Paul Milenkovic wrote: Most cars on the road today don't get close to 35mpg and if you drive the posted limit on I55 you will get run over by the big rigs.The 4-cyl Camry has been the top-selling passenger car for some time now, even before the gas-price runnup, and the 35 MPG is based on gas receipts for a 10-year old model -- the EPA mileage on that model has increased since then. I talked to a field-service person for machine tools who drives mainly highway miles in a leased Chevy Impala (a 3.4 l pushrod V6), and he reports an average of 33 MPG, which is consistent with the experience in the Camry (EPA Highway 31) and Impala (EPA Highway, also 31).A 4-cyl Camry is a mass-market car -- it is not some hybrid that is sold in small numbers. Actually, the Prius hybrid has recently become a mass-market car because Toyota has ramped up production to meet sales demand, which for 2007 will put it in the Camry-Impala-Accord level of sales numbers. Can't speak for I-55, but the original posting was about train service taking cars off US-41. I drive US-41 a lot, and the big rigs are driving the 65 limit or a tad under on that road these days, and the traffic in the left lane might be going 75, but they are not that fast going by you if you are doing 65 in the right lane because they think you may have sighted one of our courteous and dedicated Wisconsin State Highway Patrol officers that you are doing the speed limit.Drive 65 on US 41 or I-90 or I-94 in Wisconsin, and yes, people will pass you on the left-hand lane, but you are not creating a rolling roadblock or a traffic backup or in any way an unsafe situation. Park yourself at 65 MPH in the left-hand lane blocking passing traffic, and yes you will create such a traffic hazard.The places where I felt uncomfortable driving a 4-cylinder sedan were Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan, where they have these split 65-55 or even 70-55 car-truck speed limits. There, the right lane is going, maybe, 60 MPH because the truckers don't want to get tickets and they use their 5 MPH leeway -- you may be able to go a hair under 65 in the right lane. Come behind a truck doing an exact 55 for whatever reason, the traffic in the left lane is doing 70 plus whatever overage for somewhere between 80 and 85 MPH. There is a ton of auto traffic in the left lane because none of it is in the right lane, which these states have effectively made a truck lane. Get stuck behind a slow truck, and you get "freight-trained" by a line of 80 MPH plus left-lane traffic, and it is a scary experience in any car. The minute one crosses the border back into Wisconsin, there is this big sigh of relief of orderly traffic, while not strictly keeping the speed limit, is at least keeping the overages to reasonable values and is a much more serene driving experience with an even flow of traffic, unlike the European-style speed differentials they are running in those other three states.The notion that driving a 4-cylinder sedan or driving the speed limit is unsafe or creates an unsafe situation for other drivers is simply FUD as they call it in the computer business. As far as high gas prices driving people to Amtrak, it just isn't so. The sort of people who care about gas consumption and the price of gas have gotten cars that get in the mid-30's MPG highway at legal speeds a long time ago, and 4, 5, 6 dollar a gallon gas won't get a 30 MPG car off the highways, especially if energy prices get that high and start impacting the bottom line of Amtrak and people start looking critically about how much energy trains are using.
Most cars on the road today don't get close to 35mpg and if you drive the posted limit on I55 you will get run over by the big rigs.
The 4-cyl Camry has been the top-selling passenger car for some time now, even before the gas-price runnup, and the 35 MPG is based on gas receipts for a 10-year old model -- the EPA mileage on that model has increased since then. I talked to a field-service person for machine tools who drives mainly highway miles in a leased Chevy Impala (a 3.4 l pushrod V6), and he reports an average of 33 MPG, which is consistent with the experience in the Camry (EPA Highway 31) and Impala (EPA Highway, also 31).
A 4-cyl Camry is a mass-market car -- it is not some hybrid that is sold in small numbers. Actually, the Prius hybrid has recently become a mass-market car because Toyota has ramped up production to meet sales demand, which for 2007 will put it in the Camry-Impala-Accord level of sales numbers.
Can't speak for I-55, but the original posting was about train service taking cars off US-41. I drive US-41 a lot, and the big rigs are driving the 65 limit or a tad under on that road these days, and the traffic in the left lane might be going 75, but they are not that fast going by you if you are doing 65 in the right lane because they think you may have sighted one of our courteous and dedicated Wisconsin State Highway Patrol officers that you are doing the speed limit.
Drive 65 on US 41 or I-90 or I-94 in Wisconsin, and yes, people will pass you on the left-hand lane, but you are not creating a rolling roadblock or a traffic backup or in any way an unsafe situation. Park yourself at 65 MPH in the left-hand lane blocking passing traffic, and yes you will create such a traffic hazard.
The places where I felt uncomfortable driving a 4-cylinder sedan were Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan, where they have these split 65-55 or even 70-55 car-truck speed limits. There, the right lane is going, maybe, 60 MPH because the truckers don't want to get tickets and they use their 5 MPH leeway -- you may be able to go a hair under 65 in the right lane. Come behind a truck doing an exact 55 for whatever reason, the traffic in the left lane is doing 70 plus whatever overage for somewhere between 80 and 85 MPH. There is a ton of auto traffic in the left lane because none of it is in the right lane, which these states have effectively made a truck lane. Get stuck behind a slow truck, and you get "freight-trained" by a line of 80 MPH plus left-lane traffic, and it is a scary experience in any car. The minute one crosses the border back into Wisconsin, there is this big sigh of relief of orderly traffic, while not strictly keeping the speed limit, is at least keeping the overages to reasonable values and is a much more serene driving experience with an even flow of traffic, unlike the European-style speed differentials they are running in those other three states.
The notion that driving a 4-cylinder sedan or driving the speed limit is unsafe or creates an unsafe situation for other drivers is simply FUD as they call it in the computer business. As far as high gas prices driving people to Amtrak, it just isn't so. The sort of people who care about gas consumption and the price of gas have gotten cars that get in the mid-30's MPG highway at legal speeds a long time ago, and 4, 5, 6 dollar a gallon gas won't get a 30 MPG car off the highways, especially if energy prices get that high and start impacting the bottom line of Amtrak and people start looking critically about how much energy trains are using.
Thanks for all of the above...I THINK.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Petri (Fond du Lac-Oshkosh-Neenah district) was the head of the Congressional transportation committee, and several years ago, Amtrak was trying to run a train from Milwaukee to Fond du Lac.
Today, DOT is about ready to six-lane hwy. 41 from South Neenah to south of Oshkosh for all those tailgating commuters.
Would be neat to have a train to GB, but would rather see further improvement of Chicago-Milwaukee. There is real demand there, and positive momentum. It's becoming "the thing" to take trains on that route. Lease some brand new equipment. Trainsets are built in North Milwaukee.
Dan
eolafan wrote: Paul Milenkovic wrote: Right now I personally take Amtrak from Joliet to Springfield and to St. Louis when my schedule permites due to the Amtrak fares being even cheaper than driving with gas now at $3.22/gallon. What are people driving and at what speeds? My Camry averages 35 MPG at legal highway speeds. At $3.22/gallon, the Joliet-Springfield trip costs $13.60 in gas. The cheapest Amtrak fare I can find is $14, but most of the fares are $39.I really think people are indifferent to the high price of gas because at 65 MPH, a lot of folks on 41 between Oshkosh and Green Bay are going by pretty quick, even in big pickups and SUVs. The only people who have slowed down lately are some of the drivers of big trucks. Current fuel prices are around the crossover point where the fuel going into the Diesel costs about as much as the wages paid the driver, and from a simple application of optimization theory, it doesn't pay for the big trucks to speed anymore. People in other vehicles, if they value their time and trucker-driver wages, see that it still pays to speed as even a big pickup doesn't use nearly as much fuel as one of the big rigs. Most cars on the road today don't get close to 35mpg and if you drive the posted limit on I55 you will get run over by the big rigs.
Paul Milenkovic wrote: Right now I personally take Amtrak from Joliet to Springfield and to St. Louis when my schedule permites due to the Amtrak fares being even cheaper than driving with gas now at $3.22/gallon. What are people driving and at what speeds? My Camry averages 35 MPG at legal highway speeds. At $3.22/gallon, the Joliet-Springfield trip costs $13.60 in gas. The cheapest Amtrak fare I can find is $14, but most of the fares are $39.I really think people are indifferent to the high price of gas because at 65 MPH, a lot of folks on 41 between Oshkosh and Green Bay are going by pretty quick, even in big pickups and SUVs. The only people who have slowed down lately are some of the drivers of big trucks. Current fuel prices are around the crossover point where the fuel going into the Diesel costs about as much as the wages paid the driver, and from a simple application of optimization theory, it doesn't pay for the big trucks to speed anymore. People in other vehicles, if they value their time and trucker-driver wages, see that it still pays to speed as even a big pickup doesn't use nearly as much fuel as one of the big rigs.
Right now I personally take Amtrak from Joliet to Springfield and to St. Louis when my schedule permites due to the Amtrak fares being even cheaper than driving with gas now at $3.22/gallon.
What are people driving and at what speeds? My Camry averages 35 MPG at legal highway speeds. At $3.22/gallon, the Joliet-Springfield trip costs $13.60 in gas. The cheapest Amtrak fare I can find is $14, but most of the fares are $39.
I really think people are indifferent to the high price of gas because at 65 MPH, a lot of folks on 41 between Oshkosh and Green Bay are going by pretty quick, even in big pickups and SUVs.
The only people who have slowed down lately are some of the drivers of big trucks. Current fuel prices are around the crossover point where the fuel going into the Diesel costs about as much as the wages paid the driver, and from a simple application of optimization theory, it doesn't pay for the big trucks to speed anymore. People in other vehicles, if they value their time and trucker-driver wages, see that it still pays to speed as even a big pickup doesn't use nearly as much fuel as one of the big rigs.
As for the question just posed, I rather speed to keep up with traffic to avoid an accident then do the speed limit to conserve fuel and get run over, by car or truck.
Oh, and a Chi-GB train would be great during football season
Which is more troublesome:getting run over for doing the speed limitorcars that make paltry mileage?
I'm currently driving a Ford Ranger 4x4 with 4.0l v6 and by slowing down to 65 from what I was driving at I've noticed an improvement in my mileage. I figured it stood to reason that other vehicles would have a similar effect but it seems that people are going faster. I guess it's thier money.
I figured that the fare for riding a train would offset the gas cost plus the convenience of I don't have to deal with traffic.
This idea was brought up about 5 years ago. With Amtrak's currentbudget problems, it's not likely to happen. And now especiallywith CN's heavy freight traffic, there's just no room to squeeze in afew lightly patronized Amtrak runs.
As was mentioned, many depots(FDL, Oshkosh, Appleton) would have to be built. Who would pay for them? Certainly not Amtrak.
Good idea, but as unfortunately, the wrong time.
I realize that it'd be a bit of an uphill battle, but the reduction in cars on the road would be nice. I'd use it. We haven't had passenger service in this area anytime recently (past 30ish years+!). Such a service could connect in Milwaukee to AMTRAK/Metra to Chicago and from there to wherever pretty much, I would think. Maybe with gas prices starting to rise people will want to consider an option such as this.
gacuster wrote:Is there really enough demand for this service? Probably not. Are any depots around yet or have they all been torn down? The old C&NW depot in Green Bay is there yet but has been converted to a brewpub/restaurant, so there would be the expense of building new facilities at each stop.
Demand? Well, in my opinion if you could replace 10% of the cars traveling up and down Wisconsin Rt. 41 every day with the same folks riding in train cars we would have plenty of trains to watch and ride.
Assuming that the local current carrier (CN) would cooperate with an initiative like this, what kind of disruption of service and/or obstacles would exist with passenger service between Milwaukee and Green Bay with stops in FDL, and Oshkosh?
If you need to expand on the frame that's ok too. I'm curious about this.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.