Smart HOV lanes

6688 Views 23 Replies 10 Participants Last post by SmartyPants25, Feb 26, 2008

jediknight36

Discussion Starter · Feb 17, 2008

I heard somewhere that Smarts may qualify for HOV lanes in certain states. I sent a letter to our TXDOT to see what the laws are here and based on my logic, if they could change. I encourage all of you to do your own research and write your own DOTs if you do not like the laws. If Smarts are not allowed on HOV lanes, I will wait to get the ticket and let the Judge decide. Here is my letter.
"I have a question. I commute from Lewisville to Dallas now every day. When weather permits, I use my two seat Motorcycle. Because bikes are allowed on HOV, I use it. I will be buying a Smart car soon. Here is my question with my logic sprinkled in. My motorcycle gets better than 40 mpg (some states require cars to make that and until recently only single persons driving hybrids could use the HOV lanes and get away with it. Now they are not the only cars that get more than 40mpg) and even though there is room for two people, most only use it for one. It also does not take up much room. The Smart Fortwo gets better than 40mpg, thus fitting into the hybrid use category, it doesn't take up much room (it is shorter than most suburbans are wide) and seats two, and a case or soda. But most people use them to commute. Are they allowed to use HOV's in Texas based on this logic, and if not, why not? If this is a new issue, then it needs to be brought up. Even if people sold all their suvs and trucks to buy Smart Cars for this purpose, it would cut down traffic because they take up half the space, and use half the fuel. I would appreciate a human response to this."

And if you have a better way of saying this, please suggest it. It is late and I am excited.

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

CruisingAZ

· #2 · Feb 17, 2008

Not is AZ, but worth a shot. I have mixed feelings as I would love to use that wasted lane, but a car is a car and one passenger is one passenger. In AZ a mother and a child in a car seat DO NOT qualify as the child is not a commuter. Unfortunantly too many states have differernt laws regarding the use of this lane.

In AZ a Prius Hybrid qualifys but I personally think it should be restricted to two people vehicles or open it up to all other fuel effecent vehicles with a HOV plate which could include any vehicle with a MPG greater than 40 or other such limits.

angel

· #3 · Feb 17, 2008

If it's any help a smart is smaller lengthwise than a HD UltraGlide.

jediknight36

Discussion Starter · #4 · Feb 17, 2008

CruisingAZ said:
Not is AZ, but worth a shot. I have mixed feelings as I would love to use that wasted lane, but a car is a car and one passenger is one passenger. In AZ a mother and a child in a car seat DO NOT qualify as the child is not a commuter. Unfortunantly too many states have differernt laws regarding the use of this lane.

In AZ a Prius Hybrid qualifys but I personally think it should be restricted to two people vehicles or open it up to all other fuel effecent vehicles with a HOV plate which could include any vehicle with a MPG greater than 40 or other such limits.

But you see my logic. In some states, that baby is a passenger. And the hybrid law should claim the smart too.

pauly

· #5 · Feb 17, 2008

If I were a politician or a judge I wouldn't approve this. It opens up the arguement for every 2 seater out there. Soon the owners of Porsche and Miatas and MR2s would all claim exemptions. HOV lanes are designated this way to reduce traffic congestion by putting at least one, preferably more, vehicles in parking lots. The purpose is not to push environmentalism or a reduction of foreign oil reserves by encouraging the use of fuel efficient vehicles. I wouldn't buy it.

However, many states have approved the use of hybrid vehicles for HOV lanes recently. It goes against the purpose of the HOV lanes, but politicians love the lure of a sexy story. In that vein many politicians would push for the SMART to be allowed. But as soon as they do - all the other 2 seater car owners are going to cry "Unfair!"

jediknight36

Discussion Starter · #6 · Feb 17, 2008

Well, thats why I was saying that it not only falls into they 2 seater like a motorcycle, but also falls in with hybrids in that it gets better than 40mpg. Its small size fights traffic congestion already. I dont want vets on the HOV anymore than you do, thats why I argue both 2 seater and 40mpg. Heck, two smarts take up less room with 2 people each than one suburban with four.

paul c

· #7 · Feb 17, 2008

Highway space

jediknight36 said:
Its small size fights traffic congestion already. I dont want vets on the HOV anymore than you do, thats why I argue both 2 seater and 40mpg. Heck, two smarts take up less room with 2 people each than one suburban with four.

What takes up most of the space on a highway (assuming the cars are moving) is the space between the cars, not the cars themselves. At reasonable speeds, there's at least five car spaces between each car, so the fact that the smart is shorter is not very important. My understanding of the argument for HOV lanes is to remove cars from the road entirely. Encouraging the use of high mileage vehicles is much less important.

pauly

· #8 · Feb 17, 2008

Paul C - you're bring up the correct issue. Smaller vehicles don't reduce congestion, less vehicles do. Most of the space is between the vehicles (the 2 second rule, etc.) and most of the congestion is caused by each driver hitting his brakes, hitting his accelerator, hitting his brakes again. Whether traffic contains 1,000 SUVs or 1,000 SMART cars the congestion is about equal for the reasons mentioned above. Conversely, if 30% of the SUVs are removed because of carpooling, now we're actually going to see some results.

SMART owners can try to get approval for the HOV lane, I don't care one way or the other. However, SMART cars will not have a significant impact on traffic congestion.

angel

· #9 · Feb 17, 2008

paul c said:
What takes up most of the space on a highway (assuming the cars are moving) is the space between the cars, not the cars themselves. At reasonable speeds, there's at least five car spaces between each car, so the fact that the smart is shorter is not very important. My understanding of the argument for HOV lanes is to remove cars from the road entirely. Encouraging the use of high mileage vehicles is much less important.

LOL. NOT in DFW. Usually it's bumper to bumper. Leave a space for 5 cars and people go into full on road rage about it.

Now. Back on topic.
Sure. It would be good for me personally when driving the smart to be able to access the HOV lane. Though I think the HOV lane should be left to vehicles with more than one person and motorcycles only. The mistake was made when they made allowances for Hybrids. What happens when most of the vehicles are hybrids and/or getting over 40 or 50 mpg? At what point is there a line in the sand to reverse that decision? It is called High Occupancy Vehicle lane for a reason. Want to ride in the HOV lane? Ride with someone or have them ride with you. Then trying to change, bend or negotiate the rules are a moot point.

jediknight36

Discussion Starter · #10 · Feb 17, 2008

Well, if it is high occupancy, then it would depend on the bike you ride if you should be granted access then. Some bikes have room for two, some do not. But all are allowed on. That is half my point. The other half is the mpg issue, and I agree with taking them off the hov, But if they are allowed on, then along with the cycle issue, smarts should be allowed on. If they take hybrids off, then to me, it is a more convincing case against smarts on hov.

On a side note, by 2010 or 2012 (which ever) all new cars are going to have to meet this mpg standard right?

angel

· #11 · Feb 17, 2008

Actually for motorcycles it's also a safety issue. Motorcycles can easily overheat without some minimal movement for air cooling. Also a safety issue is an easy get of the way using the shoulder move. Someone hits you in a car you're likely to survive. Someone hits you on a bike and your chances are exponentially less. Easy enough for me. Because my rear seat is detachable. Though I think in my 7+ years of living in the DFW metroplex I have used the HOV a whopping 3 times. All 3 times I was in a cage and had someone with me. I usually just avoid rush hourS all together.

pauly

· #12 · Feb 18, 2008

To answer the question on the new Cafe standards: The standards signed into law a few months back require that auto manufacturers have an average fuel economy for their entire fleet (minus work trucks) to be 35 mpg in the year 2020. It starts with a sliding scale in the year 2011 and grows to 35 mpg over 9 years. There are different exemptions, and the fine for going over I think is $1,600 per vehicle. The current standard is 27.5 mpg, so its a roughly 25% increase in fuel economy compared to now.

jediknight36

Discussion Starter · #13 · Feb 18, 2008

angel said:
Actually for motorcycles it's also a safety issue. Motorcycles can easily overheat without some minimal movement for air cooling. Also a safety issue is an easy get of the way using the shoulder move. Someone hits you in a car you're likely to survive. Someone hits you on a bike and your chances are exponentially less. Easy enough for me. Because my rear seat is detachable. Though I think in my 7+ years of living in the DFW metroplex I have used the HOV a whopping 3 times. All 3 times I was in a cage and had someone with me. I usually just avoid rush hourS all together.

I can see that. I use the HOV when Im on my bike, at least most of the time. Comming off 635 to I35 south and trying to merge through several lanes of traffic on my 78 honda hawk is hard. Thanks for the input.

pauly said:
To answer the question on the new Cafe standards: The standards signed into law a few months back require that auto manufacturers have an average fuel economy for their entire fleet (minus work trucks) to be 35 mpg in the year 2020. It starts with a sliding scale in the year 2011 and grows to 35 mpg over 9 years. There are different exemptions, and the fine for going over I think is $1,600 per vehicle. The current standard is 27.5 mpg, so its a roughly 25% increase in fuel economy compared to now.

Thanks. I just had forgotten about the dates and such.

SmartyPants25

· #14 · Feb 18, 2008

In California, the use of the Carpool Lane is very much from an environmental impact stand point, it is also there to curb traffic, but it really doesn't help much in that arena. When they were put in, it was promoted that if you carpool you get rewarded for helping to clean the environment. Then hybrids came out and hybrid owners were also rewarded with the use of the carpool lanes for bettering the environment. I whole heartedly think that SMART fits in this category. It is not only just as fuel efficient, but also the most environmentally sound car produced today with the powder coated paint and recyclable materials. Those Porche owners and other two seaters can't compete with that argument, hell not even the Prius could compete with that!

jediknight36

Discussion Starter · #15 · Feb 18, 2008

SmartyPants25 said:
In California, the use of the Carpool Lane is very much from an environmental impact stand point, it is also there to curb traffic, but it really doesn't help much in that arena. When they were put in, it was promoted that if you carpool you get rewarded for helping to clean the environment. Then hybrids came out and hybrid owners were also rewarded with the use of the carpool lanes for bettering the environment. I whole heartedly think that SMART fits in this category. It is not only just as fuel efficient, but also the most environmentally sound car produced today with the powder coated paint and recyclable materials. Those Porche owners and other two seaters can't compete with that argument, hell not even the Prius could compete with that!

Thank you. I was beginning to think I was crazy! (Well I might be, but thats besides the point

)

StevenM1TX

· #16 · Feb 18, 2008

Gee, maybe they should just do away with the hov lane and open up another lane so everyone would could spend a bit less time sitting in traffic stinking the place up. Nah, that would be too easy and wouldn't pit one group against the other.

jediknight36

Discussion Starter · #17 · Feb 18, 2008

Well, a comedian I heard the other day said this about expanding roads. "Thats what they do. Too many cars on the road, open a new lane. If you gain weight, your doctor doesn't say, "Well, you are putting a whole lot of food through there. Lets expand your stomach." BTW, I am large myself, so no flaming!

CruisingAZ

· #18 · Feb 18, 2008

Saw this in teh other thread:

"The smart fortwo is also classified as an Ultra-Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) on account of its extremely low exhaust emissions. The catalytic converter is positioned close to the engine for a quick response. An electric pump blows fresh air into the exhaust port when the engine is cold to almost completely oxidize the carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC) and render them harmless."

Thought that would open the door for Arizona, But Arizona requires a MPG rating of 47 MPG or better, missed it by a mile.

Rubik

· #19 · Feb 18, 2008

The U.S. could observe that in Canada, they get a ~$2000 tax break for the smart (similar to the break hybrid buyers get here). While in England, the cars are to be exempt from the congestion tax charged drivers in London. There are even breaks (and special spots) for parking the smarts.

jediknight36

Discussion Starter · #20 · Feb 18, 2008

Yes. They have motorcycle parking, large vehicle parking, compact parking how about smart parking? Hmm. Thats looks sarcastic, but I swear its not.

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.