Theodore's World

If I recall, Road and Track proved conclusively in the 1980's that engine time is the pivotal factor in fuel consumption, and not engine speed. True, some engines were then more efficient at lower speeds, but that isn't true today, nor was it even true of all engines then.

Lower speed limits would not in themselves produce more efficiency, and would in fact probably contribute to congestion and idling, adding atmospheric contaminants and more fuel use.

Along with the laws of Physics is the law that there is not idea too stupid that a liberal won't believe it. Credulity is the first component of liberalism, a tyrannical nature is the second, and hatred the third.

It's shocking that this moron would propose it, and not because she's wrong, as usual, but shocking that the 55 MPH superstition is still part of their political package. What a bunch of morons.

Screw her and her 55 mph speed limit. That's the most idiotic thing you can do.

I loved it when I got stationed in Montana back in 1992. Montanans are so against outside intervention in their states business, the fine for the Federally mandated 55 speed limit was $5.00. That's right, Five Dollars for what ever speed you were going as long as conditions were deemed safe by the officer...no rain, snow, night time, city limits. You gave the money to the cop right on the spot. No points on your license and no insurance company notification.

Also, gear ratio has a BIG effect on gas mileage. I used to have a 77 Trans Am with a 403 (california) engine and 2:43 rear end. That 4,000 pound car got 23 mpg on the highway. At 125 mph, I was only doing 1900 RPM's. It was a dog starting out but on the highway it would really top out. My 2002 Mustang GT with 3:23 gears averages 28 mph on the highway. Not bad for a high performance car.

Also, I think it was Nixon who imposed the 55 mph speed limit.

Rhod is correct, this doesn't address the fact that it will harshly impact the transportation industry, the trucks that haul our goods are most inefficient at 55, once speed is lost a lower gear must be selected further reducing speed, hasn't anyone been behind a semi rig on a hill? Traffic backed up for miles behind a slow mover in heavy traffic. They've forgotten how many headon collisions have occurred under the 55mph limit where people tried to pass the slow movers and met their end.

I could get behind a speed limit on Hillary's aircraft whan she is on board, how about 55 mph, it's suitable and would be sufficient.

It's all about control over the populace. We're supposed to be dependent on the government to do our thinking for us, to protect us from ourselves and to be obedient to any and all ridiculous regulations they come up with. Spend the money and police resources on border control and security, the job of government is to provide a secure nation to prosper in not to provide servants for the elitists to govern. We have forsaken one important thing about our freedom sheeple.

WE THE PEOPLE

I like the video!

We have tried 55 twice or more. Doesn't work! Like Rhod and BobF state, cars are geared for higher speeds with resulting better gas mileage. Most of America is open space and higher speeds than 55 are efficient.

Hillary is just trying to appeal to targeted special interest groups. Like Jack suggests, a 55speed limit on Hillary's jet travel would nix her idea of low speed limits.

Rhod I was surprised about this. To me it is a dead issue and going no where. Hillary is one scary person to me.

Bob, thanks I wasn't sure which President is was, all I could rememeber was that it was one of them.

That's not bad at all for your Mustang. Interesting how all of that works and works better at higher speeds.

Jack hahahaha I love that idea. I can just see it now, Hillary's plane flying at 55. She with her bad temper that she has would be going nuts screaming. hahahaa

Tom, thank you.

When we used to live in Calif. and would drive to Vegas there are these long stretches of open road. I can't imagine having to go a slow 55 all that way. Nothing to look at, just miles of desert and even the radio didn't work that great in a few areas. That would drive me nuts if I had to go 55 in places like that.

Hitlery can kiss my hairy white ass.

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

The Red Rocker. Every 55 sign was circled out like the vid when I was in high school.

And driving slower won't solve a thing. As has been mentioned, cars are designed far differently than they were 20 years ago. The Vette of today gets about 23/25 MPG. The Mustang GT around 28 MPG. My cousin's new GMC 1/2 ton truck get around 23 MPG. Plus it can use ethanol.

Want to slash America's fuel consumption, then get public transportation that actually works. I live in south Hillsborough county, but work in Tampa. 30 minute car ride. Taking the bus - 1 1/2 hours after I drive to place to park and ride (15 minute trip there). So almost a 2 hour trip to work. Thanks, but I'll keep my car.

RWR.........hahahahaha good one!

razOr wow, I agree it is much easier and faster just to drive to work.

Makes Hillary sound like she wants to be all of our mommies! Sorry, I already have one and I can make my own decisions.
Would she like to drive cross country at 55 mph with two whiny kids in the backseat the whole way?
'Nuff said.

The double-nickle as the Truckers called it was the worst decision government ever made, I don't know of any trucker who could maintain that and get to where he wanted to go in an efficient manner.

When you have 10 forward gears it is tough to stay efficient on Diesel. It is all in the gearing.

The Liberals and Science have never seen eye to eye, the libs live in a fantasy world where everybody loves one another and every car gets 50 miles per gallon. What excapes the Libs is their is a material cost to everything, and gasoline is no exception. What they do not understand is there is only so much energy to a gallon of gas.

It is the old law of Conservation of Energy, i.e., You don't get something for nothing. So the politicians have insisted that the automakers make their cars more efficient to get better milage. Better gas milage means a trade off somewhere, ergo Ford came out with the Pinto and Chevy made the Vega, and we got the CAFE cars. They were nothing but garbage, oh and AMC came out with the Gremlin now there was a real piece of Sh*t. A cast aluminum block with cast iron pistons now there is an oxymoron, I had a Vega and in 2 years I replaced 3 head gaskets,

If the libs really wanted a solution they would start looking for new sources of oil, but no we can't do that, we just let the rest of the world look for oil in OUR own back yard so we can stay dependent on Foreign oil and pay extorted prices when the Shieks get a wild hair up their ass.

Now they want to run alcohol in gasoline engines, this makes as much sense as any other cockamayme liberal solution, the more alcohol you run the hotter the engines will run, now you're at a complete re-design of an engine that has served us well for over 100 years.

These morons want everyone running around in Yugos, it will look like the old bumper cars at the county fair.

Velocity will go from 88 feet per second to 10 furlongs per fortnight.

If these libs really want to solve the problem, cut taxes and get the hell out of the way and watch how America will come up with some fantastic new designs that will just astound them and simply amaze the public.

There is 114,100 BTUs per gallon of gasoline. Now they are talking about alternative fuels, the chief culprit among them is Ethanol, Ethanol(85) and Ethanol(100).The energy values for the alcohol based fuels is: 81,000 BTUs per gallon and 76,000 BTUs per gallon, respectively.

In other words it takes 1.4 gallons of Ethanol(85) to go the same distance it does with 1.0 gallon of gasoline. So where is the great savings with an alternative fuel.

This means you will be filling up 40 % more often than when you buy gasoline.

Another problem with alcohol based fuels or pure alcohol is when they burn you can't see any flame. This happens often enough to be a real concern. Top fuel dragsters have used Alcohol for years and Fires are always a problem. If you can't see the thing burning how do you know you are on fire ?

Mark your so right. The left won't let us drill for oil and we have oil right here on our land and out in the ocean. They say no no no and then complain about oil etc.They are nuts for one thing and oh man when I get started on this I get furious.

Lynn, exactly!! There is no way Hillary would follow this herself.