I think that it is totally rude when a truck driver uses his engine instead of his brakes to stop his vehicle for a red stoplight! Does anyone agree with this? I work on a busy truck route (Michigan Street in Orlando, FL) and when the light turns red for Division Street, boy do these truckers let out that annoying sound!
My opinion is in populated areas these drivers should show some respect and stop their trucks the normal way! Unfortunatley, when this happens I cannot tell the driver personally cause he is too far (and fast) away, but nonetheless it is annoying. I think it should be illegal all together, or at least in urban areas. What do you think?
Jake should allow truckers to brake their own trucks in the manner that they see fit. When he starts jumping in and braking their trucks for them, I agree, that is terribly rude of him.
There are signs posted as you get off the interstate at each interchange in Norman that jake braking is prohibited. No idea if it's enforced or not, but I don't hear it very often, so they must be respecting the signs.
no no no no, the last time I drove a truck I did 110 the whole way without hitting the brakes once.
refueling was a little bit interesting.
Most towns I've been to have signs at the city limit prohibiting jake braking. Maybe that's just a rural west thing.
Only rude if done in residential areas. Where you wouldn't expect to find too many trucks anyway, so...
Question, though: is there a benefit to jake braking over using normal disc brakes other than saving wear on the pads?
not just long-term wear, but also short-term heating, which will reduce your brake effectiveness. don't want to lose your brakes halfway down a long hill!
Quote from: corco on May 14, 2011, 09:54:24 PM
Most towns I've been to have signs at the city limit prohibiting jake braking. Maybe that's just a rural west thing.
They are all over the place in Nebraska. It's rare to find a city that doesn't have one.
Quote from: huskeroadgeek on May 15, 2011, 01:35:43 PM
Quote from: corco on May 14, 2011, 09:54:24 PM
Most towns I've been to have signs at the city limit prohibiting jake braking. Maybe that's just a rural west thing.
They are all over the place in Nebraska. It's rare to find a city that doesn't have one.
it's probably a function of geography. you get just enough hills, that trucks get used to jake braking to descend the hills ... but also enough long flat sections, that there is a vast speed limit difference between rural stretches and towns. So the driver thinks "oh, 65 changes to 30, may as well turn the jake brakes on".
this describes eastern Wyoming and Colorado to a tee, and even western Nebraska has many hills ... and half the trucks through a town in Nebraska also will go through those places.
in purely mountainous areas, or places with the towns much closer together, you never get up to 65.
Engineering practice is a factor too. In Utah, for example, there is a standard sign banning compression braking (Jacobs Vehicle Systems, which manufactures jake brakes and considers the phrase "jake brake" to be something like a registered trademark, does not like prohibitory signs which use the phrase "JAKE BRAKE," so signs tend to use phrases like "ENGINE BRAKING" or "COMPRESSION BRAKING"), which is used on freeway exit ramps all over the Salt Lake City area. In California, however, the California Traffic Control Devices Committee has consistently rejected local calls for compression brake signing in situations similar to Salt Lake (i.e., freeway off-ramps in densely populated areas). This is really a difference in how willing the traffic sign policymakers are to accommodate a local concern which is more or less identical in both areas.
The argument against jake brake signing, which I agree with, is that truck drivers should not be using them in populated areas anyway because they are a noise nuisance. If the police wish to make an issue of it, they can pursue truckers under local noise ordinances and the like without the need for jake brake signing. Therefore, jake brake signs are unnecessary clutter, much like "WATCH FOR ICE" signs at bridges. For this reason you are more likely to see jake brake signs in states like Nebraska where sign message loads are poorly controlled. You will rarely see them in other states, like Kansas and California, where signs are used more sparingly.
You see them from time to time in NE Illinois and NW Indiana, but the term used is "engine braking".
Quote from: Brandon on May 15, 2011, 06:20:22 PM
You see them from time to time in NE Illinois and NW Indiana, but the term used is "engine braking".
I've a
seen lot of those in Mississippi.
Be well,
Bryant
I've never seen such a sign in my life. Then again, I have yet to venture west of the Mississippi River.
Ligonier has signs prohibiting engine brakes on PA 711 (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Ligonier,+PA&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Ligonier,+Westmoreland,+Pennsylvania&ll=40.241459,-79.239573&spn=0.001875,0.004823&z=18&layer=c&cbll=40.241542,-79.239488&panoid=mu7CZgKPNAMzT_oCitbIPA&cbp=12,82.65,,0,2.99) for traffic entering from US 30.
There have been plans to build a 711 truck bypass but it has never progress farther than that.
Quote from: Brandon on May 15, 2011, 06:20:22 PM
You see them from time to time in NE Illinois and NW Indiana, but the term used is "engine braking".
That's what they call it in Nebraska too. Originally, some signs were using the term "jake braking", but then the Jacobs company complained that they were being unfairly singled out, so "engine braking" became the accepted term.
QuoteI've never seen such a sign in my life. Then again, I have yet to venture west of the Mississippi River.
Plenty of them east of the Mississippi as well. I've seen them all up and down the Eastern Seaboard.
Mr. Winkler has a point in that it would fall under local noise ordinances. But signage of such is a visual reminder and should remain, so I disagree with him on that note.
Note to Mods: given the topic and some of the discussion, this thread could arguably be moved under "General Highway Talk".
Quote from: froggie on May 15, 2011, 10:40:08 PM
Note to Mods: given the topic and some of the discussion, this thread could arguably be moved under "General Highway Talk".
agreed. someone please move to General...
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 16, 2011, 12:55:53 AM
Quote from: froggie on May 15, 2011, 10:40:08 PM
Note to Mods: given the topic and some of the discussion, this thread could arguably be moved under "General Highway Talk".
agreed. someone please move to General...
Done. ;)
Ohio has them too. I can't recall if Michigan has them or not.
Auburn, NY has signs that read "USE OF ENGINE BRAKES WITHIN CITY LIMITS PROHIBITED", in a horrible font to boot. This morning, I heard a truck using an engine brake approaching a stoplight downtown.
There are signs about engine braking here in Wyoming, MI. They used to say "jake brakes" until someone reported them to Jacobs and the city changed the signs. I've seen them in other cities like Negaunee, MI as well.
First, trucks don't "just" slow down with their jakes. If you were at 65mph on flat ground and tried to stop with just your engine, it would take at least a mile, etc. It helps with the drum brakes (must trucks have no disc brakes) as it keeps them cool and prevents the engine from helping push against the drum brakes.
In residential areas, I agree, compression brakes should be avoided. But, arguing against using a safety feature designed for the exact purpose you're opposing, is counter-intuitive. They're designed to keep the very large brakes of a truck cool.
Also, truck brakes with using the jake to help stop almost all the time (it's a muffled engine brake), can have brake shoes last 200k-300k or more miles. If you relied only on the shoes and drums, you'd come nowhere close to that. Plus, much greater risk of overheating them. Cracking shoes, fires, runaway trucks, etc.
I hear the occasional jake brake on the highways here in NJ. I don't really see the need to use it on freeways in at worst hilly terrain, but I don't particularly mind it. I actually kind of like the noise, the same way I like the smell of gasoline. Too much is bad, but a little bit once in awhile just takes me away from what I'm doing for a second.
Quote from: Steve on May 16, 2011, 10:44:08 PM
I actually kind of like the noise, the same way I like the smell of gasoline.
I like the noise too. I also like the smell of fresh asphalt.
Yes, I've seen the signs a number of places in the east, too. I know I have in Ohio and probably elsewhere but I'm pretty sure that I've seen "Engine Brake" a lot more than "Jake Brake".
I don't mind too much. I sometimes use engine braking in my own vehicle.
Now, railroad locomotives use something similar called dynamic braking which turns the traction motors into generators. But, since you're braking with the electric motors and leaving the diesel on idle, it is much quieter than an 18 wheeler engine brake.
?
A truck doesn't use any diesel when the compression brake is engaged. The compression brake is a third valve in the head of the cylinder to release the compression so there's no built up pressure to push back down on the piston and force the vehicle forward.
If it's an unmuffled compression brake, the loud jackhammer sound is the inside of the engine. Nothing more.
Quote from: Michael on May 19, 2011, 12:58:19 AM
Quote from: Steve on May 16, 2011, 10:44:08 PM
I actually kind of like the noise, the same way I like the smell of gasoline.
I like the noise too. I also like the smell of fresh asphalt.
I too like the smell of fresh asphalt, too. :-D
Be well,
Bryant
Many towns are beginning to outlaw Engine ("Jake" ) Braking except in emergencies.
As an aside: many of the towns have signs saying "No Jake Braking". These are incorrect and should be "No Engine Breaking" or "No Compression Braking". Jacobs Vehicle Systems has threatened to sue any municipality using the term "Jake Brake". Springdale, AR changed their signs a few years back after being contacted by lawyers representing Jacobs.
If they would pay me, I'd travel around shooting photos of all the "Jake Brake" signs so the lawyers could notify everyone ;)