I'm guessing you were flying a Warrior or 172?
Both of those the approach speed at MTOW is about 65 knots, plus or minus a bit depending upon model.
I'm also guessing you were lightweight - 1 POB, half tanks? So probably around 80% MTOW? That brings the approach speed down to about 58-60 knots.
The gust response in turbulence is calculated as TAS^2 / (wing loading x lift curve slope)
Let's just assume that TAS=IAS: it won't be, but you don't have any direct control over the relationship on a given day.
So, by (presumably) not trimming and controlling speed properly you allow speed up to 85 knots you've increased speed by a factor of 1.44, which squared is near as dammit 2.
So by having speeds that high, you've doubled the airframe response to turbulence. That would indeed give you something of a wild ride. Being too fast also means that the whole landing process lasts much longer whilst you get rid of all that
(Then throwing it away and going somewhere more benign was then excellent judgement, as is trying to learn from the event).
Incidentally, several people have repeated the common mantra of adding half the gust factor. I'm well aware that this is common advice, but I've come to believe that it's wrong - it doesn't work with the gust response equation I've quoted, and I've stopped using it myself for some years with no ill effects. Can anybody quote an authoratitative statement on this - preferably backup up by some maths and flight testing? I've yet to find one, and have come to conclude that - at least for our little aeroplanes - that it's just plain incorrect and seems to have just been made up by some FAA CFI one day and perpetuated.
G