Proposed nationwide 65mph truck limit

[CNGL-Leudimin]

Obviously some of you haven't been to Europe. Here all trucks are limited to 56 mph due to EU mandate (that weird number is due to the mandate being in km/h, and in that unit it is a round number: 90), and many countries have a 50 mph truck speed limit. The exception is the UK, where lorries (as they call trucks) theoretically could do 60, but they are capped to 56 due to the aforementioned mandate.

And anyway, aren't company trucks in the US already limited? At least Big Rig Steve's truck is capped at 65.

[oscar]

And anyway, aren't company trucks in the US already limited? At least Big Rig Steve's truck is capped at 65.

Don't know about the rest of the country, but the big rigs I saw last week on I-10 in west Texas were keeping up with the 80mph speed limit. If they had speed governors, they were adjusted, as the proposed legislation would not allow, for the higher speed limits out West.

The article cited upthread noted a proposed nationwide truck speed limit set by Federal regulation has stalled in the last three Presidential administrations. Not often they all agree on anything. The bill sponsors should take the hint.

[jeffandnicole]

And anyway, aren't company trucks in the US already limited? At least Big Rig Steve's truck is capped at 65.

There are some companies that may govern their company's trucks, but it's a decision made by the company. It wouldn't make much sense to govern a vehicle to 65 mph in a state that allows 70, so maybe they're governed to the speed limit of the state that the trucks most often drive in, or they're attempting to save on gas. Also, this doesn't apply solely to trucks, but vehicles as well. One company I see on the roads have a sticker stating their vans are limited to 70 mph.

Most over-the-road truckers aren't speed governed.

The article cited upthread noted a proposed nationwide truck speed limit set by Federal regulation has stalled in the last three Presidential administrations. Not often they all agree on anything. The bill sponsors should take the hint.

Many bills are written in such a way where if they aren't passed, they automatically are reintroduced in the next session as long as the main sponsor is still in office. Many bills aren't even noticed for many years, and just languish hoping for some attention. This one is no different.

[SSOWorld]

And anyway, aren't company trucks in the US already limited? At least Big Rig Steve's truck is capped at 65.

Don't know about the rest of the country, but the big rigs I saw last week on I-10 in west Texas were keeping up with the 80mph speed limit. If they had speed governors, they were adjusted, as the proposed legislation would not allow, for the higher speed limits out West.

The article cited upthread noted a proposed nationwide truck speed limit set by Federal regulation has stalled in the last three Presidential administrations. Not often they all agree on anything. The bill sponsors should take the hint.

Yet they won't - cause the bonus $$$ they get from lobbyists pretty much seal the need to sponsor it.

[SectorZ]

here in the Northeast, keeping the trucks out of the left lane(s) seems like it would help traffic flow

They already do that, at least where I live. MA state law says that trucks must stay in the right two lanes (not counting the breakdown lane when it is open), and truck drivers always follow that specific law.

Always? Oh I need to get you out on 95/128 during rush hour more...

[jakeroot]

here in the Northeast, keeping the trucks out of the left lane(s) seems like it would help traffic flow

They already do that, at least where I live. MA state law says that trucks must stay in the right two lanes (not counting the breakdown lane when it is open), and truck drivers always follow that specific law.

Always? Oh I need to get you out on 95/128 during rush hour more...

WA has the same law (no trucks in #1 lane when there are 3+ lanes), and it's followed exceptionally well. Are you saying that it's ignored in Mass?

[yand]

here in the Northeast, keeping the trucks out of the left lane(s) seems like it would help traffic flow

They already do that, at least where I live. MA state law says that trucks must stay in the right two lanes (not counting the breakdown lane when it is open), and truck drivers always follow that specific law.

Always? Oh I need to get you out on 95/128 during rush hour more...

From my experience, truckers would rather tailgate on the 2nd right lane than pass. Trucks illegally taking the left lane(s) are pretty rare.

[ftballfan]

And anyway, aren't company trucks in the US already limited? At least Big Rig Steve's truck is capped at 65.

Don't know about the rest of the country, but the big rigs I saw last week on I-10 in west Texas were keeping up with the 80mph speed limit. If they had speed governors, they were adjusted, as the proposed legislation would not allow, for the higher speed limits out West.

The article cited upthread noted a proposed nationwide truck speed limit set by Federal regulation has stalled in the last three Presidential administrations. Not often they all agree on anything. The bill sponsors should take the hint.

On the Pennsylvania Turnpike a couple of weeks ago, I saw empty trucks running in the 75-80 range

[sprjus4]

I was on I-10 last summer in Louisiana, I recall one port container truck easily maintaining 80 mph with all the other traffic, in a 70 mph zone.

I'm opposed to a governed speed limit. Trucks should be able to drive as fast as cars can, if it's possible. If it's a straightaway with a 70 mph speed limit, let the truck run 70 - 75 mph with everybody else.

Now, if a governed speed limit was set at 75 mph to prevent excessive speed, I could understand that more. Most truck tires aren't designed to exceed 75 mph, and governing trucks at that speed would be reasonable. 65 mph is unreasonable slow, especially on 70 - 75 mph freeways that can easily that speed on a big rig.

[webny99]

here in the Northeast, keeping the trucks out of the left lane(s) seems like it would help traffic flow

They already do that, at least where I live. MA state law says that trucks must stay in the right two lanes (not counting the breakdown lane when it is open), and truck drivers always follow that specific law.

Always? Oh I need to get you out on 95/128 during rush hour more...

I'm referring more to cases like the Thruway where there is just two lanes. Or really any case where the trucks can legally use all lanes and thus block other traffic from passing. Short of widening most freeways east of the Mississippi to six lanes, less trucks passing each other seems like a step in the right direction.

[vdeane]

Or you could end up with a truck going 65 passing a truck going 64.5.

I'd be curious to see comments regarding how well it works in Ontario/Québec.  Both jurisdictions already require truck speed limiters.  Both jurisdictions also have absurdly low freeway speed limits - to the point where there wouldn't be a speed differential if everyone obeyed the speed limit.

[Brandon]

here in the Northeast, keeping the trucks out of the left lane(s) seems like it would help traffic flow

They already do that, at least where I live. MA state law says that trucks must stay in the right two lanes (not counting the breakdown lane when it is open), and truck drivers always follow that specific law.

Always? Oh I need to get you out on 95/128 during rush hour more...

From my experience, truckers would rather tailgate on the 2nd right lane than pass. Trucks illegally taking the left lane(s) are pretty rare.

Then you need to visit Chicagoland.  Trucks are restricted to the right 2 lanes, but can be found all over the road, including the left lane from time-to-time.

[webny99]

Or you could end up with a truck going 65 passing a truck going 64.5.

So then it is a question of whether the trade-off is worth it. Would you rather fewer trucks passing each other, but generally at a slower rate, or more trucks passing, at varying speed differentials?

I'd be curious to see comments regarding how well it works in Ontario/Québec.  Both jurisdictions already require truck speed limiters.  Both jurisdictions also have absurdly low freeway speed limits - to the point where there wouldn't be a speed differential if everyone obeyed the speed limit.

Interesting you say that, as I have definitely heard comments from friends in Ontario that ON 401 between Toronto (technically Cobourg) and Kingston is terrible due to trucks passing at low speed differentials thanks to the speed limiters. Many of Ontario's rural freeways (401 from London to Toronto, QEW from Niagara to Toronto, 400 from Barrie to Toronto, etc.) are six lanes, so no issues there.
And west of London, inbound/outbound truck traffic is split between the Windsor (401) and Sarnia (402) border crossings, so it makes sense that the biggest issues develop east of Toronto. Same with QEW south of the falls with a good number of the trucks splitting off at Lewiston.

I've never had any problems with trucks on ON 403; it feels like the Thruway, but with about a quarter of the truck traffic. I can't speak for Quebec, but obviously they don't have the GTA-level of truck volumes to deal with.

[froggie]

Something none of you have considered regarding trucks, regulators, and truck speed:  fuel economy.  According to fleetowner.com, a truck traveling at 75 mph consumes 27% more fuel than one going 65 mph..  That's a huge difference, and is one big reason why most fleet vehicles have regulators and the industry as a whole supports regulators.

[GCrites]

I remember when Ohio had a split speed limit. It was pretty terrible, especially on 4-lane interstates. What it did was create a caste system where the left lane was the rocket lane with drivers doing 80+ (this was when the car speed limit was 65 rather than the 70 it is today) and the right lane was stuck doing 50 or even less under the 55 mph truck limit. Older people and other slower vehicles made the semis drop below the speed limit in the right lane where the semis were permanently trapped since they couldn't accelerate quickly enough out of the right lane to do anything with traffic doing 80 in the other. Also, if you didn't want to go 80+, too bad, into the right lane with you where were forced to go 49.

[vdeane]

Or you could end up with a truck going 65 passing a truck going 64.5.

So then it is a question of whether the trade-off is worth it. Would you rather fewer trucks passing each other, but generally at a slower rate, or more trucks passing, at varying speed differentials?

Given that, as I mentioned, not all speedometers are created equal, as well as the effects of engine power, hills (even minor changes in elevation that we wouldn't even notice in a car can cause issues), loading, etc. it's likely that speed limiters wouldn't actually produce a uniform speed among trucks.  And, of course, truck drivers don't care how many cars they hold up when micropassing another truck.

[webny99]

And, of course, truck drivers don't care how many cars they hold up when micropassing another truck.

I tend to disagree. Trucks are usually a lot more cognizant than cars in this regard. If they've committed to pass they usually just get on with it and then get back over, unlike the many cars that hang out on the left long after they've finished passing.

[Chris19001]

We're at a point where we will start to see more autonomous vehicles in conditions that can generally be trusted to be relatively "easy", and human-operated vehicles gain more autonomous functions.  But the latest auto and insurance industry projections I've seen suggest it's still another 30 years or so before half the private vehicles on the road are capable of full autonomy.

I dunno how much I would trust any insurance industry projections. They benefit from human drivers, who have to pay huge sums for their policies. Robotic cars likely won't need such extensive insurance coverage, assuming they become widespread and normal.

You're partially right in that you're thinking of personal auto insurance protections.  They generally make money for the insurers.  The opposite is generally true for the commercial (business) auto with today's market.  It is a HUGE money loser for insurers partially because commercial truck driver demand is so great.  A company won't make money if it can't get its goods to market, so they will find a driver no matter the quality.  Horrific accidents ensue as many of these folks distract themselves with everything but driving the truck.  As the economy booms, this trend gets worse.
It is the other commercial coverages which generally are bought with business auto that make the industry its profits.  If there were self driving truck fleets out there, I believe the insurance industry would be thrilled.
My apologies to the quality commercial drivers out there, keep up the good work.

[US 89]

And, of course, truck drivers don't care how many cars they hold up when micropassing another truck.

I tend to disagree. Trucks are usually a lot more cognizant than cars in this regard. If they've committed to pass they usually just get on with it and then get back over, unlike the many cars that hang out on the left long after they've finished passing.

Clearly, you’ve never been stuck behind a truck going 62.1 mph passing a truck going 61.9 mph. It eats away at the soul.

[sprjus4]

And, of course, truck drivers don't care how many cars they hold up when micropassing another truck.

I tend to disagree. Trucks are usually a lot more cognizant than cars in this regard. If they've committed to pass they usually just get on with it and then get back over, unlike the many cars that hang out on the left long after they've finished passing.

It's one thing when the car hangs out in the left lane, and you can pass him on the right.

When you have a truck passing at 63.850 mph in the left lane, and a truck in the right lane going 63.851 mph in the right lane, and the speed limit is 70-80 mph, it backs traffic up for miles, and creates recurring backups and slow downs behind the truck as traffic piles up.

[webny99]

And, of course, truck drivers don't care how many cars they hold up when micropassing another truck.

I tend to disagree. Trucks are usually a lot more cognizant than cars in this regard. If they've committed to pass they usually just get on with it and then get back over, unlike the many cars that hang out on the left long after they've finished passing.

Clearly, you've never been stuck behind a truck going 62.1 mph passing a truck going 61.9 mph. It eats away at the soul.

I certainly have, many times. But the confidence that they'll do it and get over when they're done makes it much more bearable than a car doing the same thing.

[vdeane]

I certainly have, many times. But the confidence that they'll do it and get over when they're done makes it much more bearable than a car doing the same thing.

Even if it takes much, much longer and you can't see anything around them?  Especially if it goes on for miles if the truck is actually passing 3 trucks and a RV?  Even if the car stays in the left lane (the majority of people do move over eventually, though maybe not if there's another car nearby that they're gonna pass), they can still be passed on the right.

[webny99]

I'm not saying I like waiting for trucks to pass. But the greatest joy is when they're done and traffic can flow freely and the backlog clears up. That joy doesn't happen when it comes to left lane hogs, because they carry the backlog with them; it never goes away. And the ire of having to pass on the right dissipates any sanity preserved from the other factors.

[sprjus4]

I certainly have, many times. But the confidence that they'll do it and get over when they're done makes it much more bearable than a car doing the same thing.

Even if it takes much, much longer and you can't see anything around them?  Especially if it goes on for miles if the truck is actually passing 3 trucks and a RV?  Even if the car stays in the left lane (the majority of people do move over eventually, though maybe not if there's another car nearby that they're gonna pass), they can still be passed on the right.

I was going up I-64 in Virginia to Richmond last weekend, and their was 4 trucks, 3 cars and 2 vehicles with a boat all doing about 60 mph in the right lane, and a truck in the left lane passing all 9 vehicles at 60.5 mph, in a 70 mph zone. Stuck behind it for about 15 minutes or about 20 miles. Traffic was piled up, and nobody could go around. I wish that truck would have gotten a ticket.

There's only a 30 mile stretch that actually gets up to 70 mph, and that truck ruined the entire thing 

[sprjus4]

I'm not saying I like waiting for trucks to pass. But the greatest joy is when they're done and traffic can flow freely and the backlog clears up. That joy doesn't happen when it comes to left lane hogs, because they carry the backlog with them; it never goes away. And the ire of having to pass on the right dissipates any sanity preserved from the other factors.

See my example above. It was not fun judging by the fact most of the 70 mph zone was stuck behind a truck doing 60.5 mph and having no place to get around it. And when it finally did move over, by the time the huge traffic load backlogged picked back up speed, we entered a 55 mph work zone where people feel they have to drive 35 mph because there's barriers on one side.

At least all the work zones and barriers on I-64 are widening it to 6-lanes. They just finished a bunch of 6-lane widening down in Newport News & Williamsburg, and it's so much smoother than it was when it was 2-lanes, and it's easy to pass slow moving vehicles like that truck.