Speed limits

[Edd505]

Originally Posted by Rhagfo

Well the normal limits in the commercial are 26,000 Combined weight, or trailer exceeding 10,000#. RV's are not considered commercial, but many states require special non-commercial endorsements for RV's that exceed those numbers.
Class B's would not be covered as they don't weigh enough.
If states wanted to create special endorsements it would likely be based on the GVWR of the trailer rather the combination of TV and trailer. This would skirt those that pull large 5th wheels with 3/4 ton trucks.
As to the 80 year old drivers, I see many 50ish drivers that can hardly get in the drivers seat.
Personally I drive combination that has a total GVWR's of 26,360#, no special endorsement needed in Oregon.

Your saying the same, some type enforcement for weight, you test in what you drive, you move up in size you test. You pull a small TT you test with it. That small TT does not handle like just the TV, you need wider turns and most stopping distance.

I have been flagged into a commercial scale, maybe TX not sure where we were. The just rolled me across like they do with they commercial rigs. Only reason I can think of was they were checking axle weights on my F350.

[bigchick]

i've read this thread a couple of times and there are many reasons why people drive at different speeds. just accept them.

there have been comments about the need, or lack thereof, about requiring special license endorsements. i live in state, arizona, where we do not need any special endorsement for non-commercial use. when i asked a highway patrol officer about his he related what he was told in training. he you could go buy the biggest semi and trailer you could find and fill it with popsicles and drive it anywhere you wanted. but if you opened the trailer and sold one popsicle you would have the proper license endorsement and the equipment would be subject to all the commercial regulations. it doesn't make sense to me that the same situation can and cannot be subject the applicable regulations depending solely upon the intent of its use. but i'm not required to get a special endorsement and i'm not lining up to go get one.

i think one way that this might be addressed in not through the states but through the insurance companies. if they are going to insure a non-commercial driver driving a large rv i would think i it would be in their interest to have that driver complete some form of training program before they sold the insurance.

we live in a town that hundreds of rv come through every day. i see them all the time and there are many each day that make me cringe. people towing trailers that are way to large for the tow vehicle (the front wheels are barely on the road). or 5th wheels that are so far off level. or the double towing that is way longer than the 65 foot limit. i'd like to see the highway patrol get more involved in safety of these non-commercial vehicles rather that spending all their efforts on the commercial rigs.

whenever we take to the roads we do all we can to ensure out safety, but we are still subject to a mishap caused by somebody else due to their inability or equipment failure.
i do my part, i pray the others are doing theirs!

[Daveinet]

Originally Posted by darrellr

Are you advocating against a discussion with just hauling someone into jail? I am confused. I would rather have a ticket and a discussion rather than spend time in jail waiting to see a judge, to only then have a similar discussion but out a lot more money.

Either I misquoted someone else, or you have read more into it than intended. I was only commenting on the concept of an officers perceived right to make a stop punitive, either by a "stern talking to" or what ever means are commonly used to make the stop punitive in nature. Only the law has the "right" to punish. We as humans do not have that right directly. I don't have the right to take money from you as a fine, because I as a human am imperfect and also guilty of many offenses. But it is the law that has that authority, technically not another person.

[dbircky]

Commercial drivers are also required to have an annual physical. Perhaps this would be a great starting point for all drivers instead of the every 4 or 10 year 10 second eye “test”.

[D Gardiner]

Have read all four pages while my sons is at a college baseball coach camp.

So much in this thread to unpack. Bottom line we need to drive our rigs at a safe speed, and in a safe manner. I can not control Mr. Speeder, but I can be a defensive driver of a 26 thousand pound rig. Driving on the Interstate requires one type of driving skill, undivided two-land highways require another, and mountain driving requires another set of techniques.

Pulling over on a two lane highway can be difficult on large RVs. Soft shoulders are especially dangerous. We only pull over on paved shoulders, once traffic builds up, even if we are doing the speed limit. It’s just courtesy, but it still scares my wife when I do it. Even if I announce what I’m about to do.

Have noticed how the pandemic has caused drivers to be extremely impatient, in our area. I do feel LEOs need to be more visible, and write some more tickets. We all need to be more courteous, especially us RVers.

Have told my wife for years that we need better driver training, and better testing. CA currently only requires a non-commercial license when driving a class-a over 42’. With that said, I believe anyone who has never driven a vehicle large than the average passenger car or truck needs RV-Driver training. You can find them online, and many will train you in your rig.

Tires/Speed: My RV’s tires are rated at 87 MPH, but the engine computer limits the speed to 81 MPH. Sorry she physically can not go any faster. Have I taken my class-a up to the limit? Yes once, on a lonely highway. Did she feel safe? Not as safe and planted as she feels at 70 MPH.

Lastly, my dad was a trucker in Australia, driving a B series Mack, in the mid 1950s. He always told me, “Distance (from the vehicle in front of you) is the best insurance. I live by that.
https://m.facebook.com/media/set/?va...02110666539352

[darrellr]

Post #1000 - congrats!

[randomledder]

[followingsea]

Originally Posted by bigchick

.....it doesn't make sense to me ......

Let me suggest a different way of looking at it.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And when it comes to fixing things, there is never enough resources. In the navy, I was the repair officer on a nuclear ship. Fixing safety items was at the top of my list. The XO was worried about a small leak in the wardroom ice machine drain.

When it comes to traffic safety, drunk drivers and speeders are stacking up the bodies.

RVers not so much.

[Daveinet]

Originally Posted by followingsea

When it comes to traffic safety, drunk drivers and speeders are stacking up the bodies.

RVers not so much.

The Solomon curve proves your statement false. (specifically speeding, not DUI )






Not only false, but proves it is safer to drive faster than slower compared to the average mean speed.

[followingsea]

Originally Posted by Daveinet

The Solomon curve proves your statement false. (specifically speeding, not DUI )

Not only false, but proves it is safer to drive faster than slower compared to the average mean speed.

You are both deadly wrong and missing the point.

The point is that RV are not causing a lot of fatal accidents. I do not need a CDL to drive my MH because I am not a commercial driver driving many more miles. It would be a waste of time and money.

You provided a curve for the risk of an accident, not the risk of a fatal accident. When it comes to speeding I am not thinking 10 over posted I am thinking 100+ mph.

[Daveinet]

Originally Posted by followingsea

You provided a curve for the risk of an accident, not the risk of a fatal accident. When it comes to speeding I am not thinking 10 over posted I am thinking 100+ mph.

...but I've driven my motorhome at 100 mph.

[Cloud Dancer]

The Solomon curve is a graphical representation of the collision rate of automobiles as a function of their speed compared to the average vehicle speed on the same road. The curve was based on research conducted by David Solomon in the late 1950s and published in 1964.[1] Subsequent research suggests significant biases in the Solomon study, which may cast doubt on its findings.[2]
*
Wikipedia is the source of info above. There is much more info available. But, I'm still going to tow at 65 whenever the law allows.

[Onyrlef]

I'd like to see a bell curve study done today with a line for people looking at their phones while driving. Drove by an idiot on Central Expressway in Dallas last evening going about 20 mph below the flow of traffic because he was otherwise engaged looking down at his phone. Problem on the expressways is if you're driving significantly slower than the flow of traffic, for whatever reason, you're a moving pile of debris blocking a lane, only there's no prior warning there's an idiot up ahead. The conclusion in the article about the Solomon Curve and other more recent studies is that the safest speed on multilane highways is the speed at which the traffic is flowing. No one, for example, in the history of DFW traffic ever drives 60 mph on any of the expressways in the area even though it may be the posted limit. If you're driving 60 when the flow is 75 you're creating a hazard.

[Daveinet]

Originally Posted by Cloud Dancer

The Solomon curve is a graphical representation of the collision rate of automobiles as a function of their speed compared to the average vehicle speed on the same road. The curve was based on research conducted by David Solomon in the late 1950s and published in 1964.[1] Subsequent research suggests significant biases in the Solomon study, which may cast doubt on its findings.[2]

Those "biases" were assumed by vehicles that slowed to make a turn or stop. Those biases are disputed, because why a person is going slower does not change the fact that they were traveling slower. Removing data based on the why makes no sense.



I'm not sure if you can perform an accurate study today. Throughout the 70s and 80s, it was well established that driver inattentiveness was by far the leading cause for an accident. (funny that was before cellphones) That statistic has changed, but it is silly to think our driving habits have changed. What has changed is the way accidents are assessed. If a person is speeding at the time of an accident, speed is automatically logged as a factor. Since by far, most cars speed, this heavily biases the data. There is some evidence this is the result of influence from insurance companies, as it allows for increased rates without a corresponding increased risk.