Speed limiters......

Yeah those guys in 65 mph trucks if they let off the go pedal the guy in the 64.75 mph truck that the 65 mph guy just spent 8 miles trying to pass is going to get passed by that knucklehead. I always said most of them in the governed trucks would run over their grandmother it's true. They won't let off for anything. Really does the blood pressure good to be in a governed truck.

 

It has been a long, long time since I drove a governed truck, but when I did, it was set at 65 and I typically ran around 60-62 mph. Gave me a bit of power left over if I was to blow a steer and that slight edge to get on around a 60-62 mph truck if I needed to. I found that staying off the governor had other advantages. I could apply power when I needed to for best effectiveness on working hills instead of being on the governor and not having any power to apply at the beginning of a hill and had to wait till the ECM saw fit for me to have power. Got a little better mpg on average doing it that way, and I never saw any appreciable loss of time or income as opposed to staying up at the governor. Granted, I don't like a governed truck nor do I feel some busy body mindset to sic big brother on truckers and force them to use governors.

 

I tell you, I ride 65-70 and at times when i'm in the mood I'll go 62, but them telling me to ride like Swift makes me want to throw up. I won't blame those who will somehow trick the ECM setting with some magic switch under the dash (perhaps a remote switch) aka Volkswagen emission compliance scandal. It is my understanding they won't give you citation for speeding if you're under speed limit (80 mph in UT) but rather for not having the setting on. So what, if you run below speed limit (say 79 in Parowan, UT), and you're pulled over and the setting on ECM shows 65? I think, the enforcement will be done on DOT scales rather then by regular state patrol cops (as long as you obeying their state law). Philosophically, I can see E-logs justified, but forcing us to run of the likes of Swifts, and Primes so that they make us less competitive in the name of safety, is criminal. And part of the reason I never wanted to start with Swift or Knight was their 61 mph. I need to speed up when the right music is on and even more when I listen to K.R. show.

 

Of course, there are some states where state patrol is the state DOT. That will be interesting.

 

Minnesota comes to mind.

 

As this proposal is currently written, it will only apply to new trucks. Wonder what damage that will do to new truck sales for a few years?

 

Probably not much different than the various emissions regs had...sales the year prior bumped up a bit due to those who want to "stock up" on the older unaffected model year, followed by a year or two of lower sales as people put off replacing stock as long as possible, before sales return to normal. Of course the megas will still be buying, because they already willingly restrict their trucks' speed...so in that regard, it may not hurt sales at all. What will be a kick in the teeth to all those in support of this reg is when the resale market of these governed trucks ain't what they've always enjoyed with their fleet trucks that could be turned up.

 

HERE....the DOT at the scales do 99.% of the enforcement. However, I know a fella that did get pulled over by a "state trooper" while speeding down a hill.

Cop: "Why isn't your speed limiter set to 105 km/hr?
Trucker: "It is. Want to check it?"
Cop: "Can't. I don't have the tool. If it's set, then why are you going 120 km/hr down that hill"
Trucker: "Gravity".

He allegedly got off with a warning. Also HERE, if you're traveling over 105, the cops can write you a ticket for not having your speed limiter set, which is a $400 fine I think. But if they wrote you a speeding ticket for 106 in a 100, it would be ~$50 and no points.
.

 

I'll be watching to see if the law gets challenged in the US courts. There have been a few different challenges up here. The truckers won in the lower court but lost on appeal. One fella argued that speed limiters violated his right to "safety and security of self" under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms (your constitution). The appeal judge agreed but ruled against him anyway because in the judge's mind the perceived safety of the public that speed limiter's provided (reduced speeds and reduced emissions) outweighed the trucker's right to safety. Yep this is quite an industry.

Let's say, a trucker is employed by a fleet and drives a 2014 model with no limiter. Company puts him into a 2020 truck with the limiter factory set at 65. Trucker says no I want to keep my old truck. Trucker gets fired. Trucker sues company for wrongful dismissal and violating his rights under the constitution. It will be interesting to see if the USA tramples on the trucker's rights just like Canada did.

 

USA will....its already happening. And with many Americans growing reluctance to fight for our rights...its going to be worse.