That railroad trestle isn't going anywhere and there are pipes of some sort running under the pavement that can't be moved, so 11' 8" now and always shall be. I did notice that Enterprise's rental trucks suffered less damage than Ryder trucks... must be a few inches shorter.
Richard

There's a 10-0 underpass in Charlottesville near the UVA campus that I contemplated trying. But in addition to my AC, I have a storage pod. I probably could have made it, but I decided it wasn't worth the risk.

Also, in my hometown, there is a 10-6 railroad bridge that's always getting hit. Some photos here: https://10foot6.in/

Personally, I find that low overpasses like these are an affront to
taxpayers and are professionally offensive. I don't care what "pipes" are
under that pavement, they spent however much money and raised the bridge
from 11'-8" to 12'-4"?

I have spent my professional career opposed to tort liability, but there
are times when I think the ambulance chasers have it right. These agencies
have active, not merely constructive notice of a fault that can indeed be
repaired if they want to repair it.

They claim warning systems that advise overheight trucks to turn off before
the overpass. Really? All I saw was a static warning sign with flashing
beacons, immediately downstream from a traffic signal where it won't get
seen or notice until after the driver has dealt with the signal. Traffic
engineering principles that were known in the 30's. Where are the height
detectors, sirens, far more aggressively flashing lights, breakaway
overheight sign panels that make a racket but not such wanton destruction,
and effective alternate routes?

At some point, after a dozen or so of the hundreds of truck crashes they
reported, the burden of guilt falls on the agency that won't find a way to
do something about it.

Rick "who has designed overheight warning systems with all of the above
features--40 years ago--at locations that have since been reconstructed to
provide acceptable height" Denney