Bill to raise Truck weights to 97,000 lbs is insane.

Discussion in 'Congress' started by Missourian, Apr 21, 2011.

  1. Missourian
    Offline

    Missourian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,799
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +8,124
    Bullcrap.

    97,000 lbs is too heavy, it's not safe and will destroy roadways and interstates.

    80,000 is all the trucks brakes and road surface can handle.

    Call or email your Senators to vote against S. 747.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2011
  2. Missourian
    Offline

    Missourian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,799
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +8,124
    Americans Say Bigger Trucks Threaten America's Roadways, Greater Taxpayer Burden -- WASHINGTON, April 20, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --
     
  3. Missourian
    Offline

    Missourian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,799
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +8,124
    Transportation For America

    Check out the interactive map, it's amazing how many bridges are unsound already.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2011
  4. whitehall
    Offline

    whitehall Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    27,769
    Thanks Received:
    4,332
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +10,728
    Trucking companies are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Democrats say they are part of the corporate rich and should be taxed to death and diesel prices keep going up while Obama says "get a smaller car if you don't like it". America needs trucks to get the goods delivered and keep the prices down and every time republicans try to give them a break the socialists step in to prevent it.
     
  5. Toronado3800
    Offline

    Toronado3800 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    3,572
    Thanks Received:
    274
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +355
    I am rather uneducated on this one. To come up with an opinion I need more information.

    A 97,000 pound truck in 2012 will stop in how many feet?

    Is that equal to an 80,000 pound truck in 1980?

    Something like that would make or break this one for me. The bridge statistics are a good point against it.
     
  6. martybegan
    Online

    martybegan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    29,291
    Thanks Received:
    4,000
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +10,917
    One also needs to know PSF of the trucks, as this is what affects the roadway. If more tires are added, while you get additional friction effects, the PSF is lowered.

    I would assume these trucks are mostly for long haul, and would be predominant only on the interstates in the middle of the country. a 97,000 truck requires multiple trailers I think, and those are unwieldy in urban situations, requirng depots for break-down when they enter thier destination city.
     
  7. Missourian
    Offline

    Missourian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,799
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +8,124

    I own trucks and I drive a truck.

    80,000 lbs destroys equipment, damages the road and reduces fuel mileage by 15%.

    An 80,000 lbs truck takes 400 feet to stop at 55 mph.

    That's 100 feet longer than a football field.

    Adding 17,000 lbs will increase stopping distance to almost TWO football fields.


    Truck drivers oppose this increase.

    Owner-operators oppose this increase.

    The driving public opposes this increase.


    [​IMG]

    Hauling More Weight Safer More Fuel Efficient – Says Who
    “Supporters of this bill are the Coalition for Transportation Productivity, a group of more than 150 manufacturers and associations. The associations that make up this group are mainly made up of Forestry associations in which for years have tried to get it allowed so they can haul more weight, mainly because they get paid by the weight that they haul. I’m surprised by the support of this because of so many that are against “clear cutting” of timber for paper. But truthfully this is mainly what these associations that support this do.”

    Read more about Hauling More Weight Safer More Fuel Efficient – Says Who on:
    Hauling More Weight Safer More Fuel Efficient – Says Who
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2011
  8. Missourian
    Offline

    Missourian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,799
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +8,124
    All shippers will load more product, every road will be affected.

    This is the single trailer weight being increased. The bill proposes adding a sixth axle.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2011
  9. Zander
    Offline

    Zander Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    Messages:
    17,452
    Thanks Received:
    6,575
    Trophy Points:
    390
    Location:
    Los Angeles CA
    Ratings:
    +12,890
    Trucks have a 97K GVW limit in the UK- no problems- the world has not ended.

    Denmark, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden and Finland all allow 120k .......

    We are lightweights in the trucking world.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. martybegan
    Online

    martybegan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    29,291
    Thanks Received:
    4,000
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +10,917
    again, is this for a single trailer or multiples? also the law allows the states to set the limits. I would assume high density crappy infrastructure states like NY would keep the lower limits.

    One size fits all regulation makes little sense. One has to adjust to the situation locally in cases like this.
     

Share This Page