better mileage the faster they go.
Google lemmings....
_____________________________________________
I rest my case. I’d steer clear of him. I think he may snap.

Dan of WI 2:27AM January 21, 2010

Take your nanny state return of Jimmy (peanut buster) Carter return to government lies about fuel shortages, government control etc. and shove them in the nearest oriface you can find. I'm sick and tired of you communist government shills spouting off your ridiculous proposals for more government control and the insunuation that everyone is stupid enough to keep falling for your bulls&*(. FMC. the company I work for, was approached several years ago by a company that had developed a process for adding a chemical to water to make hydrogen fuel for cars. They wanted FMC to consider devoting a part of one of our plant processes to make their product. They and FMC were considering this for a few months and then they just disappeared and FMC never heard from them again. There were people who developed carburetors in the 60s and 70s that would get between 50 and 100 miles a gallon. These products never hit the market. If the government was really concerned about fuel and oil shortage and environmental issues these things I have mentioned could and would have been put in service a looooong time ago. Governments only interest is control of the people. Once again take you 55 mph and STICK IT ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Blain Williams of WY 10:03PM January 15, 2010