Disappointed in DJR

[waldo]

I commented to my wife awhile ago on the never ending scandals in sport ( cycling, swimming, AFL, etc) but never one involving V8 Supercar identities, as they would have a lot to loose if caught DUI or speeding and there could be possible repurcussions from sponors. Imagine my surprise while returning from a delivery heading north up the Pacific Motorway I was past by a white falcon with the tags DJR-17 driven by a man with snow white hair. A double check of my speedo had my needle sitting right on the 110kph mark ( the posted and legal speed limit) and this car was still pulling away from me. I do believe the saying in QLD is; every k over is a killer. :thumbsdown: If I'm mistaken in my assumed identity of the person will some one please inform me.

[brchi17]

Not a personal attack, but what's to say yours or their speedo is accurate or not...???

Remember that all speedo's are legal within Australia if they are accurate to within, but not over 10% of the actual road speed of the vehicle at any given time.

[HDTHSVHRT]

How can you call that a scandal? The media go over the top anyway. Dont forget they are not robots. Yes he could have been speeding but we all must obey the same law!

[gab73]

No big deal, Mr Perkins was caught doing 200klicks in 85 in a Brock Commodore while he ran HDT, and a young at the time Mr Skaife was caught drag racing in a Skyline in Dandenong while employed by Mr Gibson.

[Chev_350]

a young at the time Mr Skaife was caught drag racing in a Skyline in Dandenong while employed by Mr Gibson.

Heck, in Skaife's book he admits to speeding "without trying to get caught"

but really who cares, sure these guys are role models, but why should it matter when the police can't even stick to the speedlimit.

[FPR FAN]

I commented to my wife awhile ago on the never ending scandals in sport ( cycling, swimming, AFL, etc) but never one involving V8 Supercar identities, as they would have a lot to loose if caught DUI or speeding and there could be possible repurcussions from sponors. Imagine my surprise while returning from a delivery heading north up the Pacific Motorway I was past by a white falcon with the tags DJR-17 driven by a man with snow white hair. A double check of my speedo had my needle sitting right on the 110kph mark ( the posted and legal speed limit) and this car was still pulling away from me. I do believe the saying in QLD is; every k over is a killer. :thumbsdown: If I'm mistaken in my assumed identity of the person will some one please inform me.

It looks like you might have opened a can of worms here Waldo! Everyone sets the cruise on 115-118kms/hr on the M1. I should know, I travel on it every working day of the week. And no I don't speed. The old Diesel Cruiser is a bit of a handful over 100kays. The GT is a different story though..........

[Footy]

It looks like you might have opened a can of worms here Waldo! Everyone sets the cruise on 115-118kms/hr on the M1. I should know, I travel on it every working day of the week. And no I don't speed. The old Diesel Cruiser is a bit of a handful over 100kays. The GT is a different story though..........

Hands up those who have never broken a rule...

[ferrari fan]

Over the ages, our elected representatives or the ones who simply grabbed power and their appointed public servants have done very good jobs in brainwashing the ones they supposidly represent.
This now is a well practised artform with journo's young and old fuelling the fire.

P.S. Footy, how do I stick my hands up here?
I wanna capitulate so to speak.

[Footy]

P.S. Footy, how do I stick my hands up here?
I wanna capitulate so to speak.

Then you don't want to put your hands up.;)

[spoonster05]

No big deal, Mr Perkins was caught doing 200klicks in 85 in a Brock Commodore while he ran HDT, and a young at the time Mr Skaife was caught drag racing in a Skyline in Dandenong while employed by Mr Gibson.

Actually didn't Larry deny it was him because the guy pulled over had a moustache and he had shaved his because it was around the time Jack was born ? :rolleyes:

Seriously though the V8 Supercar drivers seem to be among the most well behaved sports people around, don't know if it's because they aren't out there every week and can release the tension/unwind etc a lot more during a season than say an NRL or AFL player could ?

[athol]

Many years ago at Bathurst the Highway Patrol got John Bowe driving down town unlicenced.


Athol.

[Martin Thomas]

I dare say its because they are not as popular as maistream sportstars.

What I think is worse is I was at the lights on Joondalup drive and a rally prepped WRX with sponsors plasted all over it, including a driver education centre, blasted off the lights, tyres-a-chirpin' and poofer valve-a-puffin'. Way to attract new sponsors..:rolleyes:

[texan]

I remember a story from the early 70s or 60s when on unsignposted roads ie country roads, there was a provision where if speeding drivers could prove that they were totally in control of a car, they could avoid a ticket. It was either Peter Brock or Colin Bond (I used to confuse the two in my younger days) picked up on the Putty Road, northwest of Sydney, for doing some big speed and simply because of who they were, avoided a ticket.
To Waldo's dilemma, your main problem is you didn't stipulate how fast this car passed (not past) you. The way you describe it, doesn't really sound that fast. I really hope you're not worried about 5-10 ks (on a freeway) here because I'll tell you, Highway Patrol sure don't.

[Group A]

Seriously though the V8 Supercar drivers seem to be among the most well behaved sports people around, don't know if it's because they aren't out there every week and can release the tension/unwind etc a lot more during a season than say an NRL or AFL player could ?[/quote]


Maybe its just the intelligence of the drivers, whereas a lot of the NRL and AFL are a bunch of meat heads who think they are above every law or code they must abide by and feel the need to push the envelope at every opportunity.

[05shan]

I really dont think this is an issue, everybody does a few kays over the limit every once in a while (some more than others:D ). Role models or not, these guys are still human beings. Why dont you go tell the media, sure they will turn it into a big issue:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[sphinx84]

Next Headline.

V8 SUPERCARS PROMTES DANGEROUS DRIVING WHILE DRINKING.

Sure they will bring in the sponsorship of JB into it.

Anybody that claims they dont speed is a liar. Everybody has done it unless your first car was a limo and have never driven

[vr-x3500]

I'd say there's almost as many people speeding on the M1 than actually abiding by the limit. After just returning from the Gold Coast about an hour ago, doing the speed limit on the M1 you almost feel guilty for holding people up, there's that many that speed.

[lukey73]

I'd say there's almost as many people speeding on the M1 than actually abiding by the limit. After just returning from the Gold Coast about an hour ago, doing the speed limit on the M1 you almost feel guilty for holding people up, there's that many that speed.


Thats only coz the road could handle a speed limit of 140km/h, but the nana's that run our police wont let them book you for anything other than speeding these days so if the limit were that high you would have road rage incidents that would have a bigger total than the amount of people it would take to fill the MCG.

IF DJ was drving at 120 or dare say 125 then good luck to him, i see poilce cars driving around 15-30 km/h over the limit all the time but i bet they dont get booked:rolleyes:

[monarocveightz]

I'd say there's almost as many people speeding on the M1 than actually abiding by the limit. After just returning from the Gold Coast about an hour ago, doing the speed limit on the M1 you almost feel guilty for holding people up, there's that many that speed.

thats what we think, we come from Tassie, and now live on the Gold Coast, Tasmanian drivers are in no-where near as much rush as Queenslanders are. If it was Dick Johnson driving the speeding car, i think he was doing the wrong thing, but then everyone goes over the speed limit at least once in their life.

[brchi17]

.......:sleeping:

[waldo]

I admit I'm no Ford fan, but I do respect and admire DJ and his accomplishments during his racing career so I'm not trying to portray him or his abilities to be anything less than they are. What got to me before I posted this thread was (a) he sat in judgement of others on TV's Aust Worst Drivers, (b) he is the front face on TV for road saftey campaigns, and (c) there has been two tragic deaths in Australian motor racing in controlled racing enviroments (which the M1 is not) with-in the last twelve months, to have some idiot miscalculate a lane change, or worse not check mirrors before making a manouvre (as I have witnessed so many times as a professional driver) could result in the tragic loss of another racing ledgend or worse. It's not DJ ability behind the wheel that I doubt but 50 percent of other drivers who should not have been given a licence.

[Chev_350]

I'd say there's almost as many people speeding on the M1 than actually abiding by the limit. After just returning from the Gold Coast about an hour ago, doing the speed limit on the M1 you almost feel guilty for holding people up, there's that many that speed.

the first time I done the Gold Coast - Brisbane run I sat bang on 110k/h, was getting passed left right and centre, I thought my speedo was broken.

[ferrari fan]

doing exacly the speed limit does not exclude you from being involved in an acident in any way.
We do need rules to keep the whole show (Society) running smoothly.
Pecuniary punishment is one of the last measures together with taking licenses away we have available to enforce the road rules.
The Governing bodies have gone ape in all the different speeds posted and make it difficult to abeidt by them all the time.
Never mind having a high performance car/bike with no where to go to be able to use it legaly.

[brchi17]

I admit I'm no Ford fan.....

So do you know if the speedo in both vehicles are accurate ???

Otherwise you could possibly be rubbishing (slander) someones good name with absolutely no justification at all because you have only assumed that because of a #plate & the back of someones head that it may or may not be the said person....:rolleyes:

Time to close this thread IMHO

[Poita]

What does being "Disappointed in DJR" (DICK JOHNSON RACING) have to do with Dick Johnson going slightly faster than you on the M1. It seems to me you have taken the opportunity to have a cheap shot at DJR and DJ.

[toddy05]

mountain out of a molehill thing I think. We do not even know if it was Dick Johnson. If I saw someone drive past with HRT 22 or HDT 05 or PGB 05 could we assume it was PB? No because each of these are not registered under those names. It could just be a fan who loves DJR......I do not know that many race stars would want to advertise who they are through their number plates anyways. Wouldn't it be more likely that a DJR 320 with DJR 320 plates would be his anyways? At the end of the day big deal I think. Perhaps someone should ring DJR on Monday and see if there is even a DJR 17 car in their yard or under their business rego. I would be very surprised if their was....

[singer]

We are all human, subject to the same infallabilities as everyone else.

Just because someone is alledged Race Car driver, they are still human & can make mistakes.

[brchi17]

....Just because someone is alledged Race Car driver, they are still human & can make mistakes.

The problem I see Ken, is it that's not even known if it was the person in question to start with...just someones assumption due to a #plate :rolleyes:

[Poita]

Dick Johnson does in fact own a DJR320 and the plates are DJR-17.

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c55/Petereesa/DJ R.jpg

[toddy05]

i eat my words then, nothing like humble pie, mmm

[brchi17]

i eat my words then, nothing like humble pie, mmm

I wouldn't rush too quickly, we still don't know who the driver was ???

[Graeme]

Exceeding the speed limit is one thing ... driving at a speed that might be deemed unsafe or dangerous in the prevailing circumstances is a more relevant consideration.

I don't enjoy the 'speed kills' debate ... but my 5 cents worth says that there is more to it than just the numbers !

[Dragferret]

DJ possibly going over the speed limit is not exactly a scandal. Do we remember Bob Hawke getting pinged for not wearing a seat belt? He paid his fine and no one worried. If Marcos Einfeld had paid his fine and lost his points no one would be worried either. Can't compare someone going a few kays over the speed limit on a freeway to drug addicted footballers.

Who was the (ex) Channel 7 motorsport reporter who got done for DUI at Bathurst one year? He was a Wonder World reporter in a past life. Once he got done for drink driving Channel 7 dropped him like a sack of spuds. And he hasn't been heard from since. A really bad career move.

[toddy05]

What about the big name guy who was caught last year or the year before doing a really obscene speed in his Bentley in Sydney ?
http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/speedo-needles-damage-done-as-shortall-jailed/2005/06/23/1119321850987.html

[brchi17]

What about the big name guy who was caught last year or the year before doing a really obscene speed in his Bentley in Sydney ?
http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/speedo-needles-damage-done-as-shortall-jailed/2005/06/23/1119321850987.html

considering what the court often hands out for crimes, I think this bloke got a raw deal for being sentenced to 6 months jail for that...:rolleyes:

[Chev_350]

I wouldn't rush too quickly, we still don't know who the driver was ???

or how much faster he was going

[beast]

Who was the Ch7 commentator who got done for DUI.

Honestly who cares about a car with DJR-17 plates passing u on the highway. I would have been great ive seen dick johnsons car go past. If it was Dick driving, u should be glad that you have shared a piece of road with Dick Johnson.

C'mon.

[BIGJIM]

Who was the Ch7 commentator who got done for DUI.

Honestly who cares about a car with DJR-17 plates passing u on the highway. I would have been great ive seen dick johnsons car go past. If it was Dick driving, u should be glad that you have shared a piece of road with Dick Johnson.

C'mon.

Exactly, Who cares? This thread should be buried!!

[mick78]

DJ possibly going over the speed limit is not exactly a scandal. Do we remember Bob Hawke getting pinged for not wearing a seat belt? He paid his fine and no one worried. If Marcos Einfeld had paid his fine and lost his points no one would be worried either. Can't compare someone going a few kays over the speed limit on a freeway to drug addicted footballers.

Who was the (ex) Channel 7 motorsport reporter who got done for DUI at Bathurst one year? He was a Wonder World reporter in a past life. Once he got done for drink driving Channel 7 dropped him like a sack of spuds. And he hasn't been heard from since. A really bad career move.

I am not sure that he was never heard from again, didn't he make a fortune developing childrens board games?

[rex555]

Exceeding the speed limit is one thing ... driving at a speed that might be deemed unsafe or dangerous in the prevailing circumstances is a more relevant consideration.

I don't enjoy the 'speed kills' debate ... but my 5 cents worth says that there is more to it than just the numbers !

Absolutely agree with you Graeme. There is far more to road safety than a number painted on a sign. People have been brainwashed with the 'speed kills' mantra because it is easy to enforce. I'd rather share the roads with a bunch of people travelling 10kph over the singposted limit and concentrating than 10kph under and talking on their phones/ SMSing/eating/talking to their passenger etc etc.

Also we haven't had any indication as to what the other traffic conditions were like. Heavy traffic, light traffic, good/poor visibility, good/poor weather. All have a bearing on driving style, velocity etc. We are like a bunch of speed cameras, we have only a tiny snapshot of one instant in time without any other extenuating information to go on.

[amiers]

has anyone noticed Waldo's tag? "LARRY PERKINS: Still is and always will be a legend" the very man caught doing 200kph.

[GOBBO]

it depends on how much faster then 110 he was going if its only10 ks or so its no bigger i somtimes go over the speed limit by that much but that depands on the weather conditions and the road condition . mountain outta a mould hill i say

[brchi17]

it depends on how much faster then 110 he was going if its only10 ks or so its no bigger i somtimes go over the speed limit by that much but that depands on the weather conditions and the road condition . mountain outta a mould hill i say

....but we don't even know IF he was speeding as Waldo still hasn't told us:

what speed HE was doing
if the speedo in his vehicle that he was driving at the time is actually accurate

[Martin Thomas]

Sounds to me DJR have found some pace on and off the track..:p

[toddy05]

engineering advances courtesy of T8, maybe he borrowed Craig's car.....

[05shan]

Could see Lowndsey cruzin around with DJR plates:p :D

[Esses]

Two points many are missing here.

1/ It's totally irrelevant who the driver was, how much over the limit, how good the road, how clear the weather etc etc etc. The sign says "100", or "110". That's it. End of story Mr Motorist. Disagree by all means. Agitate for change. Write to the Minister. But until it changes, that's the LIMIT, that's the law. Cop it sweet if you're booked, even if your name is Johnson, Perkins, Bowe etc.

2/ Those that are saying "close down this thread" are completely missing the point of a DISCUSSION Forum. It's to DISCUSS, even (gee, whizz) DISAGREE, argue, debate, see different points of view & so on.

Oh & I'm no saint when it comes to speeding & stupidity on the road (in the past) - Singer can bear that out :D - but something that 23 years as a Professional Courier & my 4 kids have taught me is to relax behind the wheel, stick at the legally posted limit (read that word again - LIMIT) & arrive alive.:)

[beast]

Simple phrase.

SPEED DOES NOT KILL, THE BLOODY TREE DOES!!!!

[texan]

[QUOTE=Esses;193474]Two points many are missing here.

1/ It's totally irrelevant who the driver was, how much over the limit, how good the road, how clear the weather etc etc etc. The sign says "100", or "110". That's it. End of story Mr Motorist. Disagree by all means. Agitate for change. Write to the Minister. But until it changes, that's the LIMIT, that's the law. Cop it sweet if you're booked, even if your name is Johnson, Perkins, Bowe etc.

Sorry Esses, but I think you have missed the point. No one's been booked, no one's complaining & no one's not copping it sweet.
The point is Waldo has made a rather condeming albeit inferred accusation without explaining the crucial points that we have asked about.
Regardless of the law it certainly is not dangerous to be going an extra 10-15 ks on a freeway. Most Highway Patrol officers (in NSW) will give a tolerance of as much as 20ks over even on slower roads. They have to at the very least allow for 10% discrepancy.
Whilst I respect Waldo's right(and yours) to be disappointed with the alleged driver in accordance with your values, we are also expressing that a bit more tolerance & commonsense on the road goes a long long way.

[Leigh]

They have to at the very least allow for 10% discrepancy.
Tell that to the Victorian cops/pollies/speed camera operators:rolleyes:

[lukey73]

Simple phrase.

SPEED DOES NOT KILL, THE BLOODY TREE DOES!!!!

Brian to quote Jeremy Clarkson "Speed doesnt kill, its the sudden stop at the end that does all the damage"

The sooner Waldo gives us the info the better but i dont think its coming any time soon :rolleyes:

[texan]

Tell that to the Victorian cops/pollies/speed camera operators:rolleyes:

As I said, in NSW.

I still find it amazing how different states have different rules on such things. I think it is a very strong part of the argument for the redundancy of state governments.

[inter]

Maybe this was an Illigal V8 Test day??????:D

[wayno]

It was Team Dynamik trying to besmirch Dick's good name! :D

[GOBBO]

Maybe this was an Illigal V8 Test day??????:D

ha ha ha thats why they went so well in perth ha ha

[Esses]

[quote=Esses;193474]Two points many are missing here.

1/ It's totally irrelevant who the driver was, how much over the limit, how good the road, how clear the weather etc etc etc. The sign says "100", or "110". That's it. End of story Mr Motorist. Disagree by all means. Agitate for change. Write to the Minister. But until it changes, that's the LIMIT, that's the law. Cop it sweet if you're booked, even if your name is Johnson, Perkins, Bowe etc.

Sorry Esses, but I think you have missed the point. No one's been booked, no one's complaining & no one's not copping it sweet.
The point is Waldo has made a rather condeming albeit inferred accusation without explaining the crucial points that we have asked about.
Regardless of the law it certainly is not dangerous to be going an extra 10-15 ks on a freeway. Most Highway Patrol officers (in NSW) will give a tolerance of as much as 20ks over even on slower roads. They have to at the very least allow for 10% discrepancy.
Whilst I respect Waldo's right(and yours) to be disappointed with the alleged driver in accordance with your values, we are also expressing that a bit more tolerance & commonsense on the road goes a long long way.


Not to start an argument, Texan, but I think that YOU'VE missed my point completely. I wasn't actually agreeing or disagreeing with the original poster, just pointing out that the law is the law - black and white. As I understand it and as someone else has pointed out, in Victoria they're a lot harsher than your NSW perception. From personal experience here in the ACT I can tell you that if you go 10kmh over any limit & get caught, 90% of the time, you'll get done. While the ADRs certainly do allow for a 10% discrepancy, I don't think you'll find that many Cops who do, especially if their Sergeant is in the car!

[Esses]

Simple phrase.

SPEED DOES NOT KILL, THE BLOODY TREE DOES!!!!


And this is one of the silliest slogans that the "Speeder Apologists" have ever come up with. I mean, if you hit "The Tree" at 110kmh then yes, you'll probably die. What if you hit it at 60, or 80? Like I said - silly.

[zeitgeist]

And this is one of the silliest slogans that the "Speeder Apologists" have ever come up with. I mean, if you hit "The Tree" at 110kmh then yes, you'll probably die. What if you hit it at 60, or 80? Like I said - silly.

If speed truly killed, then any infraction, regardless of severity, should be treated as a wanton disregard for the safety of others. Many other such activities would land one in jail or at least at the business end of massive fines.

If the fine were $2000 or five days in jail for a 10kph or, in my case, a 6.2mph infraction, you better believe I would never venture north of the limit.

It is not in a government's fiscal interest to eliminate speeding. It IS in their fiscal interest to set fines at a level that fill the coffers but give the driver only the slightest pause when deciding whether or not to break the limit (and somewhat quickly remove the financial sting after one has been levied).

The use of cameras under the banner of safety is even more laughable. At least a cop stops the infraction as it is happening, thus stemming the activity they find so dangerous. Speed cameras have no such ability, as the subject is free to continue down the road uncorrected.

BC

[texan]

[quote=texan;193495]


Not to start an argument, Texan, but I think that YOU'VE missed my point completely. I wasn't actually agreeing or disagreeing with the original poster, just pointing out that the law is the law - black and white. As I understand it and as someone else has pointed out, in Victoria they're a lot harsher than your NSW perception. From personal experience here in the ACT I can tell you that if you go 10kmh over any limit & get caught, 90% of the time, you'll get done. While the ADRs certainly do allow for a 10% discrepancy, I don't think you'll find that many Cops who do, especially if their Sergeant is in the car!

No argument, just, as you pointed out, a discussion .
However.......you said..."Two points many are missing here." & "It's totally irrelevant who the driver was, how much over the limit, how good the road, how clear the weather etc etc etc"
What I'm saying is that nobody missed your first point because it was not relevant to the discussion.
Also I don't dispute what the police do in ACT or Vic however that doesn't mean that they are legally right. I won't go into this as it way too long, intricate & boring. I will give you one tip, never admit that you were speeding even 1k over.

[wayno]

If it was you Dick then good on you if you didn't get caught.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. :D

[cooper1117]

Speed is only ONE factor in many accidents. For all those on their high horse about speeding, think about what else causes accidents.

Today I drive a powerful car with sports suspension, improved brake package, ABS, traction control, you name it's on there. My first car was a HR holden, as raw as it gets. If I were doing 60 in a 50 zone and an accident looms I could pull up quicker today in my car than I could ever imagine in the HR. Add a bit of rain and today's car still would allow me to avoid the situation - the HR would be in the accident.

A driver doing 20K over on the freeway, compared to a driver doing 20K over in suburban streets with 5 mates in the car, a bit of booze, rainy conditions. Do you blame it on the speed when something goes wrong??

Speed alone does not kill, the misuse of speed mixed with other factors kills.

[Leigh]

And this is one of the silliest slogans that the "Speeder Apologists" have ever come up with. I mean, if you hit "The Tree" at 110kmh then yes, you'll probably die. What if you hit it at 60, or 80? Like I said - silly.
That's nasty Steve...I knew someone who died hitting a tree at 60...and an occupant of a car that got scalped going in a 40km/h accident:eek: Could have easily killed him!

In fact, there is usually around 10 people in the Vic toll who get run over by cars doing less than 5km/h who die...and this is relevant because it's the whole argument behind 40km/h zones! The slogan relates as much to pedestrians as it does to occupants!

FACT is, a car moving at ANY speed can kill...the probability of death may change as speed increases, but it still aint "speed" that kills...As a corrorally (sp?) if I throw a bullet at person, it is unlikely to kill them, versus sending it from the barrel of a gun...I ask, is it the speed that killed, or the bullet:rolleyes:

[Leigh]

In any case, Waldo must be congratulated for getting so many bites with such a short sharp statement...I wonder if he is this successful with trout?

[inter]

In any case, Waldo must be congratulated for getting so many bites with such a short sharp statement...I wonder if he is this successful with trout?


:D :D :D :D

[Esses]

[quote=Esses;193582]

No argument, just, as you pointed out, a discussion .
However.......you said..."Two points many are missing here." & "It's totally irrelevant who the driver was, how much over the limit, how good the road, how clear the weather etc etc etc"
What I'm saying is that nobody missed your first point because it was not relevant to the discussion.
Also I don't dispute what the police do in ACT or Vic however that doesn't mean that they are legally right. I won't go into this as it way too long, intricate & boring. I will give you one tip, never admit that you were speeding even 1k over.

Sigh, maybe I'm being obtuse, but all I'm trying to say is that no matter who you are and/or how good, if you go over the posted speed limit then you're breaking the law. Pretty simple, I'd've thought.

[Esses]

That's nasty Steve...I knew someone who died hitting a tree at 60...and an occupant of a car that got scalped going in a 40km/h accident:eek: Could have easily killed him!

In fact, there is usually around 10 people in the Vic toll who get run over by cars doing less than 5km/h who die...and this is relevant because it's the whole argument behind 40km/h zones! The slogan relates as much to pedestrians as it does to occupants!

FACT is, a car moving at ANY speed can kill...the probability of death may change as speed increases, but it still aint "speed" that kills...As a corrorally (sp?) if I throw a bullet at person, it is unlikely to kill them, versus sending it from the barrel of a gun...I ask, is it the speed that killed, or the bullet:rolleyes:

No, it's the SPEED of the bullet, the lethal projectile which is only lethal if moving at sufficient velocity, just as a car. We weren't discussing pedestrians, but one person (no matter who) deliberately on their own judgement going faster than they are legally allowed to. BTW, I hope you're joking about the nasty bit. Nothing I've said was meant that way at all. I'd've thought that it would be blindingly obvious that the harder you hit an immovable object, the more danger you're in. As for the 5kmh run-over thing, you should know that that is because at that speed you ARE run over - literally - whereas at higher speeds, typically the pedestrian is thrown onto/over the bonnet. In this case there's usually a higher chance of survival than having a tonne or two of metal crunching over you.
Here, the 40kmh speed zones (usually School Zones) are pushed as giving you more time to react should a child run out in front of you. Again, pretty simple stuff. Talk to a Road Worker someday too about how many near-misses they have due to cars going too fast in roadworks.
Speed vs time vs distance. A Cop told me this one (he was booking me at the time:D ) - how far does your car travel in a SECOND at 60kmh?
SIXTEEN metres, or FIFTY feet. I didn't believe him, so I worked it out myself. It's correct. So at 120kmh you're travelling at 32 metres per SECOND. What's your average reaction time? 1 second? 2? Plus the increased braking distance that extra speed confers as well, of course.
Call me simple, but if I'm trying to avoid a broken-down, jack-knifed Semi, I'd like as much time & distance up my sleeve as possible. But that's just me, I usually have 4 kids in the car these days.:)

[Martin Thomas]

All I know is, if someone runs down my kid and he/she is speeding, drunk or breaking the laws of driving, I will hit him/her in the head with the heaviest object I can find. they can say whatever they want, be as sorry as they want, but it is not an accident when you are breaking the law..

Pretty much any rule/law out there can be rationalised into obscurity.. Rules and laws are there because the regulating bodies have much more experience than any of us that they base the laws on. In my industry, there are a lot of 'pointless' or over the top rules that less expierienced people think are stupid. Or worse still, some people just never learn. Here follows a true, boring story from work last week.

40 something year old is filling in as foreman, he has been off the tools for 3 years with a work related bad back and shoulder.. Asks 50 something year old to get a tray restraint off a truck on the hill to use in the workshop.. 50 something year old says 'Na, that job has to be done in the workshop'. 40 something year old says, 'When I used to be on the hill, I used to do that sort of stuff all the time'....

But, I digress. How many speeding drivers crash and know they are going to crash.. None, they all think they are in control and better than the speed limit allows..

I know of people who have fallen over and died. Anyone out there who thinks that 40kph zones don't lessen the chance of death or serious injury really shouldn't be allowed to have a licence as they obviously find it too hard to understand the absolute basics of safety behind the wheel..

[Footy]

175000 people died in China in 2005, in construction related accidents?/mishaps.

[Leigh]

As for the 5kmh run-over thing, you should know that that is because at that speed you ARE run over - literally - whereas at higher speeds, typically the pedestrian is thrown onto/over the bonnet. In this case there's usually a higher chance of survival than having a tonne or two of metal crunching over you.
Just as I thought, it's better if the car is going faster, not slower...so slowness crushes and kills...:p

I was also going to throw in the other example where a woman left the handbrake off, went around to the boot, and the car rolled into her, crushing her between the wall and car...car was travelling at less than 1km/h according to the police report...

It's actually not the speed, but momentum...the mass (or weight) has as much to do with the calculation as the velocity (speed)...but now I'm being a pedantic technical bugger:p...

And I still can't get over the stat that since the introduction of lower speed limits around schools that used to be in 80-100km/h speed zones, just under twice as many pedestrian related accidents are occuring...the psychologists say that people (including kids) take more care crossing a higher speed limit posted road...

[VXfan]

but now I'm being a pedantic technical bugger

..
You?......surely not?...:p

[rex555]

[quote=texan;193598]

Sigh, maybe I'm being obtuse, but all I'm trying to say is that no matter who you are and/or how good, if you go over the posted speed limit then you're breaking the law. Pretty simple, I'd've thought.

Breaking the law or going against common sense? Yes you are breaking the 'law' however justify 100kph on a freeway. All traffic going in the same direction, divided road, no pedestrians and usually with a design speed of 130-150kph. Now make it a country road, undivided, traffic going both directions and vehicles being able to cut in from the side, yet the same number is posted on the sign, 100kph. Now make it a 35 year old car, drum brakes all round, poor steering, no inertia reel belts (and probably none in the back) and cheap road tyres. Still allowed to do 100kph. Now make the driver 70, got their licence when the roads were a very different place to be with far less traffic and never had to update their skill set. Older reactions, poorer eyesight and quite possibly poorer driving skills to begin with. Yet it is still legal for them to do 100 kph. So which car is capable of safely going slightly faster? The brand new car on the freeway with what is supposedly a very experienced driver at the wheel? Or the decrepit clunker on a country road with the same speed limit posted?

I'm not having a go at anyone but by experience the numbers painted on signs have more to do with political expedience than anything to do with road safety. After all, with the massive advances in vehicle safety and dynamics, supposedly better designed roads and supposedly better driver training, why do we still have speed limits set over 40 years ago based on travelling 'a mile a minute'? Why also, do roads that are identical in Europe, have speed limits of 130kph (France, Italy) or unlimited (Germany)? If driving faster than 100kph IS so dangerous, why did the rate of fatalities go DOWN in Montana USA when they removed daytime speed restrictions in the mid-1990's?

A number painted on a sign cannot be the be-all and end-all of road safety. They should be treated as a guide and enforced as such. There are times when it would be possible to safely exceed that by a certain ammount and other time when it would be foolish to go anywhere near it. But it needs drivers who know how to drive 'to the conditions', not just blindly follow a number on a sign regardless of rain, fog, traffic etc as happens so often now. It also needs logical enforcment of ALL the road rules, not just those that can be monitored electronically.

On that, have a happy and safe Easter everyone and remember to DRIVE TO THE CONDITIONS.

[ferrari fan]

Very well said.
The difficulty is the common idiot or bigot that we have to cater for it seems.
He/she might be behind the wheel, wear an Uniform or be in some sort of power position in our society.

[Leigh]

[QUOTE=Esses;193775]

Breaking the law or going against common sense? Yes you are breaking the 'law' however justify 100kph on a freeway. All traffic going in the same direction, divided road, no pedestrians and usually with a design speed of 130-150kph. Now make it a country road, undivided, traffic going both directions and vehicles being able to cut in from the side, yet the same number is posted on the sign, 100kph. Now make it a 35 year old car, drum brakes all round, poor steering, no inertia reel belts (and probably none in the back) and cheap road tyres. Still allowed to do 100kph. Now make the driver 70, got their licence when the roads were a very different place to be with far less traffic and never had to update their skill set. Older reactions, poorer eyesight and quite possibly poorer driving skills to begin with. Yet it is still legal for them to do 100 kph. So which car is capable of safely going slightly faster? The brand new car on the freeway with what is supposedly a very experienced driver at the wheel? Or the decrepit clunker on a country road with the same speed limit posted?

I'm not having a go at anyone but by experience the numbers painted on signs have more to do with political expedience than anything to do with road safety. After all, with the massive advances in vehicle safety and dynamics, supposedly better designed roads and supposedly better driver training, why do we still have speed limits set over 40 years ago based on travelling 'a mile a minute'? Why also, do roads that are identical in Europe, have speed limits of 130kph (France, Italy) or unlimited (Germany)? If driving faster than 100kph IS so dangerous, why did the rate of fatalities go DOWN in Montana USA when they removed daytime speed restrictions in the mid-1990's?

A number painted on a sign cannot be the be-all and end-all of road safety. They should be treated as a guide and enforced as such. There are times when it would be possible to safely exceed that by a certain ammount and other time when it would be foolish to go anywhere near it. But it needs drivers who know how to drive 'to the conditions', not just blindly follow a number on a sign regardless of rain, fog, traffic etc as happens so often now. It also needs logical enforcment of ALL the road rules, not just those that can be monitored electronically.

On that, have a happy and safe Easter everyone and remember to DRIVE TO THE CONDITIONS.

Excellent post Rex...if the post of the month award was being given out, I think you just won it!

[lukey73]

Leigh maybe you should pass that on to someone you know in the Vic Gov, i hate the way that the claim "speed kills" its not speed its in approriate speed that kills.

I find it interesting the new point to point camera set up on the hume highway, they are basically saying you have to watch your speedo over the distance you travel not the road so that you dont get pinged, why the hell dont the Governments around this country just admit its the money they are after increase the cost of rego and forget the fines, would be much better for all :D

[brchi17]

Leigh maybe you should pass that on to someone you know in the Vic Gov, i hate the way that the claim "speed kills" its not speed its in approriate speed that kills.

I find it interesting the new point to point camera set up on the hume highway, they are basically saying you have to watch your speedo over the distance you travel not the road so that you dont get pinged, why the hell dont the Governments around this country just admit its the money they are after increase the cost of rego and forget the fines, would be much better for all :D

Remember this is the same state government that earns close to 50% of it's yearly income from fleecing the road, so don't be surprised.....we all know WHY they're there, safety is simply the guise in which they justify it to the masses :rolleyes:

[ferrari fan]

Yes and the state's population lets it happen.
He who controlles the media and sets the tone for education in schools has the power to do what ever They wish.
It is called Mind conditioning.

[Leigh]

Remember this is the same state government that earns close to 50% of it's yearly income from fleecing the road, so don't be surprised.....
Not sure where you get that one from, but it's nowhere near correct;)

[cooper1117]

Now make it a 35 year old car, drum brakes all round, poor steering, no inertia reel belts (and probably none in the back) and cheap road tyres. .

You just described my HR - but you forgot, no demister (unless you count opening the quarter window as the dimister), pull to the left when braking, enormous body roll when cornering, bench front seat - so you slid around when cornering. Ahhh those were the days!!

[zeitgeist]

All I know is, if someone runs down my kid and he/she is speeding, drunk or breaking the laws of driving, I will hit him/her in the head with the heaviest object I can find. they can say whatever they want, be as sorry as they want, but it is not an accident when you are breaking the law..


According to Webster's, it's an accident unless it is my INTENTION to hit your child.

If no accident (automobile or otherwise) can be a result of stupid decisions, then the use of that word should be exceedingly rare.

What if I was adhering to the speed limit, but busily adjusting the mirror from when my wife drove the car? Perhaps I was fiddling with my nifty new MP3 player. Would those be considered accidents?

On the other side of the coin, if your child were to dart out between two cars or cross against the light and I happened to be driving over the limit by, let's say, 5kph, how should the resulting mishap be classified?

BC

[rex555]

On the other side of the coin, if your child were to dart out between two cars or cross against the light and I happened to be driving over the limit by, let's say, 5kph, how should the resulting mishap be classified?

BC

According to one of the ads on tv here, portraying exactly that, it is speeding. It is not lack of parental control, nor parental negligence for not teaching the child (in this case it looks to be a 10-12 y.o.) the road rules and how to be safe, nor is it a lack of common sense in allowing a child to walk a dog that they have no control over. The only reason for the crash is speeding according to the ad.

[lukey73]

According to one of the ads on tv here, portraying exactly that, it is speeding. It is not lack of parental control, nor parental negligence for not teaching the child (in this case it looks to be a 10-12 y.o.) the road rules and how to be safe, nor is it a lack of common sense in allowing a child to walk a dog that they have no control over. The only reason for the crash is speeding according to the ad.


But you are supposed to watching your speedo not the road, there are no other fines except for speeding or being a hoon, but dont get me started on the stupid hoon laws :mad:

[Leigh]

According to one of the ads on tv here, portraying exactly that, it is speeding. It is not lack of parental control, nor parental negligence for not teaching the child (in this case it looks to be a 10-12 y.o.) the road rules and how to be safe, nor is it a lack of common sense in allowing a child to walk a dog that they have no control over. The only reason for the crash is speeding according to the ad.
Yes, and according to my neighbours, I have to crawl down the street at less than 5km/h because it's the local playground:rolleyes: Any faster, and I would run their kids over (some of which are less than 3:rolleyes:)! Meanwhile the parents are standing in their doorways (if there is any supervision at all) glaring at the driver for daring to drive down the road designed to take vehicles...

But I can guarantee that I'd be the one at fault when the cops came around!!!

[rex555]

Yes, and according to my neighbours, I have to crawl down the street at less than 5km/h because it's the local playground:rolleyes: Any faster, and I would run their kids over (some of which are less than 3:rolleyes:)! Meanwhile the parents are standing in their doorways (if there is any supervision at all) glaring at the driver for daring to drive down the road designed to take vehicles...

But I can guarantee that I'd be the one at fault when the cops came around!!!

Unfortunately for the kids it will probably be their own parents who run them down in their own driveway when they haven't taught them any road sense. :(

[Martin Thomas]

According to Webster's, it's an accident unless it is my INTENTION to hit your child.

If no accident (automobile or otherwise) can be a result of stupid decisions, then the use of that word should be exceedingly rare.

What if I was adhering to the speed limit, but busily adjusting the mirror from when my wife drove the car? Perhaps I was fiddling with my nifty new MP3 player. Would those be considered accidents?

On the other side of the coin, if your child were to dart out between two cars or cross against the light and I happened to be driving over the limit by, let's say, 5kph, how should the resulting mishap be classified?

BC

I don't care what websters calls an accident...
Geez, how silly do we get here? How many scenarios do I have to consider?

Heres one for you.. We were in Freo last year, my youngest has never been there and had a new toy and was really excited. I was realy aware of his inexperience and stayed on the road side of him. We were going down a 1 way street with a 30 kph posted limit. My oldest used his toy to scare my youngest who darted past me and ran straight onto the road. A car zooming up the road (at least 50) actually knocked his toy out of his hand.

Ok.. My fault for not supervising my kids properly. (I did tell them to leave their toys 'till we were back at the park but obviously, I'm a bad parent).

Then again, my stupid 6 year old darted out onto a road.. Bloody hell, what an idiot, I had just lectured them on being careful.

Maybe my oldest, for scaring him and should know better..

Can't be the guy speeding up the road.. Knew the place like the back of his hand, was on the road and paying attention..

perhaps one of the reasons we have slower speeds around pedestrians is to make allowances for bad parents. is that a bad thing?

My wife ran over a dog a while back, she was under the limit, the dog darted out of a bush and she hit it. took her a while to get over it but she did say she feels better 'cause she was not speeding or mucking around with her phone. in other words, she did all she could. Not like the 'kids' who fly past my house in their mums hyundai that when they realise they are going too fast and slip their foot off the throttle the rear starts stepping out as they are going round a slight bend.

Many experts have said that as cars get better, drivers get worse. they think the car will compensate for them. imagine if we all drove like there was a spike on the steering wheel instead of an airbag?

[lukey73]

I don't care what websters calls an accident...
Geez, how silly do we get here? How many scenarios do I have to consider?

Heres one for you.. We were in Freo last year, my youngest has never been there and had a new toy and was really excited. I was realy aware of his inexperience and stayed on the road side of him. We were going down a 1 way street with a 30 kph posted limit. My oldest used his toy to scare my youngest who darted past me and ran straight onto the road. A car zooming up the road (at least 50) actually knocked his toy out of his hand.

Ok.. My fault for not supervising my kids properly. (I did tell them to leave their toys 'till we were back at the park but obviously, I'm a bad parent).

Then again, my stupid 6 year old darted out onto a road.. Bloody hell, what an idiot, I had just lectured them on being careful.

Maybe my oldest, for scaring him and should know better..

Can't be the guy speeding up the road.. Knew the place like the back of his hand, was on the road and paying attention..

perhaps one of the reasons we have slower speeds around pedestrians is to make allowances for bad parents. is that a bad thing?

My wife ran over a dog a while back, she was under the limit, the dog darted out of a bush and she hit it. took her a while to get over it but she did say she feels better 'cause she was not speeding or mucking around with her phone. in other words, she did all she could. Not like the 'kids' who fly past my house in their mums hyundai that when they realise they are going too fast and slip their foot off the throttle the rear starts stepping out as they are going round a slight bend.

Many experts have said that as cars get better, drivers get worse. they think the car will compensate for them. imagine if we all drove like there was a spike on the steering wheel instead of an airbag?


Martin i have to disagree, you cant blame the motorist for everything. If you listened to Harold Scruby the ALL pedestrian deaths where there is a car involved are the drivers fault, at some stage pedestrians have to take ownership and admit fault some where along the way.

As for the speed of the car, did you have a radar or are you trained in speed recognition? Not being picky but the majority of people cant tell what speed a moving object is doing with a device to inform them.

I have 2 kids and am constantly at them not to muck around near roads, i dont allow them to carry toys and to walk next to either my parnter or myself always as far from the road as possible.

If there was an incident with your child as could have happened then the driver would be blamed for the whole accident which is not really true given what you have said.

[diecastaddict]

I commented to my wife awhile ago on the never ending scandals in sport ( cycling, swimming, AFL, etc) but never one involving V8 Supercar identities, as they would have a lot to loose if caught DUI or speeding and there could be possible repurcussions from sponors. Imagine my surprise while returning from a delivery heading north up the Pacific Motorway I was past by a white falcon with the tags DJR-17 driven by a man with snow white hair. A double check of my speedo had my needle sitting right on the 110kph mark ( the posted and legal speed limit) and this car was still pulling away from me. I do believe the saying in QLD is; every k over is a killer. :thumbsdown: If I'm mistaken in my assumed identity of the person will some one please inform me.
Biante please release some cars to talk about instead of this dribble:mad:

[Martin Thomas]

:rolleyes: OK. No, I didn't have a radar.... Hopefully I will get one for christmas. I was not blaming the driver for everything except the 1 thing he had control over..
Yes, I am a bad parent who should have more control of my son. Yes, my son is an idiot because he stepped less than 1m onto the roadside, I did not even have to step off the path to grab his arm.

Same scenario except my son tripped or got knocked onto the road by another kid trying to catch the bus..
Now can I blame the driver.
then again, if he was going even faster, he would have been past before we even got to the corner.

So I suppose most of you guys would have assessed how good his car was, what condition it was, the road surface, lighting and his experience before you consider who is at fault.

Look. there is not really much use going on like this.. I will not be able to convince you guys that speed limits are a good idea and should be followed. Just as you guys won't be able to convince me that you should be allowed to drive as fast as conditions (car type, car conditions, road conditions, number of pedestrians, type and conditions of cars around you, age of children and experience of traffic, type of parents they have....) allow you too. Phwew, you guys reckon watching your speedo is dangerous..

Ahh.. Democracy.. Good, healthy debate..:D

[toddy05]

What a thread might as well throw my 1cents worth in. We all know that the speed laws are ridiculous and that the cameras are revenue raising despite what all authorities would have us believe. However at the end of the day if we get booked for speeding why whinge. The signs are posted clearly, you choose to break the law, reap it and shut up or change your driving habits or save for the next fine and then eventually the bus pass. If we truly want to hurt the government stick within the speed limit all the time then they cannot book you for speeding then they will lose money....

As for focussing on the speedo more than the road, gimme a break, most cars these days have cruise and even if not it is not hard to take a quick slip of the eye at the speedo every now and then. As for what DJR did being a scandal as what the start of this thread said, I am still looking for a scandal. All I see is what I see on the highway every day, another mug sitting 10k and over and at least he can afford the speeding fine more than me.

I tell ya another thing, having a wife and young children sure changes your driving habits and make you enjoy the journey a lot more. Speed is not everything. By the way some of you are talking I would not want my kids anywhere near the streets you are driving down. If your car and skills are that good take it to the track and do it there til your heart's content....

The road is exactly that a road and kids and dogs and drunks and adults and cyclists and teenagers with ipods on come out of nowhere occasionally. Do you really want to be viewing the impact with any of them through your mind for years to come knowing that if you were that bit slower that death could have been avoided? At least stick to the speed limit stay off the phone, keep to a sensible volume on the sound system and be prepared for the aforesaid to appear then your conscience is clear even if sadly should an accident happen.

[toddy05]

gosh I feel better getting that off my chest, anyone seen the soapbox I left lying around???

[Leigh]

Martin, I'm not sure anybody is saying it should be a free-for-all everywhere.

It is generally considered amongst road-safety experts world-wide that where there is persistant speeding, the posted speed limit is probably too low...

That said, road design can also be a problem, in Melbourne I know of one road that was duplicated (from 2 to 4 lane with median strip) where it would be ridiculous to have a speed higher than 70 due to the proximity to shops and houses...the first part of the duplication is dead straight, and regularly has people clocked at over 90km/h:eek:, when they did the other side, they put a great big kink in the road, and guess what, people sit closer to the speed limit;) It looks quite amusing from the top of the hill, one side all straight, and the other like the bulldozer driver had a few too many to drink that day:D LOL

[Esses]

As Martin said, healthy democracy, healthy debate. There are good points on both sides here, but I'll stick on the side of the limits.
Look, 21 years ago I had this exact debate with a very nice bloke at a barby. I was a young, overconfident, cowboy/courier in my first Owner/Driver job, driving my hotted-up XE Falcon Van. Only difference was that back then I was in FAVOUR of speeding especially as I was on piece-rate back then, GREAT incentive to go faster & faster.
I couldn't convince him that I was invulnerable & he couldn't convince me that I was dangerous. Even his plea: "But you're out there with my Wife & baby" didn't mean much to me. Boy, does age, experience & having kids change your perspective. Excuse me, baby's crying, got to go!:D

[zeitgeist]

Geez, how silly do we get here? How many scenarios do I have to consider?


Well, as many as exist, I would imagine. One of the problems is that "excessive speed" is the easy answer; everything else is largely dismissed. If all the focus is on excessive speed instead of the myriad distractions a driver willingly and unwillingly faces, problems will continue.


Perhaps one of the reasons we have slower speeds around pedestrians is to make allowances for bad parents. is that a bad thing?


Well, in some ways, yes. You guys have 'Nerf' stuff over in OZ, right? The spongy toys that don't hurt anyone? We're turning into a 'Nerf World', in which everything is padded, dumbed and slowed down to the lowest common denominator.

That said, I've never advocated the removal of speed limits. In most cases, I've not even advocated that they be increased. However, speed cameras and cops hidden in bushes reduce only one activity ... a big, fat revenue-generating activity. Unfortunately, it does little to curtail the other behaviour on roads that I would argue causes at least as many, if not more, wrecks than simple speeding.

It also does little to help out the person who might be broken down a few clicks up the road.

Frankly, I don't think a cop should EVER be allowed to sit on the side of the road. Get out there and patrol. It's akin to a beat cop, sitting on a park bench, waiting for the infraction to come to them.

BC

[malscar]

To me speeding in a town/city/etc and on the open highway are two different things. Suburbs are a no no, highway limits on dual carriageways could be raised. And speeding on highways is not open slather as I believe the said carriageway roads could go up a max of 20kph.


toddy05 (http://forums.biante.com.au/member.php?u=1412) gosh I feel better getting that off my chest, anyone seen the soapbox I left lying around???


Yes, I tripped over it.

[diecastaddict]

gosh I feel better getting that off my chest, anyone seen the soapbox I left lying around???
Hehe...........better than the original post!!!!!!!!!!!:D

[LC Torana]

FACT….the faster the speed the longer the braking distance hence the greater the risk of impact with an object…

I have never heard such utter garbage, over dramatisation and total stupidity in a long time….thanks to Martin Thomas, Esses and a few others on both sides for some common sense debate (a few really need to take a long hard look at themselves)….

As for Lukey73 with his As for the speed of the car, did you have a radar or are you trained in speed recognition?... what utter inanity.. and what’s wrong with the hoon laws Lukey?

[Martin Thomas]

and what’s wrong with the hoon laws Lukey?

I reckon they should be strengthened. It sucks that ALL P platers suffer because of the behaviour of historicly, young males and now females as well.
I say give everyone the benefit of the doubt and treat them like the adults we expect them to act like. As soon as they show they are not ready for the resposibility, hit 'em hard and long. Punish the bad drivers, not the new drivers..

[ferrari fan]

All good and well and very valid.
I want to throw this in the debate if that is OK.
Why buy a V8 HSV/FPV, Porsche, Ferrari,WRX and the like?
Or on 2 wheels the modern big capacity motorcycle?
All one need is a %#@##@#* hybrid shoebox.

[Chev_350]

I reckon they should be strengthened. It sucks that ALL P platers suffer because of the behaviour of historicly, young males and now females as well.
I say give everyone the benefit of the doubt and treat them like the adults we expect them to act like. As soon as they show they are not ready for the resposibility, hit 'em hard and long. Punish the bad drivers, not the new drivers..

oh has this turned into another P Plater debate :rolleyes:

[wayno]

All good and well and very valid.
I want to throw this in the debate if that is OK.
Why buy a V8 HSV/FPV, Porsche, Ferrari,WRX and the like?
Or on 2 wheels the modern big capacity motorcycle?
All one need is a %#@##@#* hybrid shoebox.

For FUN! :D

[ferrari fan]

Looks like your "Fun" might be illegal if you use the vehicle for it's intended purpose.

[lukey73]

FACT….the faster the speed the longer the braking distance hence the greater the risk of impact with an object…

I have never heard such utter garbage, over dramatisation and total stupidity in a long time….thanks to Martin Thomas, Esses and a few others on both sides for some common sense debate (a few really need to take a long hard look at themselves)….

As for Lukey73 with his As for the speed of the car, did you have a radar or are you trained in speed recognition?... what utter inanity.. and what’s wrong with the hoon laws Lukey?

Never said there was anything wrong with "Hoon" laws if they are used for Hoon's. The Victorian police are now using them for a varity of other offence's which are not "Hoon" related.

People attack P Plate drivers, but until they know what happens from a speeding / out of control car when it does go wrong then why wouldnt they push the envelope. Fines & Penalties have shown that in the majority of cases they dont work for the young, all they do is strenghten there resolve to do what they wish to do, the old the harder you make it the more i want to do it scenario. We have Governments saying dont do this or that here but when you dont give them an option as to where they can actually do a burnout or have a drag race etc do expect the problemn just to go away? Just because someone in a blue unifrom or a suit of Gov Co says NO without any other option what do you expect to happen.


LC have you ever looked at aboject plane / car or train and wondered what speed it was doing? Unless you are trained by professional organisation in this field then you can say how fast a car was going, if IIRC correctly you use that in a court of law it would get noted but disregarded.

Martin made the comment about the driver as it being potentially the drivers fault if his son got hit, well sorry but the responsibility rests with Martin as he had no control over his son who could have potentially walked on to the road way, the speed of the driver yes would have been a factor but at times it is the timing as you have pointed would have been the major factor, the closer the car to said object the less reaction time, hence if the car 10 meters closer but going 10-15 km/h slower the reaction to impact would have been the similar.

We need to take responibility for our actions , using the DJ scenario which is how this thread started , as a case in point if he was infact speeding and caused an accident then im sure DJ would have to owned up and said he did the wrong thing, but in this day and age we seem to be hearing from people that it didnt matter what they did it was someone else's fault for there accident and to be honest its gives me the Sh*ts.


LC as Leigh says sorry be devils adovacte but there needs to a balanced discussion if you dont like hearing from someone who doesnt agree with you well sorry but thats the way life it at times.;)

[Esses]

When I first started driving (1980) & was doing the "Learner Driver" & "Defensive Driving" courses in Yr 12 all the emphasis was on the perception of "The Right To Drive". IE: When we hit L-Plate age there is an expectation that we have that right. The courses (& the Cops) were pushing the line that driving is NOT a right, it's a privilege.
What's really striking me about this whole debate is that apparently a fairly large slice of the population - & the posters in this thread - seem to regard speeding as their right, if THEY judge that it's "safe", "justified", the posted limit is "stupid" or they just damn well feel like it. Or for fun.
I'm the first to admit that as a Courier I probably speed a couple of times every day, either inadvertantly or sometimes deliberately (forgot an important pickup the ther day:rolleyes: ) but in the full knowledge that if I'm booked, I won't whinge about it. Them's the breaks.
I just don't get why people think they have this "right" to go as fast as they like. Talking to Wifey about it this morning & she commented how she was getting so sick of being tail-gated by all & sundry even when she IS speeding slightly. This is in a people-mover, obviously with 4 kids on board, "Baby On Board" & "Child On Board" placards on the back, DVD player invariably on (we watch other drivers checking out the movies from behind us:p ) & still they (male & female) sit a few feet from the back bumper. Oh well, it weighs 2 tonne (as does my Patrol) so I know who's going to "win" most arguments! ;)

[waldo]

....but we don't even know IF he was speeding as Waldo still hasn't told us:

what speed HE was doing
if the speedo in his vehicle that he was driving at the time is actually accurate

The relevant points that everyone has asked for are
1. TIME 8.56am
2. WHERE Northbound just past the Pimpama Exit
3. TRAFFIC VOLUME moderate as it was hitting the end of peak hour congestion.
4. WEATHER good
5. SPEED Doing at least a minimum of 120KPH and was the fastest moving vehicle on the Motorway.
6. SPEEDO My speedo (2005 Hino FD series truck) is calabrated correct and as I informed my boss when I took my job that under no condition (busy day or behind schedule) would I break the speed limit to get the job done faster.

I also drive the Brisbane to Chinderah run on the M1 on a regular basis and have very few cars pass me while I am sitting on 110KPH in the 110KPH zone while others have stated that they feel like they hold traffic up by going at the speed limit. The 110KPH stretch of the M1 which is 33Kms in distance from the Logan River to Gaven will take 18 minutes to cover at 110KPH and at 120KPH it will take just over 16 minutes (this is not as long as a TV commercial break).

Approximately 2.10pm last Thursday westbound in the righthand lane on the Logan Motorway as I drew along side a car in the lefthand lane (between the Gateway merge and Mt Lindsay Hwy) the motorist's car wandered across into my lane which had me not only standing on the brakes but also pulling to the right grass median where I was forced off the road. Lucky for me that the truck that I drive was empty as I was returning back to base. Had I been loaded with up to 5 tonne of steel as I usually carry there is every chance that load movement and sudden pitch of vehicle that this could have resulted with me rolling the truck over and me being seriously hurt or killed (I was doing approx. 95KPH in a 100KPH zone). During my time as being a professional driver and also ex firefighter I have seen more than my fair share of carnage on the roads and as a family man my children will not learn bad driving habits from any example that I set:(

[lukey73]

The relevant points that everyone has asked for are
1. TIME 8.56am
2. WHERE Northbound just past the Pimpama Exit
3. TRAFFIC VOLUME moderate as it was hitting the end of peak hour congestion.
4. WEATHER good
5. SPEED Doing at least a minimum of 120KPH and was the fastest moving vehicle on the Motorway.
6. SPEEDO My speedo (2005 Hino FD series truck) is calabrated correct and as I informed my boss when I took my job that under no condition (busy day or behind schedule) would I break the speed limit to get the job done faster.

I also drive the Brisbane to Chinderah run on the M1 on a regular basis and have very few cars pass me while I am sitting on 110KPH in the 110KPH zone while others have stated that they feel like they hold traffic up by going at the speed limit. The 110KPH stretch of the M1 which is 33Kms in distance from the Logan River to Gaven will take 18 minutes to cover at 110KPH and at 120KPH it will take just over 16 minutes (this is not as long as a TV commercial break).

Approximately 2.10pm last Thursday westbound in the righthand lane on the Logan Motorway as I drew along side a car in the lefthand lane (between the Gateway merge and Mt Lindsay Hwy) the motorist's car wandered across into my lane which had me not only standing on the brakes but also pulling to the right grass median where I was forced off the road. Lucky for me that the truck that I drive was empty as I was returning back to base. Had I been loaded with up to 5 tonne of steel as I usually carry there is every chance that load movement and sudden pitch of vehicle that this could have resulted with me rolling the truck over and me being seriously hurt or killed (I was doing approx. 95KPH in a 100KPH zone). During my time as being a professional driver and also ex firefighter I have seen more than my fair share of carnage on the roads and as a family man my children will not learn bad driving habits from any example that I set:(


Waldo the Logan Motorway is a going to have loads of accidents on it as its not patrolled very much, the design is so bad that i wont go on it unless i really have too.

I remember the crash a few yrs ago where someone crossed the road and had a head on accident, i think it was actuallky suicide and yet they still havent placed barriers along most of it to stop that type of incident happening.

As for your brush last week, i can only say that im glad to hear your ok and its people like the one who caused you to take evasive action that should really be hauled over the coals, is it me or is the right hand lane in QLD the only one to drive in according to some people?

[malscar]

is it me or is the right hand lane in QLD the only one to drive in according to some people?

Staying in the right hand lane is one that all states are bad for however I believe NSW drivers are the worst for this.

Esses - I agree about the tailgating, upset a mate the other week for his driving within a car length of someone at highway speeds in the wet and then when we came to a passing lane stuck which we could have passed this guy, did not. He could not understand why I got up him even though I explained his actions were endangering not only him but the 3 passengers including my 13 yr old in my car. Last time he drives it.

Same as you, if I get caught and I was speeding, then fair enough.

[LC Torana]

We have Governments saying dont do this or that here but when you dont give them an option as to where they can actually do a burnout or have a drag race etc do expect the problemn just to go away? Just because someone in a blue unifrom or a suit of Gov Co says NO without any other option what do you expect to happen.

Since when is it the Governments or tax payers responsibility to give anyone a place to drag race or do burnouts….and there are options where these things can be done at a price, but its easier and free do endanger the public doing these things on our roads, or maybe you think the taxpayer should foot the bill….

What I do know is that when some moron does a burnout near my residence I have to close my doors and windows to keep the stench out thus affecting my quality of life…..

Martin made the comment about the driver as it being potentially the drivers fault if his son got hit, well sorry but the responsibility rests with Martin as he had no control over his son who could have potentially walked on to the road way, the speed of the driver yes would have been a factor but at times it is the timing as you have pointed would have been the major factor, the closer the car to said object the less reaction time, hence if the car 10 meters closer but going 10-15 km/h slower the reaction to impact would have been the similar.

If the driver was speeding it would also be the drivers fault….
We know children and animals can be unpredictable, and for that matter some adult pedestrians to be rather silly, ignorant or arrogant at times, therefore it is also up to the driver to be vigilant at all times, that is a responsibility of holding a license and that means driving at or below 50 in a signposted residential area, not 60 to 70 as many do….It means being aware of your surroundings and understanding the dangers that may await.

the closer the car to said object the less reaction time, hence if the car 10 meters closer but going 10-15 km/h slower the reaction to impact would have been the similar.

The closer the car to said object…ifs…..the impact would be similar if the cars 10 meters closer…but what if the car is 10 meters further, what if it got a flat 10 minutes earlier, what if they took a different route…I can bring out all the ifs as well, ….don’t bring ifs to imply 10-15km/h makes no difference….Ifs don’t bring back the deceased, and by the way, the reaction to impact may be similar but that additional 10-15km would also result in a heavier impact thus increasing chances of death or more serious injury….

LC as Leigh says sorry be devils adovacte but there needs to a balanced discussion if you dont like hearing from someone who doesnt agree with you well sorry but thats the way life it at times.;)

I have no problem with balanced discussion, but sensible balanced discussion, not ifs and buts to justify speeding, claims like speed limits are only for revenue raising or they should just tack money on to registration and do away with fines, that is not balanced discussion, that is garbage.

LC have you ever looked at aboject plane / car or train and wondered what speed it was doing?

No I don't have to wonder what speed the train is doing ,I just have to look down in front of me and I know what speed the train is doing…. :D

[Martin Thomas]

Martin made the comment about the driver as it being potentially the drivers fault if his son got hit, well sorry but the responsibility rests with Martin. as he had no control over his son

We need to take responibility for our actions , ;)

Firstly.. Perhaps speed limits are there for the surroundings.. IE, here you should only go 30 ks because it is a heavy pedestrian area, with potential of pedestrians being on the road. Something else to add. The reason I was not actively 'guarding' my son was there were no cars on the street.. "Till he came zooming around the corner, If I needed to cross the road, I would have because there was no car there when I looked. HE WAS GOING TOO FAST FOR THE AREA. thats all there is to it. Anyone who has been to Freo and can picture a car doing 50-60 on one of the side streets off the esplanade onto the main drag will know what I mean..

If I am responsible for my sons actions, Surely the guy is responsible for HIS actions. HE WAS GOING TOO FAST.

How much difference do you reckon it would make to me if I was kneeling next to my sone and the guy said "Sorry, my fault" HE WAS GOING TOO FAST.

Does that mean he has bad parents 'cause they were not controlling his speeding;)

We have open road all around us.. 400 k's either way. We have an 'unoffical' drag strip 1 minute drive from my house. We have yearly drags at the airport YET there are so many morons doing burnouts in front of the schools and all around town. Come drag/burout time, these guys are no where to be seen..

[lukey73]

[quote]Since when is it the Governments or tax payers responsibility to give anyone a place to drag race or do burnouts….and there are options where these things can be done at a price, but its easier and free do endanger the public doing these things on our roads, or maybe you think the taxpayer should foot the bill….

No I dont think the Tax Payer should foot the bill, given there are limited places in each state for this type of activitity to take place there needs to be alternatives where people can pay do it if they so which and at present there limited places available. Given the vast amounts of land vacant or industrial parks where a simple patch of concrete/asphalt could be placed would this not be a simple a solution?Or is it easier just to say NO and the problem will then go away.


If the driver was speeding it would also be the drivers fault….
We know children and animals can be unpredictable, and for that matter some adult pedestrians to be rather silly, ignorant or arrogant at times, therefore it is also up to the driver to be vigilant at all times, that is a responsibility of holding a license and that means driving at or below 50 in a signposted residential area, not 60 to 70 as many do….It means being aware of your surroundings and understanding the dangers that may await.


Precisely my point, Drivers need to be aware of what is happening on the road / foot path ect yet we also demand they dont stray over the posted limit. The governments are now telling people basically watch your speedo or you WILL kill someone but constant monitoring of your speedo at no matter what speed you are doing will endanger more lives than doing 5 km/h over the limit, why because you are not paying attention to the conditions, yet if you stick to the speed limit you and everyone else around you will be ok.


The closer the car to said object…ifs…..the impact would be similar if the cars 10 meters closer…but what if the car is 10 meters further, what if it got a flat 10 minutes earlier, what if they took a different route…I can bring out all the ifs as well, ….don’t bring ifs to imply 10-15km/h makes no difference….Ifs don’t bring back the deceased, and by the way, the reaction to impact may be similar but that additional 10-15km would also result in a heavier impact thus increasing chances of death or more serious injury….


Change that to suit your own arguement, as you have stated children and animals can be unpredictable, that is why the speed to a certain point is irrelevant, as we have seen this weekend with the unfortunate death of a 5 year old hit by a reversing garbage truck. It is personal responibility or taking control over those where possible who can not make an informed decision about there surrounding that you are forgeting.


I have no problem with balanced discussion, but sensible balanced discussion, not ifs and buts to justify speeding, claims like speed limits are only for revenue raising or they should just tack money on to registration and do away with fines, that is not balanced discussion, that is garbage.


The majority of speed limits in this country are incorrect to the roads design and construction, there is a forumla known as the 85th percentile which is applied to roads to gauge the speed limit that should be applied. Given this formula the majority of highways and major secondary roads have a speed limit UNDER the 85th percentile, our speed limits have been dumbed down over the years to satisfy those who claim we cant look after ourselves yet we are not taught how too. In Germany it takes many tests to obtain a drivers licence, you are tested in various environments before you are given a licence to drive, does this happen in Australia no why as the Government are more interested in obtaining your money than teaching you how to drive safely.

Speeding as become the soul focus of Police and Governemnt for to long, this needs to be changed to behavioural attitudes / the following of all road laws not just speed / balancing speed cameras with police on the road. A camera only takes a snap shot it doesnt give the police any idea as to why that person was speeding. It also doesnt save that person from killing themselves or others what will slow people down is a physical presence and someone telling to slow down or move over etc not a picture sent to them in the mail 3 weeks after there dead.

Read any article in any news paper around the country for traffic accidents, what you will find is that if the police can not attribute an accident to speed then they dont know why the accident happened in most cases, couldnt be the road was a factor / couldnt be they were a lousy driver / couldnt be that the car was faulty, but there was no evidence of speed it just shouldnt have happened, it is this single focus that is killing more people than its saving.


No I don't have to wonder what speed the train is doing ,I just have to look down in front of me and I know what speed the train is doing…. :D


And no im talking about the speed whilst your in the train silly, but outside standing on the street or field etc, gee there is one in every crowd ;)

[vr-x3500]

Lukey73, your right about your comment about being trained in telling how fast a motorvehicle is travelling. A few years ago in the very suburb you live there was an accident along the esplanade where two clowns were racing, there were quite a few people present that night and one guy was struck by one of the cars (something you don't forget seeing in a hurry) my bother went to court as a witness and stated he thought the car was travelling at "X" km/h. Well I can tell you the Judge gave him a roasting, and it went along the lines of have you had any training if not how would you know. So yeah they take notice of it, but they don't take it too seriously when they have trained professionals who do these things for a living.

[Esses]

[quote=lukey73;194005][quote=LC Torana;194001]

Read any article in any news paper around the country for traffic accidents, what you will find is that if the police can not attribute an accident to speed then they dont know why the accident happened in most cases, couldnt be the road was a factor / couldnt be they were a lousy driver / couldnt be that the car was faulty, but there was no evidence of speed it just shouldnt have happened, it is this single focus that is killing more people than its saving.


Umm, there's an excellent TV series from NZ called "Serious Crash Unit" that details how the NZ Police can usually tell very closely how individual accidents happen.

[LC Torana]

Given the vast amounts of land vacant or industrial parks where a simple patch of concrete/asphalt could be placed would this not be a simple a solution?Or is it easier just to say NO and the problem will then go away.

Sorry Lukey, would be good if everything was just so simple, but its not a simple solution at all…..one good reason no one will just put down concrete or asphalt for this sort of activity (particularly a Government), its called responsibility, you do this and some one is killed or injured who do think would be held responsible, you couldn’t do it without insurance and no insurance company is going to cover it for anything less than mighty big bucks if at all….

That’s why only a few places conduct these sort of activities, and under strict safety rules and regulations.

[lukey73]

Sorry Lukey, would be good if everything was just so simple, but its not a simple solution at all…..one good reason no one will just put down concrete or asphalt for this sort of activity (particularly a Government), its called responsibility, you do this and some one is killed or injured who do think would be held responsible, you couldn’t do it without insurance and no insurance company is going to cover it for anything less than mighty big bucks if at all….

That’s why only a few places conduct these sort of activities, and under strict safety rules and regulations.


And thats the sort of answer that people keep coming up with, so we wonder why it takes place on the roads endangering lives:rolleyes: Like i said before is a little cost not worth the effort to reduce the exposure to the general public?

If it can be done in Canberra for 1 event a year why cant it be done in other places? Me thinks it more to with condoning these types of events rather than providing public safety.

[acb175]

Me thinks it more to with condoning these types of events rather than providing public safety.

Totally agree lukey. Since when does any government in this country care about road safety. They can have all the tv & radio ads they want, but as long as they rely on speed cameras to police the highways & raising revenue, while we all drive around on crap roads, then I'll have my doubts. I drove from Sydney to Bathurst & back yesterday, easter long weekend, traditionally a bad period on the roads & saw a total of one police car, but 6 cameras. I remember hearing that technically a victim of a crash caused by a speeding car that had just been photographed by a speed camera could sue the government/police for failure of duty of care because had there been a cop there & that speeding driver stopped & booked/cautioned the accident would not have happened. On a side note, what is with the new cameras in Victoria? They measure your speed over a distance of 40 or more kilometres. How much tolerance do you get? I ask because with my cruise control set to 100 when going downhill it will creep to 105. I measured it with a gps so I know it's right. Am I breaking the law, technically yes, but only by a tiny percentage of the speed limit, but am I doing anything wrong, no not as far as I'm concerned. If I got booked with the cruise set to 100 over a long distance purely because of the car accelerating up to 5ks downhill I'd be less than impressed. The goverment preaches road safety, installs cameras to save us from ourselves & then makes sure that you drive down the road eyes glued to the speedo instead of where you're going. Yep, road safety. Have a happy & safe easter everyone.

[brchi17]

.....On a side note, what is with the new cameras in Victoria? They measure your speed over a distance of 40 or more kilometres. How much tolerance do you get?....

To my knowledge they did not disclose that information, but I suspect it would be 2kph like the rest of their camera fleet :mad:

[malscar]

On a side note, what is with the new cameras in Victoria? They measure your speed over a distance of 40 or more kilometres.


This has been proposed for a number of years both in Vic and NSW. NSW currently runs the system over longer distances for the trucks. They call it 'safety-cam'. As an example, there is one just north of Albury, then the next one at Gundagai. A lot more than 40km. They apparently have been checking cars as a trial. Would be interesting to see the results.

[LC Torana]

And thats the sort of answer that people keep coming up with, so we wonder why it takes place on the roads endangering lives:rolleyes: Like i said before is a little cost not worth the effort to reduce the exposure to the general public?

If it can be done in Canberra for 1 event a year why cant it be done in other places? Me thinks it more to with condoning these types of events rather than providing public safety.

Didn’t you tell me a few post ago that the taxpayer shouldn’t foot the bill for these activities….So what is it, they should or they shouldn’t.

And that’s the sort of answer people keep coming up with……get real Lukey, it’s a fact and the insurance is not a little cost...

[LC Torana]

The goverment preaches road safety, installs cameras to save us from ourselves & then makes sure that you drive down the road eyes glued to the speedo instead of where you're going. Yep, road safety. Have a happy & safe easter everyone.

With over 7000 having been caught speeding in NSW in just 4 days we need protecting from our stupid selves, and even more so the protection of the innocent motorist who obeys the limits….

[acb175]

With over 7000 having been caught speeding in NSW in just 4 days we need protecting from our stupid selves, and even more so the protection of the innocent motorist who obeys the limits….

But how many are idiots doing 40, 50 or 100ks over the limit & how many are mums & dads getting pinged for the crime of 10 over when they didn't realize the speed zone had changed because of the screaming kids in the back? Why are these cameras placed on straight stretches of road that rarely if ever see an accident, why do police hide in bushes on a perfect piece of road that could handle higher speeds than the current 100 or 110? Why do you see signs on the roads saying you are approaching an accident blackspot, but years later still nothing is done? Why is the pacific highway still not dual carriageway all the way to the QLD border like was promised to be by 1988? Why do governments spend millions on speed kills campains & then sit back & watch the revenue from speeding roll in while decreasing the numbers of highway patrol police officers? If it's not revenue raising then take away the fine & increase the demerit points. Save us from ourselves or lighten the load in our wallets for minor traffic indescretions.Everyone makes mistakes & in a modern car creeping 10ks over the limit is incredibly easy to do. How many times do you hear someone say they glanced at the speedo & surprised themselves, that they didn't realise their speed had increased? Let me add that I believe people who drink drive or speed wrecklessly should be banned/fined/imprisoned. By speed wrecklessly I mean 70ks in a school zone or 90 in the 60 zone. There are a few cameras in school zones in my local area & they have certainly slowed down drivers around the kids at school times & I'm all for it, but sticking a camera on a perfectly straight smooth stretch of road in a 110 zone that could easily handle a much higher speed is nothing short of a government cash grab & nothing to do with road safety.

[acb175]

To my knowledge they did not disclose that information, but I suspect it would be 2kph like the rest of their camera fleet :mad:

I find that incredible. How is it possible that current the ADRs (Australian Design Rules) allow for a speedometer inaccurancy of ten percent in new vehicles & yet these cameras have less tolerance than that? You could be watching the speedo religously & still get done because of an inaccurate but perfectly legal speedo. :mad:

[lukey73]

[QUOTE]Didn’t you tell me a few post ago that the taxpayer shouldn’t foot the bill for these activities….So what is it, they should or they shouldn’t.


Where did i say that Government should pay??? I stated little cost bening the land, if you had a private operator who was willing to pay for the rest with a reduced interest rate loan form the Government then recoup that money through payment from people who wish to participate would that not be a better solution?

And no its not Government paying for it before you say so, Governments across the country attract businessess to there there state through grants such as these.


And that’s the sort of answer people keep coming up with……get real Lukey, it’s a fact and the insurance is not a little cost...


Its very easy to fix the insurance issue, people who wish to participate sign an indemnity form against any insurance claims, i do that every time i go out to Queensland Raceway with my Datsun. Part of $75 entry fee is to cover there insurance, but i bet the entry fee could be done for alot less.

[lukey73]

I find that incredible. How is it possible that current the ADRs (Australian Design Rules) allow for a speedometer inaccurancy of ten percent in new vehicles & yet these cameras have less tolerance than that? You could be watching the speedo religously & still get done because of an inaccurate but perfectly legal speedo. :mad:

Unfortunatley acb175 Brad is correct, the Victorian police belive that every one should have there speedo calibrated so you know exactly how fast you are going. Vic Police unlike most of the other States and Territories acknowledge they have a sneeze factor if it were of around 10%, the Victorian police wont say what they allow.

This is were the Fedral Governement should take control over State Governments and introduce laws regarding Speedo's / Speed Camera use and tolerance / Point to Point systems etc.

[Designer]

All good and well and very valid.
I want to throw this in the debate if that is OK.
Why buy a V8 HSV/FPV, Porsche, Ferrari,WRX and the like?
Or on 2 wheels the modern big capacity motorcycle?
All one need is a %#@##@#* hybrid shoebox.

Take them to the track once a month in a controlled enviroment...

[lukey73]

Take them to the track once a month in a controlled enviroment...

Why, i own a VY Clubsport yet it wont see the track at all, nor do i speed around all the streets. Its great being able use the accleration from rest to the speed limit ( were possible given conditions etc ) or use the power for overtaking.

Most of the time i drive it like a nana, so i dont get a speeding fine;)

[brchi17]

I find that incredible. How is it possible that current the ADRs (Australian Design Rules) allow for a speedometer inaccurancy of ten percent in new vehicles & yet these cameras have less tolerance than that? You could be watching the speedo religously & still get done because of an inaccurate but perfectly legal speedo. :mad:

sadly yes, this is the case & yes it is unfair as to my knowledge there is no where you can even got to get it checked to meet our governments ridiculous standards :rolleyes:

Unfortunely in Victoria our government was blinded by the thought of all that $$$ before they bothered to check the ADR's in the case of our so-called 'safety camera's'.....:rolleyes:

[monarocveightz]

I find that incredible. How is it possible that current the ADRs (Australian Design Rules) allow for a speedometer inaccurancy of ten percent in new vehicles & yet these cameras have less tolerance than that? You could be watching the speedo religously & still get done because of an inaccurate but perfectly legal speedo. :mad:

I'm not 100% sure but i think that speedo's in cars are slightly under what the reading says. eg it reads 100 on the display but it is really 97 or something.

just can't remember where i read that though

[acb175]

I'm not 100% sure but i think that speedo's in cars are slightly under what the reading says. eg it reads 100 on the display but it is really 97 or something.

just can't remember where i read that though

It's amazing how far out they can be. I never realised this until I got a sat nav in the car. We run Toyotas & Volkswagens at work & the Toyotas are spot on 110 on the speedo 109/110 on the gps. The volkwagens are way out. 110 on the speedo is actually 95. When I drive it at 110 on the gps the speedo indicates 130. I tried it in my brothers Holden Rodeo & at an indicated 60 on the speedo we were actually going 63. Stock car & stock tyres at correct inflation. Not that he's a speed demon, but now he backs right off at cameras.

[paranoid]

the 10% tolerance with ADR's is all well and good, but in a practical situation...

My torana is probably around 10% off on the speedo. Say for the sake of argument i am going at 108 when the speedo says 100. I get a speeding fine for 108 and i say that well, i thought i was doing 100. If my speedo is within the 10% tolerance and i was actually doing 108 thinking i was doing 100, they should not fine me as my car complies within 10%. However, they won't just take your word for it, i have to argue that, and they would have to test the car to see if it is within 10% and that at 108 my speedo does in fact show 100. If i could be bothered going through this and then taking the results and defending the infringement in court, maybe i wouldn't have to pay the fine. But sheesh what a lot of cost and faffing about for the sake of $50...

[HDTHSVHRT]

Why, i own a VY Clubsport yet it wont see the track at all, nor do i speed around all the streets. Its great being able use the accleration from rest to the speed limit ( were possible given conditions etc ) or use the power for overtaking.

Most of the time i drive it like a nana, so i dont get a speeding fine;)


Im glad youve changed from your teenage days! :D

[acb175]

the 10% tolerance with ADR's is all well and good, but in a practical situation...

My torana is probably around 10% off on the speedo. Say for the sake of argument i am going at 108 when the speedo says 100. I get a speeding fine for 108 and i say that well, i thought i was doing 100. If my speedo is within the 10% tolerance and i was actually doing 108 thinking i was doing 100, they should not fine me as my car complies within 10%. However, they won't just take your word for it, i have to argue that, and they would have to test the car to see if it is within 10% and that at 108 my speedo does in fact show 100. If i could be bothered going through this and then taking the results and defending the infringement in court, maybe i wouldn't have to pay the fine. But sheesh what a lot of cost and faffing about for the sake of $50...

I don't know where you are, but in NSW it's a lot more than $50, but it's not just the money, it's the points. What if you got done during a double points period? Assuming you hold a full licence, that's half of it gone in one hit. Still couldn't be bothered?