[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('aflurry', 'm')aybe that last one was too mean-spireted, but come on... you can't deny funding to any attempt at public works and then bitch when it doesn't exist... this is just childish.

[Andy]

By the way, I also drive a very efficient automobile that gets 50 mpg going 65 - 70 mph. The funny thing is, at 55 mph, I would be looking at 55+ mpg and 800 miles per tank of diesel fuel. Guess which vehicle I drive.

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Andy', ' ')allow the Greyhounds to continue doing 70 mph on interstates with rigid speed enforcement, perhaps automated speed enforcement if necessary. The technology already exists to do it. I work with ITS and know what is possible in that regard.

[foslrock]

Electromagnetic train systems are more efficient than Amtrak, and I think they could substitute for not only trucking, but airlines between various cities within a close proximity. They could easily build a line, 100 miles at a time.

http://travel.howstuffworks.com/maglev-train1.htm

[Andy]

Not all Greyhounds stop that frequently. I happen to know that some runs are express like with two hours or more between stops. The local runs do stop in every town. It probably would encourage more ridership.

[rushdy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Andy', 'B')y the way, I also drive a very efficient automobile that gets 50 mpg going 65 - 70 mph. The funny thing is, at 55 mph, I would be looking at 55+ mpg and 800 miles per tank of diesel fuel. Guess which vehicle I drive.

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dreamtwister', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'W')hy the hell should I be constrained because of anothers desire to drive a car that gets 14 MPG?

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Andy', 'I') have already explicitly stated what the solution is for covering ground quickly overland if absolutely necessary. It is for the powers that be to decide to fund it and make it priority. In a nutshell, it is an acronym called AMTRAK. Upgrade lines to allow 90 - 100 mph running between most major urban centers up to 500 miles apart. Connect enough regional centers and you have hooked up the whole country. Barring that, allow the Greyhounds to continue doing 70 mph on interstates with rigid speed enforcement, perhaps automated speed enforcement if necessary. The technology already exists to do it. I work with ITS and know what is possible in that regard.

[arretium]

I'm completely against a speed limit reduction. I understand it will imrpove the efficiency of most automobiles. I just shouldn't be penalized for someone else's stupidity.

[Andy]

Specop,

I have ridden Greyhound not just on lengthy journeys but internationally as well. It isn't the most pleasant journey but it isn't the worst either. Ever ridden public transport in a developing country? I have done that as well. After that, you will understand that Greyhound is not as bad as people make it to be. You don't have vehicles carrying 90 passengers that were designed to carry 40, it runs on some kind of schedule as opposed to only when a full load is obtained etc. etc.

Rushdy,
I drive a Volkswagen TDI that routinely averages 47 - 50 mpg going 5 over speed limit on the interstate or rural Iowa highways. In summer, I ocassionally get up to 52 - 53 mpg. I don't use the AC much as I am from the tropics and can bear intense heat without complaint. 90 deg. F with 60 % humidity is comfortable for me.

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Andy', 'N')ot all Greyhounds stop that frequently. I happen to know that some runs are express like with two hours or more between stops. The local runs do stop in every town. It probably would encourage more ridership.

[Andy]

rwwff,

You apparently live in one of the local towns which is only served by local trips. Of course nothing will replace the convenience of getting in your vehicle and speeding down the highway to your destination. The point of this site however is that those days are numbered and going 55 mph is a small price to pay to maintain some mobility. In the grand scheme of things, what is the difference between taking 3 hours or 4.5 hours to get to a destination? Do we really need to travel so often, if so why? Is that not a problem of poor planning?

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Andy', 'T')he point of this site however is that those days are numbered and going 55 mph is a small price to pay to maintain some mobility. In the grand scheme of things, what is the difference between taking 3 hours or 4.5 hours to get to a destination? Do we really need to travel so often, if so why? Is that not a problem of poor planning?

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Andy', 'r')wwff,

You apparently live in one of the local towns which is only served by local trips. Of course nothing will replace the convenience of getting in your vehicle and speeding down the highway to your destination. The point of this site however is that those days are numbered and going 55 mph is a small price to pay to maintain some mobility. In the grand scheme of things, what is the difference between taking 3 hours or 4.5 hours to get to a destination? Do we really need to travel so often, if so why? Is that not a problem of poor planning?

[eastbay]

You dont travel much do you. 55 MPH is horrific.

Ahhh, but 55 is so very sweet. I started going 55 about two years ago. Yeah, I once was among the gluttonous, sociopathic waste-mongers... if I can change my anti-social behaviors anyone can, even you, and you know who you are. So please slow down.

Anyhow, I finally saw the light and at 55 I really get a wonderful sense of calm and peacefulness when I drive. When I drive I think about nice things rather than the car in front of me and how to quickly pass it. I get to drive with a 65 bpm heartrate too! Plus I get around 45 mpg out a Civic EPA rated at 38!

I drove to Portland and back from SF last week (four in the car) and it was a nice 13 hour drive at 55 (well, a few times I jacked it up to 57 or so) rather than a panic-driven 10 hours at 65 to 70 or faster. I almost made it one one tankful too! 1400 miles on 29 gallons.

I'm cured. No more fast driving for me.

[rwwff]

I'm not opposed to the West coast having 55mph speed limits if that is what they want as states. Trust me, no one is panic stricken over here driving 70+mph. You just point the car North, click on the cruise control, three hours later, you're in Dallas. You don't pass no one, you get passed by a few.

[eastbay]

.... oh, the thread topic, almost forgot. For the record I would applaud a 55 mph national speed limit. I would like it to be set at 50, which would be even better, but if 55 is as slow as we can get than 55 it is.

During WWII wasn't the national speed limit set at 45 mph?? I remember reading that somewhere... this crisis is soon going to be worse than that by far.

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', '.')... oh, the thread topic, almost forgot. For the record I would applaud a 55 mph national speed limit. I would like it to be set at 50, which would be even better, but if 55 is as slow as we can get than 55 it is.

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', 'F')or the record I would applaud a 55 mph national speed limit. I would like it to be set at 50, which would be even better, but if 55 is as slow as we can get than 55 it is.

[Andy]

Ah!!! , our delusions. As I said, I drive a car that gets as good fuel economy as you SPECOP yet even with my efficient car, 5 - 10 mpg is saved travelling at 55mph versus 70+ mph. Even our efficient cars are not very efficient ways to move people in the grand scheme of things. We are talking here about if there is not enough oil to go around, what can we do quickly to mitigate the impact. As I say, you will not die if it takes 5 hours instead of 3.5 hours. In fact the opposite may well be the case as was just proven in Iowa where the limit was raised to 70 from 65 and a corresponding increase in fatalities has been recorded.

SPECOP, you are on a peak oil site. Do you agree that in the near future, oil will be harder to come by? If you believe so, then it should not be hard to put 2 + 2 together and realize that business as usual will soon no longer be usual. If that is the case, what is the big deal going 55mph versus 70 or 75 mph?

Tell your politicians that you want to travel fast over land and thus invest in rail. It is the only reasonably efficient means to cover ground over land quickly. I guarantee you however that when crunch time comes, this debate will cease to exist, it will happen so no point arguing. It is too easy a controlling mechanism and will thus be easy pickings. Low Hanging Fruit!!!