Time to raise the speed limit, how does 150 MPH sound?

[a_Username]

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/04/11/o...150-mph-sound/

Ever since automobiles first appeared over 100 years ago, every automaker has tried to make them go faster. And they succeeded. Nearly every year, cars became more powerful with higher top-end speeds. But then, in the mid-1950s, we hit a plateau. The national speed limit was set at 70 miles per hour, and we've been stuck at that rate ever since. As a result, the automobile has made absolutely no progress as a transportation device in over half a century.

Actually, in 1974, it got worse. The national speed limit was lowered to 55 mph, ostensibly to save fuel and lives (it did neither). Such an agonizingly slow rate of travel proved too much to take for most Americans. We demanded that the limit be raised, and we got it back to 70 mph. Now it's time to demand another raise.

I'm not talking about some sort of modest increase to, say, 85 mph. We need to put a comprehensive plan in place to gradually move the limit up, over the next couple of decades, to 150 miles an hour. And we need to do that with no sacrifice in fuel economy or safety.

People tell me it's impossible or crazy to design passenger cars to go 150 mph. But do you want to know why German luxury cars are so good? Because they're designed to go 150. In fact, most of them have speed limiters on them. Otherwise, they'd go faster.

Speed itself is not a safety hazard. It's the difference in speeds between cars that lead to accidents. Somebody driving 50 mph while all the cars around them are flashing past at 70 mph or greater is creating a hazard. But if everyone is going the same speed, the situation is a lot safer – even at much higher speeds.

Just like today's Autobahn, some sections of highway would have lower limits, while others would be set at the maximum. The speed limit could also vary depending on the time of day and traffic load.

Before this decade is out we're going to see big strides in vehicle-to-vehicle communication, using radio frequencies and GPS. We've already got adaptive cruise control and radar-controlled braking. Put it all together and we're literally on the verge of making it almost impossible for cars to crash into one another, even if the driver fails to act. In the next decade, we're going to see the first commercialization of autonomous technology, where cars can literally drive themselves. That opens up the door to a 150-mph speed limit on national highways.

This technology also creates the opportunity to use what the transportation experts call "platooning." Cars could travel in packs, or platoons, in a nose-to-tail file not unlike the NASCAR guys drafting each other. But in this case the cars would be electronically linked together. And that kind of drafting would produce significant gains in fuel economy.

A 150-mph speed limit would transform automotive transportation. I daresay no one would ever again take an airplane ride of 500 miles or less. It would be so much faster and convenient to drive – no more pat downs from the friendly TSA agents!

Setting this kind of stretch goal would unleash a frenzy of R&D activity, create new companies, grow new jobs, and produce an economic boom much like building the Intestate Highway System did. It's just a matter of getting our heads around the idea.

Back in the 19th Century, Queen Victoria stipulated that any time she travel by train it was prohibited from going more than 40 miles an hour. The thinking was that going any faster than that was harmful to one's health. We laugh at that concept today, just as, later in this century, they'll laugh at us for thinking that driving 150 mph was dangerous.

[TheCaptain]

Don't forget to add in more stringent maintenance schedules for vehicles' while we're at it. You don't want a tire coming off that rust bucket in front of you!

And stricter loading laws too. No more throwing something into the back of the truck and assuming it stays there!

Otherwise, i'm for it!

[fielderLS3]

It can never be done in the world of electrics they are trying to foist on us, since electrics lose power with increasing speed.

100-120 seems reasonable on some of the more rural stretches of interstate in the west, though.

[Camaro_Corvette]

Sounds too fast. I mean, if they keep certain people off of these highways, then yes. Awesome! But if everybody can drive on these roads, I would have to pass. Grandpa isn't going to drive that fast.

[TOMS1SS]

We have several interstates I-17, I-10, 1-8 and I-40 here in Arizona that have large sections of 75 MPH. I drive about 40,000 miles a year and the I-17 is the only place where I hit 75 MPH on my commute heading from Phoenix to Sedona. This is the only place where my fuel economy in both my Camaro and Fiesta goes down, why you ask? In both cars the 6th gear is designed to run at its lowest RPM between 60 to 65 MPH and so is every other car. Until automakers change this gearing we'll actually be burning more gas at a national speed limti of say 85 MPH.

[DGthe3]

The only way it work is if there was a comprehensive approach, involving vehicle design, roadway design, and driver education. Neglect any one element and it falls apart. The first thing needed would be cars that are capable of doing those speeds safely and reliable. This isn't much of an issue for sports cars at the moment, but trucks, SUV's, and economy cars just aren't meant to go that fast. These cars would need to represent the vast majority of the market at least 15 years before the 150 mph roads are opened up, 20 would be better. More stringent licensing laws would be needed, unless the 150 mph cars are self driving while on the super highways ... which may be a necessity. Most highways would need to be rebuilt, or at least the on and off ramps/accel-decel lanes. It takes a pretty long time to go from a city speed of 35 mph up to 150 on a highway, especially if all you've got is a family sedan. Then there is the issue of slowing down. You would need tons of space to slow cars down without requiring each exit to be a panic stop. Firgure if the best sports cars can't go from 100-0 in much less than 100 yards using maximum effort, normal cars cars going 50% faster would need several hundred yards with moderate effort, possibly over a half mile.

[Brokinarrow]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

The only way it work is if there was a comprehensive approach, involving vehicle design, roadway design, and driver education. Neglect any one element and it falls apart. The first thing needed would be cars that are capable of doing those speeds safely and reliable. This isn't much of an issue for sports cars at the moment, but trucks, SUV's, and economy cars just aren't meant to go that fast. These cars would need to represent the vast majority of the market at least 15 years before the 150 mph roads are opened up, 20 would be better. More stringent licensing laws would be needed, unless the 150 mph cars are self driving while on the super highways ... which may be a necessity. Most highways would need to be rebuilt, or at least the on and off ramps/accel-decel lanes. It takes a pretty long time to go from a city speed of 35 mph up to 150 on a highway, especially if all you've got is a family sedan. Then there is the issue of slowing down. You would need tons of space to slow cars down without requiring each exit to be a panic stop. Firgure if the best sports cars can't go from 100-0 in much less than 100 yards using maximum effort, normal cars cars going 50% faster would need several hundred yards with moderate effort, possibly over a half mile.

Yeah, it would definitely take a huge restructuring of the roadways. I kind of envision something like on minority report with the auto-driving cars and the lil transportation pod thingies.

[WadeWilson]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

100-120 seems reasonable on some of the more rural stretches of interstate in the west, though.

I think 100 would be fast enough.

[1o.f00t.570rk]

The solution with current tech is bullet trains. Unless we want to move towards the direction that mass transit took in Minority Report, where your "car" is effectively an automated mobile room.

Modern solutions for moving fast in a safe and efficient manner almost always require taking control away from the individual...and I am not sure that's where we want cars to go.

I'd much rather support a mass transit system for my normal commute, and then have my car(s) for the inconsistent trips for groceries and dates and vacations and road trips. No doubt there is a stigma with mass-transit in the states, but it's something that's shooting us in the foot and we're going to have to grow up eventually.

[ORANGA2D]

No way..., we all have seen how people drive at any speed currently...

[hypurone]

Originally Posted by ORANGA2D

No way..., we all have seen how people drive at any speed currently...

Yup, just because the vehicle can handle it doesn't mean the driver can!!

But I am all for higher speeds no doubt!!

[rez333]

I drove 150MPH yesterday on a long stretch of road that dipped a little, and I can tell you that even in a sports car - it was scary. There's so many things that can affect you at those speeds:

1) Hit a deer - oh dear you're dead
2) hit a bump on the road the wrong way - you'll fly and die
3) take a curve the wrong way - you'll flip and burn
4) night time driving - things will be flying toward you twice as fast, but with 1/4 the warning distance meaning your reaction time is reduced to 1/8th.

There was just no room for error at all. 100MPH on the other hand is entirely reasonable IMO, based on my experience.