The FMCSA Wants To Hear From You

The FMCSA has opened up a time for public comment on speed limiters. They comment time ends November 7, 2016.

I posted my comment disagreeing with this miserable example of government/nanny state bureaucratic overreach. Too bad that I am not a special interest lobbyist who would actually be heard.

Let me preface this by saying, I am not a proponent of speed limiters...however:

I agree with bill on not letting the government stick its' hands into more and more of our lives, however, I have been listening to the commentary on this subject on road dog radio for a couple of weeks now, and, I have to say, the arguments that I've heard leave me with some questions.

They are saying that enabling speed limiters on all trucks will increase the chance for collisions, due to speed differential between cars and trucks. I could see that point, except for the fact that most of your majors have already been governing their trucks down to 62mph or 65mph for some time. While I haven't done any research, i'd be interested to know what the crash statistics are for the last 3 or 4 years. Since enabling speed limiters on many of your major carrier trucks, have the incidents of vehicular collision increased? If not, then the argument doesn't hold any weight, I wouldn't think.

They are also saying that creating a speed limiter will increase driver fatigue, since it is now going to take them longer to make their runs, and they'll be on the roads more. Again, I can see one aspect of this argument, except for the fact that I don't think it will make any difference in how long a driver spends on the roads. It doesn't matter whether that truck is doing 65 or 75mph, he is going to run as many hours per day as he can. The only change it will make is that it may take an extra half a day, at best, to complete a run, providing that run is a substantial distance. The sooner that driver can finish his run, the sooner he can pick up another and get moving on that one. As long as the driver is running his legal hours each day, and getting enough rest each night, the speed limiter should have no effect on fatigue, unless they are saying that running slower drains you faster, because it just feels like it is taking forever to get anywhere, in which case, yeah, I can see that.

They also say that you will run into a turtle race scenario. This one I agree with, however, this is always going to be a problem with your major carriers, since they seem to govern their trucks at different speeds. I think Swift governs at 63? Knight governs at 65, seems like most will generally put their speed limiters in that area. For these trucks, it's always going to be a battle, nothing you can do about that unless they all get together and decide to govern their speeds the same.

Another argument they are fighting are the ELD's, which I think are a good idea. Fatigued driving is a problem for sure, and those who do not run ELD's are at a greater potential of running illegal. Again, there are drivers out there who will push the boundaries many times, chasing the tigers tail, trying to increase their profits, and by doing so are putting others and themselves at risk. They are using the argument that installing gps tracking devices are a breach of their constitutional rights. I suppose for an O/O or L/O, this could be a valid argument, because the truck either directly or technically belongs to them. However, for company drivers, it reminds me a lot of the in cab camera debate that was hashed out, not too long ago on these very forums.

I'm not saying that all independent drivers will break these laws, but I am saying that there are those out there who will, and those who will push it if they can. The rules of the road are there for a reason, to protect people, if you have just a few that are going to throw caution to the wind, it puts a kink into the whole thing.

I do agree with the statement that, the highways are safest when everyone is moving at the same relative speed. Problem with that is that, even if they don't put speed limiters on anything, we're not all moving at the same relative speeds. Again, different companies already govern their trucks, and most of your 4 wheelers are all driving at different speeds as well. Seems to me like that argument is not valid either, since, unless you get these majors to remove their speed limiters (which they won't do), then everyone is going to be moving at different speeds.

The solution I came up with are: 1) find a way to increase driver pay. Perhaps this will ease the feeling of needing to rush to make more money? I don't know, could cause a problem in the other direction I guess.

2). STRICTLY enforce speed limits. Again, far too many times I see trucks breaking speed limits. I agree, do not put speed limiters on the trucks, however, if you are in a truck (or a 4 wheeler), if you are caught speeding, it's a ticket, cut and dry. And I don't mean the occasional, going down a hill and you went 2mph over, i'm talking about those who are intentionally speeding, and you know it because they travel at 5 to 10mph over the speed limits on flat grades.

I guess that is my pet peeve really. Speeders and disregard for caution signs on the roads. I don't know why, but for some reason, it irks me.

Maybe i'm wrong about all of this, and I welcome someone to set me straight. I do know one thing for sure, more government reach is not welcome, that is for sure, however, I do think there are some areas (ELD's) where improvement can be made.

Several states tried the split speed limits for cars vs trucks and they found out quickly that it did indeed cause more accidents. You mention Swift being governed at one speed, Knight another. Yes they're governed but at different speeds. If you force all trucks to be governed at the same speed, I suggest watching a Daytona or Talladega race to see what happens when you have groups of vehicles driving in a cluster and one vehicle does something really really dumb.

True, but then again, at the races, they are racing at almost 200 mph, and often within 1 to 3 feet of each other. However, even governing trucks all at the same speed wouldn't really be the answer, because the load each truck is carrying will make a big difference. A truck hauling 25,000 lbs is going to pull a hill better than a truck hauling 43,000 lbs.

Sambo you are right most of the major carriers have speed limiters. And look at the problems that are caused. All the problems that you listed you can see in the highways all the time. 1. Speed limiters force a driver to get far closer than is safe to pass a truck governed at close to the same speed. Speed limiters also cause 4 wheelers to get irritated at being held up and then they do really stupid things. Just today I was passing a 60mph truck and I'm governed at 63. I almost shoved a car off the road because they didn't want to wait for me to get back over after I passed the other guy. If I hadn't been paying attention or texting on my phone like I see so many other drivers doing 4 wheeler and big trucks alike, I would have gone over and he would have ended up in a ditch. 2. Speed limiters do effect fatigue because when you are governed so far below the posted limit that you arent going to exceed it It is very easy to become bored which makes you tired. Especially if scenery doesn't change. 3. There are always going to be turtle races as long as there are governed trucks. There is always going to be one guy that is loaded light that is going to try to pass everyone on the slightest bit of a hill because they think that it will get them There faster. Whenever the speed limiter is brought up everyone always points to Canada and uses them as an example but what they forget is that the speed limiters in Canada are set above the posted speed limit. So there isn't as big of change for the people that follow the limits. I totally agree that they need to focus more on enforcement of the speed limit before they worry about speed limiters.

On the eld issue it isn't the eld I mind so much as the hos we have to follow. I don't like having a box tell me when I'm supposed to sleep and when I'm supposed to be awake. I understand the need for hos rules because there are guys out there that don't know when they need to pull over but there needs to be some flexibility in them. Personally I think if there was more flexibility in the hos the parking problem would probably ease up a little bit as well.

I have 3 major issues with this idea which all i believe have been mentioned

government over reach being number one

trucks being unable to actually do posted speed limits which can become a danger in multiple ways/scenarios. we are even taught this in our cdl manuals from the dmv/dot.

for those who get paid by the mile, i imagine this would be hurting some pocket books, but then again, maybe thats what they want.

The one thing missing from every argument against speed limiters is the most basic and important thing of all - people making the conscious decision to be a safe, courteous driver.

Trucks will not be clumped together if people would allow others to pass if they're faster and everyone kept a safe following distance. It's a conscious decision.

And causing more driver fatigue by making everyone go slower is not true at all. What are you saying - let us go fast enough that the thrill of it all keeps us awake? Yeah, ok. Love to see you sell that one to your safety manager.

And driving faster isn't going to mean less time on the highway. People don't run 90 mph so that they only have to drive 5 hours a day. Be serious. They'll drive as long as possible just like drivers governed at 60.

The solution I came up with are: 1) find a way to increase driver pay. Perhaps this will ease the feeling of needing to rush to make more money?

Unfortunately there are "country-club" prisons filled with billionaires who got caught trying to cheat people out of money. There's no such thing as paying someone enough money that they won't want more.

In the end it's funny to me how everyone makes up all of these silly excuses why it would be dangerous to drive slower when in reality people simply want to drive fast as h*ll. It's as simple as that. Just say it like it is. Same with not wanting electronic logbooks. People want to cheat if they want to cheat. Say it like it is. I want to be able to run two logbooks or fudge my numbers so I can make all the money I can. Remember, I started back in '93 when cheating the logbook wasn't just something you thought about doing, it's just what everyone did. And you saw quite a few 90+ mph trucks on the road. To say that electronic logbooks or speed restrictions wouldn't make things safer is not a valid argument.

And you guys also have to realize the larger carriers are governed so slow for fuel mileage purposes anyhow, not so much safety purposes. If an 80,000 pound big rig hits something at 60 mph it isn't going to do much less damage than at 70 mph. You're also not going to get stopped much faster going a few mph slower. But the fuel mileage difference is huge when you calculate the difference across 2,000 or 5,000 trucks. It comes to millions of dollars every year. That's why the larger carriers are pushing the limits of how slow they can go - it's money in the bank.

If everyone really cared about safety above all else they would govern every vehicle on the road somewhere between 60 mph and 70 mph and strictly enforce following distances. Cameras can quickly and easily determine with fantastic precision how closely one vehicle is following another, and they can also read license plates very well. It wouldn't be difficult with modern technology to prevent a lot of the aggressive driving you see out there today.

And for those who get bored easily I highly suggest getting yourself an inexpensive stock car or drag car and taking it to the track to race against the real men and women drivers out there and let them show you how it's done. I've always been a huge racing fan and I was lucky enough to do a little bit of it myself. I drive like a grandpa on the highways but I love speed and adrenaline as much as anyone on the track.

Yeah, I work for a company that has their trucks governed at 60, and it seems to have started back in 2008 when fuel prices spiked, so it was for savings reasons like Brett mentioned above.But apparently they also found a reduction in accidents. As someone who has spent the past 6 months driving at 60 (actually 57 according to gps, because the calibration of my truck is off), I think it's likely because it creates automatic following distance because most everyone else is going away from you. I'm wondering if that benefit would go away if everyone was governed to the same speed.

I think it's likely because it creates automatic following distance because most everyone else is going away from you. I'm wondering if that benefit would go away if everyone was governed to the same speed.

Following distance is a conscious choice. A professional needs to have the discipline to do whatever it takes to be as safe as possible. I think you're right in a way that the slow speed is causing everyone to be moving away from you. But that's only helping people who would otherwise be tailgating if they were in a truck that would run fast enough to catch people.