I don't remember but I thought for sure the speed limit was reduced to 55 to save fuel and increase safety while traveling the highways. Reading this article it made me wonder if the fuel savings would be defeated based on differential gearing toward 55 mph and operating in the best possible rpm range for fuel economy, then moving to 85 mph with a higher rpm increasing fuel consumption, and thus increasing pollution. The next step will be the Federal Government getting involved with EPA to stop the increase in smog.
Having lived in that general area for most of my adult life, yes, 85MPH would be fine. I can drive from a little ways out of Bismarck, North Dakota to just east of Billings, Montana on I-94 and I-90 and encounter almost zero traffic. Apart from hitting cows, antelope or deer, you could drive 120MPH and not worry too much.
Hernando's Hideaway Plank Owner America's best radio station: wfmu.org | My Reality Remix topics blog: Here
I think you are the first person that I know of that actually needs a Ferrari, and MontanaBaun as well. It would be ugly hitting an animal at that speed. Here in VA. deer graze next to the hwy in herds. Being an ex California boy it makes me a bit nervous.
The thing that people who have never been out there don't understand is that there is basically nothing out there, apart from scrub and some mesas and buttes. No trees, no houses, no cities, no curvy roads, nothing. You can literally see for miles in any direction, so any animal that might be near the road, you'd be aware of for several minutes, even driving 120 miles per hour. I once drove a section of highway through western North and South Dakota and did not see any other person or animal for over three hours... it was like the apocalypse had happened.
The biggest distraction out there is highway hypnotism from hours and hours of driving with nothing to look at.
Not copping to any pleas, but my car is "software limited" to 120 MPH
Hernando's Hideaway Plank Owner America's best radio station: wfmu.org | My Reality Remix topics blog: Here
That would help tremendously having the ability to see an animal for miles before getting to it. Here in VA. the trees are so dense a deer could jump out and you might get .25 seconds to alter direction and/or slam on the brakes. In which case it wouldn't matter.
As far as the software limitation I wonder how many thousands it would cost to have it removed for that extra 5 mph. Makes me think of those guys that hacked the software in a new Toyota and take control of it.
As far as the software limitation I wonder how many thousands it would cost to have it removed for that extra 5 mph. Makes me think of those guys that hacked the software in a new Toyota and take control of it.
I wouldn't do it, though. If 120 isn't fast enough, I need a different car, lol.
I have hit a deer with it, though, in Wisconsin where it's more like the conditions you describe, so I was going maybe 60MPH. It jumped out it front of me, went whack and flew over the roof of the car. I hardly noticed and just kept going until the guy riding with me said "You might want to have a look at the damage" and I said "Oh yeah, I didn't even think of that."
Hernando's Hideaway Plank Owner America's best radio station: wfmu.org | My Reality Remix topics blog: Here
Well the damage wouldn't change before you got to where you were going. lol Hopefully you would notice it overheating if the radiator went wonky. I hate it when those deer have been drinking all night, they just refuse to pay attention when crossing hwy's.
The thing that people who have never been out there don't understand is that there is basically nothing out there, apart from scrub and some mesas and buttes. No trees, no houses, no cities, no curvy roads, nothing.
I have to agree entirely with this. Montana is a state that just isn't like the other 49, and the Dakotas probably do come the closest. Wyoming is similar..but it sure isn't Montana!
My wife was born and raised in Bozeman and I lived there for a period of time with her...as well as getting across Montana any chance I could invent for loads with the truck. I love that state. I wouldn't live there full time for the winters...(I lost a bet to my wife about it snowing on the 4th of July... -sigh-..I said no way! ...and it snowed) but its a special kind of place.
I also see no problem with 85 Mph. The unlimited speed would have worked fine too if not for two major problems.... Out of state morons who had NO skill to drive the speeds they thought they 'had a right to'....and that never ends well. Don't drive faster than your ability to control it...people live longer by following that advice. Second was the trucks..and it'll be interesting to see how they handle that. Unlimited car speeds vs. Trucks still set to 65 Mph or whatever it is up there now...was flat out insane. The speed differential can and DID cause some real dangerous situations I saw when I was up there during that period.
In general tho? Heck... You can drive from the Idaho border to Butte and see fewer cars on the interstate between than you'd see across just a few miles of freeway in any major US city. Its a whole different approach to life and ways of living it up there.
The thing that people who have never been out there don't understand is that there is basically nothing out there, apart from scrub and some mesas and buttes. No trees, no houses, no cities, no curvy roads, nothing. You can literally see for miles in any direction, so any animal that might be near the road, you'd be aware of for several minutes, even driving 120 miles per hour. I once drove a section of highway through western North and South Dakota and did not see any other person or animal for over three hours... it was like the apocalypse had happened.
The biggest distraction out there is highway hypnotism from hours and hours of driving with nothing to look at.
Not copping to any pleas, but my car is "software limited" to 120 MPH
Yep. Driven through Montana a few times. My memories of Montana are that it's flat. That's it. Montana is flat. It's also sparsely populated (less than 1 million live in the state) so not much worry about smog either.
Cities that are "brown air cities" typically have a couple things going against them--geological features that capture automotive exhaust in the area and higher populations. For example, Salt Lake City, UT is a serious brown air city. It's population is over 1 million within the city and it's nestled into a curvature of mountains. Perfect mix for creating a major pollution pocket and the total opposite of Montana where no city surpasses 100k in population size. And well, it's flat.
My memories of Montana are that it's flat. That's it. Montana is flat. It's also sparsely populated (less than 1 million live in the state) so not much worry about smog either.
Eastern Montana is pretty flat, yes, though nothing like North Dakota. The eastern part of North Dakota, the Red River Valley, is an old glacial lakebed, so it is flat as a pancake. The only changes in elevation are right next to rivers. This is what the valley looks like (I lived there for 30 years, and it took some getting used to when I moved to Minnesota, where they actually have hills and stuff, lol)
Western Montana, on the other hand, is some of the most mountainous land in the country. I love that state!
Hernando's Hideaway Plank Owner America's best radio station: wfmu.org | My Reality Remix topics blog: Here