News through today that the RTA NSW is seriously considering eliminating the +3 kmh leeway permitted on posted speed zones. That is in NSW currently we can travel at up to 3kmh over the posted speed limit without being booked. The idea being to allow for practical real life errors in vehicle speedo readings, differences in tyre diameters, tyre air pressures etc.

The proposal will be to limit speeds to exactly the posted speed limit.

Revenue raising again??

The amount of mobile cameras have also increased, 161 to 3000 in nsw.

that will be a fail as adrs allow for a percentage of 3 or 5 percent on a vehicle speedo so they will have to change the adrs and also do speedo checks as part of rego checks because currently you can not be fail for a pink slip if your speedo doesn't work. it's not a require to have a working speedo for a pink slip the is not fail code in rtas new system and after mechanic mate rang to find out he was told he could not fail for that. so as he says this rego check is just a joke.

None of our classic cars from the 60's & 70's have cruise control that should (?) retain our speed at the preferred figure. Therefore we are relying on human input to control the speed the car travels at. We can't spend our whole trip staring at the speedo to see that we are abiding to the law (otherwise you will crash)

Here's a thought - if you travel 5km below the speed limit, that would allow for a 3km trigger for a fine to be applied.

Most of our roads are that congested (especially at peak work times - morning & afternoon) its near impossible to go over the designated limit. I just stick with the flow of traffic and if you have some idiot trying to rub the paint off your rear bumper, I just merge to the left lane and let him have his acciednt wih someone else.

That said I agree that speed cameras are more about revenue raising then road safety. At least there are signs up to tell you about their presense.

"that will be a fail as adrs allow for a percentage of 3 or 5 percent on a vehicle speedo...."

This is corect. However the onus is on the driver of the vehicle to make sure the speedo is operational and correctly callibrated.

I got pulled over several years ago when I was driving directly into blinding sunlight on a hot summers day on a straight stretch of road with 100kmh speed limit. Honestly I couldn't see the speedo due to glare so I assumed all was well. The cop approaching from the other way booked me for 105 in 100kmh zone. I argued the point with him saying I was correctly travelng at 100kmh by my speedo. He told me I should have my speedo re-calibrated. The fact that my car was clearly a recent ex-chaser fitted with the police calibrated speedo appeared to have little influence on him. Another tick for revenue raising.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeterM

"that will be a fail as adrs allow for a percentage of 3 or 5 percent on a vehicle speedo...."

This is corect. However the onus is on the driver of the vehicle to make sure the speedo is operational and correctly callibrated.

I got pulled over several years ago when I was driving directly into blinding sunlight on a hot summers day on a straight stretch of road with 100kmh speed limit. Honestly I couldn't see the speedo due to glare so I assumed all was well. The cop approaching from the other way booked me for 105 in 100kmh zone. I argued the point with him saying I was correctly travelng at 100kmh by my speedo. He told me I should have my speedo re-calibrated. The fact that my car was clearly a recent ex-chaser fitted with the police calibrated speedo appeared to have little influence on him. Another tick for revenue raising.

---

That's why (as of 12 months ago) I never answer their questions after being pulled over. Right from go the conversation is recorded. The alleged is given a false sense of hope by the officer, that "if I'm honest/sincere he/she might let me off.
From my experience the police have no intention of giving warnings or letting anyone off. They appear to be friendly when they're asking the questions because all they want is admission of guilt on the tape recorder.

peter that may be true but a letter contesting the fine stating the adr number and a bit of maths showing that your speed varition meets the required adrs. the office of state debt dont seem to like this very much they figure they will lose in court. this happend to my boss he recived a fine for doing 63 in a 60 zone which is 5% over and he did the above and they withdrew the fine. i'm not saying if you speed its fine i'm just saying that cops job is to make money. so if you speed your deserve what you get but flowing with traffic and get done for 3 klms or less over then that is just money making.

Hi William,

I did write a letter offering a detailed account of the booking. It was quickly rejected, claiming that I had in fact acknowledged I had exceeded the speed limit. So the infringement stood.

However, I quickly responded by informing the authorities of my good driving record as I had no infringments for over 5 years (honestly, I don't know how I managed to do that). I requested that they take into account my excellent driving history, and that the current offence was in fact technically quite minor.

They replied by withdrawing the infringement (both payment and loss of points) and firmly stated that no type of speeding should be seen as "quite minor".

But I guess there are people around who believe that traveling at 61 kmh is unsafe, where-as 60 kmh is regarded as safe.

My thoughts are at the moment that should I be involved in an accident of any type I will make sure I am within the speed limit and claim that I was spending more time looking at the speedo than looking at the road and what other cars were doing. And because I was infact clearly traveling within the speed limit that there was no way I was at fault.

I think it also comes down to the cop, I've been caught doing 92 in a 80 zone and was never fined. But I wasn't being a richardhead about things.

Factory speedo's are not very accurate, my 2001 Falcon which minus the sound system is completely standard and to do 60 the speedo needs to read 62.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeterM

"that will be a fail as adrs allow for a percentage of 3 or 5 percent on a vehicle speedo...."

This is corect. However the onus is on the driver of the vehicle to make sure the speedo is operational and correctly callibrated.

---

There used to be speedo check signs for this reason.

Can't say i've seen any on the new highways around here. They are still out on the old highways.