Whats up with 62 mph?

That is assuming the faster driver actually rests and isn't doing something else with that "free" time. And it is assuming that running faster, he is also not stressed more than his counterpart who ran slower. There are a lot of variables that have to be factored in. A less stressed driver will need less rest to recuperate. And less stress equates to safer driving just as much as more rest. One anecdotal reference does not solid evidence make.

 

If they would have spec'd the drivetrain so that the engine was turning in the ideal sweet spot of the engine at the slower speed then it would have been a non issue for Cat. Just because a company cannot spec its trucks right is not a case that running faster is better. My truck is spec'd ideally for the proper engine RPM to operate in direct drive (16th) at between 58 and 67 mph. I still have two gears above that if I wanted to go faster. And running in direct at, say, 62 mph, my transmission runs cooler, so much so that even the chief engineer at Eaton is on record as saying that a transmission cooler is not required running that way. The engine is running in the optimum sweet spot for that particular engine as well. Spec'ing is everything. Speed or lack thereof is not a compensation for stupid.

 

Ok what is it with this stress crap when running the posted speed limit??

If it's stressful to you, maybe driving a truck isn't your thing?

 

That's good. Go on a personal attack instead of looking at what was actually stated and having a well reasoned comment. There is evidence that running slower, at least a few mph below the flow of traffic, is less stressful overall than running the speed limit or faster. For one, less slowing down and speeding up and less passing are involved with a vehicle that is running less than the speed limit, or rather, the flow of traffic, which are hardly ever the same thing. The less you have to compensate for traffic the less stressful.

I think truck driving is fine for me. I seriously doubt you have even come close to the experiences I have had in trucking over 3 decades. And still able to maintain an accident free record and only one moving violation in those 3 decades. Ten of which were operating in the Alaskan interior year round well before Ice Road Truckers was even a glimmer in some TV producer's eye. And that doesn't even take into account the years pulling doubles/triples, double 48's, tanks, etc. I am taking life easy now. Just a 53' dry box and running between 60 and 65 mph within a 600 mile radius of home. I'll leave all the feather strutting to youngsters. I already paid my dues.

 

No personal attack just an observation, there's a difference.

Didn't know they did a study on slower moving vehicles cause less stress. They did do a study on split speed limits and IIRC it showed that they was dangerous...

BTW with the way people are now a days, running the posted speed limit you'd still be running slower than other traffic...

 

But that is being taken care of if ATA, TCA, and FMCSA have their way and all trucks will be doing slower than most all the speed limits. Got a tweet that FMCSA just finished a study that shows conclusively that speed limiting trucks is safer. Guess we all can look forward to a 65 mph speed limiter mandate on trucks in the near future. I feel sorry for those that have trucks that operate in the sweet spot at higher than 65 road speed and don't have a 13 or 18 so that they can split down. They will be either lugging the engine or running too high of RPM's in the next full gear down. Both of which will be an mpg killer. I saw this coming and took it into account when I spec'd the truck I have on order. It ought to be a load of laughs to watch all the turtle races going on because the driver will just back out a notch or two to let the other truck get on around. If this 65 mandate becomes reality, my running 62 will work out fine. I'll let everyone else play the turtle race game, and I will be right dead center of the sweet spot on my engine at 62 in 16th gear direct. If the mandate doesn't come thru, I will still have two gears on up the line that I could use if I really wanted to stretch my legs. Having that 18 speed tied to 2.79 rear ends looks better all the time.

Now you will really see some speed differential! Remember, with the government, it is never about safety. They just try to make you believe that.

And yes it was a personal attack. You knew nothing about be or my experiences. You comment was not leveled at my statement, but was directed at me. There is a difference. If you could refute my statement, why didn't you do so? Your comment did nothing to refute what I had stated, but was leveled your comment at me. It is like when someone says something and then says "no pun intended". Yes it was, or the speaker would not have felt the need to make sure that the listener got the pun.

 

I swear, never in any profession before this one did I hear so much crying and hurt feelings.

 

It's already been proven that split speeds is dangerous. You and the FMCSA ATA and whoever else can think what you want to try and justify you not being a hazard, personally I don't care, I'll just go around you.

Besides isn't Canada having an issue with that whole speed limiter thing up there??? Aren't they now requiring trucks to stay in the right lane only, or something like that? WOW won't that be fun...lol.

If my post was a personal attack I would've quoted yours and said to you directly.......... There's a McDonalds in your area, you should go apply....

It does seem as though you are pretty proud of the FMCSA wanting to restrict truck speed. Why is that? Is it cause its actually more stressful being passed all the time? Personally, I'd get a little nervous with all these trainer company trucks like Swift passing me all day too.

 

It doesn't have anything to do with how I feel about it. The ATA and the TCA are both lobbying congress and pushing the FMCSA for speed limited trucks. The most recent study done by the FMCSA says to them that it is safer. You love to read a lot into a comment. Really could give a rip whether they speed limit trucks or not when it comes to my operation and am in no way "proud" of anything the government does. I would prefer they didn't, mostly because I don't like government meddling in anything.

I never said whether it was safer or not. Just stating the realities as they are and that my truck is spec'd so that whether they do it or not, it will not affect me, and either way my truck is spec'd for anything like this that comes along. Those whose trucks are not spec'd quite right for keeping the speed down and find themselves being forced into the speed limiter game will have some issues to deal with and will suffer because of any mandate.

Like I stated, it has nothing to do with safety. Nothing the government does has anything to do with safety. It is merely control over others that they seek. Any discontent with the speed limiter thing is misplaced at me. It is government that is your real problem. I just have to deal with any contingencies that may arise due to government goofiness.

But lets look at realities further. Just yesterday while running from OK to CO on two lanes with speeds of 65 mph. Even when I did the speed limit of 65, everyone was crawling all over my rear end... trucks, cars, motorcycles. This has gone on since the dawn of time. I might as well run the 62 I stated I prefer to do, so that they can get around quicker. I am not going to cater to everyone who is trying to get pole position at Daytona. Don't like it... tough.

And, by the way, what did everyone do when the national speed limit was 55 everywhere for almost 2 decades? Now we have 65 just about everywhere, with a lot of 70 and 75 thrown in. How is it that even with these increased speed limits are people still having a problem getting things done? I think that speaks more to them than it does any speed limit.

 

Like I said, this thread will end up 100 pages and not one person 's opinion will change.