Congress Introduces 65 MPH Speed Limiter For Trucks

Congress Introduces 65 MPH Speed Limiter For Trucks

Just what we needed - bypassing DOT , congress seeks speed limiter bill...

Rick

"The trucking industry says limiting truck speeds to 65 would create dangerous speed differentials with faster-traveling cars."

... then why are some of the big companies already limited there?

I'm honestly not a fan of this idea though, I (and we) have probably all seen what happens when trucks get into ****ing matches over speed, and that's bad enough when they're only racing each other, not including the fifteen other trucks that just escaped a lane closure in a work zone.

I works pretty well right now with various trucks governed at various speeds.......59, 61, 63, 65, 67, 69. It makes passing or getting passed work out. If EVERYONE was governed at 65 it would be a total fuster cluck out here! I am governed at 65. Whenever I spot a faster truck in my mirror, I just let off the gas, coast down to 55 or so and let them pass. You lose seconds doing that. 15 minutes later I can still see the 67 mph truck ahead of me. Some people have no sense. Some of these asshats in the right lane will back up traffic in the hammer lane for a mile.

I’m sorry one of my state senators is an idiot. Hopefully its just the 2 idiots feeling this is more important than other matters and it doesn’t gain traction so too speak

You will ALWAYS get out of trouble in a rig by slowing down. Anybody that thinks being able to speed up faster than the other trucks is the safest way to avoid trouble is sadly uninformed and inexperienced. This is not a big deal. Learning how to drive a big truck properly is much more critical.

Can’t outrun a tornado in a slow truck!

Sadly, this has nothing to do with safety. Follow the money, see who is behind the lobbyists bending the ear of Congress and you'll quickly figure out why they're pushing so hard.

Sadly, this has nothing to do with safety. Follow the money, see who is behind the lobbyists bending the ear of Congress and you'll quickly figure out why they're pushing so hard.

Actually I'd love to know who is going to benefit financially by reducing truck speeds to 65. I don't follow politics so I have no idea who is lobbying to slow down trucks. What is their agenda?

I agree with Old School - it's not a big deal at all:

1) You can run a 65 mph truck from New York to Los Angeles in about two days.

2) There are tons of drivers making $70,000 - $80,000 per year driving trucks that run 65 mph or less.

3) The overwhelming majority of trucks are running in that range already, either because of speed limits, governed trucks, heavy traffic, or fuel economy.

It's funny how every time you mention any sort of change to the trucking industry you get a bunch of people screaming that the sky is going to fall. I've been listening to it for over 25 years about every single change that has come down the line and so far the sky is holding up really well. It's still way, way up there.

If you're talking as 2 days being 48 hours of continuous driving you're close or as a team then definitely but the distance from Buffalo to LA is just under 2600 miles so for a solo driver, you're looking at 4 days of driving. The people pushing the lobbyists and putting up all the money are the members of the ATA which are mostly the mega carriers. Just as the CEO of US Express was overjoyed with the ELD mandate and commented that it would force smaller companies to close giving them more freight, I see a similar issue here. A company that doesn't have as many drivers to relay a load will be effected if forced to run a truck that can't maintain current posted speed limits. I never said the sky is falling and never have. I do have an issue with companies using lobbyists to effect laws to control competition and that's for any business. If you can't compete with service itself, you shouldn't be using money and politics to push others out of the way. I'm well aware that's how things have become but it doesn't make it right.

The other aspect comes down to the original claim by the ATA, which is safety. If that were truly the case, then why are 12 states currently in the process of repealing their split speed limit laws? They're doing away with it because of safety issues and accidents caused by traffic flow being forced to run different speeds. Yet still, you have a powerful group using money to influence law who want to impose split speed limits nationally? Something doesn't pass the smell check.