FMCSA proposes speed limiter rule again — safety move or driver frustration? Here we go… again

by TRUCKERS VA
(UNITED STATES)

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is once again proposing a speed limiter rule for heavy-duty trucks.

If that sounds familiar, it should.

This idea has been floating around for years. It fades out. It comes back. It sparks debate. It disappears. Then boom — headline again.

The proposal would require trucks over 26,000 pounds engaged in interstate commerce to use electronic speed limiters set at a specific maximum speed. The exact number has varied in past discussions — often somewhere between 60 and 68 mph.

And every time this comes up, drivers split into camps.

Let’s break it down.

What FMCSA says the goal is

Reduce crash severity – Lower speeds mean less impact force.

Improve highway safety – Speed differences are a major factor in accidents.

Standardize fleets – Many large carriers already use limiters voluntarily.

Lower fuel consumption – Slower speeds improve fuel economy.

On paper, the logic seems straightforward: slower trucks = safer roads.

But trucking doesn’t happen on paper.

Perspective #1: Safety first

Supporters of the rule argue that physics doesn’t lie.

An 80,000-pound truck traveling at 75 mph carries significantly more kinetic energy than one going 65 mph. In a crash, that difference matters.

Many mega carriers already limit trucks to 62–68 mph. They say it:

Lowers fuel costs

Reduces tire wear

Cuts insurance risk

Protects drivers

From this view, the rule simply levels the playing field. If everyone runs governed speeds, no carrier gains a competitive edge by pushing faster.

Some safety groups also argue that consistency reduces dangerous speed variations among trucks.

That’s the case for it.

Perspective #2: Real-world highway problems

Now let’s talk about what drivers actually experience.

When trucks are governed too low — say 62 mph — and traffic flows at 70–75 mph, you create rolling roadblocks.

You’ve seen it:

Two governed trucks side-by-side trying to pass at a 1 mph difference. Four miles later, cars are stacking up behind them like a freight parade nobody asked for.

Some drivers argue that artificially limiting trucks increases congestion and aggressive driving from motorists.

There’s also the issue of merging.

Sometimes you need that extra speed to merge safely onto fast-moving highways. A hard cap can remove flexibility.

And let’s be honest — independent owner-operators don’t like being told how fast they can legally run if conditions allow.

The competition angle

Here’s where it gets interesting.

If speed limiters are mandated nationwide, smaller carriers who currently run faster lose that advantage.

Some drivers make up time by running 72–75 mph where legal. A hard federal cap changes trip planning, appointment timing, and possibly earning potential.

Miles per day matter.

Especially when rates are tight.

This isn’t just about speed. It’s about productivity.

Insurance and liability pressure

Behind the scenes, insurance companies love speed limiters.

Lower speeds reduce claim severity. Period.

And with nuclear verdicts crushing carriers, insurers push anything that reduces risk.

So while the FMCSA frames this as safety policy, insurance economics play a role too.

Less speed. Less exposure. Lower payouts.

Whether that savings reaches drivers? That’s another question.

Will it actually pass?

That’s the million-dollar question.

Speed limiter proposals have faced heavy pushback from owner-operators and industry groups in the past.

Regulators have to balance:

Safety data

Industry feedback

Economic impact

Enforcement practicality

If implemented, the rule would likely apply only to trucks with electronic engine control modules capable of limiting speed — which covers most modern trucks.

Older equipment? That’s another layer of complexity.

The bigger conversation nobody is having

Let’s zoom out.

Why is trucking constantly dealing with control-based regulation?

ELDs.
Hours-of-service.
Speed limiters.

Each one chips away at driver discretion.

Some argue that technology improves safety.

Others argue that it reduces professional judgment.

The tension between automation and driver autonomy isn’t going away.

And speed limiters are just another chapter in that story.

Bottom line

The FMCSA proposing a speed limiter rule again doesn’t mean it’s finalized. It means the conversation is back on the table.

Supporters say it improves safety and levels the industry.

Opponents say it increases congestion, reduces flexibility, and hurts productivity.

Both sides have valid points.

But here’s what smart drivers understand:

Regulations change.

Markets change.

Technology changes.

And if your entire income depends on adapting to whatever Washington decides next, you stay reactive.

The most resilient drivers build leverage outside of policy swings.

Not quitting trucking.

Not panicking.

Just building options.

Using off-duty time to learn AI tools, digital systems, and online income strategies gives you flexibility that no regulation can take away.

If you want to start building income outside the truck while you’re still driving — without walking away from your CDL — head over to 👉 offdutymoney.com

Because whether it’s speed limiters or freight cycles, options are power.

Stay safe. Stay sharp. And keep your foot steady on whatever pedal they let you use. 🚛