How fast to beat a speed Camera?

How fast to beat a speed Camera?

Author
Discussion

Hoppy2008

Original Poster:

2,496 posts

195 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
Is it possible to drive past a speed camera at such a high speed that the camera is "too slow" to detect you?
Purely a hypothetical question.
Hoppy

Fly Boy

1,282 posts

241 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
iirc Clarkson tried this on TG a while back

Tuscan 170+ cool

I'm sure someone will post a youtube link, unable to from work...

FB

Hoppy2008

Original Poster:

2,496 posts

195 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
Thanks Flyboy..
Thats Interesting.

C.A.R.

3,967 posts

188 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
Indeed Clarkson did it, whilst the camera detected the car in the first photo it failed to capture it in the second because the car had already gone by.

Not something that you'll likely need to know/use anyway, but that's Top Gear for you!

Dwight VanDriver

6,583 posts

244 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
From elsewhere

Myth 1: One in five drivers believe you can drive fast enough to beat a speed camera.

The reality is that the vehicle would need to be travelling at 171mph or above to technically 'outrun' A STANDARD speed camera; few cars on the road are capable of that kind of speed. Even if you do have such a car, attempting this is a very high risk strategy, as just 1 mph below 171 and… well it’s safe to say that most judges take a very dim view indeed of drivers who drive 100 mph over the limit and you will end up in the clink for quite some time.

dvd

FishFace

3,790 posts

208 months

The Black Duke

1,642 posts

193 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
Dwight VanDriver said:
From elsewhere

Myth 1: One in five drivers believe you can drive fast enough to beat a speed camera.

The reality is that the vehicle would need to be travelling at 171mph or above to technically 'outrun' A STANDARD speed camera; few cars on the road are capable of that kind of speed. Even if you do have such a car, attempting this is a very high risk strategy, as just 1 mph below 171 and… well it’s safe to say that most judges take a very dim view indeed of drivers who drive 100 mph over the limit and you will end up in the clink for quite some time.

dvd
That means you will have to be going abou 200ish to make sure.


Also, does this mean that if a car is photographed and then in the next photograph the car is not present will the driver be prosecuted anyway as the only other way the car could have disappeared would be if the car had been teleported or flew?

a boardman

1,316 posts

200 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
and if the camera is pointing down hill you may need to travel even faster.

MK4 Slowride

10,028 posts

208 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
Mythbusters tried this with a Murci Lambo (orange one) & failed to fool it with speed or other ingenius contraptions.

jimmy306

3,691 posts

187 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
MK4 Slowride said:
Mythbusters tried this with a Murci Lambo (orange one) & failed to fool it with speed or other ingenius contraptions.
I think the rules are different in the US of A, and they dont need 2 photo's, as the british GATSO's do.

IIRC with the Top Gear test at 170+ (or whatever speed it was they were doing) the camera failed to detect the tuscan at all and didnt activate, as opposed to the car not being there for the second photo. I dont think anything other then then a fighter jet could pull that off...

James


Edited by jimmy306 on Friday 19th September 16:22

wideload

754 posts

208 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
Dwight VanDriver said:
From elsewhere

Myth 1: One in five drivers believe you can drive fast enough to beat a speed camera.

The reality is that the vehicle would need to be travelling at 171mph or above to technically 'outrun' A STANDARD speed camera; few cars on the road are capable of that kind of speed. Even if you do have such a car, attempting this is a very high risk strategy, as just 1 mph below 171 and… well it’s safe to say that most judges take a very dim view indeed of drivers who drive 100 mph over the limit and you will end up in the clink for quite some time.

dvd
Wasn't there a biker that got prosecuted and banned for a long time after being pinged by a laser at 171 even though it was above their highest limit?

The Black Duke

1,642 posts

193 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
Hoppy2008 said:
Is it possible to drive past a speed camera at such a high speed that the camera is "too slow" to detect you?
Purely a hypothetical question.
Hoppy
Is it possible to drive past a speed camera so slow that its too fast to detect you? Pureley a hypothetical question.

spikeyhead

17,317 posts

197 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
The Black Duke said:
Is it possible to drive past a speed camera so slow that its too fast to detect you? Pureley a hypothetical question.
If you drive past it at below the limit, it won't trigger but the radar part of the speed detector will still know that you're there.

However you do need to be traveling at some speed for the radar to detect you, travel past infinitely slowly and it won't detect you, not sure what the limits are but I suspect that more than walking pace and it will detect.

Cpn Jack Spanner

2,632 posts

205 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
What if your car is shaped like a stealth fighter, all wierd angles and radar obsorbing sorbothane?


Brett928S2

1,504 posts

215 months

Friday 19th September 2008
quotequote all
Hi smile

I may be wrong but I thought the Top Gear thing was 161 mph...and it did beat it ??

All the best Brett smile