Speed Question

[RBPerry]

I'm new to RV, purchasing our first trailer this month. Since I'm retired I'm really in no hurry to get from point A to B. Here is California the speed limit while pulling any trailer is 55 on the Freeways, however if you drive 55 you will get run over.

I plan to drive 60, and no faster. What is the general consensus or is there on regarding speed and pulling a RV trailer?

[hotpepperkid]

Yes 55 is nuts when everyone else is going 70+. Supposely because of stopping yet they let a 24,000 buss or motor home go 70+ go figure.

[Atlee]

In 2014, I survived towing 55 on the freeways in California, including the freeways in Los Angeles. I was about he only trailer combo that was driving 55. But being out of state, I did not want to give the LEO's a reason to pull me over.

RBPerry wrote:
I'm new to RV, purchasing our first trailer this month. Since I'm retired I'm really in no hurry to get from point A to B. Here is California the speed limit while pulling any trailer is 55 on the Freeways, however if you drive 55 you will get run over.

I plan to drive 60, and no faster. What is the general consensus or is there on regarding speed and pulling a RV trailer?

[spoon059]

captnjack wrote:
You make some valid points. There really is a lot that goes into it. But the stopping distance goes up drastically when comparing 64 to 70 MPH. At 70 mph you will need around 50-75 feet of additional space to stop your vehicle. (Numbers are conservative I believe) So the difference between 64 and 70 could be the difference between hitting something in front of you or not hitting it. Close call vs collision. I think we can agree that close calls are safer than collisions.

Correct. Hard to compare distance to stop numbers not knowing the weight of the vehicle, condition of tires, brake controller settings, etc. My post is based upon my driving conditions. When I am pushing 68 or 69 mph (usually my top end for towing), I make certain that I have an adequate stopping distance and that I am scanning the road ahead.

Some people just believe the blanket statement that "SLOWER IS SAFER". My sister subscribes to the mentality. She drivers slow everywhere she goes, but she barely pays attention to the car ahead of her, let alone 2 cars ahead of her, or beside her, or behind her. She employs ZERO awareness when driving... but she is driving slow, so its safe, right?

That is absurd. If you are driving safely, paying attention to the road, being diligent about road conditions, know the cars that surround you so you know where you have an avenue of escape, are paying attention to the cars (plural... more then the one directly in front of you) in front of you, scanning the horizon for potential hazards, etc then going 70 is no more dangerous than 64.

Blanket statements about speed being the end all, be all to safety are ignorant at best. Speed is one piece of the pie. If you are doing everything else right, then 70 is just as safe as 64. However, if you aren't doing everything else right, 64 can be just as deadly as 70.

[captnjack]

spoon059 wrote:

Sprink-Fitter wrote:

Teamfour wrote:
I like to travel at 64 mph just to be safe. But lets look at the math: We typically drive 400 miles a day on a long trip. At 64 mph that takes 6 h 15 m. At 70 mph it takes 5 h 45 m. I will gladly eat the measly 30 minutes for the sake of safety. Those of you who travel shorter distances are saving even less time.

So you think you won't get as injured doing 64 like you would if you were doing 70?

Ha... I love the "safety" aspect that some people quote. The difference between 64 and 70 mph is minimal... 64 mph is 94 feet per second (fps), and 70 mph is 103 fps. If that 9 feet per second is the difference between life and death, you are doing a LOT of other things wrong.

If your vehicle is properly set up and properly loaded, with proper brakes and proper tires that are properly inflated, if the driver is paying attention to the ROAD instead of staring at his GPS or eating lunch, if you are maintaining proper following distances and aware of the vehicles around you, if the roadway can support that speed, if road conditions can support that speed, then 9 feet per second is NOTHING.

Now, if you are overloaded or improperly loaded... if your tires are bad or underinflated... if you aren't looking out your window... if you aren't aware of your ability to make an emergency lane change left or right... or any other distraction... if you are driving on a windy or steep road... if it is raining/snowing/sandy/debris on road... than the speed difference between 64 and 70 probably won't be enough to save you anyway.

The fact of the matter is that the difference between 64 and 70 is simply in fuel costs. If people really want to get on the "safety" bandwagon, then we shouldn't ever tow about above 15 mph in optimal conditions, should never tow more than 50% of your GVWR, should never tow at night or in the rain, should never tow on highways, should never tow during rush hour, should never tow in a construction zone, etc.

Some people will have their opinions, but they really aren't based in much fact. People can make whatever decision they want and I don't care until it affects MY ability to make whatever decision I want. You want to tow at 100 mph, I just hope that I'm not on the road at the same time, or shortly thereafter when emergency crews are trying to clean up the mess from your accident. You want to tow at 35 mph, I just hope you are behind me or on a different road so that I can drive at whatever speed at which I feel comfortable towing (usually 65-68 mph).

But please, lets save the nonsensical argument that 70 is inherently UNSAFE, but an arbitrary number only slightly lower is somehow inherently SAFE.

You make some valid points. There really is a lot that goes into it. But the stopping distance goes up drastically when comparing 64 to 70 MPH. At 70 mph you will need around 50-75 feet of additional space to stop your vehicle. (Numbers are conservative I believe) So the difference between 64 and 70 could be the difference between hitting something in front of you or not hitting it. Close call vs collision. I think we can agree that close calls are safer than collisions.

[transamz9]

Bumpyroad wrote:

transamz9 wrote:
I just spent $5,000 on boat anchors last year. People spend their money in different ways.

I hope that was for "power poles", not mushroom anchors. 🙂
bumpy

HAHAHA!! Yes! and the other bad thing is that I'm only good to 10' deep.

[GoPackGo]

I am retired and a full timer. I enjoy driving. I absolutely love traveling down the road from one place to another.

You said you're retired. So you no longer need to be in a hurry. When I retired and started fulltiming I needed to get into a different mindset. When I was employed and only had a couple weeks for a vacation, I always needed to make big miles going and coming. Now things are different. I don't have to rush now - ever ! I don't even wear a watch !

I try to limit my day to about 250 miles, but 200 is fine too.

I usually run 58-60 and stay in the right hand lane. At that speed I don't come up on too many people so I don't need to pass many. I also have a bit more reaction time in the bank and can stop a little quicker. On 2-lane roads, I always pull over if traffic backs up. I spent about 2 1/2 months wandering around California last summer and as I recall, California is very good about having frequent turnouts on their 2 lane highways.

So my advice is to run at a speed where you are relaxed and comfortable. And remember that you no longer have a schedule.

[tinner12002]

I generally stay at 65 or under...retired with no reason to stress or get in a hurry!! Even if people are flying by me when I'm towing, I just cruise along at my poky 65mph and take in some scenery.

[BenK]

Good thread and GREAT commentary on the laws of physics

Braking is MORE important to me, than go...though go is ingrained in
this wrench/gearhead/boy-racer...

Why advise that trailer brake controllers must be tuned to lead the
TV's braking (in timing...initiation)

Posted this before and many do NOT believe that braking is a performance
rating...that it is a mandated requirement by specification...by regulatory
agencies (FMVSS). Mostly for commercial, but they also for civilian vehicles

Here is an image showing them all side by side from a vendor's site
marketing that their friction materials better

brakingdistance stoppingdistance FMVSSstoppingrequirements FMVSSbraking


My TV's brakes are in the performance level and out stop some cars when
empty (just me in it). So look in the rear-view as much as ahead at
what am trying to avoid

Why advise touching the trailer brakes every once in a while (often)
to keep them in their optimum temp range...and...re-adjust during
long trips

[noteven]

Answer to previous skill testing question is c. about 12mph extra speed adds half again to your (already poor rv) stopping distance.

Managing the energy and inertia of large vehicles is what bus and truck drivers learn.

RV pilots not so much: High speed in the hammer lane...is the lock on the fridge door?

Do I putter along at 50mph in the right lane on I15 in the open country in Utah! ? Nope. I'll run 65 and 70 on the retarder on the long down grades as long as I have lots of room in front. Do I drive fast in heavy traffic? nope.

[Bedlam]

transamz9 wrote:

Maybe they want to save money to be able to enjoy something else with it. There are a lot of reasons to save money. Some like to ride like you. Some like to fish like me. Some like to collect rocks so they can have the biggest and heaviest rig on the road.
The more money I can save on one thing is more I have to spend on other interest. Camping is cheap compared to some hobbies and pastimes. I just spent $5,000 on boat anchors last year. People spend their money in different ways.

I agree, we all have priorities on how we spend our money. There are things I enjoy doing that require my camper and trailer, but that doesn't mean I should not minimize expenses while maximizing fun. For me, that means I can make more frequent trips by minimizing the cost of each trip. I work full time yet still can get away twice a month through the entire year (there is no defined camping season for me). We average about 10K miles each year just in camping, so fuel cost and tire longevity do play a role in our budget.

[Bumpyroad]

transamz9 wrote:
I just spent $5,000 on boat anchors last year. People spend their money in different ways.

I hope that was for "power poles", not mushroom anchors. 🙂
bumpy

[rhagfo]

Bedlam wrote:
I try to tow at the same speed as the other towing traffic unless that speed exceeds 65 mph to preserve traffic flow. If non-towing traffic wants to go faster, they can pass and I do observe the use of turn outs on 2-lane roads.

X2 mostly 🙂

On interstates, I run up to 70 while towing, depending on traffic and road conditions.

On secondary roads I run with the flow which is usually doing about 60. I seldom use pullout, as I am not the slowest in the line of traffic, I will pull to the right when a passing zone comes up, but will also pass slower vehicles in those areas.

[the_happiestcam]

Sprink-Fitter wrote:

Teamfour wrote:
I like to travel at 64 mph just to be safe. But lets look at the math: We typically drive 400 miles a day on a long trip. At 64 mph that takes 6 h 15 m. At 70 mph it takes 5 h 45 m. I will gladly eat the measly 30 minutes for the sake of safety. Those of you who travel shorter distances are saving even less time.

So you think you won't get as injured doing 64 like you would if you were doing 70?

I can't speak for the OP, but they probably meant that 64 is safer because it stays below the 65 rating for tires.

[dodge_guy]

Illinois has a similar law. however I still travel at 65 in those areas and have never been bothered. when the 55max speed goes away I set the cruise at 67, then I just sit back and enjoy.