Overdrive

November 2015

Overdrive Magazine | Trucking Business News & Owner Operator Info

Issue link: http://read.dmtmag.com/i/596928

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 11 of 91

VOICES 10 | Overdrive | November 2015 Attempts to raise maximum interstate truck gross weight are nothing new. The current eff ort is a standalone bill (the "SAFE Trucking Act"), proposed by U.S. Rep. Reid Ribble, to increase maximum weight from 80,000 to 91,000 pounds. The Wisconsin Re- publican promotes the legislation as a way to "increase effi ciency, decrease traffi c and make everyone safer." In 2007, the proposal was to raise weight to 97,000 pounds, with an extra trailer axle. As lobbying from shipper and other interests continued, the I-35W bridge collapse in Minne- apolis helped end that discussion. A couple years ago, similar congressio- nal dynamics were ramping up for the 97,000-pound measure just as the I-5 bridge collapse in Washington state took place. Asked to choose between a variety of options or specify other primary consequences of raising weights in the above poll, almost two-thirds of the more than 1,000 reader respondents see negative consequences, preferring the current limit to the added burden of new equipment and potential infra- structure and safety drawbacks. The reach for a "new normal" of additional weight is little more than the "same song and dance," noted Jim Stewart. "Each time, within a few short months of the new rules being implemented, the freight rate either goes right back to what it was before or in many cases is reduced. "Every time the majority of these so-called trucking industry offi cials talk about changing laws for effi cien- cy or extra profi t, that always works out as a windfall for the shipper. We actually made more money at 73,280 pounds than the standard 80,000 today." While concern for stopping distance on today's congested roads – even with the extra braking eff ect of a sixth axle – shows strongly in the poll results, some readers suggested such sentiment was not warranted. Among the 6 percent who saw a potential safety-positive outcome for a boost in truck weight was Robert P. VanNatta, who wrote that "Oregon is grandfa- thered all the way to 105,500 pounds if axle spacing is enough to meet bridge formula rules (spread out). More axles = more brakes and better stopping distances." At press time, the Ribble bill showed nine cosponsors. Readers say no to bigger big rigs What would be the principal effect of raising interstate truck weight limits to 91,000 pounds with an additional trailer axle? Infrastructure deterioration would likely accelerate Necessary investment in new equipment would hinder owner-operator success Despite added braking power of a sixth axle, accident severity would increase Very little would change Boost in freight efficiency would improve carrier and driver financial prospects and broader economy Boosting individual-unit carrying capacity would decrease congestion Other/I don't know 30% 17% 17% 14% 9% 6% 7% 64% OverdriveOnline.com poll When safety is at stake, there's no need to take needless risks in the name of uncertain efficiency. — Overdrive Editorial Director Max Heine on the subject of heavier truck weight limits. If you missed his October Pulse column, search "Conflicting accounts of bigger big rigs" at OverdriveOnline.com. To hear reader views, search "All about the money," or scan the QR with your mobile device. The 2007 collapse of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis effectively muted further discussion of truck weights at the time.

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Overdrive - November 2015