Speed Limiter Petition Filed with FMCSA
 

Carriers, Road Safe, File Speed Limiter Petition With FMCSA


Truckload carrier Schneider National and travel safety group Road Safe America last week filed a petition with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to require electronic speed governors to be set at no more than 68 miles per hour, Schneider said Monday.

The petition, which Schneider and Road Safe filed last Monday, was also signed by eight other motor carriers, including J.B. Hunt Transportation, CR England, Covenant Transportation and Dart Transit Co.

The speed limiter requirement would affect class seven and eight truck manufactured after 1990, Schneider said in a statement.

what kind of crap is that...... that would be required on ALL trucks???? who pays for these things???

Sounds to me like they are jealous of outfits that can run faster than them so they're trying to screw everyone equally.

Look who filed the it the big companies who already say no faster than 65 for the most part already. I for one do hated a limted truck all it created was a rolling road block on the highway.

This whole bit is also supported by the ATA, TCA, and a few other organizations.

IMHO it has nothing to do with safety. It only has to do with money. Slower trucks would generally mean less fuel used, and it would also mean the need for more trucks and the justification to bring in foreign drivers at a sub-standard wage (as defined by pay lower than they can get American drivers for).

How lame! What the big pumpkin fails to realize is that "restrictor plate trucking" leads to big clumps of trucks out on the highway, all of whom would then become incapable of passing one another... how is this safer?

Restrictor plate trucking..... LOL :D

I'd prefer seeing OBR's required...

I think governing all trucks to the same speed is dangerous. people tend to go through turns faster, driver faster in the city and not let off the throttle till they are feet from the truck infront if they cannot overtake. Then you have 'the wildcards' (4wheeler) getting impatient and squeezing through spaces they shouldnt...how to stop them from doing that??? Can they at least make some laws requiring you to maintain a certain distance to the vehicle youre cutting off? How about teaching the general populus how to deal with big trucks??? :evil:

When they tell me I have to govern my truck to that, I'll govern it, all right. I'll PARK IT. When I drove a truck governed at 65, I had far more chances to KILL people than at any other time in my career. Safety is a "driver's call". I will not drive a truck that I feel is unsafe on the hiway. I don't care if I'm sweeping floors, flipping hambergers, or serving pizza. Been there, done that, and I will not do it again.

Come on , tell us how you really feel about this issue.

Speed is always the answer..... :roll:

Damn, the Truck Races are bad enough on the road with trucks governed anywhere from 62-70. I can't imagine life on the road with EVERY truck going the same speed.

-p.

One LONG ass Convoy :P

Fozzy, we have had on-board recorders for years. All you need do is connect to the CPU and it will tell you everything you need to know about the truck, including how fast it has been driven.

I spoke to someone at the ATA a few days ago about this. According to this individual, the ATA hasn't made a final decision as to whether they are recommending this or not. According to what I was told, it is these few carriers who have filed the petition on their own. If you don't want it to proceed, I suggest that you write individual letters to those making these decisions. You may also want to drop a letter to the carriers themselves and let them know how you feel about working for a carrier who has speed limiters on their trucks. It only takes about 5 minutes to govern a truck with a computer. I see no problem with these carrier's governing their own trucks. I do have a problem with them telling me and every other carrier and owner operator how they should run their business.

Okay, I will.

We've all had ocassions when we see a situation building. When I drove a governed truck, there was NOTHING I could do about it. Having a little extra throttle gives me a few options. I generally run at 65 anyhow.

A few years ago, in WI, I came up on a Ford Escort that was only doing about 58 or so. As I went to pass, there were 5 people in it, and when I got even with the driver's door, he speeded up. In a short time, he was about 100 feet in front of me again. I tried to pass again, and same thing. I slowed down to 45 mph and he was still 100 feet in front. Try to pass, and he speeds up again. Another truck was passing me (and him) and a deer jumped out. The Ford hit the brakes, and the deer. He stopped, half in my lane, half on the shoulder. Another truck alongside of me. I put some pretty deep ruts in the grass, but didn't lose control or roll the truck. I managed to get it up on the shoulder and stop. 5 high school kids that thought it was a joke to play around with trucks. I've also found that a little extra speed available stops their GAME.

"Oh, oh.... This one's not governed." and the game is over. Now, they don't know what your top end is.

Otherwise, you slow down, and they slow down. You slow down more, and they do the same thing. You can be down to 35 mph, and they are still 100 feet in front of you. And, that's only one example.

Pass a law that all trucks must be governed at 65, and you'll have many more of these "games" on the hiway. NO!!! Govern the trucks, even the O/Os, and I QUIT!!!

Yeah I don't know what it is, our trucks are governed at 70 mph, today as I was driving home a single person in a small SUV was driving along at probably about 65-66mph. I go for the pass, should be pretty easy. He speeds up just as I'm nose and nose with him, and matches my speed. We go past an on ramp and now there are cars behind me and him. I know that if I slow down any I'm just going to make it worse for me. If I wasn't goverened I could have sped up and around him but I was stuck there. 70 isn't really a bad speed, but I wish with the computerized governers they let you go above governed speed for a period of time, that seems like the safest idea.

I just don't understand why people can't figure out how to use the cruise control.

The boss of our company has the truck set to 63 on cruise and 65 if we don't use the cruise. it has taken some time to get use to and it is frustrating when trying to pass someone and they speed up. He done it because we had some people that thought it would be okay to do 70 and above so all of us had to suffer. We run mostly Washington and Oregon so it works for us. the only time i really bugs me is when we run in Idaho

It seems that the ATA (American Trucking Association) has now filed a petition with the Feds to attempt to force all truck manufacturer's to put speed limiters on from the factory with stiff penalties for anyone who tampers with them. If they have their way we will all be forced to travel at no more than 68 mph. OOIDA is opposing the petition, but the ATA has a lot of resources to put behind this move. You can read about it in the current issue of Landline Magazine.

Oh well, if they find it ok that traffic will be cronically following too closely and trucks doing 68 blocking the place, then I wont have ANY problem running in the Hammer lane at my 65 for 300 miles at a time. My carrier has a policy that im supposed to move over for merging traffic...Well, if i CAN move over due to slow passers, then ill be stuck there due to the impatient right-lane passers. Can you say CLUSTERF***?
If this gets passed, itll be just another example of laws made for the benefit of big business, not for the safety of the population. :evil:

Dumbest law ever, might as well throw the log book out the window because the pirates will thick. Can you imagine the races out in the desert with a truck going 1/2 a mile an hour faster, flat ass dumb!!

I drive a 65mph truck, but I am sure this will pose a safety hazard and flood the crowded roads with more trucks and underskilled drivers tailgating and pileups on interstates resulting. We do not know pileups like have seen from documentaries and reality shows in Europe, get ready for it.
www.ejectionseat4yourtruck.com :lol:

Who to write letters to, GMAN?

To your Congressman and Senator.

if this goes through would you c a strike or would everyone just deal with it ?
first trucks then cars?

Strike? The only ones striking anymore are unions....it seems hard to unite the us population...besides, most drivers are strapped enough to where they cannot sit for a week.

so what you r saying this is an underhanded way for large carriers to push out o/o leavingmore freight for them.
i dought anyonethat has their own truck paid for bythemselves would voluntarily turn their trucks down that leaves one of 3 options.
1 every one stops
2 everyone hangs up the keys
3 everyone fights so it doesnt go through

and none of those 3 things will happen

While I laugh at this pathetic attempt at a new law, which will never fly. I laugh even harder at the 'supertruckers' who say how unsafe this new law would be.

Ok, I do not claim to be a supertrucker, but I did express my reservations about this law....So whats so funny? If you wanna discuss wether this law makes us safer or not, go right ahead, Im willing and able to discuss> If not, dont diss people that feel different from you without backing your view up.

1) How can there be cluster driving if everyone is driving the same speed? The only way that can happen is if everyone somehow comes out the onramp at the exact same time. Cluster driving is due to poor driving habits, not some law that was passed by congress.

2) The "one driver taking half an hour to pass another driver" argument. Again, poor driving habits. If it really takes that long to pass, why is he passing? He might gain 10-15 seconds to his destination. When I come up to a driver going 1 mph slower then me(INCLUDING four wheelers), maybe I'll just slow down? Of course, keep a safe distance, and not create a cluster.

3) The "not being able to pass a four wheeler" argument. If the four wheeler didn't want you to pass, THE SPEED LIMITER WILL HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. Face it, a car can outdo any truck on the highway. If he's being an ass, it doesn't matter if you have a "king of the hill 625 hp cat", you're not getting by!

I also have heavy reservations against this law. For one reason and one reason only, it impedes in our freedom. To be honest, this law doesn't affect me one bit, I tend to cruise at 60 mph. I am still dead set against it, however.

This all was started last year by the Ontario Trucking Association who petitioned it's counterpart south of the border to do the same. Be glad it's 68 mph; Ontario wants (and will get) 65 for all trucks based in and operating through it's province. And they say the US gets it's nose in everyone else's business.....

Nono its not them getting into our business...Ontario is looking to prohibit all trucks that drive through it to be governed, its been suggested that US trucks also be governed to not lose the ability to go to Ontario...Noone is requiring us to do anything....

Or how about... just not go to Ontario.

good idea...but since it would be hard for them to verify wether your truck has a gov. I guess....Personally id say the same, only allow us trucks that have a certification of speed limitation to enter Ontario...

Like yoopr said, you could write your Congressman and Senator. I have asked OOIDA if they know of a specific person who could be contacted. I do expect OOIDA to file an opposition to this petition. It isn't law, yet. There is no need for such a law. Any one who wishes, can govern their own truck. All it takes is a laptop or handheld computer and the codes for your truck. They can do it in a matter of a few minutes. I will let you know if I can find a specific person that can be contacted.

Can't believe ATA is pulling this crap and have no clue what their reasoning is other than maybe Insurance companies and lawyers have started padding their pockets.

Yeah-If we quit coming into Ontario your province would Fold without OUR products.

This is a pretty feeble excuse for the members of the ATA.
They are as much as saying they have no control over their own company.
They own the equipment and they have control over any o/o's that lease on to them.
They can restrict their company speed anytime they choose to.
They tried with their hours of services changes and it backfired on them with the 8/2 sleeper provisions.
They just want to get everybody down to their level.
I note that they also have a request that's valid until 2009 to uprate weight limits to 96,000 GVW.
I just can't see how large trucking companies control the highways in the US.
I don't think they see the problems that will cause.
Can you imagine the BS from four wheelers if a truck is restricted to 68.
I can just see them all goofing around.
They tried that in Eastern Canada and they got told to pee up a rope.
The bottom line as usual is that it's started by large companies that have a self inflicted driver shortage and they try to use government regulations to improve their bottom line.

They tried that in Eastern Canada and they got told to pee up a rope.

LOL-I miss those Canadian Sayings :P

I thnk that if they are going to try to pass this law then tell those numb nuts on the hill to govern thier $100,000 cars to 68. I am willing to bet any sort of money they woulod say that they would not govern a $100,000 car down to 68 and there is no one that could make them.