simcor:
It does not matter whether is it exceeded by power or gravity ffs. Oh sorry officer gravity made me do 45mph down the hill in a 40mph limit so it’s not my fault. Can’t see that holding up very well in any vehicle.
Youve missed the point entirely. In a 40mph thats what it is 40mph,however if gravity or power take a truck to 60mph on a DC or Motorway, no laws have been broken…
AndrewG:
simcor:
It does not matter whether is it exceeded by power or gravity ffs. Oh sorry officer gravity made me do 45mph down the hill in a 40mph limit so it’s not my fault. Can’t see that holding up very well in any vehicle.Youve missed the point entirely. In a 40mph thats what it is 40mph,however if gravity or power take a truck to 60mph on a DC or Motorway, no laws have been broken…
You’re wasting your time Brother.
The Borg won’t listen 
AndrewG:
simcor:
It does not matter whether is it exceeded by power or gravity ffs. Oh sorry officer gravity made me do 45mph down the hill in a 40mph limit so it’s not my fault. Can’t see that holding up very well in any vehicle.Youve missed the point entirely. In a 40mph thats what it is 40mph,however if gravity or power take a truck to 60mph on a DC or Motorway, no laws have been broken…
Ok in simple terms then.
You exceed 56mph on a motorway whether under or over 60mph which is the legal limit which was set when limiters were not required to be fitted by law.
A police officer stops you for it, would sorry officer it was gravity that caused me to over speed be accepted by said officer or would he deal with you for the offence that has been committed?
For speed alone why would a copper stop a HGV doing less than the posted, current, speed limit?
Wiretwister:
Speed limits - GOV.UKFor speed alone why would a copper stop a HGV doing less than the posted, current, speed limit?
He can stop you for any reason he deems fit!
At the very least he can prosecute you for “not being in control of the vehicle” or whatever wording it is they use nowadays. By exceeding the speed limiter he may deem you are not in proper control of the vehicle.
I also said whether under or over the legal limit, not just the under that you chose to pick up on.
simcor:
Wiretwister:
Speed limits - GOV.UKFor speed alone why would a copper stop a HGV doing less than the posted, current, speed limit?
He can stop you for any reason he deems fit!
At the very least he can prosecute you for “not being in control of the vehicle” or whatever wording it is they use nowadays. By exceeding the speed limiter he may deem you are not in proper control of the vehicle.
He would need better than driving UNDER the speed limit to justify not being in control of the vehicle.
Sometimes you need to accept your wrong and stop arguing a point?
Wiretwister:
Speed limits - GOV.UKFor speed alone why would a copper stop a HGV doing less than the posted, current, speed limit?
Leave him to it mate, you are ■■■■■■■ into the wind…
eagerbeaver:
Leave him to it mate, you are ■■■■■■■ into the wind…
So…youre saying that any argument i may put forward with gravity taking me to 110kph wont wash then…
AndrewG:
eagerbeaver:
Leave him to it mate, you are ■■■■■■■ into the wind…So…youre saying that any argument i may put forward with gravity taking me to 110kph wont wash then…
I suggest you ask The Borg mate. He has been driving bendy’s for a year now and is a complete oracle on all trucking matters.
My point for those who can’t understand it is this:
Show me where it says you can exceed a set speed limiter on a vehicle which requires it under use and construction regulations whether by means of the power of the engine or otherwise.
That is my point not by using this says powered beyond 90kph.
eagerbeaver:
AndrewG:
eagerbeaver:
Leave him to it mate, you are ■■■■■■■ into the wind…So…youre saying that any argument i may put forward with gravity taking me to 110kph wont wash then…
I suggest you ask The Borg mate. He has been driving bendy’s for a year now and is a complete oracle on all trucking matters.
I’m not an oracle on all things truck related at all Beaver.
I have been driving trucks since 2003 so not just a year, just bendy’s since I passed my C+E over a year ago.
It’s called having a discussion and I am asking for someone to show proof one way or the other, I like to work on proof not say so or my mate said or I read it to mean this.
I trust legal people to know the law, not your average truck driver unless you just happen to be a “member of the bar”.
I have not said anyone’s opinion is wrong, I am seeking clarification of the laws and how that relates to the speed limiter and exceeding the speed limiter whether under or over 60mph.
If you were involved in a fatal accident and your speed trace shows an increased speed whether under or over 56mph would that be used against you in a court of law as a contributory factor in the accident?
simcor:
Anyone can interpret anything in any way they like.I would like to see someone prove with evidence which is correct not just I say it’s this and people have to accept I am right.
It does not matter whether is it exceeded by power or gravity ffs. Oh sorry officer gravity made me do 45mph down the hill in a 40mph limit so it’s not my fault. Can’t see that holding up very well in any vehicle.
You’re talking unbridled rubbish (again) and you don’t have the first clue about what you’re trying to lecture others about (again).
The speed limit for a truck on a motorway is 60mph unless posted otherwise. That is fact. Legally, the limiter has to be set at no more than 56mph. That is also fact. The limiter is solely concerned with the powered speed that the lorry may travel at. It does not affect the speed that it achieves when gravity assists and hence it is totally legal to travel downhill in a truck at 60mph. Company policy at places like Culina may dictate otherwise, but the law is very clear.
Your attempt to drop in a diversionary ramble about 45mph in a 40mph zone is a red herring because it is not the same situation as traveling at 60mph in a 60mph limit. Anyone with the slightest amount of common sense can see that.
As far as evidence is concerned, perhaps you could look at something called the highway code and then follow it up with a scan of the construction and use regulations. Then you can come back here and apologise to all those who know better than you do.
simcor:
Wiretwister:
Speed limits - GOV.UKFor speed alone why would a copper stop a HGV doing less than the posted, current, speed limit?
He can stop you for any reason he deems fit!
At the very least he can prosecute you for “not being in control of the vehicle” or whatever wording it is they use nowadays. By exceeding the speed limiter he may deem you are not in proper control of the vehicle.
I also said whether under or over the legal limit, not just the under that you chose to pick up on.
Oh perleeze. If I set the cruise control on the truck at the maximum allowed by the truck systems, that is the limiter set speed, and the vehicle systems have eco roll (other names are available) which, with no driver input, allows the vehicle speed to exceed the limiter setting in neutral before applying the exhaust brake the driver can be prosecuted for not being in control of the vehicle?
Please reference the case when this has happened. I have given you the courtesy of making the references you asked for, please return that courtesy if you can. If you can’t I accept your acknowledgement that you are mistaken.
At the very least if this was illegal then construction and use laws would have been breached by the vehicle manufacturers. Wouldn’t these systems, if aiding lawbreaking, be withdrawn/modified? I’m not seeing those modifications except by company policy, usually on economy grounds.
I chose the under simply because I am not making an argument for speeds above the limit determined by vehicle and road type.
Olog Hai:
simcor:
Anyone can interpret anything in any way they like.I would like to see someone prove with evidence which is correct not just I say it’s this and people have to accept I am right.
It does not matter whether is it exceeded by power or gravity ffs. Oh sorry officer gravity made me do 45mph down the hill in a 40mph limit so it’s not my fault. Can’t see that holding up very well in any vehicle.
You’re talking unbridled rubbish (again) and you don’t have the first clue about what you’re trying to lecture others about (again).
The speed limit for a truck on a motorway is 60mph unless posted otherwise. That is fact. Legally, the limiter has to be set at no more than 56mph. That is also fact. The limiter is solely concerned with the powered speed that the lorry may travel at. It does not affect the speed that it achieves when gravity assists and hence it is totally legal to travel downhill in a truck at 60mph. Company policy at places like Culina may dictate otherwise, but the law is very clear.
Your attempt to drop in a diversionary ramble about 45mph in a 40mph zone is a red herring because it is not the same situation as traveling at 60mph in a 60mph limit. Anyone with the slightest amount of common sense can see that.
As far as evidence is concerned, perhaps you could look at something called the highway code and then follow it up with a scan of the construction and use regulations. Then you can come back here and apologise to all those who know better than you do.
Yes I agree using 45mph in a 40mph wasn’t the best analogy it was just the first thing that came into my mind at the time. It wasn’t a diversionary ramble at all it just wasn’t worded the way I wanted to explain myself. See the thing is I’m only human and sometimes can’t express exactly what I mean in words on a forum, the same as many people often forget without body language it is hard to gauge someones meaning from a post, where people assume that because you say something else your being argumentative, or lecturing or telling someone else they are wrong.
I also agree the law states the legal speed for a truck to be 60mph.
I also agree the law states the maximum speed limiter may be set at 90kph in the case of a truck.
What I am trying to point out is if the vehicle cannot be powered above 90kph by its engine how can it be legal to coast or exceed that limit by gravity on a downhill section of road when the vehicle is fitted with tools to ensure the speed is maintained or kept to the speed limiter?
I don’t like the words used in law a lot as they are often left to interpretation as law, in general is a very grey area is it not? Or are all laws black and white?
It’s hysterically laughable reading some of the off topic replies 
Who wouldnt actually take advantage of gravity anyway? Saves fuel for starters and to be on the brakes downhill just to keep it at 56mph with the inevitable gradient in front of you makes no sense at all…
Wiretwister:
Oh perleeze. If I set the cruise control on the truck at the maximum allowed by the truck systems, that is the limiter set speed, and the vehicle systems have eco roll (other names are available) which, with no driver input, allows the vehicle speed to exceed the limiter setting in neutral before applying the exhaust brake the driver can be prosecuted for not being in control of the vehicle?Please reference the case when this has happened. I have given you the courtesy of making the references you asked for, please return that courtesy if you can. If you can’t I accept your acknowledgement that you are mistaken.
At the very least if this was illegal then construction and use laws would have been breached by the vehicle manufacturers. Wouldn’t these systems, if aiding lawbreaking, be withdrawn/modified? I’m not seeing those modifications except by company policy, usually on economy grounds.
I chose the under simply because I am not making an argument for speeds above the limit determined by vehicle and road type.
I would guess that yes you could possibly be prosecuted for not being in control of the vehicle, just because the vehicle allows eco roll etc you still have the means by engine retarder or use of the brakes to control the vehicles speed. As equally, you can guess that you could not be prosecuted for not being in control of the vehicle. I still would not like to test it in a case of law for example as I said if you were involved in an accident and speed was shown to be a factor.
In the highway code can you coast a car down a hill out of gear or is it classed as not being in control of the vehicle, which I believe is correct without going to read it just to confirm or deny but that’s what I was taught when I first started to drive?
I also don’t believe that eco roll is actually in neutral even though it shows N in the gear selection indicator.
And no I don’t personally know of any cases where someone has been prosecuted for exceeding the speed limiter so can’t provide any links to that, if I did know of them then I happily would. I am talking hypothetically as a counter discussion.
Maybe I should have a read up again on the highway code and use and construction regs and see what my interpretation is, but I would like to see from an official body the stance on this subject for my own piece of mind and curiosity.
It is one subject that intrigues me of which there are many.
AndrewG:
Who wouldnt actually take advantage of gravity anyway? Saves fuel for starters and to be on the brakes downhill just to keep it at 56mph with the inevitable gradient in front of you makes no sense at all…
See that is one of the things that bugs me here, our company suggests using eco roll to save fuel, now on approach to roundabout etc I can see that argument stacking up. Then in the same vain they go on about overspeeds downhill and produce a list of shame and site the construction and use regs, by people who should know the laws as to the qualifications they hold. Namely O licence holders and compliance and driver trainers.
So as far as I can tell what they are saying is use eco roll to save fuel when coming to a stop or slowing down but not to exceed the limiter on downhills to save fuel.
Whether that is company policy or not is not the issue that bugs me, it’s more the legal side of it. If the company want me to do x y or z then as a paid employee I have to accept it whether I like it or not or find an alternative employment opportunity.
So lets look at this overspeeding “infringement” from the other direction.
It was 25 years since I took the class one, but one of the things I took away from the training from that was that in certain circumstances, a driving examiner would expect you to speed.
For example, heading towards a big hill in a fully loaded truck, you could be failed for not giving it a 10% over speed as you were not gaining more momentum to tackle the gradient ahead.
I have never heard of anyone being prosecuted for this “infringement” (please feel free to put me right if anyone knows better) under the law of the land, so the situation Mr. Beaver finds himself in sounds to be nothing more of a petty company rule, used for the express purpose of creating a “violation” to aid a disciplinary action.
Divide and rule, rule by fear. Keep towing the company line and NEVER think for yourself.
dieseldog999:
harrawaffa:
Seems like you’ve spat the dummy because someone dared to think there may be room for improvement in your driving.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
total pish…
there a million crappy beancounting plobber jobs out there with or without the agency. if they had strapped it and loaded it right it would never have moved,and overspeeds count for nothing .nothing for o licence operators or vosa for the driver.its only the fannys in the office to bleat on about to smack your wrists…good man anyway.no loss as far as work goes.
This.
DD sounds like a loose unit but he is one of the most practical guys posting on these forums and the sort of fellas I would want when the going gets rough.
