What's the deal with the big boys regulating how fast we go?
 

I recently read where Schneider, JB Hunt and other big boys are trying to regulate how fast drivers can go in their own trucks. They are pressing to get all trucks regulated and required to run at no faster than 68mph.

Why are they doing this??

More then likely for insurance, safety and fuel costs, if there is any truth to your statement/rumor.

There are allot of good reasons to govern a truck, I could tell you a few stories.

Am personaly againt such a push but since am not doing more than 70MPH anyways it would not bother me a bit even if it goes thr.

Such a decision should be left to the drivers..

Well let's just say this, there are truck drivers (the responsible ones), and then there are steering wheel holders (fill in the blank).

nuf said.:wink:

November 30, 2006


OOIDA: Speed limiter proposal unsafe, doesn’t address real problems



Mandatory speed limiters could actually have a negative impact on highway safety and would not address the root causes of excessive speeding.

That’s the message the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association delivered loud and clear in letters to two federal agencies countering the American Trucking Association’s recent petitions requesting mandatory speed governors.

OOIDA officials sent the letters to the administrators of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration – the two agencies ATA petitioned for rulemakings that would require mandatory speed limiters and prohibit tampering with them.

OOIDA President and CEO Jim Johnston pointed out in the letters the ATA petition lacked any credible evidence that could back up the claim that mandatory speed limiters would improve highway safety.

“OOIDA believes that restricting trucks to speed below 68 mph would provide no safety benefit and would, in fact, have a negative impact on highway safety,” Johnston wrote in the letters.

The OOIDA president said ATA’s petition is not supported by any scientific study, data or analysis of the actual use of speed limiters or their effect on highway safety.

The Association contends that 68 mph is an appropriate, safe and legal speed on many roads. However, under less-than-normal road conditions, most any rate of speed less than 68 mph may be excessive relative to the adverse condition encountered.

In the letter, Johnston points to a 1991 NHTSA study, “Commercial Motor Vehicle Speed Control Devices,” that concluded “incremental benefits of mandatory speed limitation in terms of either crash reduction or lives saved is questionable.”

And while any benefits of mandatory speed limitation are “questionable,” government-mandated speed limiters most certainly would create additional speed variance on the roads – which increases the risks of accidents, according to another study cited by OOIDA in the letter. In fact, that study concludes that “the frequency of interactions with other vehicles by a vehicle traveling 10 mph below the posted speed limit is 227 percent higher than moving at the traffic speed.”

Johnston even reminded the agency administrators in the letters that one of their predecessors, Julie Cirillo who is a former FMCSA associate administrator and chief safety officer, testified that when vehicles deviate from the prevailing speed on a highway, accidents occur.

If excessive speeding is the real issue supposedly being addressed by proposing mandatory speed limiters, Johnston pointed out that the feds should take a long, hard look at the real causes of excessive speeding.

“If the Department of Transportation would like to reduce excessive speeding, then it should directly address its primary causes: the lack of a comprehensive driver training standard and the compensation of drivers by the miles driven or loads hauled,” Johnston wrote.

“New truck drivers are often not properly trained and do not know when and how to moderate their speed. Drivers need behind-the-wheel instruction in operating a truck on different types of roads, in different types of traffic and in different weather conditions.”

Beyond knowing how to drive properly, Johnston stressed that the motivator behind excessive speeding is all that needs to be addressed – driver pay.

The current prevailing forms of compensation – by the mile and by the load – provide a “direct incentive to drive more miles or to take more loads in a shorter period of time,” Johnston wrote.

He pointed out that the difficulty in just getting enough miles to cover the bills is exacerbated by long periods of uncompensated time spent at the docks waiting to load and unload – to the tune of 30 to 40 hours a week.

“Facing such pressures, many OOIDA members have told us that if they were forced to limit the speed of their vehicle preventing them from driving speeds that are otherwise safe and legal, they would quit the business,” Johnston wrote.

Rather than safety, the Association believes ATA’s speed limiter proposal is all about competition for drivers.

“Motor carriers who have adopted speed limitation policies lose drivers to carriers without such policies, and they have more difficulty recruiting new drivers,” Johnston wrote.

“By imposing such technology on all motor carriers, they would eliminate this competitive advantage. This is not a sufficient basis for the FMCSA or NHTSA to impose such a burdensome requirement.”

The final point OOIDA raised is that mandating speed limiters by the feds could very well be stepping on some the toes of some states.

In 1995 Congress specifically returned the authority to create speed limits to the individual states. Mandating speed limiters on trucks would, in effect, be imposing split speed limits on state highways, Johnston pointed out.

Johnston encouraged both agencies to look beyond the ATA petition.

“Instead of entertaining this petition, DOT should spend their valuable time and resources pursuing more concrete solutions to truck safety issues,” he wrote in conclusion.

– By Jami Jones, senior editor
[email protected]

Simply put many of you can't control your self so the company must step in. Maybe your truck, but you are running under their authority and they are responsible for you.

We have so many rules because of a few who don't have any common sense.
few years ago Montana dropped the speed limit and said use common sense. Well that didn't work so they have a posted speed limit again.

Same goes for log books. If we all used common sense we would not need them.

Actually, the federal government told Montana they would recieve no more highway money if they didn't get their speed limit back.

If I bought it, it should go as fast as I want it to go.

I believe the petition has more to do with the changes taking place in Ontario, Canada than safety. Ontario has passed legislation which would require carriers to put speed limiters on trucks and set them at 68 mph. Sound familiar? The petition was pushed through by the Canadian Trucking Association. All trucks have speed limiters on them now. It only takes a few minutes to set a trucks speed to whatever the owner wishes. All you need do is connect to the trucks computer and set the speed where you want it. There is no need to have additional legislation for the rest of the industry. If you look between the lines, I think it says more about these carriers and the quality of their training programs. In their petition, they cite speed as a contributing factor in accidents. Most accidents happen at a much lower speed than 68, so limiting the speed to 68 is not going to reduce accidents. When they note speed being a factor in accidents, it is often in construction zones or other areas where the driver is going too fast for road conditions. The carriers who are behind this petition already have their trucks governed. It hasn't seemed to have lowered their accident rate by keeping their top speed down. On my way to the Truck Show in Dallas, a few months ago, I was 3 overturned trucks. I believe one was Covenant and I think the other two were Swift. All were governed trucks. These accidents were all on open road. I don't see how any of these could have been prevented by having every other truck owner govern his trucks to 68. 8)

Could you imagine if every truck went 68mph that would be a cluster on the highway. :shock:

A few months ago I was in a 4 wheeler behind a J.B. Hunt truck trying to pass another governed truck. I don't recall the other company name. It took him at least 5 miles to make it around the other truck. Cars were backed up as far as you could see. Ironically, it started happening a couple of miles from the corporate offices of one of the signors of the petition, Covenant. :roll: