What is the rationale for the Bridge Laws?

Because the weight is more spread out.

 

In your experience in the real world, do most truckers refer to the KPRA laws as the bridge laws too?

 

Ok, yeah I understand that now.

 

A lot of what we did paid by weight. And that adds up over time.

And the weights I mentioned were overall gross weight. We weighed around 35000 empty so we were hauling 69 to 70k of product.

 

I created this thread because I didn't know that the word bridge in bridge laws referred to a part of the tractor-trailer called a bridge. I thought that bridge laws had the name bridge laws because the bridge laws were designed to protect bridges, defining bridges as an elevated pathway to carry traffic over bodies of water or areas of low elevation. I thought to myself: How would a short wheelbase protect a bridge when shorter wheelbase put more of a strain on a bridge?

 

ok

 

A lot do. The only reason I said something to correct your terminology was because of how you posed your question. I thought your line of reasoning was already leaning toward the weight and distance end of it because you questioned why they’d want trucks to have their tandems ahead.

 

Am I the only person who is used to hearing other truckers referring to the KPRA laws as the "bridge laws"?

 

Well, you should be able to see why this confused me before I created this thread then.

 

I meant to create a thread about this issue about a year ago, but I forgot to. Today I had to look up the KPRA laws for GA and AL, and it reminded me of this question. Now I understand it all 100%.