Only if all the cars are geared to 55 MPH as the optimum fuel efficient speed. I had a 1980 Subaru w/ a 5 spped manual transmission that ran most effeciently at 70 MPH (39 MPG). To drive 55 MPH I had to down shift to 4th gear and my gas economy went with it--more like 32-33 MPG.
It won't necessarily work. Back when the first 55 mph speed limit was forced on us, it instantly took my gas mileage from 18 mpg at 68 mph to 13 mph at 55 - while increasing my time on the road by similar margins. This was no favor. I've determined my mileage with my current (diesel) pickup, and it gets 19.8 mpg at 63 mph, while at 55, it gets 15 mpg. The engine on the first pickup was a 350 cid; the engine on the current pickup is 6.9 L, or 420 cid. The answer is still, however, NO. If people really care, they will do the ultra-simple arithmetic needed to determine at what speeds they get what mileages, remember them, and drive accordingly. Since this "math" is taught in the 4th grade, almost any adult should be able to do it.
Wow that sounds like a great idea! But why 55? I mean what about 25? Or better yet let’s get the speed down to coasting speeds. Wasn’t the world so much better when we were atop horses or behind in the buggy? Why are we allowed to have cars? The gov should take them away and give us all a horse. They can pick up the cars at the same time they pick up our incandescent bulbs. I believe I may still have a toilet that allows too much water during flush. They could grab that at the same time.
Sorry about that. I am just a little tired of how willing we are to seriously consider questions that IMO should not be considered prima facie. If the majority honestly believes that we are causing global warming then the fed should allow a slower driving speed in the right lane. Then those that want to drive slower can CHOOSE to do so. Although slightly oversimplified, the role of government should be to defend our country, enable commerce, and protect us against each other – beyond that they should tread very seldom and very carefully. After all, they are supposed to be working FOR us not the other way around. – sorry for the rant
Many Americans (myself included) value time more than money, so drive above the speed limit (whatever it is). As Stephen More of the WSJ put it in his opinion page, "...What is in short supply -- the only truly finite resource, as the late economist Julian Simon taught us -- is the time each of us spends on this earth. And most of us don't want to spend it sitting longer than we have to in traffic." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121685880778279315.html
The old 55MPH was the biggest time wasting ploy that our government ever dreamed up. It only benefited left lane bandits and your local cop shop. If you want to drive fast you should be allowed to... the only limit should be if you want to spend the money to get there faster.
Shall we also bring back prohibition to curb alcoholism? We can't legislate conservation any more than we can legislate morality. People's motivation to save gas will not come from arbitrary (and headline grabbing) speed limits. When gas hit $4 a gallon suddenly people realized they didn't need a vehicle the size of a small bus to lug the children to soccer practice. When gas hits $5 a gallon, they will realize that the kids can walk or ride their bikes to soccer practice and maybe the subway or bus isn't such a bad idea after all. Anyway, who wants a revival of that awful Sammy Hagar song "I Can't Drive 55?" Didn't think so.
No. The less (U.S.) government intervention with global economics the better. They don't have these limits in Europe where for years gasoline has sold for substantially higher.
Let’s see should we bring back a failed idea from 30 years ago? The last time we tried this, I seem to remember that it wound up costing us more in lost traval time than it saved in fuel usage. That’s why we dropped it.
The federal government should be concerned about the big picture of the oil/gasoline problem. Slowing people down to conserve gasoline is not a solution. It would only be more short-sighted government policy. We are moving forward in time. Lets not flashback to the 70's and 80's simply because our leaders failed us. Instead of changing the speed limit, let's change the leaders who have failed us. We need a change in the source of our energy, not a change of how fast we are allowed to drive.
If the 55 MPH speed limit increases fuel efficiency, we should do it. We should also have some laws around how cold you can make an office, or lighting of buildings and offices in the evening (i.e an office building being fully lit at 2AM). The best thing we can do is offer better rebates to people who buy hybrid cars. A lot of people don't buy them because they are more expensive than regular cars. Finally, can someone in the gov't. get some courage and force or motivate better engines and fuel efficiency before 2020. We are naive to think companies will do it on their own. Just look at Ford, GM and Chrysler.
It is NOT the speed limit that saves gas but the RPM the engine turns that saves gas.
Today cars turn between 1500 and 2100 RPM for maximum efficiency. Some cars at 1500 RPM can maintain 65 mph.
So at the peek efficiency of an engine (between 1500 and 2100 RPM) and a car runs at 65 MPH then that is the speed that should be set of all INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS.
CONGRESS has NO IDEA how efficient engines play into fuel economy, yet they try to enact colorable statutes, based on their ignorance.
CONGRESS should get ALL THE FACTS before opening their collective mouths and STICKING THEIR size 14 SHOW into their mouth.
It would not make a difference, they cannot drive the posted speed as it is. Speed is something some people cannot get out of their systems until they are an obituary.
They can bring it back but without sufficient police to enforce it, nothing will really change. The only way to slow people down is to use more camera enforcement and stand firm on fine collections.
No...that would not put a big enough dent in fuel consumption. The key is to keep people off the road. Here's a thought...How about instituting something similar to the old Texas blue laws which allowed only essential businesses (such as gas stations, grocery stores, and restaurants) to be open on Sundays. Their hours of operation on Sunday were also limited, which still reduced the shear numbers of people out and about. This era of a 24/7 society is detrimental to our fuel supplies.
NO!! My car gets 33MPG doing 75-80, I have sometimes 700-900 miles to drive in one day, and I don't need to be driving horse and buggy speed. My car is NOT a hybred its a 2005 Chevy Colbalt.
They need to be making alterinitive fuel instead of writing speeding tickets!
Nope - the federal government should vigorously enforce fuel efficiency requirements instead. With better gas mileage, people will be more inclined to go faster/cut out traffic delays/improve efficiency of travel overall.
Absolutely. The energy, environmental, and safety benefits far outweigh any other considerations, not to mention the fact that we could all afford to slow our lives down in general...
You cannot give a kid a new toy and then take it away because you forgot to balance your checkbook, and have to return it to Walmart. The federal government needs to step up its investment in moving the country and our reliance on oil. They should be heavily funding any companies that are working on any ideas that move our country forward. They should mimic the business community. Apple is funding companies to make Apple Apps- the government should be doing the same. Yeah I know about grants- but I am talking about seriously stepping up their game.
No! They should not constrain people. They should take away the legislative and beaurocratic obstacles to individual use of alternative fuels in cars. Biofuels and hydrogen technology could readily reduce gasoline consumption by 50% if it were allowed.
No the federal government should prevent the large auto makers from buying up the patent rights to carburetor's that would get a hundred miles to a gallon!
What the federal government should do is create guidelines for city planning. Most people I talk to would stop driving all together if they could, but many cities intentionally build without considering public transportation because there is a belief that some hold that public transportation deflates property values. A alternative would be to use a staggered commute system where individuals telecommute during peak times and commute during non peak times to reduce the amount of congestion on our roadways. Most people don't realize that traveling outside of rush hour significantly reduces commuting time.
A: Only if you enjoy socialism. This is all about freedom versus lack thereof.
I value time much more than a few mpg savings. You drive as you wish and I will drive as I wish. But don't hold a gun to my head and tell me how to drive.
Let's worry about getting the oil we have so we can not have to worry about this at all while we work towards energy sources for the future.
Hmmm.. well since most cars are not really made to run most efficiently at 55mph, I definitely say no! My car a VW GTI cruises best at about 80. It is after all made for the German Autobahn.
If the government wants to regulate something. How about the car makers. Make them use the technology they already have to increase fuel efficiency in vehicles. Or how about alternative fuels. Now I'm just talking crazy I guess. ;)
33 Total
July 25, 2008 at 9:16am by Scott Stein
No.
July 25, 2008 at 10:24am by Mark Clark
Only if all the cars are geared to 55 MPH as the optimum fuel efficient speed. I had a 1980 Subaru w/ a 5 spped manual transmission that ran most effeciently at 70 MPH (39 MPG). To drive 55 MPH I had to down shift to 4th gear and my gas economy went with it--more like 32-33 MPG.
July 25, 2008 at 10:56am by John Agno
That's not the road to faster, better and cheaper in a competitive global economy.
July 25, 2008 at 2:40pm by Carel Two-Eagle
It won't necessarily work. Back when the first 55 mph speed limit was forced on us, it instantly took my gas mileage from 18 mpg at 68 mph to 13 mph at 55 - while increasing my time on the road by similar margins. This was no favor. I've determined my mileage with my current (diesel) pickup, and it gets 19.8 mpg at 63 mph, while at 55, it gets 15 mpg. The engine on the first pickup was a 350 cid; the engine on the current pickup is 6.9 L, or 420 cid. The answer is still, however, NO. If people really care, they will do the ultra-simple arithmetic needed to determine at what speeds they get what mileages, remember them, and drive accordingly. Since this "math" is taught in the 4th grade, almost any adult should be able to do it.
July 25, 2008 at 3:38pm by Mr Patrickque
Wow that sounds like a great idea! But why 55? I mean what about 25? Or better yet let’s get the speed down to coasting speeds. Wasn’t the world so much better when we were atop horses or behind in the buggy? Why are we allowed to have cars? The gov should take them away and give us all a horse. They can pick up the cars at the same time they pick up our incandescent bulbs. I believe I may still have a toilet that allows too much water during flush. They could grab that at the same time.
Sorry about that. I am just a little tired of how willing we are to seriously consider questions that IMO should not be considered prima facie. If the majority honestly believes that we are causing global warming then the fed should allow a slower driving speed in the right lane. Then those that want to drive slower can CHOOSE to do so. Although slightly oversimplified, the role of government should be to defend our country, enable commerce, and protect us against each other – beyond that they should tread very seldom and very carefully. After all, they are supposed to be working FOR us not the other way around. – sorry for the rant
July 25, 2008 at 3:53pm by John Kibler
Many Americans (myself included) value time more than money, so drive above the speed limit (whatever it is). As Stephen More of the WSJ put it in his opinion page, "...What is in short supply -- the only truly finite resource, as the late economist Julian Simon taught us -- is the time each of us spends on this earth. And most of us don't want to spend it sitting longer than we have to in traffic."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121685880778279315.html
July 25, 2008 at 6:23pm by Mark Cady Jr.
The old 55MPH was the biggest time wasting ploy that our government ever dreamed up. It only benefited left lane bandits and your local cop shop. If you want to drive fast you should be allowed to... the only limit should be if you want to spend the money to get there faster.
July 25, 2008 at 7:51pm by Rich Pasenow
Shall we also bring back prohibition to curb alcoholism? We can't legislate conservation any more than we can legislate morality. People's motivation to save gas will not come from arbitrary (and headline grabbing) speed limits. When gas hit $4 a gallon suddenly people realized they didn't need a vehicle the size of a small bus to lug the children to soccer practice. When gas hits $5 a gallon, they will realize that the kids can walk or ride their bikes to soccer practice and maybe the subway or bus isn't such a bad idea after all. Anyway, who wants a revival of that awful Sammy Hagar song "I Can't Drive 55?" Didn't think so.
July 25, 2008 at 9:15pm by david wayne osedach
No. The less (U.S.) government intervention with global economics the better. They don't have these limits in Europe where for years gasoline has sold for substantially higher.
July 26, 2008 at 7:26am by Allen Laudenslager
Let’s see should we bring back a failed idea from 30 years ago? The last time we tried this, I seem to remember that it wound up costing us more in lost traval time than it saved in fuel usage. That’s why we dropped it.
July 26, 2008 at 8:20am by curtis smith
No, this will only increase speeding tickets. People will still drive 80mph. Now you pay more for gas and speeding tickets.
July 27, 2008 at 1:35am by Brigs H
I don't think so. These days we're all driving more than ever, we'll still find other ways to waste gas...
July 27, 2008 at 4:08am by Chad Nelson
The federal government should be concerned about the big picture of the oil/gasoline problem. Slowing people down to conserve gasoline is not a solution. It would only be more short-sighted government policy. We are moving forward in time. Lets not flashback to the 70's and 80's simply because our leaders failed us. Instead of changing the speed limit, let's change the leaders who have failed us. We need a change in the source of our energy, not a change of how fast we are allowed to drive.
July 27, 2008 at 5:48am by Jonathan London
If the 55 MPH speed limit increases fuel efficiency, we should do it. We should also have some laws around how cold you can make an office, or lighting of buildings and offices in the evening (i.e an office building being fully lit at 2AM). The best thing we can do is offer better rebates to people who buy hybrid cars. A lot of people don't buy them because they are more expensive than regular cars. Finally, can someone in the gov't. get some courage and force or motivate better engines and fuel efficiency before 2020. We are naive to think companies will do it on their own. Just look at Ford, GM and Chrysler.
July 27, 2008 at 12:29pm by DJ Francis
I'm all for regulation when it is required, but I also go back to one of the wisest quotes from my time in DC: "Let's not regulate stupidity."
July 27, 2008 at 3:23pm by Gerard Panza
55 MPH speed limit a MYTH!
It is NOT the speed limit that saves gas but the RPM the engine turns that saves gas.
Today cars turn between 1500 and 2100 RPM for maximum efficiency. Some cars at 1500 RPM can maintain 65 mph.
So at the peek efficiency of an engine (between 1500 and 2100 RPM) and a car runs at 65 MPH then that is the speed that should be set of all INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS.
CONGRESS has NO IDEA how efficient engines play into fuel economy, yet they try to enact colorable statutes, based on their ignorance.
CONGRESS should get ALL THE FACTS before opening their collective mouths and STICKING THEIR size 14 SHOW into their mouth.
Want to see the whole story? Go to
http://www.ilm-efx.5u.com/photo4.html
You will be amazed at what you read!
Also click on GLOBAL WARMING and the VIDEO section.
July 27, 2008 at 4:44pm by Al Phillips
It would not make a difference, they cannot drive the posted speed as it is. Speed is something some people cannot get out of their systems until they are an obituary.
July 27, 2008 at 7:09pm by rick wemmers
They can bring it back but without sufficient police to enforce it, nothing will really change. The only way to slow people down is to use more camera enforcement and stand firm on fine collections.
July 27, 2008 at 10:11pm by Johnny Elizondo
No...that would not put a big enough dent in fuel consumption. The key is to keep people off the road. Here's a thought...How about instituting something similar to the old Texas blue laws which allowed only essential businesses (such as gas stations, grocery stores, and restaurants) to be open on Sundays. Their hours of operation on Sunday were also limited, which still reduced the shear numbers of people out and about. This era of a 24/7 society is detrimental to our fuel supplies.
-JE
July 28, 2008 at 6:34am by Hollyecho Montgomery
NO!! My car gets 33MPG doing 75-80, I have sometimes 700-900 miles to drive in one day, and I don't need to be driving horse and buggy speed. My car is NOT a hybred its a 2005 Chevy Colbalt.
They need to be making alterinitive fuel instead of writing speeding tickets!
July 28, 2008 at 9:36am by Brendan Collins
Nope - the federal government should vigorously enforce fuel efficiency requirements instead. With better gas mileage, people will be more inclined to go faster/cut out traffic delays/improve efficiency of travel overall.
July 28, 2008 at 1:24pm by John Hartman
More like 50-mph. Why is everyone in such a hurry?
July 28, 2008 at 1:57pm by David Stephenson
Absolutely. The energy, environmental, and safety benefits far outweigh any other considerations, not to mention the fact that we could all afford to slow our lives down in general...
July 28, 2008 at 4:26pm by John Eckerle
No!
When is Washington going to stop trampling state and individual rights.
July 28, 2008 at 4:47pm by Ken Glanton
You cannot give a kid a new toy and then take it away because you forgot to balance your checkbook, and have to return it to Walmart. The federal government needs to step up its investment in moving the country and our reliance on oil. They should be heavily funding any companies that are working on any ideas that move our country forward. They should mimic the business community. Apple is funding companies to make Apple Apps- the government should be doing the same. Yeah I know about grants- but I am talking about seriously stepping up their game.
July 28, 2008 at 6:53pm by Rodger Calder
No! They should not constrain people. They should take away the legislative and beaurocratic obstacles to individual use of alternative fuels in cars. Biofuels and hydrogen technology could readily reduce gasoline consumption by 50% if it were allowed.
July 28, 2008 at 7:44pm by Katrina Filmore
No...we already have bad traffic pile ups...55 would make it worse. It is up to the people to regulate there gas milage.
July 28, 2008 at 8:35pm by jason botchko
No the federal government should prevent the large auto makers from buying up the patent rights to carburetor's that would get a hundred miles to a gallon!
July 29, 2008 at 5:22pm by Todd Bryant
What the federal government should do is create guidelines for city planning. Most people I talk to would stop driving all together if they could, but many cities intentionally build without considering public transportation because there is a belief that some hold that public transportation deflates property values. A alternative would be to use a staggered commute system where individuals telecommute during peak times and commute during non peak times to reduce the amount of congestion on our roadways. Most people don't realize that traveling outside of rush hour significantly reduces commuting time.
July 29, 2008 at 8:49pm by n a
A: Only if you enjoy socialism. This is all about freedom versus lack thereof.
I value time much more than a few mpg savings. You drive as you wish and I will drive as I wish. But don't hold a gun to my head and tell me how to drive.
Let's worry about getting the oil we have so we can not have to worry about this at all while we work towards energy sources for the future.
July 30, 2008 at 1:32pm by The Guru
Absolutely not.
I draft (not tail gate, it's all in the wording) at higher speeds (it's the cyclist in me) so I conserve fuel just fine...
On more casul trips, I will admit I do go a little slower, but when I'm busy and on a mission, speed vs. cost do not phase me.
~the GURU
July 31, 2008 at 12:23pm by David Grossman
ahhhh no.
September 5, 2008 at 1:30pm by Bryan Coe
Hmmm.. well since most cars are not really made to run most efficiently at 55mph, I definitely say no! My car a VW GTI cruises best at about 80. It is after all made for the German Autobahn.
If the government wants to regulate something. How about the car makers. Make them use the technology they already have to increase fuel efficiency in vehicles. Or how about alternative fuels. Now I'm just talking crazy I guess. ;)