Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have to write this thing on "whether speed cameras are effective?"

what do you think?

Are they completely unnecessary?

Are they completely revenue-raising or do you think there is some need for them on a partial level?

Just some things to think about

Apparently "when travelling between 60 and 80 km/h, the vehicle occupants' risk of a fatality or serious injury crash doubled for each 5 km/h increase in travelling speed."

According to a study from University of Queensland: "speed cameras cut the average speed by 1-15 percent and the percentage of vehicles that exceeded local speed limits between 14 percent and 65 percent"

On the flip side it's said that as speeding tickets take so long to come in the mail, there's nothing to indicate to the driver that s/he should modify his driving habits and in this space between him/her getting booked they could continue to drive at excessive speeds and may injure people.

As Victoria is the only state that doesn't have signs notifying people they are approaching a fixed speeding camera, to what extent do you think they are (or are not) revenue raisers.

So please share your opinion or any stories you might have. I read on somewhere on SAU a while ago that someone saw a cop with a speed trap planting himself outside of a Queensland town when they were evacuating from the floods.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/381194-opinions-on-speed-cameras/
Share on other sites

^ thought they did have signs on fixed cameras...

the white ones with blue writing "speed cameras operate in Victoria" then there's always a camera close by.....

nah. they're a few on the eastern freeway, there are no fixed cameras on the eastern.

They do slow people down, the problem is they only slow people down at the point of the speed camera, then people just hit the gas again.

But honestly as much as we hate them, can you imagine our roads with no speed or red light cameras at intersections and freeways? would be a mess

Having said that i believe that the correlation between road toll dropping and more cameras going up is not correct. The way see it the drop in the road toll is due to people upgrading into safer cars and not the rise in cameras going up.

Edited by SKYL1N

They were off for a while there, they are back on now. At least for outright speed.

I went through them yesterday, they still IR flash you. Which they were not doing for a while.

http://www.camerassavelives.vic.gov.au/home/locations/

Anything that adverts your attention from the road is deemed dangerous and distracting to the driver. Accidents by in attention and or distraction has a greater effect than the stats stipluated by governments.

If speed camera's are in fact road safety cameras why then is every drive capelled to look at there speedo more than the road?

If a mobile phone can kill being a distraction then what is speedo watching?

Apparently "when travelling between 60 and 80 km/h, the vehicle occupants' risk of a fatality or serious injury crash doubled for each 5 km/h increase in travelling speed."

Yeah? Is that the same for other countries?

Is it a statement referring to if the car ends up hitting something stationary, then the chance of the occupants living decreases? I find this hard to believe, as with all new cars and greater safety, the speed would be increasing as we speak (more new cars being sold etc.)

Perhaps statistically there are slower speed limits and more traffic on the road slowing down due to congestion so wouldn't it decrease?

Would you say 50 years ago this number would be different? I would hazard a guess to say if you were doing 40km/h your chance of death would be higher than now due to car safety and road design?

Really, I think the whole speed camera statement helping the traffic safety is complete bull$hit.

Ask yourself this....

How many people have jumped to their death off the Westgate bridge Vs how many have died due to road/driving accidents on the Westgate Bridge?! :whistling:

touché

Thanks for the input guys. Keep em coming if you or anyone else has anything to add

Check out these sites too. There's a load of reseach and stats that may be useful.

I think speed cameras are a way of life now and we just have to live with them. The pros and cons sort of balance each other out. Interestingly, the new Australian National Road Safety Strategy states that road infrastructure improvements (i.e. safer roads) are where the biggest gains will be in further reducing the road toll, not continuing to try to flog the education/enforcement thing.

TAC Road Saftey Site

AU Road Safety Strategy

MUARC

Good luck

Dave

anyone who has tried speeding down a winding road that they dont know ,

will know how dangerous it can be to keep looking at your speedo :ninja:

Problem is as stated, people will slow down for a camera then drive like a lunatic to the next one, so the cameras really arent doing alot of good..i really think Undercover or unmarked police cars are a better idea.

Have them in traffic just cruising and wait for the idiots that stand out from the pack, not the guy safely doing 10kms over the limit but the idiots, who floor it in traffic or are swerving around jumping 3 lanes of traffic, or on their phone swerving or are braking for no reason on a busy freeway or tailgaters etc etc you get the idea?..

We have all been cruising along abiding to the laws and there is always some fool that sticks out from the pack and gets away with it while you get a fine for doing 5kms over when there is no-one near you for miles..How is that unsafe?? The TV ads tell us if someone steps on the road and you are going 5kms too fast they get run over and it is your fault but really, the Way i see it if someone steps on the road in front of a moving vehicle, it is there fault for walking in front of that moving vehicle not the driver for going a few KMs over..

i drive around all day and I could pull so many people up everyday that I'm sure I could easily reach a quota..Now the cost of this, well my car uses a tank of fuel every 2 days in Melbourne traffic 9hrs a day..thats about 40$ in fuel a day possible less in a more economical car,to have it running and a days wage for the driver..theres a person sitting on their butt in a camera car all day doing nothing..there is people installing and maintaining cameras all the time..get them on the road..

No, cameras are nothing but a copout for people that dont want to do any ACTUAL work..its all too easy to get a camera to do the work take the blame and make the money. Then again most of us are guilty of bludging at work arent we..Especially those with government jobs..

Now I do however believe red light cameras are a good idea, without them people are just stupid..Which people?? Well anyone that accelerates when they see a orange light is an idiot..if you cant get through at the speed you are currently doing you brake simple as that..people are always pushing the limits at red lights and it is very dangerous.

Anyway on another note,I really do think mobile phones are a bigger concern than speeding now anyway, driving around melbourne all day everyday I can tell you that i reckon 1 in 5 is on their phone almost constantly and yes I am guilty, but, There is a time and place for everything..I dont think there is anything wrong with talking on your phone. I do it alot and find it can actually be quite relaxing and takes your mind off the stress of traffic whilst also keeping you alert and awake, it makes tiresome trips go by quicker. and really it is no different from talking to a friend sitting next to you in the car. Also, (this may be pushing it) but browsing the net while stuck at traffic lights is also very relaxing..

but... using your phone, dialling numbers texting etc whilst driving is evil and I see people swerving all over the place all the time because of it....problem is how do you ban one and not the other?

Anyway that my rant for the night, I have had a few beers so it probably wont make sense in the morning :cheers:

I have to disagree with one of your points there, Arthur.

Unmarked/undercover police cars don't stop people from speeding.

It's the marked, blue n white cars that cause people to drive below the limit.

Remember the strike the coppers were having earlier this year? They would park their cars close to speed cameras and have their lights flashing to deter motorists from speeding.

The figures can be found somewhere on the net but this caused a high loss for government revenue in road fines ;)

I.e less people speeding.

I guess the unmarked cars will work well for the paranoid motorists, though.

I do agree with you about the idiots on the phone. I even saw a guy swerving between two lanes just yesterday, only to see he was using his iPad as I passed him.

Something else I see a lot of, are stupid women doing their make up and almost causing an accident.

People are running from serious trouble and cops still have the time and audacity to speed trap them???

I have to write this thing on "whether speed cameras are effective?"

what do you think?

Are they completely unnecessary?

Are they completely revenue-raising or do you think there is some need for them on a partial level?

Just some things to think about

Apparently "when travelling between 60 and 80 km/h, the vehicle occupants' risk of a fatality or serious injury crash doubled for each 5 km/h increase in travelling speed."

According to a study from University of Queensland: "speed cameras cut the average speed by 1-15 percent and the percentage of vehicles that exceeded local speed limits between 14 percent and 65 percent"

On the flip side it's said that as speeding tickets take so long to come in the mail, there's nothing to indicate to the driver that s/he should modify his driving habits and in this space between him/her getting booked they could continue to drive at excessive speeds and may injure people.

As Victoria is the only state that doesn't have signs notifying people they are approaching a fixed speeding camera, to what extent do you think they are (or are not) revenue raisers.

So please share your opinion or any stories you might have. I read on somewhere on SAU a while ago that someone saw a cop with a speed trap planting himself outside of a Queensland town when they were evacuating from the floods.

Apparently "when travelling between 60 and 80 km/h, the vehicle occupants' risk of a fatality or serious injury crash doubled for each 5 km/h increase in travelling speed."

Obviously the risk of injury increases with increased speed, but first you have to have the crash.

I haven't had a serious crash in over 30 year of driving, yet I have received a few speeding tickets during that same period. I have NEVER been involved in a crash that had any element of excessive or inappropriate speed. In fact, the 2 most recent collisions I was basically stationary! (1 was in a shopping centre car park, the other I was stationary waiting the car in front to do a right turn).

In a disproof of the arguments, there were 2 incidents in recent times. Firstly, top cop Ken Lay was nailed by a speed camera, but wasn't involved in any collisions. And secondly, (former) police minister Cameron was involved in a collision where he wasn't speeding (by his own admission, just not paying attention).

All these arguments for cameras are based on statistics. There is a saying about statistics - "there are lies, damned lies, and there are statistics".

I will admit to having generally slowed down on the roads, but not because I believe the arguments in favour of cameras. I have slowed down because I no longer wish to contribute to the coffers of Victoria.

The thing about Publishing statistics is that we, the readers, don't know how accurate they are. The government can make up numbers to however they see fit.

The worst one is, "motorcyclists have 36 times more risk on the road". Is this an average? Does it refer to city driving? Does it mean if the rider is a douche? The whole scare tactic is stupid.

And sure, going 5kph more may double the risk. But is that for an alert driver or some dumbarse who's not paying attention?

Here's a question for you;

Who's more likely to have an accident?

- A vehicle travelling at 100kph with a driver who is paying attention and has their eyes on the road, or

- A vehicle travelling at 80kph with the driver concentrating more on the radio and looking at the speedo every second?

Ergo, "an extra 5kph doubles risk of an accident" is an incorrect and sly statement - it's a play on words.

Yes, it doubles the distance it takes for one to react but in no way does it double "the risk."

A pre-occupied driver who's not paying attention is where the major risk lies.

I will admit to having generally slowed down on the roads, but not because I believe the arguments in favour of cameras. I have slowed down because I no longer wish to contribute to the coffers of Victoria.

+1

Which further proves my point. The reason people reduce speed is not because it's "safer" but because they simply don't wanna give free money to the government.

What a way to spend a Sunday. Blabbing on about speed cameras. Time for a beer ;)

I have to disagree with one of your points there, Arthur.

Unmarked/undercover police cars don't stop people from speeding.

It's the marked, blue n white cars that cause people to drive below the limit.

I do see what you mean, but my theory wasnt aimed at prevention.

It is aimed at catching the real dumbasses doing stupid dangerous shit I see on the road everyday, instead of pointlessly criminalizing everybody for harmless misdemeanors.

It is these tactics that haves people accusing them of revenue raising..while they do make an easy dollar off everybody, do they really get the fools off the road, isn't that the real problem.

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

    • Next on the to-do list was an oil and filter change. Nothing exciting to add here except the oil filter is in a really stupid place (facing the engine mount/subframe/steering rack). GReddy do a relocation kit which puts it towards the gearbox, I would have preferred towards the front but there's obviously a lot more stuff there. Something I'll have to look at for the next service perhaps. First time using Valvoline oil, although I can't see it being any different to most other brands Nice... The oil filter location... At least the subframe wont rust any time soon I picked up a genuine fuel filter, this is part of the fuel pump assembly inside the fuel tank. Access can be found underneath the rear seat, you'll see this triangular cover Remove the 3x plastic 10mm nuts and lift the cover up, pushing the rubber grommet through The yellow fuel line clips push out in opposite directions, remove these completely. The two moulded fuel lines can now pull upwards to disconnect, along with the wire electrical plug. There's 8x 8mm bolts that secure the black retaining ring. The fuel pump assembly is now ready to lift out. Be mindful of the fuel hose on the side, the hose clamp on mine was catching the hose preventing it from lifting up The fuel pump/filter has an upper and lower section held on by 4 pressure clips. These did take a little bit of force, it sounded like the plastic tabs were going to break but they didn't (don't worry!) The lower section helps mount the fuel pump, there's a circular rubber gasket/grommet/seal thing on the bottom where the sock is. Undo the hose clip on the short fuel hose on the side to disconnect it from the 3 way distribution pipe to be able to lift the upper half away. Don't forget to unplug the fuel pump too! There's a few rubber O rings that will need transferring to the new filter housing, I show these in the video at the bottom of this write up. Reassembly is the reverse Here's a photo of the new filter installed, you'll be able to see where the tabs are more clearing against the yellow OEM plastic Once the assembly is re-installed, I turned the engine over a few times to help build up fuel pressure. I did panic when the car stopped turning over but I could hear the fuel pump making a noise. It eventually started and has been fine since. Found my 'lucky' coin underneath the rear seat too The Youtube video can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLJ65pmQt44&t=6s
    • It was picked up on the MOT/Inspection that the offside front wheel bearing had excessive play along with the ball joint. It made sense to do both sides so I sourced a pair of spare IS200 hubs to do the swap. Unfortunately I don't have any photos of the strip down but here's a quick run down. On the back of the hub is a large circular dust cover, using a flat head screw driver and a mallet I prised it off. Underneath will reveal a 32mm hub nut (impact gun recommended). With the hub nut removed the ABS ring can be removed (I ended up using a magnetic pick up tool to help). Next up is to remove the stub axle, this was a little trickier due to limited tools. I tried a 3 leg puller but the gap between the hub and stub axle wasn't enough for the legs to get in and under. Next option was a lump hammer and someone pulling the stub axle at the same time. After a few heavy hits it released. The lower bearing race had seized itself onto the stub axle, which was fine because I was replacing them anyway. With the upper bearing race removed and the grease cleaned off they looked like this The left one looked pristine inside but gave us the most trouble. The right one had some surface rust but came apart in a single hit, figure that out?! I got a local garage to press the new wheel bearings in, reassemble was the opposite and didn't take long at all. Removing the hub itself was simple. Starting with removing the brake caliper, 2x 14mm bolts for the caliper slider and 2x 19mm? for the carrier > hub bolts. I used a cable tie to secure the caliper to the upper arm so it was out of the way, there's a 10mm bolt securing the ABS sensor on. With the brake disc removed from the hub next are the three castle nuts for the upper and lower ball joints and track rod end. Two of these had their own R clip and one split pin. A few hits with the hammer and they're released (I left the castle nuts on by a couple of turns), the track rod ends gave me the most grief and I may have nipped the boots (oops). Fitting is the reversal and is very quick and easy to do. The lower ball joints are held onto the hub by 2x 17mm bolts. The castle nut did increase in socket size to 22mm from memory (this may vary from supplier) The two front tyres weren't in great condition, so I had those replaced with some budget tyres for the time being. I'll be replacing the wheels and tyres in the future, this was to get me on the road without the worry of the police hassling me.
    • Yep, the closest base tune available was for the GTT, I went with that and made all the logical changes I could find to convert it to Naturally Aspirated. It will rev fine in Neutral to redline but it will be cutting nearly 50% fuel the whole way.  If I let it tune the fuel map to start with that much less fuel it wont run right and has a hard time applying corrections.  These 50% cuts are with a fuel map already about half of what the GTT tune had.  I was having a whole lot of bogging when applying any throttle but seem to have fixed that for no load situations with very aggressive transient throttle settings. I made the corrections to my injectors with data I found for them online, FBCJC100 flowing 306cc.  I'll have to look to see if I can find the Cam section. I have the Bosch 4.9 from Haltech. My manifold pressure when watching it live is always in -5.9 psi/inHg
    • Hi My Tokico BM50 Brake master cylinder has a leak from the hole between the two outlets (M10x1) for brake pipes, I have attached a photo. Can anyone tell me what that hole is and what has failed to allow brake fluid to escape from it, I have looked on line and asked questions on UK forums but can not find the answer, if anyone can enlighten me I would be most grateful.
    • It will be a software setting. I don't believe many on here ever used AEM. And they're now a discontinued product,that's really hard to find any easy answers on. If it were Link or Haltech, someone would be able to just send you a ECU file though.
×
×
  • Create New...