68mph……??

I’m like you. I rarely run faster than 68 as it is, but that isn’t the point.

 

Yall just sit side by side at 68 and make the 4 wheelers do it too. The idea is stupid. They want to regulate truck speed, then regulate everyone, cars included.

 

I always thought the big ATA companies wanted a federal-mandated speed limit of 65mph. At least, that was all the talk a few years back? Then someone mentioned them giving trucks with automated braking 70mph... then I didn't read much about it till recently. During that time I noticed Melton, Maverick, Swift... all were running faster than 65mph. Sure #### all these companies are now running 68mph bumper to bumper. I'm a rock n a stream as it is, so I typically cruise at 62mph or so, the old TMC speed. Much more enjoyable than trying to run 65mph and having to deal with a slow pass every 5-10 miles...


Needless to say... congestion will get worse. It dumbfounds me how the general public in favor of nonsense like this doesn't realize that.

People have said 2003 and older will be exempt? Not sure what the reasoning is there... I'm sure it'll be like the ELD mandate and gliders will find a loophole based on engine build dates... probably some exemption for emergency and agriculture carriers as well. And I'm sure many owner-operator single truck carriers will not comply... they'll probably fight this like Canada if they don't figure out how to do it electronically through the ELD or PCM. Dealers wont wrench once they realize the truck isn't limited... etc.



Seems like more over regulated ######## to me. Won't make the roads any safer and will simply add to the frustration out here.

 

Well many drivers and owners think it is unfair that the markets are messed up and they want the government involved with fixing things or giving more control to the driver but when you ask for things to make it fair, it opens the door for the government to do other things.

Until this industry stops being so fractured, nothing is going to get fixed and it will remain to be a target of the do-gooders and hate groups like the ATA.

 

So here we go ...

Speed Limiting Technology

All vehicles with electronic engine control units (ECUs) are electronically speed limited to prevent general damage to the vehicle. This is because the ECU monitors an engine’s RPM and also controls the supply of fuel to the engine. Available information indicates that ECUs have been installed in most heavy trucks since 1999, though we are aware that some manufacturers were still installing mechanical controls through 2003.19 In addition, it appears that the practice of voluntarily setting the speed limiting devices, most often at speeds from 60 to 70 mph, has grown in recent years. Some trucking fleets use ECUs to limit the speed of their trucks in order to reduce the number of speed-related crashes, reduce fuel consumption, and reduce maintenance costs.

Hino Motors indicated in its comments to the 2007 Request for Comments that it manufactured mechanically controlled vehicles through model year 2003.
​

And then for tampering

As discussed above, at this time NHTSA is proposing to require a speed limiting device that reports the last two modifications of the set speed and the last two modifications of the speed determination parameters, along with the time and date of the modifications.
.....
drivers and carriers would be subject to Federal civil penalties if they are determined to have operated CMVs with a GVWR of more than 26,000 pounds in interstate commerce when the speed limiting device is (1) not functioning, or (2) set at a maximum speed in excess of the maximum specified set speed. They would be subject to Federal civil penalties of up to $2,750 for drivers and up to $11,000 for employers who allow or require drivers to operate CMVs with speed limiting devices set at speeds greater than the maximum specified set speed. If a speed limiting device is not functioning, drivers and carriers could avoid violations by driving no faster than the maximum specified set speed until the vehicle is repaired. ​

 

GovInfo

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2016-09-07/pdf/2016-20934.pdf

 

"The agencies estimate that limiting
the speed of heavy vehicles to 60 mph
would save 162 to 498 lives annually,
limiting the speed of heavy vehicles to
65 mph would save 63 to 214 lives
annually, and limiting the speed of
heavy vehicles to 68 mph would save 27
to 96 lives annually. Although we
believe that the 60 mph alternative
would result in additional safety
benefits, we are not able to quantify the
60 mph alternative with the same
confidence as the 65 mph and 68 mph
alternatives. " (read, we completely made stuff up for the 60 mph stats)




"In evaluating the role travel speed
plays in heavy vehicle crashes, the
agencies used FARS and GES crash data
over the 10-year period between 2004
and 2013 to examine crashes involving
heavy vehicles (i.e., vehicles with a
GVWR of over 11,793.4 kg (26,000
pounds)) on roads with posted speed
limits of 55 mph or above. The agency
focused on crashes in which the speed
of the heavy vehicle likely contributed
to the severity of the crash (e.g., single
vehicle crashes, crashes in which the
heavy vehicle was the striking vehicle).
The agencies estimated that these
crashes resulted in 10,440 fatalities 38
from 2004 to 2013 (approximately 1,044
annually)."

So let me get this straight, with 35,000 vehicle related fatalities per year, only 1000 of which involve heavy vehicles (also in "study"), we are focusing on a 6-20% reduction of fatalities not across the board, but of that smaller subset, so this is going to be focusing on reducing usa vehicle fatalities at BEST by half a percent.

Theres a huge problem when you try to focus on a diminishing returns issue BEFORE you try tackling a broader possibility with more widespread benefits.

 

But if we lower the max speed to 45mph there will be zero deaths from crashes.

Suicides by trucker will be thru the roof, tho.

 

The thing is everybody is against it mostly because they will get paid less while spending same amount of time otr....because they are on cpm... So maybe fmcsa should regulate that and make the pay by hour mandatory with cpm/%load as supplemental option.