I-95 in Maine 295 miles, I-15 (north/south) in Montana 397 miles. I-90/94 (east/west) in Montana 734 miles. I have driven in both states and I don’t think I would want to do 85 in Maine, not even 75, but in Montana, I have driven over 90 quite a bit.
I have only driven in Montana twice, both times going from Mt Rushmore to Glacier NP, then south to Utah. My recollections are that it is not flat. It is pretty straight with few trees along the interstate, but it was rolling hills so that I spent a lot of time going 55 uphill and 90ish down the other side. 02 Saturn SL. Stayed in fifth so I lost a lot of speed on the uphill, but still got 42+ MPG.
Montana put a roadside marker everywhere there was a fatal accident with a cross for each life lost. I didn’t see many of those on the interstate, but there were a lot of them on the secondary roads. I suspect that if you get in an accident out there in some of those places in the winter, you can die before rescuers can get to you. That would have been really true before cell phones.
The secondary roads are generally very good as well. On my second trip, I took 89 from I-90 to Glacier, very scenic drive but 89 is one of the least maintained roads in the US and certainly one of the worse in Montana. It was first built to link all the National Parks together. I’m beginning to think that the feds want to keep us out of our National Parks.
You drove north of Bangor ?
And the Feds want to keep you out of the national parks ? Maybe sequestration…
You are absolutely right about secondary undivided highways being where the carnage occurs. The big offenders are the 55mph undivided highways where people routinly drive over 60 mp and pass each other by just feet, occasioning hit each other as well at over 100 mph closing speed. Not a lot of people survive these crashes. The interstate dangers pale in severity compared to tis kind of accident where people pull out of side roads on to these roads where accidents are waiting to happen. The speeds produce severe effects even when no one is speeding.
A subjective observation was made to me by a state cop. Every time the speed limits go up on the interstates, the larger the number of speeding offenders there are on surrounding roads, including these higher speed un divided highways, especially near the off ramps.
The big offenders are the 55mph undivided highways where people routinly drive over 60 mp and pass each other by just feet, occasioning hit each other as well at over 100 mph closing speed. Not a lot of people survive these crashes. The interstate dangers pale in severity compared to tis kind of accident where people pull out of side roads on to these roads where accidents are waiting to happen.
So…you’d admit that increasing the speeds on interstates (and leaving the PSL on undivided highways alone) can result in a NET INCREASE in safety, by causing traffic to favor the interstate versus the US routes in marginal cases? That is the point I was making, and you were arguing against.
Forget about driving 85 MPH even where road conditions would be fine. Just think of how many people you know that you would ride with at 85. I only know 2 myself and one of those is a fighter pilot.
That is the point I was making, and you were arguing against.Huh ???
I’m not “arguing” anything. In my experience, increasing speed most places, even interstates, generally increases the severity and frequency of accidents. That they ALSO may ( subjective observation ) increase the number of speeders on roads around the interstate is another consequence. You have an active imagination. I like that.
That higher speed undivided highways are less safe does not diminish that idea. As a matter of fact, higher divided highway speeds could very well make both road types more dangerous. If you come off an 85 mph highway, it’s harder to adjust to a 55 mph undivided road then coming of a 65 mph highway. That was the idea behind the observation of one cop in the area he patrolled. So I could say, higher speeds have a multiple effect. How is that for an imaginative statement. I think I one upped you.
Dag, early on in the thread you wrote “you need not comment on Maine if you haven’t been </i>there”. Yet, you commented on Montana. Have you been to Montana?
I’ve driven in Maine regularly for many years all the way northeast to Eastport and north to Canada. I’ve also driven many other states, including three years in North Dakota, Montana’s adjoining state, and Illinois, another “plains state”. I can tell you definitively that driving in the plains states is dramatically different that driving in Maine. Judging Montana’s speed limits based upon Maine driving is not realistic. The driving difference is as different as riding a motorcycle is to flying an airplane.
I can see easily where 85mph on the highways in any modern car would be perfectly safe in many areas in the central U.S. In North Dakota, and in many areas in the plains state, the primary and even secondary highways (like rt2) are straight, flat, smooth, and disappear into the horizon 16 miles away. You can see a car coming many miles before it gets to you. You can see an obstruction many miles before you get to it. You can even see a rain shower in a town 20 miles away. Maine driving is very, very, very different.
The difference is…the comments made by post on Maine were MISTAKES about the topography of Maine. So you take that out of context. I made no mistakes about Montana because I made few assumptions about it’s topography as it was not germane o my point. I said they have snow (fact), I said there will be a bigger speed differential with 85 mph speed limits then lower limits before (fact).
If Montana is anything like Texas or New Mexico or parts or California or Pennsylvania …and many other states I have driven in, it is vast as far as its topography is concerned. Vastness has nothing to do with black ice or coming up on a car going 25 mph slower. Especially considering…
“You can see an obstruction many miles before you get to it.” No you can’t.
At NIGHT vastness means little, as you drive with the range of your headlights. At night, there is less difference then you think driving interstates between MANY states. Because at night, while you drive you have no idea what is outside the visual field of your lights. And like in Texas where I still had to be as aware there in night as in any state, you will in Montana, and more so in winter.
It has always been about the speed differential, and potential winter problems, even in good weather, like those in Maine and every other state with snow and ice refreeze problems in the day and the night. And, every state that increases the speed limits on interstates faces problems with increased accidents in these and all conditions.
Now, if you say between driving the interstate in Maine and Montana is like this comment: "The driving difference is as different as riding a motorcycle is to flying an airplane… Your beginning to make me wonder if you have ever driven a car. (jest)
Do I care about what they doing it in Montana ? Heck no. But to hear some say it makes no difference in safety and may actually make things safer for those traveling there, makes no sense to me.
I stand by my statements that driving in Montana is very different from driving in Maine, the safety of Montana speed limits cannot be judged by Maine highways, and that your comments equating the two and criticizing someone else for making that point were totally off base.
Frankly, I’m sure the good people of Montana don’t give a rat’s behind what you do either.
I did not criticize, I stating that they need not comment if they had never driven there. Why ? because their comments were incorrect and if they drove in Maine, enough to make comments, maybe they would have noticed. Now if you feel the need to jump in because someone can’t speak for themselves, fine. But, I feel you are off base doing it that too. and even if you thought I was being overly critical, your exaggerations didn’t help. But if you do, be accurate too in your comments too. The differences in driving in the two states some want to make aren’t even germane to my points, and these differences especially don’t exist to that great a degree at night.
Making their own speed limits is one of their state’s rights as soon as the federal govt. stopped mandating limits years back. When states do this, they will have to deal with the results of their actions, good and bad. I would think one should be applauded for not caring about another’s state law they disagree with. Not giving a rat’s behind what we do here is entirely welcome too. Maybe not giving one in the first place on the original matter would have been better.
I find it odd that you don’t hold yourself to the same standards you hold others to.
Oh well, as always, this will get us nowhere. You’ll never realize that if you called the new speed limits of Montana unsafe without ever having been there, you should not admonish others that they should not comment on Maine’s driving environment unless they’ve been there.
I’ll not return to this thread, as I can see the usual evolution emerging. No point in trying to make a point to someone whose reception has been barricaded.
Just saying its 1600 miles from Seatle to Minneapolis and a lot of that is just plain very sparse in population. And Minneapolis is roughly in the middle of the country. Its another 1400 miles to get to Boston. So yeah, Maine to Miami is a long way but Seatle to Boston is a really really long way.
All driving is unsafe to a degree. My comments surround the fact that it is less safe to travel at these higher speeds especially at night and winter regardless of where it is…Please don’t keep making personal comments about other’s intent unless you are a psychologist. When I or anyone corrects your miss statements, it becomes a personal attack on your part instead of saying, " I understand your POV," or treating it lightly. As long as everyone agrees or pretends to, it’s fine with some. But not everyone does when you consider all the situations. Just let others have their own ideas. I think speeds this high are less safe , in winter time especially at night where 40% of accidents occur with less then 25% of the driving time. And I agree, you need not respond if you want to talk about personal matters and not stay on topic which is your natural evolution, not mine.
Then the title does not accurately reflect what the article says which I read three times before I made the comments about night time problems. That still does not alter my opinion of driving 85 mph but is an important consideration. . There is no mention it being daytime only. There are no day/night differences in any states I have driven in recent memory in New England but other states do I am sure. It would good to know if night time change is one and what affect this proposal has on it. After all, night time is where 40% of the accidents ocurr with 25% of the traffic.
Another article, which specifically mentions it is a daytime speed limit. And your winter comments are still irrelevant because Montana still has a law that says you can’t drive faster than conditions warrant no matter what the speed limit sign says.
This is going to be 85mph during the day, in dry conditions, with lots of visibility and tens or hundreds of miles between mild curves. It is not going to be the orgy of death you seem to want us to believe it will be.
There’s always a clause in speed limit laws that stipulates a driver will limit speed to what is “safe and prudent” under less than ideal conditions.
So one could get a ticket for driving under the posted limit if the officer deems it too fast for conditions.