Post by: Joe Sawaya on August 18, 2010, 11:48:36 AM
For the last ten years or so I've annually rented a commercial Ryder that will go about 64 mph top speed. That's fine for local travel. But driving 64 cross country seems like a looooooong time on the road.
Does anyone have any experience with any of the major rental places offering top speeds higher than 64 mph? Seems like I've been passed by some rental trucks going 70 mph or better.
Thanks,
Joe
Post by: Jason Tubbs on August 18, 2010, 12:21:56 PM
...don't do that, of course.
jt
Post by: Silas Pradetto on August 18, 2010, 12:24:51 PM
The trucks are also unbranded, so they give a better impression if you're doing gigs.
Oh, and the last Budget truck I rented was a GMC 6500 POS. Yes, POS should be part of the model number on that thing. It was governed at 65, but I never even got going that fast. Even empty, foot to the floor it wouldn't make it to 65 on the highway except on a downhill. I might have hit 66 once on like a 30% downhill grade
And this is a truck like only a couple years old...guess the name of the company says something?
Post by: Tom Manchester on August 18, 2010, 12:25:06 PM
On the other hand, every one of the 16' GMC W4's I've driven have been little speed demons.
YMPHMV
Post by: Bennett Prescott on August 18, 2010, 12:39:04 PM
Try Ryder, and ask them where the governor is set. They'll tell you.
Post by: gordon mcgregor on August 18, 2010, 12:45:59 PM
Post by: Tim McCulloch on August 18, 2010, 12:51:56 PM
You'll have to rent from a commercial rental/leasing company (Rollins is one). Their trucks will do 70 or 75. You'll also have to return the truck to the dispatching location (no one-way rentals).
Post by: Jamin Lynch on August 18, 2010, 02:05:53 PM
Let me know when you leave so I can stay off the roads that day.
Post by: Adam Whetham on August 18, 2010, 04:43:12 PM
| Jamin Lynch wrote on Wed, 18 August 2010 13:05 |
Do you really need to go that fast with a loaded 26ft truck? Let me know when you leave so I can stay off the roads that day. |
65 would be killer for me also... I'd want to be going at least 70.
Then again this is what the local interstates look like... Its normally never packed like I was in on the east coast (I don't miss that)
Post by: Eric Hendricks on August 18, 2010, 04:47:41 PM
As a former OTR truck driver, I can tell you that the top speed of the truck is not what shortens the time. Staying in the seat shortens your time on the road. When you stop for the night, you actually sleep instead of staying up ratchet jawing all night in the truck stop, then waking up later in the morning and having to hammer on it to make up for lost time. And of course if your well rested, your performance on the road is much better and everyone is safer.
Post by: Lee Douglas on August 18, 2010, 06:11:01 PM
Post by: Christian Tepfer on August 18, 2010, 06:53:13 PM
| Adam Whetham wrote on Wed, 18 August 2010 22:43 | ||
65 would be killer for me also... I'd want to be going at least 70. Then again this is what the local interstates look like... Its normally never packed like I was in on the east coast (I don't miss that) |
Speed limits for trucks seem to be very high in some states. There are longer distances to go there obviously.
In Germany for trucks (3.5 tonnes and more) we have a 80 km/h speed limit on the Autobahn and a 60km/h limit on other roads that are not going through towns or are otherwise limited.
So much for the "unlimited" German streets. We have some Autobahns that are unlimited for passenger cars and it scares me that small trucks can go 180 km/h and faster with over 4 tonnes (3.49 tonnes plus overload). There are some movements to limit small cars to 120 km/h (rental companies try that first to reduce insurance costs)
Once again, our speed limits for trucks
60 km/h = 37 mph
80 km/h = 50 mph (Autobahn)
89 km/h = 55 mph (real speed via speed limiters in the trucks)
I have seen some bigger trucks going a little faster but most of the limiters bite at 87/88/89 km/h. Depends on the tires and tire pressure when these limiters are adjusted
Post by: James Feenstra on August 18, 2010, 06:56:18 PM
i rarely see a truck going under 95-105 on a 400 series highway here
Post by: Christian Tepfer on August 18, 2010, 07:17:13 PM
Post by: David Buehler on August 18, 2010, 07:23:17 PM
Post by: Art Welter on August 18, 2010, 07:24:29 PM
| Joe Sawaya wrote on Wed, 18 August 2010 09:48 |
I'm helping a friend move across the continent in a few weeks and it looks like we're going to need a 26' rental truck. For the last ten years or so I've annually rented a commercial Ryder that will go about 64 mph top speed. That's fine for local travel. But driving 64 cross country seems like a looooooong time on the road. Does anyone have any experience with any of the major rental places offering top speeds higher than 64 mph? Seems like I've been passed by some rental trucks going 70 mph or better. Thanks, Joe |
As Eric Hendricks said:
“If we assume 3000 miles at 64mph, that's 46.875 hours. 3000 miles at 70mph is 42.857 hours, a difference of 4 hours.”
Of course, if you could do 85 mph like the GMC Top Kicks could do in the 1980s, you could cut that to 35.29 hours as my brother and I proved in one trip when we only stopped for fuel
.That said, the extra top speed makes for a pretty substantial gas mileage hit- saving 4 hours time could cost around 10 % in MPG.
If you got 10 MPG, 3000 miles uses 300 gallons. Take 30 gallons x $2.75 = $82.50.
So you spend about $20 more per hour saved.
Art Welter
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on August 18, 2010, 07:44:22 PM
| Christian Tepfer wrote on Wed, 18 August 2010 18:17 |
I think safe speed depends on traffic density and our streets are packed mostly. |
With trucks it depends on a few more things (think mass time velocity squared).
There is an open discussion right now about allowing trucks (in US) to carry heavier loads (and more double trailers) to improve the driver cost vs load economics, but that will have an impact on braking distance and safety.
In general the big rig drivers I've seen are much better drivers than the cars around them, but there's always a few, out on the road so tired (or whatever) they give the rest a bad name.
JR
Post by: dave tesch on August 18, 2010, 11:59:28 PM
| Adam Whetham wrote on Wed, 18 August 2010 15:43 | ||
65 would be killer for me also... I'd want to be going at least 70. Then again this is what the local interstates look like... Its normally never packed like I was in on the east coast (I don't miss that) |
that looks eerily familiar, almost like 76 miles south of there
Post by: Jay Barracato on August 19, 2010, 06:36:01 AM
Once I worked my way through the traffic, sure enough, there was the same van upside down after rolling at least 6-7 times. You have to pray no one was seriously hurt, but it would be hard to imagine how.
Poor decisions on the road can lead to tragedy in a heartbeat, regardless of what is around you.
Post by: Christian Tepfer on August 19, 2010, 08:32:38 AM
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Thu, 19 August 2010 01:44 | ||
With trucks it depends on a few more things (think mass time velocity squared). There is an open discussion right now about allowing trucks (in US) to carry heavier loads (and more double trailers) to improve the driver cost vs load economics, but that will have an impact on braking distance and safety. In general the big rig drivers I've seen are much better drivers than the cars around them, but there's always a few, out on the road so tired (or whatever) they give the rest a bad name. JR |
I agree, the small truck's drivers are the biggest risk around. And the non frequent passenger car drivers. And the overworked "just-in-time" drivers that have to cheat when it comes to driving (working) time regulations. The system is quite strict but not so easily enforced. In theory a truck driver can not be tired. Well, the regulation can not force a driver to actually sleep or relax when he is having his breaks.
However, in dense traffic it is some risk having the trucks go 89km/h on the right lane and passenger cars going 150km/h or more on the left lane. When a truck overtakes another (elephant race) this is a recipe for trouble. Because of that we have some routes where trucks are not allowed to overtake other trucks. So stay on the right lane, drive in convoi and when the first truck only goes 86km/h every truck goes 86km/h until they are allowed to use the left (or middle) lane.
For time and cost efficiency it is important to keep the speed and use the breaks you must take for gas stops, relaxing and being concentrated for the next leg. No need to go faster. Well it would be expensive, too.
Post by: Tom Reid on August 19, 2010, 09:34:24 AM
| Jamin Lynch wrote on Wed, 18 August 2010 13:05 |
Do you really need to go that fast with a loaded 26ft truck? Let me know when you leave so I can stay off the roads that day. |
I have to agree here. I've never been accused of being sane, but I am one of the safety cops. Slow and steady wins the race and saves a few pennies. If the girl from Buchannan decides to slow your trip, put her in the back of the truck. Never drive alone.
Post by: Jamin Lynch on August 19, 2010, 11:10:30 AM
We could have driven 80mph on IH10, as that was the posted speed limit in west Texas, but it wouldn't have been very safe as you might expect. Of coarse we had to stop and walk the horses every 4-5 hours or so. The trip took 5 days.
But I'm glad we took our time and didn't zoom through northern California and miss all the beautiful views. Sometimes you just gotta slow down a bit and enjoy the country side.
Post by: Tom Bourke on August 19, 2010, 11:42:46 AM
| Jamin Lynch wrote on Thu, 19 August 2010 10:10 |
I took a road trip a couple years ago from Corpus Christi Texas (way down south) to Oak Harbor Washington (2 hours north of Seattle) pulling 2 horses in a large horse trailer. We hit IH10 at San Antonio and drove to LA, there we picked up on IH5 the rest of the way. Yes, I know there is a shorter route. Visited some friends along the way. We could have driven 80mph on IH10, as that was the posted speed limit in west Texas, but it wouldn't have been very safe as you might expect. Of coarse we had to stop and walk the horses every 4-5 hours or so. The trip took 5 days. But I'm glad we took our time and didn't zoom through northern California and miss all the beautiful views. Sometimes you just gotta slow down a bit and enjoy the country side. |
I will second that. I have driven from Wisconsin to Oregon (and on one trip back to WI via LA, Vegas, Denver and many great places along the way.
I HAVE made the WI to OR trip in 3 days. My wife and I have also taken a week to do the same trip. It is worth it to slow down and stop more often. It is amazing the places you can find.
Post by: Ben Johnson on August 19, 2010, 01:06:15 PM
| Tom Bourke wrote on Thu, 19 August 2010 10:42 |
I HAVE made the WI to OR trip in 3 days. My wife and I have also taken a week to do the same trip. It is worth it to slow down and stop more often. It is amazing the places you can find. |
My ex gf and I went from Chicago to Oregon in 2 days. I bet you did see a _lot_ more in that week than we did.
We had 3 days for the drive back, which seemed even harder. But the drive back always is for some reason...
Ben
Post by: Tim McCulloch on August 19, 2010, 01:18:19 PM
| Eric Hendricks wrote on Wed, 18 August 2010 15:47 |
As a former OTR truck driver, I can tell you that the top speed of the truck is not what shortens the time. Staying in the seat shortens your time on the road. When you stop for the night, you actually sleep instead of staying up ratchet jawing all night in the truck stop, then waking up later in the morning and having to hammer on it to make up for lost time. And of course if your well rested, your performance on the road is much better and everyone is safer. |
Eric has the pertinent observation: keep moving, don't stop unless you have to. In a truck of almost any size, *every* stop stop adds a minimum of 15 minutes and typically a half hour to a drive.
Back in my "band in a van" days I had a little talk with the band when I was driving. "I only stop for fuel and cops. Pee now."
The look on the keyboard player's face was priceless when, 2 hours after downing a 2 litre bottle of cola beverage, he was handed a funnel and told to recycle the 2 litre bottle. "I only stop for fuel & cops, and we have half a tank." Applied to the ladies, too.
Jay's experience demonstrates WHY such a driving policy is important: people die at 90 mph because the driver isn't experienced in dealing with corrective maneuvers or reacting to emergencies at such speeds and the vehicle isn't designed for those speeds at full load.
Using Eric's math, one unnecessary stop between fill ups eats up every minute saved by higher speeds.
Drive safe, pay attention for fools like me on the road!
Tim Mc
Post by: Tom Bourke on August 19, 2010, 02:58:27 PM
Now we tend to take a little over 2 weeks if we visit Oregon. 3 to 4 days out and back with a week of visit time.
Post by: Marlow Wilson on August 19, 2010, 06:25:34 PM
| Ben Johnson wrote on Thu, 19 August 2010 13:06 |
We had 3 days for the drive back, which seemed even harder. But the drive back always is for some reason... Ben |
I did Vancouver to Minneapolis in 36 hours with a good friend some time ago. We stopped for coffee in Seattle (First Starbucks at the Pike market) and then a few beers and quick nap in Missoula. The two of us would alternate between fillups and sleep as much as possible while not driving. I actually much preferred it to the 24 + hour flight I make every so often. We were actually busting are asses to get back for a IATSE holiday call that ended up paying for most of our trip
