Communist Government In Ontario Gets Their Wish.

[Teacher Mark 53]

TORONTO -- It’s no longer a question of if, but a question of when.

Ontario will be the first jurisdiction in North America to mandate the use of speed limiters on commercial trucks, as Queen’s Park gave its stamp of approval to Bill 41 yesterday.

The debate of speed limiter legislation has been a hot topic for nearly two and a half years when the Ontario Trucking Association introduced the idea and began lobbying the government for such a mandate.

At one point Quebec looked like it would be the first province to get out of the gate with speed limiter legislation. But after tabling a motion earlier this year, the government held back, saying it didn't want to put itself on an island and preferred to wait until Ontario passed the rule first.

Ontario finally put the motion forward in its legislature in March 2008 and to much controversy.

It's Official: Speed limiters are coming to Ontario.

The idea of mandated speed limiters has ruffled a lot of feathers – particularly among drivers and owner-operators – and it all finally came to a head on June 5 during a public hearing before the Standing Committee on Justice Policy.

Both supporters and denouncers of Bill 41 were on hand to voice their opinions of speed limiter legislation and many MPPs left the hearing wanting more information before making a decision. Written comments were accepted up until June 10.

In the end, Ontario’s government passed the now infamous Bill 41, which mandates all commecial trucks operating in the province be limited to a speed of 105 km/h, on June 16 on the strength of safety and environmental benefits.

"Speed limiters slow down trucks, help keep our roads safe and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is another step forward in our plan to build a cleaner, greener and stronger province," said Transportation Minister Jim Bradley.

An official date of implementation has not yet been decided upon, but is expected soon.

http://www.todaystrucking.com/news.cfm?int...FTOKEN=14857825

This is going to increase the amount of cars rear ending Semis. Hopefully not lot of people will die before they realize they've made a mistake.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I dunno - it'll force those b*stards to not drive 75+ mph in the outside lane where they're not supposed to!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

How does a speed limiter work?

[Kazan' Tiger 1]

Or better question (IMHO), how difficult would it be to remove or bypass?

How does a speed limiter work?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

But how does it work?!?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I found it:

A speed limiter, sometimes called a governor, is a built-in microchip that allows a truck engine’s top speed to be preset. Trucks built in the last decade come equipped with this technology. Nonetheless, regulation would ensure all trucks operate at a safe speed. That would reduce highway collisions related to tailgating and improper lane changes.

...

Recognizing the speed limit on Ontario's major highways is 100 km/h, the proposal is to set speed limiters at no more than 105 km/h. The cruise speed for most trucks will be set at no more than 100 kph, but a cushion of up to 5 kph will be allowed on the “pedal” speed to enable trucks to pass slower moving vehicles (avoiding long periods where trucks operate side-by-side called “elephant races”) and to make other precautionary manoeuvres as required.

http://www.safety-council.org/info/traffic/truckspeed.html

[YuAndDan 153]

Nothing new, many US trucking companies have set speed limiters on their trucks and have been doing so for years.

I drove for a company that had the fleet limit set to 60mph if the truck fell below a set fuel mileage, and would allow 65 if the driver could keep the mileage above that line to encourage less idling, I know Swift, Schneider, JB Hunt, and many more do this volenterily, it only makes economic sense.

What does not make sense are split speed limits, where cars are allowed a higher limit than trucks.

[YuAndDan 153]

Or better question (IMHO), how difficult would it be to remove or bypass?

How does a speed limiter work?

Hard, all trucks use computer controlled engines (EFI) the cruse control, speed governor, and throttle are programs in the EFI system, it is programmed and secured using a password only the fleet owner can access.

[Emancipation 2]

Communist Government?

Holy flip.. you need to get out more..

[Cassie 8]

Communist Government?

Holy flip.. you need to get out more..

Seriously.

[GaryC 7]

Nothing new, many US trucking companies have set speed limiters on their trucks and have been doing so for years.

I drove for a company that had the fleet limit set to 60mph if the truck fell below a set fuel mileage, and would allow 65 if the driver could keep the mileage above that line to encourage less idling, I know Swift, Schneider, JB Hunt, and many more do this volenterily, it only makes economic sense.

What does not make sense are split speed limits, where cars are allowed a higher limit than trucks.

I know. We have that in Illinois. 65 for cars and 55 for trucks. It makes for some dangerous moments.

[YuAndDan 153]

Nothing new, many US trucking companies have set speed limiters on their trucks and have been doing so for years.

I drove for a company that had the fleet limit set to 60mph if the truck fell below a set fuel mileage, and would allow 65 if the driver could keep the mileage above that line to encourage less idling, I know Swift, Schneider, JB Hunt, and many more do this volenterily, it only makes economic sense.

What does not make sense are split speed limits, where cars are allowed a higher limit than trucks.

I know. We have that in Illinois. 65 for cars and 55 for trucks. It makes for some dangerous moments.

Yep, that is the state I was thinking of.

A forced 10 mph differential is a stupid and un-safe thing, it interrupts the smooth flow of traffic.

My truck could only go 60, so guess at what speed I always operated at in IL?

Edited June 17, 2008 by YuAndDan

[Teacher Mark 53]

Communist Government?

Holy flip.. you need to get out more..

I get out quite a bit actually, including trips to the Peoples Republic of Ontario. In fact I'll be there next month. Right now I'm in the Peoples Republic of California though. I'm trying to decide which is worse. I think it's a tie.

[Teacher Mark 53]

Nothing new, many US trucking companies have set speed limiters on their trucks and have been doing so for years.

I drove for a company that had the fleet limit set to 60mph if the truck fell below a set fuel mileage, and would allow 65 if the driver could keep the mileage above that line to encourage less idling, I know Swift, Schneider, JB Hunt, and many more do this volenterily, it only makes economic sense.

What does not make sense are split speed limits, where cars are allowed a higher limit than trucks.

I know. We have that in Illinois. 65 for cars and 55 for trucks. It makes for some dangerous moments.

Yep, that is the state I was thinking of.

A forced 10 mph differential is a stupid and un-safe thing, it interrupts the smooth flow of traffic.

My truck could only go 60, so guess at what speed I always operated at in IL?

It is the same as a split speed if you think about it. What makes it worse is the fact that the truck cannot accelerate beyond 65mph.

I'm already governed at 65, but I am in a Ryder rental. Thye were supposed to turn it up to 70 this week but now I won't have it done. The Bolshevist's in Ontario have already got enough of my money.

When I get a company truck it will be governed at 75, unless the company decides to keep them at 65 because of this law.

Split Speed Limits + Lane Restrictions

Even if you're not a trucker, and even if you don't like trucks, please read this page, because it affects the safety of EVERY individual driving on the highways and interstates in the country, and that means every driver and passenger in every vehicle, including you, your friends, your spouse, and your children:

Take a moment to ask yourself why you would want your state to make a law that put your life, and your children's lives at risk every time you enter and exit an interstate or highway by having to try and maneuver your car in and out of a group of 70 foot long, 80,000 pound trucks?

If you are merging on or off an interstate between two trucks, and ANYONE were to make a mistake that causes the truck ahead of you to have to slam on it's brakes, if the truck behind you can't stop fast enough, your air bags and safety belts won't help you, because your car could be crushed like a bowling ball would crush an egg!

Your car probably weighs between 2,000 and 4,000 pounds. A semi truck and trailer weighs anywhere from 30,000 pounds EMPTY to 80,000 pounds LOADED! They are up to 20 times heavier than your car, and if someone dies in an accident, I don't care who's at fault and who sues who, the fact remains someone is still dead and all the money in the world isn't going to bring them back!

Even if you drive the biggest, baddest, longest, heaviest, safest one ton truck made,

IT'S NO MATCH AGAINST AN 80,000 POUND SEMI IN AN ACCIDENT!

We are NOT ASKING FOR states to turn us loose on the highways like a pack of wild animals waiting to devour innocent four wheelers that get in our way. What we ARE ASKING FOR are reasonable laws and regulations that allow us to do our job in a safer, less stressful and more professional manner.

Believe me, we DO NOT WANT to run over cars, we want to AVOID THEM at ALL COST!

Anyone that has been driving for very long has probably read a trucking magazine or publication, and hopefully you have seen the articles stating that independent studies have shown that a split speed limit for cars and trucks DOES NOT improve safety.

What a split speed limit DOES is increase the risk of an accident by as much as 60% for a split speed limit of 15 m.p.h.

Think about that a minute. By driving a truck 15 miles per hour slower than the cars on the same interstate (say 55 mph for trucks vs. 70 mph for cars as an example), you are placing yourself and other drivers at risk of being involved in an accident by 60% MORE than driving your truck at the same speed as the cars.

So why do states have split speed limits? The popular belief is that it is simply for revenue. Although no state will admit this is true, and most states with a split speed limit will claim it is for public safety, how can they make this claim when they haven't done any independent research to justify such a statement, and studies already exist PROVING it isn't safer, but more dangerous to have trucks moving slower than cars?

So far the only drivers I've talked to that aren't concerned about a split speed limit are the ones driving trucks that are governed lower than most speed limits, with the exception of the states that have a 55 mile per hour speed limit for trucks. They do agree those states should raise the speed limit for trucks.

Whether you drive a truck that does 65 m.p.h, 75 m.p.h., or a triple digit large car, the fact remains that states with a split speed limit cannot prove in any independent studies that a split speed limit is safer than the same speed limit for cars and trucks.

If these states are in fact simply looking at trucks as a source of revenue rather than taking safety into consideration, then they are placing their citizens, and any individual traveling in that state at risk, including truck drivers. By ignoring the independent studies proving a split speed limit increases the chance of accidents, then they are blatantly admitting they are more concerned with revenue than public safety.

This in itself should not only be illegal, but it should be a federal crime, and the governing powers of these states that refuse to change the speed limits for trucks to the same speed limit of cars should be charged with public endangerment!

Another issue that is creating a more dangerous situation for truck drivers is the lane restrictions. Although I'm not aware of any independent studies being done, a little common sense goes a long way on this issue.

The far right lane is where almost all on ramps and off ramps originate. This automatically means that the traffic patterns in this lane is changing more frequently than any other lane. Cars and trucks entering and exiting the interstate also create a constant change in traffic volume in this lane. On a three or four lane interstate, the two right lanes are obviously more susceptible to accidents due to the more frequent and constant changes in traffic patterns and traffic volume.

Now, we drive the largest vehicles on the road. They take the longest to get up to speed, they require more space to maneuver, and they take the longest to stop. By the very nature of the vehicle, they are admittedly more dangerous in respect to their size, weight and stopping ability than a car, so what possible logic is there in placing the largest, hardest to stop and hardest to maneuver vehicles in the lanes that are subject to the most frequent changes in traffic conditions?

There is no logic in it! The only reason we are restricted to the right lanes is because the motoring public doesn't want us in their way, and state politicians are more than happy to place us in harms way in order to make it seem like they are doing something to benefit their voters. Just like the split speed limit, all they are doing is creating a condition that is more likely to increase the risk of an accident, and creating a situation where they have endangered the lives of their citizens and truck drivers once again.

Wouldn't it seem more logical to have large trucks that are going through a city rather than exiting in the city use the far LEFT lane? They would not interfere with local traffic trying to enter and exit the interstate, and the traffic that is entering and exiting the interstate would not have to contend with the trucks when trying to merge on or off of an interstate or highway.

What could make more sense than that?

A quick note on lane thickness. I've heard the excuse that the left lanes aren't poured thick enough to handle the weight of a semi truck and trailer. In fact, a California Highway Patrol officer told me that. Now, I did spend a couple of years driving a concrete mixer, and I have poured concrete on a federally funded interstate, and I have news for the officer. Every interstate and federally funded highway requires ALL lanes of an interstate to be poured to certain minimum standards, and those standards include being able to support the weight of a fully loaded commercial semi tractor trailer combination. While I've never poured asphalt, I have no doubt there are standards for asphalt highways as well requiring them to support the weight of a loaded semi. If it's true that California didn't meet the federal guidelines when pouring their interstates, then I guess they have a lot of work to do in order to bring their interstates up to standard.

Additionally, fuel taxes from diesel fuel is suppose to help fund the maintenance and repair of the interstate system. Although I have read that these funds have been diverted by Washington to support 'other' services, the fact remains that if we are paying taxes that are intended for the maintenance of the interstates and other highways, states have no right restricting our use of any portion of the road unless they can prove the diesel tax was not used for any improvements on any lanes other than the ones trucks are allowed to use.

Maybe these states feel that just because we are the ones that supply everything every citizen of the state uses on a daily basis, we aren't as important as the four wheelers, and it's more important to make sure people out for a Sunday drive don't have to worry about the big trucks being in their way, even though we are the ones that use the highways to do our jobs rather than for recreation.

Although avoiding driving through these states would be preferable, unfortunately it isn't an option since it seems almost every state has lane restrictions posted for trucks in one location or another, even if they don't have a split speed limit.

What is an option is to stop buying fuel in these states until they change the speed limits to make them the same for cars and trucks, and remove any and all lane restrictions for trucks so that when we are traveling through a city, we can do so safely without being placed in the most dangerous positions on the interstates and highways.

Fuel boycotts work when everyone joins together! Between the loss of revenue from diesel fuel taxes, and the complaints from the truck stops within the states due to their loss of revenue from diesel fuel sale, it wouldn't take long before every state we targeted would be willing to raise the speed limit and eliminate any lane restrictions on the interstates and highways, and this is something anyone can do, including company drivers that might not be willing to refuse to haul for particular shippers.

Although a nationwide shut down would definitely include a federal law prohibiting states from imposing a split speed limit and removing lane restrictions for trucks, there are options available to us that wouldn't require such a drastic measure, and the more we agree to work together on smaller issues that are easy to achieve, the easier it will be to get the boys in Washington D.C. to listen to us when they see a large enough driver unification to make us a positive force to not only be dealt with in a reasonable manner, and it will make it much easier to get the politicians to not only listen to us in the future, but take us serious.

http://www.truckdriversunited.com/split_speed_limits.htm

[Teacher Mark 53]

I found it:

A speed limiter, sometimes called a governor, is a built-in microchip that allows a truck engine’s top speed to be preset. Trucks built in the last decade come equipped with this technology. Nonetheless, regulation would ensure all trucks operate at a safe speed. That would reduce highway collisions related to tailgating and improper lane changes.

...

Recognizing the speed limit on Ontario's major highways is 100 km/h, the proposal is to set speed limiters at no more than 105 km/h. The cruise speed for most trucks will be set at no more than 100 kph, but a cushion of up to 5 kph will be allowed on the “pedal” speed to enable trucks to pass slower moving vehicles (avoiding long periods where trucks operate side-by-side called “elephant races”) and to make other precautionary manoeuvres as required.

http://www.safety-council.org/info/traffic/truckspeed.html

Ineffective. Most drivers will use this extra speed as a practice. I have the cushion built in as well and I don't usually "run up against it". This is standard practice for a rig that is governed. If you have a steer tire (front) blow out you are supposed to hit the gas instead of the brake. I've had it happen and it worked. I thought I was going to lose control of the rig because the wheel was shaking so violently. If I had hit the brakes I probably wouldn't be here today. Hitting the gas leveled it out enough for me to get pulled over.