Forget that 55mph bunk. There are many more ideas that make sense, and so many arguments against 55mph.
First less need for the 70mph cruiser. I wholey agree, it is time for the 80mph cruiser to be baptized. Smaller, more efficient engines doen’t mean slower, just better. That is why a 3.0L Turbo charged engine get 21/30 mpg and 300 hp. That will cruise at 80 just fine, at 30 mpg and accelerate to 60 in under 5 seconds.
Fewer traffic fatalities in the 70’s. Whatever. Deaths per mile driven are down consistantly, and while that is a crap statistic, there isn’t really anything better to refute it. What?s overlooked is that per-mile death rates across all kinds of US roads ?rural and urban ones, interstate highways and city streets, etc.?are too broad to assess the effects of a specific policy change like raising speed limits on specific roads. Urbanization, demographics, and climate have a greater effect on fatalities than speed limits and safety measures. So instead, who is driving around you, how close to a city you are, what your weather girl is saying, how much sleep you got, what you are eating, and who you are texting has a greater effect on traffic fatalities and accidents in general, than speed. (IIHS) "The very rural state of Montana, for example, has the highest per-mile death rate among the 50 states. What happens when its rate is standardized by urban versus rural mileage to match the US as a whole? Then Montana drops to 27th among the states in terms of its death rate per mile traveled. States with the highest per-mile rates also have the lowest median incomes, percentages of population with college degrees, and school spending per pupil. They have the highest proportions of high-risk drivers, those 16-20 years old. States with high population densities and traffic congestion have low per-mile death rates. In fact, almost 70 percent of the variability among passenger vehicle occupant death rates can be explained by urbanization and demographics…New Hampshire has the fourth lowest per-mile death rate among the 50 states. Does this mean its programs and polices are better or more effective than those in other states? No. In fact, New Hampshire is the only US state without a belt use law. Its buckle-up rate is much lower than in other states. Nor does New Hampshire have a motorcycle helmet law. Its per-mile death rate is low largely because of factors related to urbanization and demographics, not because of its safety policies.
" The only real solutions are to be done before one even gets in the car by themselves. An age variable and adjusted rate/fee for getting a license, tougher inspections for getting and keeping your car registered, required individual driving training, steeper penalties for safety offenses (including speeding when the limit is properly set), driver testing which includes a comprehensive road course, written test, parking lot test, and vehicle inspection.
Congestion: Has nothing to do with speed limits and everything to do with city planning, weather, traffic, time of day, demographics, urbanization, etc. etc. etc. In my commute every day, the speed limit is meaningless, you are either doing 15 or 80, often with large, seemingly random accelerations between. No change in speed limit is going to make an over-crowed road less croweded. No speed limit is going to encourage drivers to leave room for cars merging from on ramps, not tailgate, move right when not passing, or drive at an appropriate speed for the conditions. Only driver education and a change in culture can do that. Some changes can be made to our roads. Adaptive signage, like on the Autobahn, which adjusts to weather conditions, congestion, and even the percentage of trucks, but generally aims for high speed driving when the sun is out and the trucks are far and few between. Restricted/limited/or taxed inner city driving, London’s so called congestion charge will, could encourage mass transport. Adaptive lanes/shoulders/tolls on ring roads and roads entering and exiting the city. There is an answer, but it isn’t a lower speed limit, and will certainly cost more. Fixing the congestion problem and traffic flow problems will go further to reducing emissions than reducing speed limits ever will, just look at the differance between city and highway driving mpg estimates. Now apply that city number to all the time you sit in traffic. Remove all those hours spent sitting in traffic, and watch the air get cleaner. That is real change.
Results instantly: Bunk as well. From the Arizona DOT “[Nationwide] raising and lowering speed limits had little or no effect on speeds. Although maximum speed changes up to 3 mi/h (5 km/h) were observed at individual sites, the average change in the mean and 85th percentile speeds was less than 1 mi/h and similar to sites that were not changed.
However, studies in the USA and abroad generally show an increase in speeds when speed limits are raised on freeways. Changes in mean speeds ranging from 1 to 4 mi/h were observed when the speed limits in the United States were increased from 55 mi/h (89 km/h) to 65 mi/h (105 km/h) as shown in table 2.”
“Spitz (1984) reported that the 85th percentile speed of traffic increased less than 0.4 mi/h (0.6 km/h) in 40 zones where speed limits were raised in 10 California cities.”
“Dudek and Ulman (1986) found no significant changes in speeds at six sites in the urban fringe where speed limits were lowered from 55 to 45 mi/h (89 to 72 mi/h).”
As for the rest, Cars lasting longer, less road damage, fewer repairs, those are maintenance items, not speeding items. And the Yaris, Focus, Fit, Aveo, Crap I, Crap II, Crap Red, Crap Blue, may be at home in a 55mph world, but not my home.