4 km/hr speed tolerance 2015

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › 4 km/hr speed tolerance 2015

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ... | 24

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1441686 7-Dec-2015 06:27

joker97:
Zippity: Excuses, excuses.

If you exceed the allowable speed limit, you deserve to receive an infringement notice and the associated fine.

I set the cruise control on my Maxima to 104 and sit back and concentrate on the road ahead :)

Not possible when every other km there is a 65 bend, or when cars are ahead.

Used to be dead easy to tow at one speed when the throttle was a no 8 wire attached to a NA engine coupled to a manual box. Nowadays with electronic throttle control, CVT, turbo ... the bloody pedal is a sponge!

It's easy to stay with in the required limits on modern vehicles.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1441687 7-Dec-2015 06:29

DravidDavid: Firstly, I'm pretty sure last year there was a massive media uproar as the Christmas road toll was nearer to double that of the year before that, which brought in to question the campaigns effectiveness. I also remember the police apologising saying they "could have been more clear" about the campaign.

Secondly, it is quite obviously revenue gathering, and I'm expecting the same result as last year (or the year before, I can't remember) which is more deaths than anticipated. It will once again be blamed on their stupid campaign and nobody will do anything about it because 100 kilometers per hour is actually a magic safety number that even gods cannot tamper with.

I budget for about 250 dollars in speeding fines over Christmas as a "just in case". It's funny watching the police officers face when I ask if I can pay in cash! If you ask them about their day and crack a joke or two they usually let you off anyway. In my experience, anything 115KM/h and under you can get a warning for. You might want to hide your detector or switch your jammer off though, haha.

A further measure the Government should take is the banning the importing, selling and use of devices such Radar detectors etc.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1441768 7-Dec-2015 09:04

MikeB4:
DravidDavid: Firstly, I'm pretty sure last year there was a massive media uproar as the Christmas road toll was nearer to double that of the year before that, which brought in to question the campaigns effectiveness. I also remember the police apologising saying they "could have been more clear" about the campaign.

Secondly, it is quite obviously revenue gathering, and I'm expecting the same result as last year (or the year before, I can't remember) which is more deaths than anticipated. It will once again be blamed on their stupid campaign and nobody will do anything about it because 100 kilometers per hour is actually a magic safety number that even gods cannot tamper with.

I budget for about 250 dollars in speeding fines over Christmas as a "just in case". It's funny watching the police officers face when I ask if I can pay in cash! If you ask them about their day and crack a joke or two they usually let you off anyway. In my experience, anything 115KM/h and under you can get a warning for. You might want to hide your detector or switch your jammer off though, haha.

A further measure the Government should take is the banning the importing, selling and use of devices such Radar detectors etc.

They wont do that. I seem to remember them talking about it 10 years ago. At the time the evidence showed those with radar detectors were less likely to crash. Why? The theory was they relaxed more and that driving was less stressful and so less tiring.

Apparently its not speed that kills...

Matthew

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1441818 7-Dec-2015 09:46

Zippity: Excuses, excuses.

If you exceed the allowable speed limit, you deserve to receive an infringement notice and the associated fine.

I set the cruise control on my Maxima to 104 and sit back and concentrate on the road ahead :)

So, since the allowable speed limit is in fact 100 and not 104, you're saying that *you* deserve fines. I suggest that you be pro-active about this and not wait for cops and tickets, and just send the money in voluntarily.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1441819 7-Dec-2015 09:46

mdooher:
MikeB4:
DravidDavid: Firstly, I'm pretty sure last year there was a massive media uproar as the Christmas road toll was nearer to double that of the year before that, which brought in to question the campaigns effectiveness. I also remember the police apologising saying they "could have been more clear" about the campaign.

Secondly, it is quite obviously revenue gathering, and I'm expecting the same result as last year (or the year before, I can't remember) which is more deaths than anticipated. It will once again be blamed on their stupid campaign and nobody will do anything about it because 100 kilometers per hour is actually a magic safety number that even gods cannot tamper with.

I budget for about 250 dollars in speeding fines over Christmas as a "just in case". It's funny watching the police officers face when I ask if I can pay in cash! If you ask them about their day and crack a joke or two they usually let you off anyway. In my experience, anything 115KM/h and under you can get a warning for. You might want to hide your detector or switch your jammer off though, haha.

A further measure the Government should take is the banning the importing, selling and use of devices such Radar detectors etc.

They wont do that. I seem to remember them talking about it 10 years ago. At the time the evidence showed those with radar detectors were less likely to crash. Why? The theory was they relaxed more and that driving was less stressful and so less tiring.

Apparently its not speed that kills...

I wonder how many of the folks steamed about VW defeating emissions testing use Radar detectors etc.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1441862 7-Dec-2015 10:36

MikeB4:
mdooher:
MikeB4:
DravidDavid: Firstly, I'm pretty sure last year there was a massive media uproar as the Christmas road toll was nearer to double that of the year before that, which brought in to question the campaigns effectiveness. I also remember the police apologising saying they "could have been more clear" about the campaign.

Secondly, it is quite obviously revenue gathering, and I'm expecting the same result as last year (or the year before, I can't remember) which is more deaths than anticipated. It will once again be blamed on their stupid campaign and nobody will do anything about it because 100 kilometers per hour is actually a magic safety number that even gods cannot tamper with.

I budget for about 250 dollars in speeding fines over Christmas as a "just in case". It's funny watching the police officers face when I ask if I can pay in cash! If you ask them about their day and crack a joke or two they usually let you off anyway. In my experience, anything 115KM/h and under you can get a warning for. You might want to hide your detector or switch your jammer off though, haha.

A further measure the Government should take is the banning the importing, selling and use of devices such Radar detectors etc.

They wont do that. I seem to remember them talking about it 10 years ago. At the time the evidence showed those with radar detectors were less likely to crash. Why? The theory was they relaxed more and that driving was less stressful and so less tiring.

Apparently its not speed that kills...

I wonder how many of the folks steamed about VW defeating emissions testing use Radar detectors etc.

I would guess none

Matthew

andrew027

1286 posts

Uber Geek

#1441865 7-Dec-2015 10:44

As the comments in this thread descend closer to those in the average Stuff article I figure it's time to put my two bob's worth in.

(1) I personally think a 4kph tolerance is too low but regardless of what I think the law says the limit is 100. I can write to a newspaper, the AA, LTNZ or my MP, and if enough people did those things maybe the 4k tolerance would increase, but until that time the limit is 100 and the tolerance is 4. Even if I was given a ticket for doing 102 I wouldn't complain (I'm not saying I would be happy about it, but I wouldn't try to argue my way out of it) because I would be breaking the law and I don't get to choose what laws I obey and what laws I don't, depending on whether I see personal merit or inconvenience in them. It's up to me to keep my speed within the law and that means 100 or less, not 110 or 104.

(2) New Zealand's roads are shocking. Having lived and driven long distances in a number of countries I am appalled that much of our national highway network is a twisty maze of little passages. Compare driving Auckland to Wellington via SH1 with driving Sydney to Melbourne on the Hume Highway or San Francisco to Los Angeles on I5. There's nothing complicated about their highways - just two lanes each way, as straight as possible, with a bit of land in between to separate you from on-coming traffic. And don't get me started on how many kilometres of road will be down to 70 or less due to road works over the holiday period.

(3) Like @Kyanar I'd like to see Police blitz things other than speed occasionally. They did this in South Australia when I lived there throughout most of the 1990s - one week it might be following too close, the next it might be not indicating, the next it might be not wearing a seatbelt. Evidence suggested people's behaviour changed long term, not just for the week the blitz was on.

Now, how about those cyclists?

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1441872 7-Dec-2015 10:53

andrew027: As the comments in this thread descend closer to those in the average Stuff article I figure it's time to put my two bob's worth in.

(1) I personally think a 4kph tolerance is too low but regardless of what I think the law says the limit is 100. I can write to a newspaper, the AA, LTNZ or my MP, and if enough people did those things maybe the 4k tolerance would increase, but until that time the limit is 100 and the tolerance is 4. Even if I was given a ticket for doing 102 I wouldn't complain (I'm not saying I would be happy about it, but I wouldn't try to argue my way out of it) because I would be breaking the law and I don't get to choose what laws I obey and what laws I don't, depending on whether I see personal merit or inconvenience in them. It's up to me to keep my speed within the law and that means 100 or less, not 110 or 104.

(2) New Zealand's roads are shocking. Having lived and driven long distances in a number of countries I am appalled that much of our national highway network is a twisty maze of little passages. Compare driving Auckland to Wellington via SH1 with driving Sydney to Melbourne on the Hume Highway or San Francisco to Los Angeles on I5. There's nothing complicated about their highways - just two lanes each way, as straight as possible, with a bit of land in between to separate you from on-coming traffic. And don't get me started on how many kilometres of road will be down to 70 or less due to road works over the holiday period.

(3) Like @Kyanar I'd like to see Police blitz things other than speed occasionally. They did this in South Australia when I lived there throughout most of the 1990s - one week it might be following too close, the next it might be not indicating, the next it might be not wearing a seatbelt. Evidence suggested people's behaviour changed long term, not just for the week the blitz was on.

Now, how about those cyclists?

I agree with NZ roads being bad with a big percentage of 100km roads barely safe enough to be 80km roads, however there are some that could be safely greater than 100km.

I would like to see proactive action regarding...
1. Intersection compliance.
2. keeping left unless passing.
3. inconsiderate slow drivers. (that does not mean all slow drivers)
4. use of indicators and driving with fog lights on during fine weather.

Another thing I would like to see is screens on the back of large Semi's that show the road ahead.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1441876 7-Dec-2015 10:58

MikeB4:
Another thing I would like to see is screens on the back of large Semi's that show the road ahead.

Did you see that Top Gear episode when they tried to make an invisible truck using large LED screens?

Matthew

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1441877 7-Dec-2015 11:00

mdooher:
MikeB4:
Another thing I would like to see is screens on the back of large Semi's that show the road ahead.

Did you see that Top Gear episode when they tried to make an invisible truck using large LED screens?

Yep,

I saw an attempt by the US Army to do similar

keewee01

1737 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1441895 7-Dec-2015 11:20

andrew027: As the comments in this thread descend closer to those in the average Stuff article I figure it's time to put my two bob's worth in.

(1) I personally think a 4kph tolerance is too low but regardless of what I think the law says the limit is 100. I can write to a newspaper, the AA, LTNZ or my MP, and if enough people did those things maybe the 4k tolerance would increase, but until that time the limit is 100 and the tolerance is 4. Even if I was given a ticket for doing 102 I wouldn't complain (I'm not saying I would be happy about it, but I wouldn't try to argue my way out of it) because I would be breaking the law and I don't get to choose what laws I obey and what laws I don't, depending on whether I see personal merit or inconvenience in them. It's up to me to keep my speed within the law and that means 100 or less, not 110 or 104.

(2) New Zealand's roads are shocking. Having lived and driven long distances in a number of countries I am appalled that much of our national highway network is a twisty maze of little passages. Compare driving Auckland to Wellington via SH1 with driving Sydney to Melbourne on the Hume Highway or San Francisco to Los Angeles on I5. There's nothing complicated about their highways - just two lanes each way, as straight as possible, with a bit of land in between to separate you from on-coming traffic. And don't get me started on how many kilometres of road will be down to 70 or less due to road works over the holiday period.

(3) Like @Kyanar I'd like to see Police blitz things other than speed occasionally. They did this in South Australia when I lived there throughout most of the 1990s - one week it might be following too close, the next it might be not indicating, the next it might be not wearing a seatbelt. Evidence suggested people's behaviour changed long term, not just for the week the blitz was on.

Now, how about those cyclists?

Well said. I agree on all 3 points. I too travel above the speed limit (but only a little) and if I get pinged I know it will be deserved but I won't be happy. I would take speeding campaigns and the police far more seriously if the NZ Police choose to do campaigns on a few other driver behaviour also rather than just speed and booze.

Dingbatt

6754 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1441950 7-Dec-2015 12:35

This time of year people can't even drive round a shopping mall car park properly, so what hope is there for anything but the simplest roading message to get out there.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

hangon

397 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1441975 7-Dec-2015 13:01

A further measure the Government should take is the banning the importing, selling and use of devices such Radar detectors etc.

They wont do that. I seem to remember them talking about it 10 years ago. At the time the evidence showed those with radar detectors were less likely to crash. Why? The theory was they relaxed more and that driving was less stressful and so less tiring.

Apparently its not speed that kills...

that does ring true when I was driving 900 km round trips every other weekend a few years back

I was fined for doing 111 (no kidding) passing a car before I bought a detector. I didn't get another ticket afterwards, although I rarely drive above 110 (except on the express way), I was more relaxed to drive to the condition rather than checking speedo every few seconds. The cops know the sweet spot that could catch drivers on surprise, i.e. down hills gentle bend, detectors won't give you much headroom in those conditions especially if you drive too fast.

The black spots on SH2? Never saw them.

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1442002 7-Dec-2015 13:47

DravidDavid: Firstly, I'm pretty sure last year there was a massive media uproar as the Christmas road toll was nearer to double that of the year before that, which brought in to question the campaigns effectiveness. I also remember the police apologising saying they "could have been more clear" about the campaign

With a short period from a larger data set there will always be variance. Also that period was 11.6 days vs 9.6 days for the previous period. When corrected for that it looks more sensible.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1442196 7-Dec-2015 16:54

I have a radar detector and it keeps me conscious of my actual speed, which tends to creep up without me noticing.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ... | 24