My Stinking Speedometer Is Accurate
 

So, I see all these posts about how the speedo appears to be overstating the speed. Well, on my ride to work is a road where they use photo-radar. The speed limit is 25 (which is absurd on the road in question). But, the radar allows you to go 10 miles over the limit before triggering. My trusty V1 picks up the photo-radar unit. My speedo says I am going 36. Okay, so given the MINI speedo overstatement, I decide not to slow down. FLASH! Ticket in the mail. Recorded speed: 36. GRRRRRRR. 1 stinking MPH cost me $40! Oh, well. At least I know my speedo is accurate. (In case you are wondering, I did get the info on the calibration of the radar unit that nabbed me and I have good reason to believe it was accurate).

Thanks for doing this research!!! In light of your findings I believe I shall also assume my speedo is correct, thereby potentially saving additional research expense.:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

I need to get a policeman to radar me to find out if my car is actually off as much as the GPS shows it is.

You're Welcome!

I haven't checked my speedometer at low speeds, but I have found that mine reads about 2 mph high in the 40s and 3 mph high in the 70s (I allow myself a 2 mph buffer at above 40 mph just to be safe).

I've made my checks comparing my speedometer with my GPS and comparing my speedometer with those digital radar signs that show your speed. I have found though that sometimes the portable radar displays (the ones on wheels that get moved around from one area of the city to another) don't seem to always be accurate.

Based on your experience though, I will treat my speedometer as absolutely accurate at the lower speeds until I discover otherwise. Sorry I had to learn at your expense, but hanks for the head's-up

You should spray your license plates with photo blocker

http://www.photoblocker.com/www/index.html

I've been motoring past one of those self contained speed sign/radar trailers for the past week and it's dead-on. Of course, dead-on at 35 mph. Not sure beyond that! :sad:

Does that actually work as advertised?

Oh yes, it works.:thumbsup:

A photo ticket was only $40? Here they are like $150 I think. That's super cheap. The company that sets up the system gets a chunk of each ticket in most towns. I'd say you were lucky. Heck, I got one almost 20 years ago in Paradise Valley, AZ the second town to use one and it was $85 back then.

Better to err on the side of caution than push the system. From the tests I've seen done the photo blocker only lines the manufacturers pocket and does little else. The better question is the time savings worth the ticket.

hmm... interesting point. My GPS shows that I am driving 3 mph slower than what my speedo says. I always figured the GPS was off, but now that you mention this...

Well driving in NYC in traffic means you can get caught in a situation where traffic is moving well but you have to stop all of a sudden where you would be blocking traffic if the light were to turn red. Of course at that time you see it turn yellow but traffic ahead clears up so you just move up fast but you're like .25 of a second late and the red light camera gets you.

Fortunately that hasn't happened to me yet but I've seen it happen to other people when they weren't doing anything that was unsafe. So it's not the time savings but actually getting a ticket for something unavoidable.

I hate red light cameras even more than speed cameras they're only there to make money for the city at the expense of everyones safety. It's been shown that they don't reduce the number of accident and in fact increase the number of rear end collisions. So I've been thinking about getting a product like the one mentioned above as long as it actually works.

Yep. $40, no points, no insurance notification. Not considered a moving violation.

It's not a matter of time-savings; it's the damn near impossibility of going that slow on a wide road with numerous small hills.

that product sounds like a good idea to me, if it works. the photo radar tickets here in portland are not cheap by any means. imho, the red light cameras are a terrible idea.

I havent seen Photo Blocker before...but there is a bunch of stuff on http://www.laserveil.com/ There are multiple tests on video to show how the photo-radar works, as well as police laser. As far as the laser goes, they need a reflective surface to get an accuate lock...meaning your license plate or headlights. Its pretty interesting stuff, and seems to work...then there are always the license plate covers that dont allow the plate to be read at an angle. (My speedo is reading 3 mph fast at 75mph).

$100 for a coating? If it caused those women to get stuck to my car, maybe.......

Yes, the speed is accurate.
 

Well, I know my speedo is accurate - also tested by law enforcement unfortunately!

Last Sunday, my friend and I were cruising on I80 to Reno from Grass Valley (Mini Mania country!) Anyway, she kept getting on me for going too fast, said the Mini had turned me into a speed maniac. I said, chill, I know better than to go over 75. Well we were hauling up the mountain, past Truckee, chit chatting away like women do. Didn't notice I was on a downhill incline. Didn't notice the CHP officer parked ahead about a 1/4 mile. Didn't notice I was going 91mph! By the time I did, I hit the brakes, got back to 74 and hoped. No, here he comes down the mountain, headed straight toward us, lights flashing just for me.

My friend rolled down the window. The officer tried to hide his obvious disapointment. He probably thought we were about 30 years younger in the swift little Mini. Instead, there sat two middle aged broads old enough to be his mother.

There was no point in arguing about the ticket, so I just sat there, smiling, waiting for him to lower the boom. "Well ma'am, do you know how fast you were going back there?", "No, but I know it was a little too fast, officer." "I clocked you at 91mph." (Oh fiddlesticks!, I thought, my husband is going kill me!) I gave him my license and so on and he went back to his car. My friend, a real smarty pants, grabbed the face of the giant Mini speedo and said, "Well, you can't exactly tell him you had no idea how fast you were going, now can you?" Grrrr!

The good news is he issued a 75 in a 65 mph zone instead of 91.
The exact number I saw on the speedo.

I don't like to speed, really! But the Mini is so smooth you don't feel like you're going so fast. Really.

Hopefully there won't be any
Fun, Fun, Fun, when Hubby takes the Mini away.:cool:


ps. he wouldn't dare, unless it is out of my cold, dead hands!!!

2 Things:

1. Set the speed alarm (it's a user adjustable option)
2. Valentine 1

Now you tell me!! Didn't know about the speed alarm, tho. I'll check that out this afternoon.

You know I was thinking about getting a detector and using when on road trips, etc. Instead I'll be paying the ticket. I get a ticket once a decade:
79, 89, 99, oops, 07 - I'm 2 years early!

I grew up in a town where 99% of the roads were 25mph. We had a rule 32 - 32 miles per hour and the cops would never bother you.

It wasn't 1 mile over the limit. I was 1 mile over the 10 mile "courtesy"

Where each region of the country has its quirks with regard to how people drive, Albuquerque's has centered around its red light runners. So .. The city installed cameras at the intersections that experienced the highest frequency of accidents. Good idea .. Frequency of accidents is down.

But .. Then our city leaders decided that those same cameras could be used to ticket people for speeding. So .. A first offense (running the red light or speeding) costs $100, a second costs $200, and a third and subsequent costs $300 ($40 doesn't sound so bad does it).

After many complaints from visitors to our city from other New Mexico cities, the state legislature stepped in and insisted on lower fines (those mentioned above are the new lower fines). They also insisted that there be some kind of warning to those approaching a camera intersection. The city is now installing rumble strips at the approaches to these intersections (19 intersections with more coming).

P.S. The city claims that all revenue is going toward purchasing more camera setups.

NO! Mythbusters tested several sprays like this one, some clear covers that are also supposed to do the same, some along with some other stuff.

NONE of them worked. None of them did anything.

At least for now. Once they have cameras on all the busy intersections where's the money going to go then?