Information
- Category:
- Common Interest - Beliefs & Causes
- Description:
- ONTARIO AND QUEBEC GOVERNMENTS PASS LEGISLATION PLACING MOTORISTS AT HIGHER RISK FOR COLLISIONS WITH TRUCKS!
FACTS BACKED BY TRANSPORT CANADA.
TRUCKERS BEING COMPLIANT WITH THE NEW LAW CREATING INCREASE IN ROAD RAGE AND NEAR MISS INCIDENTS.
We have added another access to information web page on yahoo. You can access the Yahoo Group at this link:
http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/group/nospeedlimiter/
Anyone interested in one of the posters for your trailer they can be found at:
730 Truck Stop,... (read more) - Privacy Type:
- Open: All content is public.
Admins
- Scott
Officers
- Scott
- Founder of Group: Trucker's Against Speed Limiter Legislation.
- Cheryl
- Founder of Group: Help Truckers Fight Ontario Bill 41
Basic Info
- Name:
- Drivers Against Speed Limiter Legislation.
- Category:
- Common Interest - Beliefs & Causes
- Description:
- ONTARIO AND QUEBEC GOVERNMENTS PASS LEGISLATION PLACING MOTORISTS AT HIGHER RISK FOR COLLISIONS WITH TRUCKS!
FACTS BACKED BY TRANSPORT CANADA.
TRUCKERS BEING COMPLIANT WITH THE NEW LAW CREATING INCREASE IN ROAD RAGE AND NEAR MISS INCIDENTS.
We have added another access to information web page on yahoo. You can access the Yahoo Group at this link:
http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/group/nospeedlimiter/
Anyone interested in one of the posters for your trailer they can be found at:
730 Truck Stop,... (read more) - Privacy Type:
- Open: All content is public.
Contact Info
- Email:
- http://www.nospeedlimiter.ca
- Location:
- North America
Recent News
- News:
- ONTARIO: JANUARY 14, 2010
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
SPEED LIMITER CHALLENGE GOING TO COURT
(LONG SLOW PROCESS)
Scott Mooney:
UPDATE:
The next court appearance marked "to set a date" was set for January 13, 2010
Lawyers have requested another adjournment and have estimated that the challenge will not be before the summer of 2010.
To anyone who has received a citation for not having their speed limiter set, and who's court date is before the summer 2010, I am suggesting that you also request an adjournment of your case for at least six months after that date.
For anyone looking for legal councel to represent them in this matter, www.gowlings.com. This is a firm who has been investigating and representing truckers on this issue. They have branch offices all across Canada.
ONTARIO & QUEBEC -------------------------------------
The speed limiter is not doing what it is intended to do, rather it is having a serious negative affect on the independent truckers from all across North America. In theory, the speed limiter "may" have come from a good idea.
In reality, not all trucks are spec'd out the same way. Thus, the speed limiter being placed on a truck that is spec'd out to run best at 100km/h, the 105 km/h limiter will have little negative effect financially. It will also restrict that truck from going over its optimal operating parameters.
Now when you put that 105 km/h speed limiter on a truck that the manufacturers spec'd out to operate most efficiently from 110 to 116 km/h, which is the overall average of the speed limits throughout North America, you have a drastic negative effect.
By doing this to the latter group, you are essentially causing every one of these trucks to run less efficient by burning more fuel to do the same mileage.
My own experience has found that my 2000 Volvo, with a Detroit Series 60 engine, is burning an average of 70 litres more fuel, per week, to go the same distance as before operating below the 105 cap.
You can not tell me that the people at the top of these special interest groups who are pushing for limiters on all trucks, that they didn't know this would be the end result. If that were the case, then why would they have been specially ordering their trucks for the past couple years to be spec'd to run optimum at 105? I believe they are well aware of the financial negative effect the limiters would have on their competition.
The speed limiters were not to make our roads safer, not for the environment, which can be easily explained from any truck service technician, but rather to create a financial hardship on the small fleet operators and the independant owner operators.
If the speed limiter was for safety, then put the speed limiter in charge of the Ontario and Quebec Court Judges. For those who routinely are caught speeding exessively, the court can impose a provincial restriction on the individuals drivers licence for a speed limiter to be required. This would make the speed limiter about safety.
As far as the environment, making a truck able to run at its optimum preformance will make that truck more environmentally friendly. Creating lanes or allowing trucks to use the existing HOV lanes would be environmentally friendly. The less times a truck has to slow, stop or accelerate through heavy traffic, as is with any vehicle, would be environmentally friendly.
For safety, having a "trucks only" lane would reduce the number of truck/car accidents in our metro areas. Come on Ontario, lets start getting smart about what we are doing.
Sometimes our government officials need to remember that the best course of action, is no action.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
HERE IS A COPY OF THE TRANSPORT CANADA FINDINGS ABOUT SPEED LIMITERS...
The introduction of speed limiters set at 105 km/h (commensurate with Ontario and Quebec regulations) increases safety in the uncongested region of traffic flow for all geometric configurations, especially in the straight segment. As maximum speed is set at 110 km/h the safety gains with the introduction of mandatory limiters become less prominent.
(THAT MEANS IT BECOMES LESS SAFE)
This result holds for the uncongested region of traffic flow. The maximum safety gains were obtained when the maximum control speed was set at 90 km/h for uncongested traffic volumes.
As volume and percentage trucks are increased the safety gains associated with mandatory limiters set at 105 km/h become less pronounced.
(SAFETY FACTOR DECREASE)
As the volume is set close to capacity (2000 vehicles per hour per lane) more vehicle interactions take place and this leads to a reduction in safety especially for those segments with increased merging and lane-change activity, such as, on and off ramp segments. In these instances the introduction of truck speed limiters can actually reduce the level of safety when compared to the non limiter case.
(NOW WE ARE IN TO THE INCREASED RISK CATEGORY)
As compliance is increased, there is a small corresponding increase in safety for the mandatory speed limiter case. It should also be noted that as volume and percent of trucks increase, the safety gains associated with the full compliance are offset by the additional traffic turbulence caused by higher volume and percentage trucks.
(AND THAT IS WHERE IT GETS DANGEROUS!)
<><><><> NOTE <><><><>
Postings on this site containing exessive foul language or racial slurs, directed at any one individual or group will be deleted. Abuse of this rule may result in an immediate ban from the group. We value all of the opinions posted, so please, choose your words carefully. You are welcome to re-post any deleted postings without the use of inflamitory language or racial slurs. By becoming a member of this group, you acknowledge that you are opposed to the speed limiter issue and give consent for your name, written postings, photos or videos to be used, quoted, or reprinted by the Drivers Against Speed Limiter Legislation group or its officers.