2008/12/22 Dave Ackrill <dave.g0...@tiscali.co.uk>: > Richard Moore wrote: >> The answer? The Feds then >> required the speedometer to read not less than 2% nor more than 8% >> high -- oddly enough, 5% is the mean of this variance. I don't know >> what's required now. My '02 Toyota Highlander reads a tad less than >> 1% high, based on readings from my Garmin eTrex. >> >> > That's true this side of the herring pond as well... > > So, if you are caught on camera, you cannot say your speedo was telling > you that you were under the speed limit. > > However, over here, you can still challenge the plods (UK term for > Police Officers) to show that their measuring instruments were correctly > callibrated on the day that they tracked you... > > If they did not keep to the law on this, then you were not lawfully > shown to be over the limit.
Just a bit off topic but it's probably a waste of time having a really accurate spedo over here in New Zealand. We have roadside cameras which have a coil of wire in the road and the action of a speeding car travelling over the coil triggers the speed detector. To me it seems quite privative and I'd bet that it is not that accurate. A while back someone contested a speeding ticket on the grounds that they wanted to verify that the unit had been calibrated. Well it seems they cannot reliably check the accuracy so this seemed to be a way out of any ticket issued by these units therefore making all of them throughout the country redundant. So the government fixed this by making a law that basically said that the units don't need to be checked for accuracy and that tickets given out by them cannot be challenged on this issue. 73, Steve - JAKDTTNW -- Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD Omnium finis imminet _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.