You Can't Drive 55; But Should You?

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago
Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 44 comments
  • Kman Kman on Dec 27, 2008

    Okay so first I'll add my own contribution of thanks to the chart: Thanks to the chart, I now know that my old Boston-Montreal trip was about 100 minutes (over 1 1/2 hours) shorter since I did 75 'stead of 55. As for my other point. So, um, why 55? Only because it once was the speed limit? Why that number? By this logic -- "55 is better for the environment" -- why not 45mph? Why not 40mph or 50mph? Wanting to do something for the environment is admirable, but boy is this ever barking up the wrong tree. Find something useful to do for the environment. I'll be driving 75-80 thank you very much.

  • BMW325I BMW325I on Dec 27, 2008

    If you want to help the environment make a bike out of wood and ride it everywhere. I will still be driving at 80mph.

  • Tankd0g Tankd0g on Dec 27, 2008

    How much time getting a ticket costs is really the only thing this chart should show because the rest is common sense.

  • Geeber Geeber on Dec 29, 2008

    DrivetheSpeedLimit is inaccurate...I don't know of any state where the speed limit on rural limited access highways is 55 mph anymore. I just got back from a two-hour trip on the Pennsylvania Turnpike, where the official speed limit is 65 mph. I got stuck behind the one vehicle driving at 65 mph...and was passed by a steady stream of vehicles driving 75-80 mph. And I'm not talking about Corvettes and M-Series BMWs, either. The majority of people are voting with their right foot. We aren't going to lower any speed limits, and the great majority of people are not going to drive slower. Most people have found other ways to save gas (note that gasoline consumption is down for the year in the U.S.).

Next