Skip to comments.Texas (80mph!), Iowa (70), Indiana(70) Raise Maximum Speed Limit
Posted on 06/27/2005 8:37:42 PM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
Drivers in Texas, Iowa, and Indiana will enjoy higher speed limits next month as legislation raising the top speeds on rural roads takes effect.
On Friday, Texas Governor Rick Perry (R) signed HB 2257 into law making 80 MPH the maximum allowable speed in the state. Rural portions of I-10 and I-20 will enjoy the new top speed, while other rural roads could see the limit rise to 75 MPH. Both the state House and Senate adopted the legislation without opposition last month.
On July 1, a law signed by Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack (D) creating a 70 MPH speed limit goes into effect. This new limit better reflects the actual speed of cars on rural highways which averages 69.8 MPH according to sensors embedded into the pavement.
In May, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels (R) signed SB 217 into law raising the maximum limit from 65 MPH to 70 MPH in areas with less than 50,000 population. The law also raises the limit for trucks from 60 to 65 MPH, and gives a 10 MPH boost to several roads currently posted at 55 MPH. The state will begin placing the higher-limit signs on July 5.
(Excerpt) Read more at thenewspaper.com ...
Actually, and I can find the link if you like, the EPA hwy mileage ratings are based on a loop that involves some speeding up and slowing down, and a top speed of 55. The test simulates a 10 mile trip and averages 48 mph. At steady speeds, like out on the interstates in rural areas, especially with the cruise control set, many cars can do better than the EPA hwy ratings at speeds of 65-75.
WHy don't they do the thick concrete for road construction nationwide (at least on interstates)? I know down in Louisiana they do, and they don't have to do much road work other than lane widening or bridge work but once every ten years or so, even with all the trucks on the road. This asphalt stuff may be cheaper, but I think with all the $$ poured into that, it would save to do concrete.
Auxillary transmission coolers are a snap to put on. just bypass the line out from the radiator for the fluid from going straight back to the transmission, go to the cooler, and out from there back to the transmission. Or if you don't want it to be tied to engine temperature at all, just run it directly bypassing the radiator altogether both ways(however running it through the radiator first helps in winter). I have run my 455 powered Cutlass w/ a 2004r overdrive (a transmission that three shops told me should not be behind a big block) regularly up and down the highway, some at 90+ mph, as well as some thrilling 1/4 mile runs, some sanctioned at tracks some well, i plea the fifth, and the only thing ever to go wrong is I had to replace a defective 2nd gear band... But guess what, I still get 26 mpg hwy in the speed range everyone practically drives at...
What do all 4 have in common? Lots of New Yorkers and ex-New Yorkers.
That's what deer/animal horns are for. Take the critter factor out of the picture...
Power to weight ratio has a lot to do with it too. If you have relatively high power vehicle with a relatively low weight (12-15 lbs per hp), as long as it is not geared too steep or accelerating too hard to get up to speed, decent fuel economy is essentially a given, and while youre right wind resistance does increase geometrically, it doesn't overcompensate for a decent power/weight ratio in detracting from fuel economy. Add the higher speed/fuel efficency powerband, and the fuel efficency factor is not adversely effected by speed unless you are way up there in velocity, like 95+mph or more.
From Nashville TN to Baton Rouge, LA, going I-40, I-55, and I-12/10, doing 65 on the trip down I averaged 20.98 mpg. From Baton Rouge back to Nashville, I did 75-85 most of the way, depending on where I was (didn't do much over 80 in TN for fear of the lawman), and I got 26.35 mpg.
Simple solution Mr Diddle E Squat -- Stay out of the left lane and leave it for those that are passing.
Now why would you waste time and money on a part that drags down gas mileage..
The limit might be high, but I have never been in the Chicago area when anyone was able to go the speed limit because of congestion.
One summer day a few years ago, I was on 465 headed west to I65 (no 865 then) and was going 80 mph just to keep from getting run over. This was about 3:30 in the afternoon, so traffic was starting to pick up.
About the time I got to Michigan Road, I saw an Indy cop had someone pulled over--while the rest of us continued to fly by. How the h*ll the cop picked this guy out of all of us to ticket, I will never know.
Orange to El Paso - 803 miles.
Dalhart to McAllen...1108 miles
Why does Missouri, a hilly state have a 70 mph limit, while Illinois (aka boring-flat-as-a-pancake-state) have a 65 mph limit?!
After 100 mph in the Civic, I have to concentrate hard. It's quite tiring, actually, to sustain that amount of concentration for very long. But I did get from Mobile to Tallahassee in 3 hrs once. That's an average of 80 mph. In Atlanta I routinely drive over 80 dang near out of necessity.
I'm NOT complaining about safety at all. Would just like to see a new study of the fleet to find the average most efficient speed and go with that.
Please don't get me started on those kind of drivers :)
One of them danged near put me in a ditch yesterday.