How Much Time Does Speeding Save?

Q: You write about the downsides of speeding, but what about the upsides? If I’m looking at it selfishly, speeding might be the difference between making or missing my flight, or catching a ferry rather than waiting for the next sailing. And if I pass a bunch of cars on the freeway, I’ll be in front of them when I get to my exit, so I won’t have to wait behind them at the next intersection.

A: Benjamin Franklin, America’s first philosopher, once said, “Lost time is never found again.” He’s right, of course. From my public school education about Ben (I like to think we’re on a first name basis), he seemed to be nearly obsessed with productivity and efficiency. If he were alive today, would he try to save a bit of time by speeding?

I don’t think he would. You might believe you’re getting back some time by speeding, and occasionally you actually will (it’s less than you think), but how does it play out in the long game? If only someone had done a cost benefit analysis so we could know for sure how much time we could save by speeding. Oh wait, someone has.

If we set the average speed of all drivers as our baseline, researchers found that driving a half mile per hour faster than the average results in a 26 second increase (yep, you read that right) in travel time. Driving about two mph below the average was the sweet spot for time lost. Driving has inherent risk. As speeds increase, so do crashes. Along with injuries and damage, crashes take time. When we add up the time supposedly saved by speeding, and subtract the time lost to traffic crashes, it’s a net negative.

You began by mentioning downsides to speeding, and there are plenty. Here’s a brief list: increased risk and severity of a crash, vehicle repairs from those crashes, speeding tickets, worse gas mileage, elevated stress. But the biggest downside is the loss of family, friends, and neighbors. In Washington about a third of all fatal crashes involve a speeding driver. It’s the second biggest contributor to fatal crashes, after driving impaired. I’d argue that even if there was a significant time savings, it wouldn’t be worth it for the human costs.

If we’re really about saving time, we have alternatives. I’m a cyclist, and within the cycling community there’s a subset of riders who are obsessed with the weight of their bikes. They’ll spend 600 dollars to save three ounces. That’s an expensive way to lose weight. I’m not a competitive cyclist, which is a gentle way of saying it would be alright if I dropped a couple of pounds. I could reduce my combined bike/rider weight a lot more than three ounces for free with a bit of dietary discipline.

What does that have to do with speeding? Speeding is trying to save time the expensive way. I can save far more time than I gain from speeding by wasting a little less of it scrolling on my phone or on some other pointless activity and leaving a bit earlier. Plus, I’m not taking on additional risk by driving faster than I should.

If you ever talk to a gambler, they’ll tell you about the money they’ve won. But they won’t tell you how much they’ve lost. Speeding is a lot like gambling. Sure, you may have some short-term wins. But measured over a lifetime, and measured by the net good or bad to you and your community, even if you’re selfish speeding is a losing proposition.