Speed camera tolerance change?

Avatar MIA

Advanced warning - this is third hand info.

A friend of my wife got penalty points for doing 52 in a 50 kph zone. She went to a Garda acquaintance and he told her the leeway has been removed from the speed vans and there have been changes to their own equipment (more accurate), and also have less tolerance.

Unless you've got cruise control you're going to be spending a lot of time looking at your speedometer or going 5kph below the relevant speed limit - if true.

colm_mcm

Speedometer still over-reads speed.

Damien360

colm_mcm wrote: »

Speedometer still over-reads speed.

My skoda is 126 on clock is 120 on GPS. 106 is 100 GPS. 84 on clock is 80 GPS. Haven't done the lower speeds as I tend to drive at or lower than indicated. I suspect they are a lot closer to each other at 60 and 50.

Avatar MIA

colm_mcm wrote: »

Speedometer still over-reads speed.

She was still done at 52kph actual.

colm_mcm

Avatar MIA wrote: »

She was still done at 52kph actual.

I get ya.

Isambard

so what you're saying is there is no tolerance at all any more effectively?

TheChizler

Isambard wrote: »

so what you're saying is there is no tolerance at all any more effectively?

Was there ever? I don't remember ever hearing it officially.

TheChizler

Avatar MIA wrote: »

She was still done at 52kph actual.

With my speedo anyway that would read roughly 57-58.

antodeco

Avatar MIA wrote: »

She was still done at 52kph actual.

I reckon she was probably driving quite close to 60KPH on her Speedo.

1 of mine reads 120KPH on the Speedo when you're actually doing closer to 135KPH on reality!

Another I have GPS linked, so 53KPH on the Speedo is 53KPH in reality.

Avatar MIA

Isambard wrote: »

so what you're saying is there is no tolerance at all any more effectively?

Apparently. But as said above don't think it was ever official, technically you could be prosecuted for going 121 in a 120 zone and have no defence re speed.

Avatar MIA

antodeco wrote: »

I reckon she was probably driving quite close to 60KPH on her Speedo.

1 of mine reads 120KPH on the Speedo when you're actually doing closer to 135KPH on reality!

Another I have GPS linked, so 53KPH on the Speedo is 53KPH in reality.

Everyone should test their Speedo to GPS, but it's a separate issue.

ShadowHearth

Didn't Subaru back in the day got in trouble for having very accurate speedo reading to actual speed?

All cars for very long time show higher speed then what you actually travel at. I personally drive 105km/h on 100km roads and 128ish on 120km roads.

Still, going 52 in 50 and being done for it sounds stupid.

On same note, did the new law on speeding already active?

Isambard

i checked mine out with the gps and it's about 4% over, so that's what I put into the CC. I don't know if there's an allowance made in Ireland, I know there is in the Uk and it's something like 4 mph plus 10% which is generous. It's a bit galling to think you could get points for doing 52 in a 50

drunkmonkey

ShadowHearth wrote: »

On same note, did the new law on speeding already active?

It's only a proposal.

Avatar MIA

Isambard wrote: »

I know there is in the Uk and it's something like 4 mph plus 10% which is generous. It's a bit galling to think you could get points for doing 52 in a 50

A tolerance in the UK makes sense as there'd be no drivers on the road such is the propensity of static speed cameras over there.

Avatar MIA

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's only a proposal.

Unlikely to be supported in this Dail I'd say.

thelad95

There was never a tolerance. A speed limit is a speed limit. Mind you, I could see it being overturned if she appealed on the basis that the speedometer said 50.

Avatar MIA

thelad95 wrote: »

There was never a tolerance. A speed limit is a speed limit. Mind you, I could see it being overturned if she appealed on the basis that the speedometer said 50.

She's never had points before, so might suggest it to her.

TheChizler

Avatar MIA wrote: »

She's never had points before, so might suggest it to her.

That's more of a case to get the speedometer fixed rather than to get the penalty overturned though...

Del2005

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Didn't Subaru back in the day got in trouble for having very accurate speedo reading to actual speed?

All cars for very long time show higher speed then what you actually travel at. I personally drive 105km/h on 100km roads and 128ish on 120km roads.

Still, going 52 in 50 and being done for it sounds stupid.

On same note, did the new law on speeding already active?

It's an EU law that vehicles have to over state the speed by upto 10%. So if your speedo shows 50 you are doing between 45 and 49.

I'd much prefer people to be done for 52 in a 50 than 140 in a 120 zone as the low limit is usually in a built up area so people need to slow down, I often set my cruise control in 50 zones and always have a massive gap ahead and a queue up my arse, while in 80 or 100 zones I'm passing nearly everything when I'm at the limit.

The problem in this country is that they have pushed that speed kills so people travel slowly on the open roads with high limits yet travel too fast in areas where they shouldn't. In the 30 zones I don't think I've seen anyone obey them, even cyclists exceed it not that they have speed limits.

99nsr125

Del2005 wrote: »

It's an EU law that vehicles have to over state the speed by upto 10%. So if your speedo shows 50 you are doing between 45 and 49.

I'd much prefer people to be done for 52 in a 50 than 140 in a 120 zone as the low limit is usually in a built up area so people need to slow down, I often set my cruise control in 50 zones and always have a massive gap ahead and a queue up my arse, while in 80 or 100 zones I'm passing nearly everything when I'm at the limit.

The problem in this country is that they have pushed that speed kills so people travel slowly on the open roads with high limits yet travel too fast in areas where they shouldn't. In the 30 zones I don't think I've seen anyone obey them, even cyclists exceed it not that they have speed limits.

Yeah, built up areas are where people really get hurt

I always do less than posted in municipal areas

On the open road could be doing 250 or 260 but that's the open road

donspeekinglesh

Avatar MIA wrote: »

A tolerance in the UK makes sense as there'd be no drivers on the road such is the propensity of static speed cameras over there.

A Black Forest Gatso as I once heard it described.

TheChizler

Del2005 wrote: »

It's an EU law that vehicles have to over state the speed by upto 10%. So if your speedo shows 50 you are doing between 45 and 49.

May, not have to. They may also be spot on, which is why this is always a risky comment. "Someone on the Internet told me my speedo was overreading" won't cut it with the judge!

kirving

Del2005 wrote: »

I'd much prefer people to be done for 52 in a 50 than 140 in a 120 zone as the low limit is usually in a built up area

2kph in a 50 zone is well within the margin of human error. It's unrealistic to expect humans to be able to maintain a give speed with such accuracy without neglecting other factors such as observation. Even my cruise control can show off by 1-2km/h before reacting and slowing the car. That said, keeping well below the limit is the safest and most recommended of course.

140kph in a 120 zone (where other cars are present) in my opinion is more dangerous.

It takes (relatively) so much longer to go from 140 to 120, that by the time car car doing 120 has stopped, the car that was doing 140 is now doing 60 or so. (Not exact maths, but roughly correct).

Add in the 80kph limit for vehicles towing, 100kph trucks and other eejits that you're required to account for, and I think 140kph is too high, unless of course the limit is raised, and a minimum enforced for all users.

On an empty motorway, I have zero issue with 140kph. In isolation it isn't that fast.

Related-ish side note:
I recently had a car pull out from the hard shoulder, from stopped, in front of me. I couldn't move right as I usually do as there was a car overtaking ever so slowly. Stood on the brakes and avoided them by a few meters. Had I been doing 140kph it would have been a huge accident.

Henry Ford III

thelad95 wrote: »

There was never a tolerance. A speed limit is a speed limit. Mind you, I could see it being overturned if she appealed on the basis that the speedometer said 50.

There is. A relative worked for Go Safe and confirmed this.

Isambard

Henry Ford III wrote: »

There is. A relative worked for Go Safe and confirmed this.

it's a function of the Gardai to examine the photos and issue the fine. They should have the leeway to ignore trifling infringements. Probably they have, and most of the cases you hear about don't accurately reflect the facts (ie the margin over the limit was in fact bigger)

Del2005

TheChizler wrote: »

May, not have to. They may also be spot on, which is why this is always a risky comment. "Someone on the Internet told me my speedo was overreading" won't cut it with the judge!

Someone posted the law / regulation before and it can never read the correct speed it has to over state the speed. In some cars you can open the diagnostics and see the correct speed, but the speedo will not show it.

All the judge will say is that the limit was x and your speedo was showing more than x so you knew that you were speeding.

Henry Ford III

Isambard wrote:

it's a function of the Gardai to examine the photos and issue the fine. They should have the leeway to ignore trifling infringements. Probably they have, and most of the cases you hear about don't accurately reflect the facts (ie the margin over the limit was in fact bigger)

Go Safe. Not Gardai.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

if shw got done for 52 her speedo likely showed 55 or 56

mine shows 53 at 50 actual so it is over reading

really doubt her speedo is under reading actual .

Avatar MIA

....

Isambard

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Go Safe. Not Gardai.

the gardai issue the fines foe gosafe captures.

DaveyDave

Checked mine with GPS there, seems to be 3-4kph difference.

Henry Ford III

Isambard wrote: »

the gardai issue the fines foe gosafe captures.

The penny dropped, eventually. My contact is an ex Garda who would have pretty detailed knowledge of the workings of the system.

Isambard

DaveyDave wrote: »

Checked mine with GPS there, seems to be 3-4kph difference.

at what speed? Obviously it would be less than that at 30km/h and a lot more at 120km/h. I always contend the inaccuracy would be a percentage ,

Del2005

Isambard wrote: »

at what speed? Obviously it would be less than that at 30km/h and a lot more at 120km/h. I always contend the inaccuracy would be a percentage ,

It would be easier for a manufacturer to just display the speed plus 3km/H, as that means they comply with the EU regulations in 30 zones, rather than programming the ECU to over state by a percentage of the speed.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

Isambard wrote: »

at what speed? Obviously it would be less than that at 30km/h and a lot more at 120km/h. I always contend the inaccuracy would be a percentage ,

it is
its +5 % in VAG cars anyway at any speed

so it checks your speed and adds 5% for the speedo that you look at

DaveyDave

Isambard wrote: »

at what speed? Obviously it would be less than that at 30km/h and a lot more at 120km/h. I always contend the inaccuracy would be a percentage ,

60kph. I'll see what it's like at 30, 50 and 80 if I can.

TheChizler

Isambard wrote: »

at what speed? Obviously it would be less than that at 30km/h and a lot more at 120km/h. I always contend the inaccuracy would be a percentage ,

It all depends on tire pressure, wear, speed, accuracy of whatever is doing the measuring, even before you get to adding an intentional offset. Probably off by some second order exponent equation if you want to get technical.

deandean

If I got a ticket for doing 52 in a 50 zone I'd take it to court and take my chances in front of the Judge.

I'd argue that it's unreasonable to be fined for being 2km/h over the limit. Cars are driven by people, not by robots.

TheChizler

deandean wrote: »

If I got a ticket for doing 52 in a 50 zone I'd take it to court and take my chances in front of the Judge.

I'd argue that it's unreasonable to be fined for being 2km/h over the limit. Cars are driven by people, not by robots.

"€1000 fine and 5 penalty points, next!"

i57dwun4yb1pt8

deandean wrote: »

If I got a ticket for doing 52 in a 50 zone I'd take it to court and take my chances in front of the Judge.

I'd argue that it's unreasonable to be fined for being 2km/h over the limit. Cars are driven by people, not by robots.

yes but the point is 52 means you were doing 55 on the speedo ,
they know this , so imply you were consciously over .

josip

Del2005 wrote: »

It would be easier for a manufacturer to just display the speed plus 3km/H, as that means they comply with the EU regulations in 30 zones, rather than programming the ECU to over state by a percentage of the speed.

It would the same amount of effort in both cases,

DisplaySpeed = ActualSpeed + 3
or
DisplaySpeed = ActualSpeed * 1.05

unless I've misunderstood your point?

GreeBo

DaDumTish wrote: »

yes but the point is 52 means you were doing 55 on the speedo ,
they know this , so imply you were consciously over .

That would imply they would fine you for doing 49 as your speedo read > 50.


More likely the limit on the road was 30.

OP, what road are we talking about here?

Del2005

josip wrote: »

It would the same amount of effort in both cases,

DisplaySpeed = ActualSpeed + 3
or
DisplaySpeed = ActualSpeed * 1.05

unless I've misunderstood your point?

Your right, I was over thinking it.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

GreeBo wrote: »

That would imply they would fine you for doing 49 as your speedo read > 50.


More likely the limit on the road was 30.

OP, what road are we talking about here?

i think they let you away with 51 but 52 means you were at the speedo midpoint so tough luck

this is on a car with 5% leeway

Avatar MIA

GreeBo wrote: »

That would imply they would fine you for doing 49 as your speedo read > 50.


More likely the limit on the road was 30.

OP, what road are we talking about here?

It was a 50 zone, but I can't remember if they told me the road they were on.

RiseToMe

I've posted about this before on here, but in terms of "tolerances and allowences" when you set up measuring equipment you need to consider the entire set up including what you are measuring and calculate a "measurement of uncertainty".

In this case there the measurement of uncertainty will be affected by the calibration accuracy of the equipment, there will be an allowance for the user and an allowance for any small deviations from set up. So if they determine the above has for example, a +/-5% uncertainty then this is your leeway. If they have improved the "true reading" of the equipment, the uncertainty is adjusted.

If you get done for traveling at 52kmph in a 50 zone, the calculation of your speed will have already allowed for an uncertainty of measurement, so the absolute SLOWEST you possibly would've been travelling is 52kmph, hence the ticket.

mikeecho

I don't believe that a ticket was issued for 2km over.

Post a pic of the letter.. with identifying info hidden.. otherwise, I call Büllshīt

ED E

RiseToMe wrote: »

I've posted about this before on here, but in terms of "tolerances and allowences" when you set up measuring equipment you need to consider the entire set up including what you are measuring and calculate a "measurement of uncertainty".

In this case there the measurement of uncertainty will be affected by the calibration accuracy of the equipment, there will be an allowance for the user and an allowance for any small deviations from set up. So if they determine the above has for example, a +/-5% uncertainty then this is your leeway. If they have improved the "true reading" of the equipment, the uncertainty is adjusted.

If you get done for traveling at 52kmph in a 50 zone, the calculation of your speed will have already allowed for an uncertainty of measurement, so the absolute SLOWEST you possibly would've been travelling is 52kmph, hence the ticket.

Worth noting the informational radar speed signs are rated to +/- 3% so its safe to assume the margin in six monthly calibrated guns and vans is more like 1%.

RiseToMe

ED E wrote: »

Worth noting the informational radar speed signs are rated to +/- 3% so its safe to assume the margin in six monthly calibrated guns and vans is more like 1%.

I didn't say it was 5%, I said for example. Furthermore that 5% was based on total uncertainty, you need to consider the other aspects such as user and set up in your overall uncertainty (all relative uncertainty) as well as allowing for expanded uncertainty using coverage factor k in order to determine your confidence level. All of which will see that 1% rise much further.

mikeecho

mikeecho wrote: »

I don't believe that a ticket was issued for 2km over.

Post a pic of the letter.. with identifying info hidden.. otherwise, I call Büllshīt

Also calling nonsense on this thread. No ticket was issued for 52 in a 50. I doubt such a ticket was ever issued in the country's history.

deandean wrote: »

If I got a ticket for doing 52 in a 50 zone I'd take it to court and take my chances in front of the Judge.

I'd argue that it's unreasonable to be fined for being 2km/h over the limit. Cars are driven by people, not by robots.

TheChizler wrote: »

"€1000 fine and 5 penalty points, next!"

There isn't a judge in the country that would do you for 52 in a 50. Which is why such a ticket wouldn't be issued.

These kind of threads always remind me of a local newspaper's court section, where a person was done for, I believe, 59 in a 50. Person explained that although it was a 50 zone, it was not a built up area, was not a housing estate or town, was a well-paved, wide road, at night with little traffic and with good lighting.

The judge replied that his courtroom was "a court of law, but also a court of justice", and dismissed it, letting your man go free. He said it'd be different if the person were doing 59 in a 50, in a built up area with people around.

Now, I know these things vary from judge to judge, but I'd definitely take my chances in court if I got done for 52 in a 50. Judge would give out to the Garda for wasting his time.