Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i really can't believe this but it happened so i'm passing on the warning.

overtaking in a 50 zone (classed built up are) is now classed driving manner dangerous the police have been issued that offical mandate but nowhere is there any public knowledge of this.

i know because i was pulled over outside my home because i overtook a old fart doing 20 in a 50 & i used blinker & didn't have to go over 50 because it was up a hill. cops were further up road did u turn & pulled me over & told me above & that they could book me. believe me i put up a major fight asking wtf & police in a nut shell said well we have been told this & it's not our problem the public don't know.

I DIDN'T GET BOOKED BUT THIS IS JUST WRONG

note i wasn't in my R33 i was in my work ute to boot.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/28969-if-you-drive-please-read/
Share on other sites

thats rough... did you have to go on the wrong side of the road to do it?

yes i did, before hill there is bends with double yellows (old man was doing about 10-15 through these) then as you hit hill double yellow stop & there are no road markings at all. i waited till double yellow finished put blinker on & overtook on his rhs (which is wrong side road) acc to about 50 & pulled back in (cops veiw was pass & pull in). there are side streets at top of hill but i was back in my lane before 1/2 up hill.

his reason was someone could pull out of street top of hill but i shot that through the window when i said i never had to speed because of slow car & if that car wasn't there i would be doing 50 anyway so if car pulled out why would stoping time be any diff (he had no answer).

i would have guessed it has always been illegal to overtake somebody unless there are 2 lanes in the same direction, ie not crossing onto oncoming traffic lane.

you have to be joking right, come on have you read driver handbook.

why do we have road markings like double yellow (no crossing lanes), etc.

if you have only a 2 lane rd & markings in center of rd are broken lines you may cross if safe to do so (unless this isn't earth & i'm in a bad dream)

That's Bullshit - I reckon the guy was trying to scare you - If there were no double yellow lines when you overtook, and you were doing under the speed limit, I seriously doubt that a court would convict you - that's why he let you off - cause you weren't doing anything wrong -

scare tactics. i've had one threaten me with confiscation under the "burnout policy" for doing a 0.5 second chirp off the lights in my charade. i admitted to doing 10km/h over the limit too (i was doing at least 20 over) but once he found out my old man owned the car he put the pressure on to slow down "and i'll tell your old man if you don't" (he asked and I said dad probably doesn't know i drive like that - which was complete BS of course my old man encouraged me to drive it hard lol)

they have a shit job and i respect them a lot but they sure don't do themselves favours occasionally.

hehe of course but i never knew it wasnt a nono, like the times when there is someone going like 20 and you burn around real fast even though its safe to do so it still feels like your'e being naughty.

not too many one lane roads around where i drive though and if they are theyre too small to be impatient on...

again i'm just a patient driver, whenever i get in the car with an aggressive driver i'm like, whats the bloody rush dude??

I don't know all the details, and I'm not taking any sides because of that.

But let me ask this: How long was the stretch of road from where you started overtaking, to the crest of the hill?

How sharp was the crest? How steep were either sides of the hill? Could you see down the other side of the hill before you go over the crest?

What if a P-plater came flying over that hill at 50-60km/h?

Do you think he would have been able to stop in time before landing on your bonnet and his engine in your lap?

The only reason I ask this is because there's a hill near my place which has steep gradients on both sides, and people FLY over the crest and often grab a bit of air before plunking down on the other side and swerving back into control. If someone were to try and overtake there, it would be suicide.

But yes, it's entirely possible that you encountered overzealous cops...

it's not easy to explain but the hill goes a very long way then flatens out so you have a very long clear view (they say you need about 2 football feilds to stop at 60km so i had about 10 veiw). the police car was the oncoming traffic & he was so far up the road he pulled over & waited till i went past. i just new he wanted to talk to me (why else pull over) but didn't stop because my home was about 2 corners away & he didn't even flash me until i almost stoped to enter my home.

now if i was doing something that looked ilegal most police spin arround & hit lights he hadn't even done his u turn before i turned further up st.

i posted not to wine or say gee wiss, but from info sarg told me true or not (your call) i thought others might wish to be aware.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...