Just received a fine for speeding on the return to Melbourne, on freeway in Broadford.
110 km/h zone, Detected 118km/h, adjusted to 115 km/h.
I was speeding, I don't dispute that, & I'm hoping to get out of it because of a clean record.
But, 5 km over in a 110 km zone!? I thought you had 10% leniency when it was over a 100 km/h zone? Can someone clarify the rules?
$201 is very expensive considering I was doing 5 km over on a freeway!
I think the problem in this country is leniency
Sit the test again.
You deserved it. Sucked in.
Would you trust GPS or Cars Speed Prediction? My car says 115km p/h but my gps reads 109..
Your speedometer needs calibration.
115 / 109 = 1.055
It's well within spec. (assuming minimal error on the GPS side of things, usually true, depending on various factors)
The speedo must not indicate a speed less than the vehicle’s true speed or a speed greater than the vehicle’s true speed by an amount more than 10 percent plus 4 km/h.
https://www.racq.com.au/cars-and-driving/safety-on-the-road/…
I looked up the law too, it says the same thing but much harder to read and for some reason the version I saw rendered "less than or equal" signs as pounds symbols.
Pretty much all speedos are 5 to 10% faster than the actual speed.
When my car speedo says 120 my GPS says 111. Think mine is a little off too
The GPS is accurate, but if you go off your speedo you are unlikely to ever get booked as you'll be under the limit (assuming you drive at a speed where the needle shows matches the posted limit)
I always drive based on GPS speed.
My speedo always shows me speeding by 5%. I just drive based on speedo+5% now.
No speeding fines in my decade (and more!) of driving.
Most cars intentionally read higher than you're going for various reasons. Safety, margin of error, etc.
5-6km difference between speedo and GPS is pretty normal.
This is to allow for variation in tyre size etc. For example if you put on new tyres, compared to the old worn ones you will be travelling faster for any given speed showing on the speedo. Diameter increases on a new tyre, therefore you travel further for each wheel revolution and the speedo measures drive shaft revolutions, not actual road speed.
The manufacturers allow for this slight variation by over estimating your speed by up to 10% on the speedo so you are less likely to be booked.
This is to allow for variation in tyre size
No, it's not.
And different sizes can have the same rolling diameter.
not sure why you were negged but what you say is true - if you change the tyre size, your actual speed changes, whether this is the rationale for car manufacturers remains to be seen!
The reason for the overestimation of speed is that it's the law, not because the manufacturers are trying to stop you being booked or that they care about tyre sizes etc. Prior to 2007 when the law changed, half the cars I owned would show the speed as lower than it actually was, because the law simply said that the accuracy has to be within +/- 10%. In 2007 it changed to say that it could be up to + 10% (+ 4km/h), but it couldn't show less than the actual speed you were travelling at.
3% leniency when travelling over 100km/h
Speedometers are usually off by a minimum of 2-3kms an hour
My car on 100km/h, is actually doing 6km/h lower (94)
Nawwwwwwwww
I was speeding, I don't dispute that…
Then pay the god damn fine.
For the record, last time I researched it, in Vic, it is 3km/h margin for mobile speed cameras and 2km/h for fixed speed cameras.
Yes its a km/hr adjustment, not a %.
% when speed limit over 100
For fixed digital it is 2km/h
For mobile it is 3km/h for under 100km/h, and 3% over 100km/h
Going to get out of it with a warning! 😜
Then why are you complaining about how much it costs?
There is a high probability that you will receive a caution, but it doesn’t take away the fact that think you are above the road rules.
haha i doubt it,
Welcome to Victoria
where was this in Victoria?
On the road.
Quoted from racv but is in line with my previous knowledge of this
This tolerance deducts two km/hr from a vehicle's detected speed for fixed digital safety cameras. For mobile cameras, a tolerance of three km/hr or three per cent for speeds over 100km/hr is deducted.
Besides the shrinking number of people that believe the government bs that it's "for our own safety", the rest of us already know it's pure revenue raising.
Anyway, whichever category you fall in, just pay up and stare at your speedo more carefully next time.
I always laugh at the people who whinge about "revenue raising".
Simple fact is… speeding fines are a stupidity tax.
It's not as if they're just randomly handing them out.
You have to speed in order to get a speeding ticket….
Solution: Don't speed (duh).
The offences and fines are there and, yes, we can avoid them by driving under the speed limit.
The real reason for those fines are very much arguable. It's very clear that revenue-raising is a huge component of it.
How do you suggest enforcing the rules? Instead of monetary fines, maybe the gov should take their first born child, chop a Finger off?
People still drive with license suspension.
If fines weren't so expensive, I'd speed a lot more.
How do you suggest enforcing the rules?
It's not about the actual enforcement of the law.
It's the way the law has been set and the justification behind it.
Just because a law is there, it doesn't mean that the law is right.
Often you see roads with speed limits that have been set at (x)km/h for years and years. Then all of a sudden the speed limit is dropped to (x-10)km/h with the installation of a new "safety camera". Following that, they tell everyone that travelling at (x)km/h would mean certain death.
(But wait - how does that work? Everyone was travelling at (x)km/h for years and years before that safety camera was installed!). Seriously.
@Ughhh: More visible enforcement. What’s the point of a speed camera that you don’t know is there? You are speeding, you go past the camera and continue to speed without knowing you’ve been caught. You continue to speed for the days until the ticket arrives.
If it was truly about road safety, you would see visible police cars so people will actually slow down at the time they’re speeding.
Because road conditions like amount of passing cars, parked cars, pedestrians, quality of road, complaints from schools /people living in the area etc all determine the speed conditions, and as a growing community, things change over years.
You shouldn't be speeding in the first place, if you do, you have to accept the consequences. Do we really want Australia to be a nanny state? Like children who only behave when they know their mum is watching them. Once their mum has left, its do whatever the hell you want.
Knowing that if I speed and I could get caught anytime, it forces be to behave all the time- not just when I see a cop car/speed camera. If the fear or getting caught in unsuspected places didnt' exist, as soon as there's no visible police, people will go wild.
Given the amount of roads, I don't think it's practical for a cop to be patrolling every main and side street like if it was iraq.
@Ughhh: No, you shouldn't. But if you are, you continue to do so not knowing you've been caught on camera. How is that road safety?
Knowing you can get caught anytime isn't doing anything for stopping speedsters, because the amount of tickets being given doesn't appear to be reducing.
“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”
But hey, it keeps the money rolling in!
No, you shouldn't. But if you are, you continue to do so not knowing you've been caught on camera. How is that road safety?
So unless you've been caught on camera, you don't know that you're committing a driving offense? You should assume and drive like you're always under camera… Behave at all times, not just when mummy is present.
To be honest, I agree and I would rather speed cameras and police be more obvious on the roads, that way I know when I can speed and when I need to go back to legal speed for a bit.
It's like playing fornite and being able to see all your enemies on the map.
@Ughhh: No, that's not what I implied. If you are speeding and you see a police car, you slow down. If you are speeding and you go past a concealed speed camera, you continue speeding.
In an ideal world of course everyone would stick to the speed limit and drive like there's a camera everywhere. But many people don't. If there is a visual deterrent then people will slow down. Simple really.
(But wait - how does that work? Everyone was travelling at (x)km/h for years and years before that safety camera was installed!). Seriously.
In Victoria, camera locations are chosen according to the criteria which includes accidents and deaths etc https://www.camerassavelives.vic.gov.au/camera-locations/how…
Although, I still agree with you with regards to roads suddenly dropping speed (but haven't experienced a fixed camera being suddenly installed).
I don't agree with trying to justify the speeding but I feel like 'stare at your speedo more carefully next time' can be more harmful in cases where the driver is paying more attention to their speedo than the road!
It's a fine line between the two and eventually you start to understand the car and the speed you're doing without looking at the speedo too much.
stare at your speedo more carefully next time' can be more harmful in cases
It definitely is more harmful and dangerous to simply stare at the speedo. I'm taking the piss because government policy indirectly says that watching every single km/h of speed is safer than focussing on the road ahead.
eventually you start to understand the car and the speed you're doing without looking at the speedo too much.
The small tolerances we're "allowed" before getting a ticket doesn't really reflect our human ability to judge speed based on "feeling". The roads are not all flat and were stopping and starting all the time.
Speed limit.
They gave you leniency. They took off 3km/h.
It's not leniency. That's the 3% tolerance that is automatically applied.
The analog dial on many cars can take up about 5km/h. Less than 10% tolerance is quite ridiculous considering real world circumstances.
Then you should take that in to consideration when you drive. The police shouldn't have to.
@Cyphar: The system should take that in to consideration when you drive. Then the police wouldn't have to.
That’s not leniecney. It’s a margin of error, whittled down to a sliver.
Did the OP recently become the new MFB boss?
Revenue raising is getting fined for driving at 44kmh in a 40 zone.
Revenue raising is getting fined for driving at 44kmh in a 40 zone
No, that's not revenue raising. That's called breaking the law and getting a fine for doing so.
If you don't like abiding by Australian laws perhaps you could instead move to more accommodating countries around the world, such as those in the Middle East where there are laws to the effect of making you liable if members of the royal family are at fault in an incident involving your vehicle.
Ergo decedo?
Its apparently illegal to be in possession of more than 50kg of potatoes in Western Australia
I for one demand we uphold this law even though its stupid, makes look like idiots and anyone who doesn't agree with the law should get the hell out of Australia. Because having more than 50kg of potatoes is called breaking the law and they should get a fine for doing so.
Welcome to Victoria.
High rental.
High fines.
High council rates.
It's all in your best interest.
You are free, to do as well tell you.
And yet still easily the best state in Australia.
Not sure if :) or :(
That is Victoria your lucky it is only $201 to be honest
just take it as a lesson
i coped a single 700 ticket once and never got another since
What did you do to cop $700?
doing 110 all the way and got done for over 30 on 80 zone
FFS. Did you lose your licence too?
Is that you Cletus?
doing 110 all the way
Impossible!!
Government "road safety" statistics will tell us that you should be dead already, not here writing in the OzBargain forums!
and never got another since
Because you haven't driven since or…?
because now i'm spending more time looking for speed signs / my speedometer, than the road condition / cars around me.
and almost everyone overtaking me on motorway even though i'm right on the speed limit. I have to admit i'm roughly 6km/h slower due to speedo inaccuracy.
Was just joking.
Yeah - I don't find I necessarily drive safer after getting a speeding ticket a few years back, I'm just a lot more aware of speed cameras or speed traps. I might actually be driving less safely because I'm probably paying less attention to the actual road in a sense.
Welcome to the dystopian socialist police state that is Victoria.
Not from around here but want to host a talk for Victorians? That will be a 65k police bill and we will send our union leaders out to rally their troops to assault you and the people who want to hear you speak even after you pay the bill.
It's time for OP to buy a GPS which has notification when speeding, and notification when approaching speeding camera.
Speeding is speeding. To be safe and to avoid fines, just go under speed limit.
It's time for OP to stick to the signposted speed limit, how's that for a FREE idea?
Some people have no idea to read signpost. A sound notification may help. :D
Be aware that the speed camera at Broadford is a "Point to Point" speed camera. These are relatively new in Australia (for car's at least, they've been used to monitor trucks for years).
Two camera's record the time at which you passed them, then your AVERAGE SPEED between those camera's is calculated.
So even if you are not speeding when you actually pass the camera's, if you speed up in between the camera's, you will still be caught.
This mean's you can't speed for the entire distance (many km's) between the camera's.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/point-to-point-c…
Wondering if anyone know how these work? Yes, it calculates average speed based on time and distance, but there would have to be a relatively big tolerance built since the roads aren't completely straight. Where the road curves, the distance in the "inner curve" would be less than that of the "outer curve". The variation increases with more lanes. It may not seem like a lot, but it will make a difference over distances.
They won't catch you speeding if you stop for a break. Or if you do 5 under most of the time and then a burst of speed.
Ouch….
Come the technology revolution where Governments literally know everything about you.
Driverless cars can't come s00n enough….
I love passing these and going 150km for half and then 50km for the 2nd half in the 100km limit!
there is no "leniency" else the sign would be 115?
replace your dumb phone with something less dumb that tells you how fast you are actually going
you weren't doing 5 over, you were doing 8
More like 15km/h over once you factor in what OP's speeding would actually have been displaying…
The speed limit is 110 km/h, not 115! Don't speed, simples.
The only thing worse than Victoria's ridiculously strict enforcement of speeding laws is Ozbargain commentator's utter contempt and lack of empathy towards others.
It's been widely known for the last 10-20 years that Victoria is a really really shitty state when it comes to road laws and enforcement.
From what I remember reading on car forums years ago, the Steve Bracks Victorian government are largely to blame.
The enforcement of speed limits to such a minor degree is ridiculous, and regardless of all the holier than thou commentators here, it is bullshit. No other state follows Victoria's unfair example. That should be proof enough. Annoyingly Australian's are utterly indoctrinated with an anti-speed attitude which you simply don't see in other countries. Talk to people in the US and all over Europe, the strictness of authorities towards speed in Australia and especially vicotria are shocking to foreigners.
Exactly. That's all I'm saying. I'm going to get out of it anyway but that doesn't stop me from thinking it's over the top
The rules aren't created for the foreigners, they're created for the Australians.
Actually they are created for Drivers in Victoria, which could include foreigners.
I don't live in Victoria and think a ~5km margin of error is fair and would be pretty grr if I copped a fine for say, doing 84 in an 80 zone like you do there. But in the OP case, he was 8km over and has a pretty entitled attitude, no sympathy ;)
Coming from a guy that paid over $10k in speeding fines in my first 5 years of driving (180km in an 80 zone probably the best, before anti-hoon laws), was deprived of my license for 3 years (couldn't really complain, it was deserved) & haven't had a fine in a decade since keeping to my 5km rule (per speedo).
Helps to buy a tank of a diesel or something hybrid…
~5km margin of error is fair
The problem is that at 110km/h. That's a 4.5% margin. Which is simply too low. It's not enough to account for analog dials on cars, it's not enough to account for tyre pressure effects, change of tyres/wheels, accuracy deterioration over time. Plus the same problems with any of the methods for recording the speed of a vehicle by police/roads authority.
It doesn't need to be a ridiculous tolerance but it should be fair and reasonable.
I think 10% tolerance fits that bill, most other states agree, most everywhere agrees. It's pretty much just victoria that's an outlier.
NSW always has the "Speed Camera Ahead" or "Red light Camera Ahead" signs. Why do they have those signs if they could just let everyone to speed and fine them. It seems to me NSW implementation is for reckless drivers who over speed. VIC method just seems to "Revenue Raising". I recently moved to Melbourne and noticed 2 places where the speed limit changes from 100 to 80 and immediately after is a speed camera.
VIC has 'speed camera ahead' signs as well for every camera.
For every fixed camera…
You were 8km/h over not 5. The leniency is 3km and was taken into account when they adjusted the rate.
It's interesting though because I believe that you while you get a 3km/h leniency, Speedometer manufacturers only have to supply Speedo's that are within 10% accuracy. I've never actually looked into that though, it may be an urban myth…
This is true but the accuracy requirement is not +-, they can be off but have to be overestimating as far as I know. They would face huge legal bills and be liable if they were underestimating speed and this was found to have had an impact in an accident causing death.
yea, 0 tolerance is what the VIC Police aiming for!
So 110/km is the cap.
Please be quiet and bend over for your cavity search.