Questions For The Maths Gurus

[Guest INASNT]

whats YUK??

Whats another BS thing about the courts is that u have to bring scientific evidence to prove your innocense but cops can use a uncailbrated speedo as evidence, even tho they cant provide a calibration certificate

[GTRgeoff]

Wheels is YUK mate.....the magazine for the dedicated taxi owner.

Sorry about the confusion. Maybe Motor magazine might have the detail as well. I don't read them though....i prefer EVO from GB.

[riggaP]

Nov 2002 Wheels tested a VY Commonwhore.

[pinoi_boi_r33]

LOL at zagan he got shut down badly. I'm an engineering student so go skylinegeoff. Good luck in court inasnt. whens the date??

[Zagan]

You want some real data?

Victorian Police TOG - Holden Commodore

The standard patrol vehicle used by the TOG is a Holden Commodore V8, as pictured with the "American Style" lighbar. Unmarked Commodores are also used. Both are SS spec vehicles.

Performance (Holden Commodore VR SS manual):

0-100km/h 7.87 seconds

0-400m 15.91 seconds

Top Speed 221km/h

Not the correct spec but has the numbers, maybe.

[SS8_Gohan]

but even if the cop was following to prove speed, and then use the supposed recordings of their speed, what if they were slowly catchin up to the car, therefore technically following, but going faster than the car they were following, therefore making their speed recordings of their car not comparible to the car they were following??? or if a cop says they were following, that's taken as bible?

[Zagan]

I think this guy is trying to prove that the cop car couldn't be near him and is going to use "maths" to get out of the fine.

To do that he is going to use "maths" to say the cop car was only doing such and such speed, this is recorded by the cop car, so they'll be able to look this up.

What I've been saying is, you have to prove you weren't speeding.

He probably flew by the cop car and didn't know and got pulled over, and the guy is now spewing about it.

If that is the case then the guy will be well and truely stufffed as they would simply say yep flew by us at speed he were doing 80 or 100 when he went by.

[Guest INASNT]

dude do u need a hearing aid??? How many times have i said it was an unmarked exec VT car, not a SS, i know the farkin difference between a SS and a exec, and no it didnt have any speed measuring device coz it is not present in their evidence, just that they recon they followed me at X distance. And i didnt fly past any car coz the cops recon they were sitting behind a few cars behind me before it happened when we were stopped.

Have u ever done physics and maths in school? or r u an arts student??? coz i aint using maths to prove i wasent speeding, i am using facts that what they are claiming cant be done in the car they were driving in the distance and time it happened. Its am using facts and maths as the proof!!!

[riggaP]

this is recorded by the cop car, so they'll be able to look this up.

:bs!:

Sorry, but I cant swallow this. There are too many variables that make such a device completely useless. The biggest 1 being wear'n'tear on the car and thats the very reason the ADRs allow a vehicles speedo to be out by a certain percentage.

Where is some proof?

[browny]

Some may find this interesting...

http://carpoint.ninemsn.com.au/news/blanks...ory.asp?ID=4956

[Zagan]

:bs!:  

Sorry, but I cant swallow this. There are too many variables that make such a device completely useless. The biggest 1 being wear'n'tear on the car and thats the very reason the ADRs allow a vehicles speedo to be out by a certain percentage.

Where is some proof?

It's for that reason why they try too keep the speedo correct in cop cars all the time.

In NSW, VIC, SA all the WRX cop cars speed fines had to be refunded for the whole time they were on the road as they had found that the speedos were all out by so much, the WRX cop cars were around for 3-4 years.

That was last year and the WRX cop cars were taken off the roads in 2000-2001.

It's been on the news so you should be able to look up at news sites for the proper info.

That Car Point page would be correct, in that most people don't win, no matter what they say or tey to prove, but also says you can make it work but it's not easy by any means.

To prove your maths you'd have to have a court approved expert and stuff so the local machainc might not be good enough, also would need to be a car expert as well so you couldn't just pull joe blow off the street and try it out either.

Anyway, Most speed fines are binding so you have to prove you weren't speeding at that time or place.

[riggaP]

I dont doubt that the cop cars speedos are calibrated every so often. Every speed measuring device they use must be calibrated every 6 months, wether it be a camera, radar, or speedo.

Just because fines were refuned does not mean they have a device that records thier speed.

The :bs!: was directed at the claim that cop cars have a device that records their speed every time they're driven.

[browny]

so INASNT...

Were you actually speeding?

[Guest Munky]

^^ sif! He's inasnt after all!

[predator]

zagan... as has been stated many times... THERE WAS NO OFFICIAL SPEED DETECTION DEVICE USED!

The cop was basically following him, decided he wes going at "xx km/hr" but the question is whether he accurately followed the car for an adequate distance to get a correct and accurate measure of this. But it does have to be for a certain amount of seconds, and an average reading is taken. This is what Inasnt is trying to obviously work out.

It is true the speedos are calibrated every xx,xxx km or x months.. and is probably quite admissable..BUT I have a feeling that the cop basically saw him "speeding", checked the speedo for a second, said "ok, I am going xx, he appears to be going xx I'll pull him over and try and pin him for that" then now its come to court he has to make the evidence to support this claim. Of course, he was hoping that it never came to this, as most of the time the cops just hope like hell the public doesn't actually use their brain and take it further.

[Duncan]

stopping distance from 130 according to this site is 215m

http://www.csgnetwork.com/stopdistcalc.html

[Guest INASNT]

so INASNT...

Were you actually speeding?

I sped for about 2 seconds to overtake a car and brake so i could turn right at an intersection, not what the cops recon i was doing

[Guest INASNT]

stopping distance from 130 according to this site is 215m

http://www.csgnetwork.com/stopdistcalc.html

sweet, so basically the data i have now already shows the cops r talking BS coz the total distance they recon they followed me to the distance it took for them to accelerate and stop from the speed claimed is way over the distance of the actual road it happened on. Zagan get it now???????

[browny]

Here is a quote from the carpoint article I posted before:

"It is difficult, but not impossible, to challenge experienced police. They don't even need speed detection equipment. If the policeman says he estimates you were traveling at 160km/h, the Magistrate is likely to believe him. It is then up to the driver to prove he wasn't."

[Guest INASNT]

And now i have the proof. Plus this pig wasent even a tmu ****, she works for the sexual crimes section, so i dont know wft speed detecting skills she has.

Me and my lawyer have named her bitch face