Interesting Thought On Speed Limiters

From what I'm understanding, this speed limiter debate is not coming from just the ATA. Both FMCSA and the NHTSA are also on board in trying to get this passed.

Sambo, you've stumbled on something that is partly political, and only partly related to the FMCSA's concerns over safety. There are "groups" that constantly barrage the FMCSA with their misconceived concerns that big trucks are responsible for way too many accidents on our interstate system. I have friends who said things to me this week, while I was home having some more surgery, that indicated their concerns that "we truck drivers" are the cause of so many accidents on the roads. One of my wife's friends flat out told me how she zooms around the big trucks and cuts back in front of them so she can see. She said she "feels paranoid" when a truck is in front of her, beside her, or even approaching her! I kind of irritated her by suggesting that she might be the cause of some accidents with her erratic maneuvers around big trucks, but there are a lot of folks out here who think like she does. We have to conduct ourselves safely around the "not so intelligent masses" with whom we share the roadways. This whole scenario that is being played out between OOIDA and the FMCSA is a dance they are all too familiar with. It is a sort of CYA production so the FMCSA can give evidence that they have taken these concerns seriously and have tried to do something about them.

I guess my point of this question was, if OOIDA can prove to FMCSA and other government agencies that having speed limiters is deemed to be unsafe, is it not possible that the regulatory bodies would look at starting a motion to propose a new rule to outlaw speed limiters, thus forcing current companies who use them to have to remove them?

Not gonna happen! There is way too much evidence to the contrary. Both fuel efficiency and safety are well documented as being improved by reducing speeds.

I know there are some who would argue the fuel efficiency point with me, so let me just state that I have proven this myself. I understand the arguments about RPM's is the critical thing for fuel efficiency - I understand about operating your truck in it's power curve. I drive a 2014 Volvo that is governed at 63 MPH. It has a 12 speed I-shift automated manual transmission, what some folks refer to as an automatic transmission. When cruising the interstates at 63 in 12th gear it is less efficient than it would be if I were cruising at 68 or even 70 MPH. So, I always cruise the highways while bumping up against my governor, and I keep the transmission in the manual mode, not allowing it to shift out of 11th gear. This runs my engine at the proper RPM level so that I can get some great fuel mileage. Our driver development manager at the Gulfport terminal once asked me how I was getting such good fuel mileage, after he noticed my name was always on the short list of "three star" drivers who were getting the maximum bonus money paid out to them. I explained it to him and he was floored - he had never heard of anyone doing that little trick! Sometimes I think these folks in the office think we are just dumb rednecks who can't think for themselves.

Anyways, I wouldn't expect to be able to be driving that truck any faster any time soon!

OS the only part of your comment I disagree with is the supposed safety being improved by speed limiters.

Safety is not improved by speed limiting trucks to slower speeds than cars. It has been proven that a speed differential of more than 5 mph causes an increase of interactions that increases the risk of an accident. It also increases the problem of road rage because of too many drivers truck and otherwise that have a me first mentality. They won't slow down 1 or 2 mph and just follow the truck in front of them they have to go and pass them which causes rolling road blocks which irritates the 4 wheelers which causes them to do even more stupid things.

JakeBrake points out:

OS the only part of your comment I disagree with is the supposed safety being improved by speed limiters.

Safety is not improved by speed limiting trucks to slower speeds than cars.

You are talking about traffic safety, which involves the safety consciousness of all the drivers in a situation.

The safety in question that Old School is taking about is safety in a crash. The energy (technical term: momentum) in a 55 mph semi is exponentially less than the energy in a 65 mph truck. A faster truck would cause more damage in an accident than a slower moving one. This, a safer truck is a slower truck.

JakeBrake points out:

OS the only part of your comment I disagree with is the supposed safety being improved by speed limiters.

Safety is not improved by speed limiting trucks to slower speeds than cars.

You are talking about traffic safety, which involves the safety consciousness of all the drivers in a situation.

The safety in question that Old School is taking about is safety in a crash. The energy (technical term: momentum) in a 55 mph semi is exponentially less than the energy in a 65 mph truck. A faster truck would cause more damage in an accident than a slower moving one. This, a safer truck is a slower truck.

That is true. But is the increase in accidents because of people being stupid going to outweigh any decrease in the damage reduction. Add to that the fact that over 70 percent, if I'm remembering the figure right, occur in areas where the speed limit is 55 or less and I really don't see how it makes anyone safer.

people being stupid

Really? People can be stupid?

people being stupid

Really? People can be stupid?

Yes all the time every day I see someone I would swear has a death wish lol

As a C-store manager, I told my staff:

Always treat customers as equal or better. But never underestimate the stupidity of the general public.

As a C-store manager, I told my staff:

Always treat customers as equal or better. But never underestimate the stupidity of the general public.

I think Ron White put it best "You Can't Fix Stupid"