http://www.news9.com/story/25995837/norman-senator-suggests-raising-speed-limit-on-turner-turnpike
OTA is against it, saying the turnpike wasn't designed for 80 MPH.
The politicians are normally the ones who want it lowered. Do we finally have one that's different?
Quote from: 1 on August 13, 2014, 06:19:48 PM
The politicians are normally the ones who want it lowered. Do we finally have one that's different?
Politicians want what gets them votes, so, no, not different.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 13, 2014, 06:16:35 PM
http://www.news9.com/story/25995837/norman-senator-suggests-raising-speed-limit-on-turner-turnpike
OTA is against it, saying the turnpike wasn't designed for 80 MPH.
I would agree with that as the ups and downs on the hills are too steep for most trucks, thereby creating a large speed differential between semis and cars. If they would agree to widen it to at least 6 lanes, then I would be for it.
A lot of comments I have read about this have said that 80 is too fast and they are wanting to LOWER it. US 66 is there for those who can't handle the turnpike.
Made two round trips from OKC to Tulsa and back in the last 10 days. Good weather meant i could get a better feel for this discussion. Once I thought it through, I would stay with my opinion that 80 will create too much of a speed differential. I lost count of the times a semi pulled out into the "not as slow" lane right in front of me causing me to hit the brakes. Assuming most companies will keep their 65-70 max speed restrictions on trucks, there will be more accidents IMO.
It should be against the law for a trucking company to govern their trucks to a speed lower than 75 MPH.
Quote from: bugo on August 24, 2014, 08:22:56 AM
It should be against the law for a trucking company to govern their trucks to a speed lower than 75 MPH.
The problem is the legal minimum is 50 on the Turner. How would you have a law prohibiting a speed between 50 and 80? How would you enforce your new law?
Quote from: rte66man on August 24, 2014, 10:01:40 PM
Quote from: bugo on August 24, 2014, 08:22:56 AM
It should be against the law for a trucking company to govern their trucks to a speed lower than 75 MPH.
The problem is the legal minimum is 50 on the Turner. How would you have a law prohibiting a speed between 50 and 80? How would you enforce your new law?
Huh? He wasn't saying "make it illegal for trucks to travel at speeds slower than 75", he was saying "make it illegal for trucks to be forced to travel below 75 by some stupid device the company installs/mandates".
Quote from: vdeane on August 25, 2014, 09:36:49 PM
Quote from: rte66man on August 24, 2014, 10:01:40 PM
Quote from: bugo on August 24, 2014, 08:22:56 AM
It should be against the law for a trucking company to govern their trucks to a speed lower than 75 MPH.
The problem is the legal minimum is 50 on the Turner. How would you have a law prohibiting a speed between 50 and 80? How would you enforce your new law?
Huh? He wasn't saying "make it illegal for trucks to travel at speeds slower than 75", he was saying "make it illegal for trucks to be forced to travel below 75 by some stupid device the company installs/mandates".
And.... how would that be enforced?
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 13, 2014, 06:16:35 PM
http://www.news9.com/story/25995837/norman-senator-suggests-raising-speed-limit-on-turner-turnpike
OTA is against it, saying the turnpike wasn't designed for 80 MPH.
For 80 MPH, the road needs to be completely reconstructed, which it should be. Deepen the cuts, add to the fills, 12 - 16 ft shoulders, LH shoulder, catchment cables, and increase the median width to the standard rural 88 feet!
Quote from: rte66man on August 26, 2014, 06:57:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 25, 2014, 09:36:49 PM
Quote from: rte66man on August 24, 2014, 10:01:40 PM
Quote from: bugo on August 24, 2014, 08:22:56 AM
It should be against the law for a trucking company to govern their trucks to a speed lower than 75 MPH.
The problem is the legal minimum is 50 on the Turner. How would you have a law prohibiting a speed between 50 and 80? How would you enforce your new law?
Huh? He wasn't saying "make it illegal for trucks to travel at speeds slower than 75", he was saying "make it illegal for trucks to be forced to travel below 75 by some stupid device the company installs/mandates".
And.... how would that be enforced?
Presumably the same way any other business regulation is enforced. Possibly via the annual vehicle inspection (do trucks have them just like cars?).
Quote from: vdeane on August 27, 2014, 12:56:33 PM
Possibly via the annual vehicle inspection (do trucks have them just like cars?).
I don't know of any state that inspects semis on a state level. State police do perform random roadside inspections of both the truck and driver. They're also checked at weight stations. However, do remember that vehicle inspections for cars vary state to state. Some states check safety and emissions, some only check one or the other. Some like your state of NY and neighboring PA have a state wide safety check, but only check emissions in certain more populous counties. While other states have no inspection whatsoever.
I would imagine governors are put on trucks at the behest of insurance companies. If they were unlawful, the insurance companies would stop providing incentives to install them.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 27, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I would imagine governors are put on trucks at the behest of insurance companies. If they were unlawful, the insurance companies would stop providing incentives to install them.
I wish I could remember the source, but I read that governors were installed because of the extra fuel cost for driving faster.
Quote from: rte66man on August 29, 2014, 01:35:24 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 27, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I would imagine governors are put on trucks at the behest of insurance companies. If they were unlawful, the insurance companies would stop providing incentives to install them.
I wish I could remember the source, but I read that governors were installed because of the extra fuel cost for driving faster.
As a truck driver, I can assure you that the governors are for fuel savings. Most companies are governed between 60-65, while a few are as low as 55.
Quote from: vdeane on August 27, 2014, 12:56:33 PM
Quote from: rte66man on August 26, 2014, 06:57:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 25, 2014, 09:36:49 PM
Quote from: rte66man on August 24, 2014, 10:01:40 PM
Quote from: bugo on August 24, 2014, 08:22:56 AM
It should be against the law for a trucking company to govern their trucks to a speed lower than 75 MPH.
The problem is the legal minimum is 50 on the Turner. How would you have a law prohibiting a speed between 50 and 80? How would you enforce your new law?
Huh? He wasn't saying "make it illegal for trucks to travel at speeds slower than 75", he was saying "make it illegal for trucks to be forced to travel below 75 by some stupid device the company installs/mandates".
And.... how would that be enforced?
Presumably the same way any other business regulation is enforced. Possibly via the annual vehicle inspection (do trucks have them just like cars?).
Trucks must have an Annual Safety Inspection done in accordance to FMCSR.
Quote from: robbones on October 01, 2014, 11:04:37 PM
Quote from: rte66man on August 29, 2014, 01:35:24 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 27, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I would imagine governors are put on trucks at the behest of insurance companies. If they were unlawful, the insurance companies would stop providing incentives to install them.
I wish I could remember the source, but I read that governors were installed because of the extra fuel cost for driving faster.
As a truck driver, I can assure you that the governors are for fuel savings. Most companies are governed between 60-65, while a few are as low as 55.
Those ones governed to 55 mph are skirting the law if they're on a Michigan freeway signed for 70 mph for cars (60 mph for trucks). The minimum on those
is 55 mph.