Skip to comments.
HILL DRIVE FOR '55' ( National Maximum Speed Limit )
New York Post ^
| May 24, 2006
| IAN BISHOP
Posted on 05/24/2006 3:25:12 PM PDT by george76
- In a surprise move yesterday, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton called for "most of the country" to return to a speed limit of 55 mph in an effort to slash fuel consumption...
"The 55-mile speed limit really does lower gas usage.
And wherever it can be required, and the people will accept it, we ought to do it," Clinton said at the National Press Club.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Front Page News; Government; Political Humor/Cartoons
KEYWORDS: 109th; 55; 55mile; 55milespeedlimit; 55mph; callingsammyhagar; clinton; congress; corruption; energy; gas; gasusage; gifter; hillary; hillaryclinton; hillaryrodham; icantdrive55; jimmycarteresque; media; national; nationalpressclub; neveragain; oil; overhillarysdeadbody; press; pressclub; rodham; senator; speedlimit; transportation; washington
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 461-466 next last
To: SF Republican
The other day it was so it was so hot in West Texas that I saw a lizard jump into a grass fire just so he could cool off!
301
posted on
05/28/2006 1:12:41 PM PDT
by
texasmountainman
(Remember the heroic men and women of Flight 93-go watch United 93.)
To: george76
55, yeah that'll work. When the national limit was 55 in the 70s and 80s anyone who actually drove 55 on a freeway was cringing behind the wheel in fear because of the 70mph+ traffic streaming by him on both sides.
I think the local cops in the metro Atlanta area have given up even trying to enforce speed limits. I haven't seen a blue light flashing behind a pulled over car on the I-285 perimeter or I-75 north of the perimeter in a long time. I don't think the entire GA national guard could enforce the speed limit around Atlanta if every guardsman had his own cruiser with a chain gun mounted on the hood.
302
posted on
05/28/2006 1:16:15 PM PDT
by
epow
(Outside of a dog a book is man's best friend, inside a dog it's too dark to read a book, Groucho)
To: george76; HOTTIEBOY
Say it isn't so Doc! I'm actually agreeing with Hillary for I think the first time ever. I was against it when the speed limits were raised back up. I'm perfectly comfortable driving at sub-60 speeds. No doubt Hottieboy will instantly attribute this to the same type of brain damage that leads one to buying a Harley.
303
posted on
06/06/2006 3:37:57 PM PDT
by
Melas
(What!? Read or learn something? Why would anyone do that, when they can just go on being stupid)
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
No, there won't be any studies that show that 70mph uses less than gas than 55mph. Simple physics is enough to demonstrate to even the most stuborn of village idiots that drag is exponential.
304
posted on
06/06/2006 3:39:46 PM PDT
by
Melas
(What!? Read or learn something? Why would anyone do that, when they can just go on being stupid)
To: conservative in nyc
West Texas to 80 because *gasp that's the speed people drive in the middle of nowhere *gasp* and it doesn't make sense to criminalize normal driving behavior. Sorry can't agree at all. Check out the stopping distances for pickups and SUV's at 80mph lately? I'm totally against raising the speed limits further, and while I know I'm virtually alone (even my wife, a Democrat thinks I'm nuts on this one) I'd welcome the return of the 55mph speed limit. 55 was plenty fast enough.
305
posted on
06/06/2006 3:45:04 PM PDT
by
Melas
(What!? Read or learn something? Why would anyone do that, when they can just go on being stupid)
To: jetson
Wrong. Extremely bad science. Fuel consumption at speed is a result of drag, not engine technology. While it's true that cars today use less gas at 70mph than previous generations of vehicles, today's most modern cars still use more fuel at 70 than at 80.
Drag is an exponential force. A car cruising on a highway at 50 mph (80 km/h) may require only 10 horsepower (7 kW) to overcome air drag, but that same car at 100 mph (160 km/h) requires 80 hp (60 kW). With a doubling of speed the drag (force) quadruples per the formula. Since power is the rate of doing work, exerting four times the force at twice the speed requires eight times the power. So, until they design an engine that uses less fuel while generating 40hp than it uses while generating 100hp (a physical impossibility) your statement is going to be absolutely false.
306
posted on
06/06/2006 3:52:38 PM PDT
by
Melas
(What!? Read or learn something? Why would anyone do that, when they can just go on being stupid)
To: imskylark; obnogs
You are both wrong. It wasn't Nixon or Carter, it was Gerald Ford who signed the 55mph speed limit into law.
307
posted on
06/06/2006 3:56:33 PM PDT
by
Melas
(What!? Read or learn something? Why would anyone do that, when they can just go on being stupid)
To: AFreeBird
Nixon left office in August of 2004. It's my understanding that the 70mph speed limit was still in effect.
308
posted on
06/06/2006 3:58:58 PM PDT
by
Melas
(What!? Read or learn something? Why would anyone do that, when they can just go on being stupid)
To: tomzz
Again, very bad science. Where do you people get this stuff?
Again: Drag is an exponential force. A car cruising on a highway at 50 mph (80 km/h) may require only 10 horsepower (7 kW) to overcome air drag, but that same car at 100 mph (160 km/h) requires 80 hp (60 kW). With a doubling of speed the drag (force) quadruples per the formula. Since power is the rate of doing work, exerting four times the force at twice the speed requires eight times the power. So, until they design an engine that uses less fuel while generating 40hp than it uses while generating 100hp (a physical impossibility) your statement is going to be absolutely false.
309
posted on
06/06/2006 4:01:48 PM PDT
by
Melas
(What!? Read or learn something? Why would anyone do that, when they can just go on being stupid)
To: Bryan24
My vehicle would have gotten the same mileage at 55 that it would have at 70. Scientifically impossible to overcome greater drag without expending more energy.
310
posted on
06/06/2006 4:46:06 PM PDT
by
Melas
(What!? Read or learn something? Why would anyone do that, when they can just go on being stupid)
To: obnogs
Wasn't the 55 limit passed during the Nixon years?I wouldn't do anything to make that Carter creep look better, but it really was Nixon who implemented the 55 mph speed limit.
311
posted on
06/06/2006 4:51:11 PM PDT
by
saminfl
(,/i)
To: Melas
Nixon left office in August of 2004. It's my understanding that the 70mph speed limit was still in effect.
Richard Nixon
signed the Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act into law on January 2, 1974. It essentially set the speed limit at 55 MPH by denying federal highway funds to states that didn't lower their speed limits to 55, although it may have taken some time before some states enacted legislation creating a 55 MPH speed limit. Nixon left office on August 9, 1974.
The 55MPH speed limit is arbitrarily low for most suburban and rural interstates (and many urban interstates outside of rush hour), and is
lower than the speed limits on most motorways in more energy conscious Europe and Canada. I see little reason to go back to it. Time is money.
To: Melas
You're assuming there is no such thing as aerodynamics and that all cars are built like 1962 stationwagons. That ain't the way things are.
313
posted on
06/06/2006 5:35:44 PM PDT
by
tomzz
To: Melas
All very interesting information but my truck gets some of its best gas mileage at 70 MPH. Why do they do wind tunnel tests if drag is unbeatable?
314
posted on
06/07/2006 5:38:01 AM PDT
by
jetson
To: Melas
You can tell I'm a biker at 100 yards
No, THAT'S the type brain damage that leads one to buying a Harley.
What exactly does "a biker" look like.
I think I know. I watched an episode of American Chopper the other day. I watch it purely for entertainment and won't get into the whole radical chopper issue because, well, I own one.
But anywho, they built a bike for a guy who was a big fan of the show. He had the prerequisite goatee with a wallet-on-a-chain and standard issue tattoos. His house was decorated with convenience store Harley knickknacks and giant wall paintings of choppers and Harleys.
The guy never threw a leg over a bike. He was only following the cataleptic walk of the bewildered herd. But he looked like a biker, so that was the most important thing.
I know you have rode for years so that statement does not pertain to you. But it does give validity to my argument that a store bought image is more important than substance.
BTW, there's a new horse in my staple.
I took it to bike week and turned alot of heads. Folks were taken aback when they saw the Yamaha emblem on the side. VStar 1100. It doesn't have any power but power is not its job. Its meant to be pretty.
I can cruise on a chopper at a bike rally wearing a dew rag. But its not a Harley. My hypocrisy only goes so far.
315
posted on
06/07/2006 6:52:26 AM PDT
by
HOTTIEBOY
(I'm your huckleberry)
To: jetson
All very interesting information but my truck gets some of its best gas mileage at 70 MPH. Why do they do wind tunnel tests if drag is unbeatable? Wind tunnel tests, test the amount of drag a vehicle has. Wind tunnel tests are performed because drag is the single most important factor for both economy and performance. Making a vehicle areodynamic is always a good thing.
However, even the most areo of vehicles will have more drag at 70mph than it did at 55mph. Should you ever find away to accomplish otherwise, you're just a baby-step away from patenting perpetual motion.
316
posted on
06/07/2006 8:09:38 AM PDT
by
Melas
(What!? Read or learn something? Why would anyone do that, when they can just go on being stupid)
To: george76
317
posted on
06/07/2006 8:13:21 AM PDT
by
The Wizard
(DemonRATS: enemies of America)
To: Bryan24
>>My vehicle would have gotten the same mileage at 55 that it would have at 70.<,
I drive a Chrysler 300m, which has a very low drag coefficient. My normal long distance freeway mileage is in the high 20's. But on one trip I drove from Seattle to Portland and back and stayed between 50 and 55 the entire trip.
I got 35 mpg!
That said, the 55 mph speed limit is ludicrous. As one poster said, time is money. On a long trip, the time lost is staggering. And for goods shipped by truck, it is downright INFLATIONARY!
Maybe they should control the length of my showers as well.
The useless twits!
318
posted on
06/07/2006 8:17:50 AM PDT
by
RobRoy
To: The Wizard
We are encouraging the liberals who want to control everything and everybody to make this national speed limit of 55 mph their main political theme.
It should work nicely.../s
319
posted on
06/07/2006 8:19:19 AM PDT
by
george76
(Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
To: george76
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton called for "most of the country" to return to a speed limit of 55 mph in an effort to slash fuel consumption Jane Carter lives.
320
posted on
06/07/2006 8:26:44 AM PDT
by
Centurion2000
(You go to Heaven for the climate; Hell for the company and conversation.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 461-466 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson