 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General MotorcyclesHarleyYamahaSportbikesRacingOff-roadSnowmobilesTechnicalCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupClassic (UK Group)Related Topics CarsBoatsMore Topics ... |
Motorcycle Forum / Country Specific / UK Group / July 2008Satnav speed accuracy
I've read here that Sat nav actual speed displayed is very accurate, so I was surprised to see a large difference in displayed speed to that of my speedo. I was given a Garmin Zumo 550, which I've only stuck in the car at present. It's a nice bit of kit, well made, but I really hope you can get other voices... It consistently shows an over-read on the car speedo of 4mph at lower speeds and 6mph at higher speeds. At 70 indicated this means I'm actually only travelling at 64. I would have thought that this would have put me at odds with other motorway users, but my speed always seemed comparable to theirs. Similarly, when I go through those flashing speed signs in villages etc I find that doing 42 in a 40 gets the sign flashing (which would be 35 on the Garmin), and 39 doesn't, which seems odd if my car speedo is that far out. As soon as I can work out a good mount on the Blackbird I'll compare it on that, but is the Garmin always accurate?  SignatureRegards, Danny http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site) (apparently bad grammar but I like it that way...) <GPS> >It consistently shows an over-read on the car speedo of 4mph at lower >speeds and 6mph at higher speeds. At 70 indicated this means I'm >actually only travelling at 64. Sounds about right. >I would have thought that this would >have put me at odds with other motorway users, but my speed always >seemed comparable to theirs. That's because all speedos are designed to over-read, usually by around 10%, which is what you're seeing. >Similarly, when I go through those >flashing speed signs in villages etc I find that doing 42 in a 40 gets >the sign flashing (which would be 35 on the Garmin), and 39 doesn't, >which seems odd if my car speedo is that far out. Those type of 'display-your-speed' signs aren't neccessarily properly calibrated. >As soon as I can work out a good mount on the Blackbird I'll compare >it on that, but is the Garmin always accurate? I'd tend to think so. Signature_______ .'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com) \`\ | /`/ `\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10 `\|/` ` > <GPS> > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > I'd tend to think so. Thanks, so I can drive at an indicated 76 at least without getting nicked :) Bad news, though, since it makes my Isuzu Bighorn even slower than I thought it was. Just got to tackle the Blackbird mount, which is actually the only reason I got the Garmin. I can navigate to Paris (and the hotel by the Eiffel Tower) easily, but I cannot get to somewhere like Montmatre and back in darkness without getting royally lost. SignatureRegards, Danny http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site) (apparently bad grammar but I like it that way...) > Thanks, so I can drive at an indicated 76 at least without getting > nicked :) On motorways, I set the Saab's cruise control for a sat-nav accurate 78 mph, which equates to about an indicated 83-84 mph on the speedo. ACPO guidelines state you shouldn't be nicked for any speed under <the speed limit> + <10% of the limit> + 2 mph, so 70+7+2=79 mph threshold, and that's a *calibrated* 79 mph, ie a true (sat nav) figure. I've been under "safety partnership" (christ, what a cobblers phrase) speed camera vans at a calibrated 78 mph and never had a problem, but I happen to know they're now nicking at a (calibrated/sat nav) 81 mph in a lot of places, so watch you don't stray over if you don't have cruise control (or there's a steep downhill gradient). SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport >>Similarly, when I go through those flashing speed signs in villages >>etc I find that doing 42 in a 40 gets the sign flashing (which would [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Those type of 'display-your-speed' signs aren't neccessarily properly >calibrated. I've seen a rash of those things around here (Hampshire) recently that seem to be deliberately calibrated low. This morning one went off whilst travelling through a 40 mph section at about 37-38 mph. I can see what they're trying to do here but I expect the ignore factor will quickly increase if they do that. SignatureCB500 (blue + flies) > I've seen a rash of those things around here (Hampshire) recently that > seem to be deliberately calibrated low. This morning one went off whilst > travelling through a 40 mph section at about 37-38 mph. > > I can see what they're trying to do here but I expect the ignore > factor will quickly increase if they do that. They're the ones I'm thinking off - round Meon Valley way. The one in particular was at Bedhampton, as I happened to have the GPS on at the time. SignatureRegards, Danny http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site) (apparently bad grammar but I like it that way...) Nick spoke: > I've seen a rash of those things around here (Hampshire) recently that > seem to be deliberately calibrated low. This morning one went off whilst > travelling through a 40 mph section at about 37-38 mph. > > I can see what they're trying to do here but I expect the ignore > factor will quickly increase if they do that. There is one around here that is actually in a 40 limit, approaching a 30 limit, but is calibrated to 30mph, so doing anything over 30 triggers it in the 40 limit. SignatureRob_P UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl) FJ1200, CCM130 Benelli Cabiolet Easily confused. > I've seen a rash of those things around here (Hampshire) recently that > seem to be deliberately calibrated low. This morning one went off whilst > travelling through a 40 mph section at about 37-38 mph. > > I can see what they're trying to do here but I expect the ignore > factor will quickly increase if they do that. We've got quite a special one on the A1020 in a 40mph zone that flashes your speed at you at any speed over 30mph. It's nice and bright, and if you're the first vehicle to arrive at it in a while, people seem to be surprised by it lighting up and flashing. I'm still waiting for it to cause a wreck because I often see people brake from 40 down to 30 real suddenly and the driver behind them doesn't expect it because, hey, it's a 40 zone. Still, they'll probably use the wreck that their poxy 'safety' sign causes as the excuse to lower the limit from 40 to 30 down there. -- Wayne >>>Similarly, when I go through those flashing speed signs in villages >>>etc I find that doing 42 in a 40 gets the sign flashing (which would [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >I can see what they're trying to do here but I expect the ignore >factor will quickly increase if they do that. The lowest speed I've ever set one off in a 30 was at 22mph. There's a 'Slow Down'one that I occasionally pass, just before a blind bend on a bridge. It flashes even when the traffic queue is doing 2 mph.... Signaturefrom Kim Bolton >>>Similarly, when I go through those flashing speed signs in villages >>>etc I find that doing 42 in a 40 gets the sign flashing (which would [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I can see what they're trying to do here but I expect the ignore > factor will quickly increase if they do that. And it's my guess that the number of "high" readings are being recorded. Not a problem from a prosecution POV, but get enough "overs" and you can bet a proper speed cam will be implanted in place of the warning tool. It's happend on two roads I use regularly and both roads used to be 40 limits, but were dropped to 30 and had these "warning" tools. Both now have rear facing cams. SignatureBeav VN 750 Zed 1000 OMF# 19 "Ace" <b.rogers@ifrance.com> escribió en el mensaje > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:15:06 +0100, Danny >>it on that, but is the Garmin always accurate? > I'd tend to think so. I'd give a try to comparation with milestones. On a highway limited to 120km/h I did that speed according to the GPS and ¡ding! "kilometer"stones [1] appeared exactly every 30 seconds. Ace spoke: > <GPS> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > That's because all speedos are designed to over-read, usually by > around 10%, which is what you're seeing. I think Sir will find that speedos are, by law, allowed to be accurate or over-read my a *maximum* of 10% Which leads to a bit of a conundrum WRT ACPO guidelines on speeding - i.e. limit + 10% + 3mph, so in a 70 limit, if you speedo over reads by 10%, you should be safe at anything up to an indicated 88mph Ob: GPS speed accuracy - discounting the fact that plod repeatedly assert that they are *not* accurate - shirley they can only be accurate on flat level ground over a reasonable distance? bends, gradients etc. would distort the satellite speed calculations? SignatureRob_P UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl) FJ1200, CCM130 Benelli Cabiolet Easily confused. > > That's because all speedos are designed to over-read, usually by > > around 10%, which is what you're seeing. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > level ground over a reasonable distance? bends, gradients etc. would > distort the satellite speed calculations? A recent court case for speeding went in favour of the GPS accuracy, and the driver was let off the penalty. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.me.com/andrewhewitt1/> > Ob: GPS speed accuracy - discounting the fact that plod repeatedly > assert that they are not accurate - shirley they can only be accurate > on flat level ground over a reasonable distance? bends, gradients > etc. would distort the satellite speed calculations? *ahem* <steps up to lectern> Depends. I suspect[1] most vehicle GPS speed readings are 2D, in that they give you your horizontal speed, so if you're going down a 1 in 5 hill at 50mph, the GPS will read 49mph. Other than that, accuracy will be at best accurate to +/- 0.25mph, with good signal from 6 or more satellites. With a weak signal from fewer satellites, it could be completely wrong. However, except for the really cheap chips, each reading will come with an accuracy estimate, and with 3 sats, and OK signal, I've never seen one get worse than +/- 3 mph. On the open road in good weather, I'd expect +/- 1mph easily. Technically, all those accuracies should be "90% chance of being within +/-" whatever. [1] as every one I've ever dealt with has been >> Ob: GPS speed accuracy - discounting the fact that plod repeatedly >> assert that they are not accurate - shirley they can only be accurate [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >they give you your horizontal speed, so if you're going down a 1 in 5 >hill at 50mph, the GPS will read 49mph. Indeed. Although I've never been able to see the difference between my old 3-D garmin and the later car-biased 2-D sat-navs. I used to have them side-by-side when doing a lot of mountain driving, as it's sometimes really useful to have the altitude displayed too. <SNIP> >Technically, all those accuracies should be "90% chance of being within >+/-" whatever. Confidence Interval. Is that the term you're avoiding using? Signature_______ .'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com) \`\ | /`/ `\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10 `\|/` ` > > Technically, all those accuracies should be "90% chance of being > > within +/-" whatever. > > Confidence Interval. Is that the term you're avoiding using? Sort of, 2nd standard deviation was what I was specifically avoiding. >Other than that, accuracy will be at best accurate to +/- 0.25mph, with >good signal from 6 or more satellites. With a weak signal from fewer >satellites, it could be completely wrong. You mean I didn't really hit a maximum of 313mph on the A10 south of Paris in 2004? Bum. Signature| ___ Salad Dodger |/ \ _/_____\_ GL1500SEV/CBR1100XXX/CBX1000Z |_\_____/_| ..98154../..30234.../..32080. (>|_|_|<) TPPFATUICG#7 DIAABTCOD#9 WG* |__|_|__| BOTAFOT #70 BOTAFOF #09 PM#5 \ |^| / IbW#0 & KotIbW# BotTOS#6 GP#4 \|^|/ ANORAK#17 IbB#4 YTC#4 two#11 '^' RBR Clues: 42 Pts:0695 Miles:2498 > > Other than that, accuracy will be at best accurate to +/- 0.25mph, > > with good signal from 6 or more satellites. With a weak signal from [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Paris in 2004? > Bum. My TomTom Go has an apparently un-switch-offable feature which tells you in red flashing numbers and shrill bleeping that you're very over the speed limit. Unlike the speed display, it works off the instantaneous calculation, and is very, very, very annoying every time I drive under a tree or something. > > > Other than that, accuracy will be at best accurate to +/- 0.25mph, > > > with good signal from 6 or more satellites. With a weak signal from [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > instantaneous calculation, and is very, very, very annoying every time > I drive under a tree or something. You should be able to disable the bleeping. SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport > > My TomTom Go has an apparently un-switch-offable feature which tells > > you in red flashing numbers and shrill bleeping that you're very [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You should be able to disable the bleeping. I have every 'safety' option switched off, and I always have the sound turned off anyway. I've taken to turning the stereo up. > > > My TomTom Go has an apparently un-switch-offable feature which tells > > > you in red flashing numbers and shrill bleeping that you're very [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > I've taken to turning the stereo up. Try emailing TomTom (Warning! Crap support department!) ... I had a One as my first sat-nav, and it didn't beep at me, and neither does my 910. SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport >> > Other than that, accuracy will be at best accurate to +/- 0.25mph, >> > with good signal from 6 or more satellites. With a weak signal from [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >you in red flashing numbers and shrill bleeping that you're very over >the speed limit. My pikey michelin one does that I wish it could at least get the road speed right on occasions Signaturegeoff >My TomTom Go has an apparently un-switch-offable feature which tells >you in red flashing numbers and shrill bleeping that you're very over >the speed limit. Unlike the speed display, it works off the >instantaneous calculation, and is very, very, very annoying every time >I drive under a tree or something. Our TomTom Go XL has the same feature, but it's certainly user-selectable. Can't remember OTTOMH how, but I'll try it later to see. Signature_______ .'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com) \`\ | /`/ `\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10 `\|/` ` >>My TomTom Go has an apparently un-switch-offable feature which tells >>you in red flashing numbers and shrill bleeping that you're very over [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Our TomTom Go XL has the same feature, Doh! It's a "One XL", not a Go. Signature_______ .'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com) \`\ | /`/ `\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10 `\|/` ` > I think Sir will find that speedos are, by law, allowed to be accurate or > over-read my a *maximum* of 10% Stupid question on this one ... Is it just the speedo that overreads? Or does this impact the mileage recorded as well? -- Wayne "Anonymouslemming" <anonymouslemming@gmail.com> escribió en el mensaje >Stupid question on this one ... Is it just the speedo that overreads? Or does this impact the mileage recorded as well? My shite olde Audi has an over-reading speedo and accurated mileage recorder. And calculates near exact fuel economy (0.2 litres per 100km error) > "Anonymouslemming" <anonymouslemming@gmail.com> escribió en el mensaje > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > recorder. And calculates near exact fuel economy (0.2 litres per 100km > error) Without exception, all the vehicles I have ever checked have had fairly accurate odometers despite most having wildly optimistic[1] speedometers. The most accurate speedometers I've owned were on my 1981 Hondas, a CB900C and a CM400T. Both of them were equipped with 'Joan Claybrook Special' speedometers that maxed out at 85 mph. [1] reading 7 to 10% high Signature'07 FJR13AW '99 EX250-F13 OMF #7 >>>Stupid question on this one ... Is it just the speedo that overreads? >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Without exception, all the vehicles I have ever checked have had fairly >accurate odometers despite most having wildly optimistic[1] speedometers. It's cos the mechanism (at least in older vehicles) for odo and speedo are quite different. For the odo, the wheel turns a cable that turns a device that clicks over the miles. It's a direct mechanical linkage. For the speedo, the wheel turns the same cable, that turns a magnetic disk. This spinning disk induces a <checks web for correct terminology> eddy current in an aluminium disc attached to the speedo needle, which, interacting with the rotating magnetic field, induces a small torque in the disc, and hence speedo needle. This torque is resisted by a spring. Hopefully, you can see that getting the speedo mechanism to be accurate is a fair bit more complicated than getting the odo mechanism to be accurate. Of course, everything's digital nowadays, so gawd knowa how it works. SignatureChamp ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle To email me, neal at my domain should work. > Of course, everything's digital nowadays, so gawd knowa how it works. I don't know about modern ones, but on early digital speedo designs it was simply the same as the analogue system you described, but input into a digital display device. I recall having an argument with a mate after he claimed his (and mine) digital speedos were more accurate ... another mate, who worked at a garage, brought in a copy of the cutaway of a Vauxhall digital speedo to the pub a week later ... it was identical, apart from when the signal got to the digital display. I would think things have moved on since then though. Probably :) I would guess magnetic sensor outputting direct to digital nowadays? SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com> wrote in news:MPG.22f7ee9e1ba9734d989f03 @news.individual.de: >> Of course, everything's digital nowadays, so gawd knowa how it works. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Vauxhall digital speedo to the pub a week later ... it was identical, > apart from when the signal got to the digital display. and what a pile of crap those early Delco speedos were. My employer had a contract to assemble the electronics from a kit of parts sourced by GM. Our own stuff was pretty cheap & nasty but GM took it to the ultimate level... Signaturewessie at tesco dot net BMW R1150GS <speedos>[1] > and what a pile of crap those early Delco speedos were. My employer had a > contract to assemble the electronics from a kit of parts sourced by GM. Our > own stuff was pretty cheap & nasty but GM took it to the ultimate level... Seems to be a bit of a trait with GM. We were looking at new cars at the weekend and it seems that GM have managed to remove that quality feel from SAABs. The general feel just didn't hold a candle to Volvo or Volkswagen. [1]Just don't > <speedos>[1] >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > feel from SAABs. The general feel just didn't hold a candle to Volvo > or Volkswagen. I thought that GM was edging upmarket, or is that just the Vauxhall brand being distanced from GM Daewoo, aka Chevrolet? Signaturewessie at tesco dot net BMW R1150GS >> <speedos>[1] >>> and what a pile of crap those early Delco speedos were. My employer [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I thought that GM was edging upmarket, or is that just the Vauxhall brand > being distanced from GM Daewoo, aka Chevrolet? I'm no expert, so it's only the impression I took away at the weekend and it seems to be supported by the SAAB forums[1]. We haven't looked at Opel so can't comment on how they compare. [1]With the usual caveat about forums for enthusiasts. >>> <speedos>[1] >>>> and what a pile of crap those early Delco speedos were. My employer [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > [1]With the usual caveat about forums for enthusiasts. You should stick with the Great Red Shark. It's not a bad-looking car. > >>> <speedos>[1] > >>>> and what a pile of crap those early Delco speedos were. My employer [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > You should stick with the Great Red Shark. It's not a bad-looking car> Indeed, but I intend to complement it rather than replace it. Higgins@work spoke: > > You should stick with the Great Red Shark. It's not a > bad-looking car> > > Indeed, but I intend to complement it rather than > replace it. Er... what is this Great Red Shark? SignatureRob_P UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl) FJ1200, CCM130 Benelli Cabiolet Easily confused. > Higgins@work spoke: >>> You should stick with the Great Red Shark. It's not a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Er... what is this Great Red Shark? http://maserver.org/saab.jpg Higgins <the.best.names.are.gone@gmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? > http://maserver.org/saab.jpg Nice. The black one yours, too? (black 3-dr T16 here...) > Higgins <the.best.names.are.gone@gmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding much > like they were saying: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > (black 3-dr T16 here...) It was at the time but was ebayed shortly after the arrival of the red one. Higgins spoke: > > Er... what is this Great Red Shark? > > http://maserver.org/saab.jpg Ooookay! well, it is red,, it may well be great, but, to be honest with you, it looks f.ck all like a shark. SignatureRob_P UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl) FJ1200, CCM130 Benelli Cabiolet Easily confused. > Higgins spoke: >>> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Ooookay! well, it is red,, it may well be great, but, to be > honest with you, it looks f.ck all like a shark. I suggest that you take that up with the monotreme, who seems to have coined the phrase just today. >> Higgins spoke: >>>> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I suggest that you take that up with the monotreme, who seems to have > coined the phrase just today. Does nobody read books anymore? Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, platypus <monotreme@blueyonder.co.uk> typed >>> Higgins spoke: >>>>> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Does nobody read books anymore? It's these kids with their short attention sp... Ooh! Look! Something shiny! SignatureWicked Uncle Nigel - "He's hopeless, but he's honest" My position was (and, to be honest, largely remains) one of complete ambiguity. > Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, platypus > <monotreme@blueyonder.co.uk> typed [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > It's these kids with their short attention sp... Ooh! Look! Something > shiny! Prolly a Soviet ICBM. Fire a laser beam at it. Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, platypus <monotreme@blueyonder.co.uk> typed >> Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, platypus >> <monotreme@blueyonder.co.uk> typed [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Prolly a Soviet ICBM. Fire a laser beam at it. Righty-ho. <KZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP> OW! You bastard, you knew that was going to happen. SignatureWicked Uncle Nigel - "He's hopeless, but he's honest" My position was (and, to be honest, largely remains) one of complete ambiguity. >>>>> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Does nobody read books anymore? Some of us do. SignatureChamp ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle To email me, neal at my domain should work. >>>>>> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Some of us do. Are you ready for a library refresh? >>> Does nobody read books anymore? >> >> Some of us do. > >Are you ready for a library refresh? To my shame, I've made no dent on the initial drop. Been too busy watching TV. In my defence, it's been fairly high quality TV (e.g. 'Homicide', 'The World at War', and, my latest addiction, 'The Wire'). SignatureChamp ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle To email me, neal at my domain should work. > 'The Wire' Excellent. Series I is the best. We just finished watching Series IV after a marathon 11-hour session. McNulty is almost completely absent from that series. Best cop show on the planet. D. Signaturedes | 'what does it matter what he posts?' http://www.jr.co.il/terror/israel/index.html end the 'occupation': http://minilien.fr/a0k8xe ukrm: 'where it's "cool" to be stupid!' > Been too busy watching TV. In my defence, it's been fairly high > quality TV (e.g. 'Homicide', 'The World at War', and, my latest > addiction, 'The Wire'). George Pelecanos is one of my all time favorite authors. Have you read any of his novels? I guarantee satisfaction. Signature'07 FJR13AW '99 EX250-F13 OMF #7 >> Been too busy watching TV. In my defence, it's been fairly high >> quality TV (e.g. 'Homicide', 'The World at War', and, my latest >> addiction, 'The Wire'). > >George Pelecanos is one of my all time favorite authors. Have you >read any of his novels? I guarantee satisfaction. <googles> Ah, I'd only heard of David Simon wrt to The Wire. SignatureChamp ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle To email me, neal at my domain should work. >>> Been too busy watching TV. In my defence, it's been fairly high >>> quality TV (e.g. 'Homicide', 'The World at War', and, my latest [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > ><googles> Ah, I'd only heard of David Simon wrt to The Wire. <Googles> Never seen it, actually, but it doesn't sound quite as bad as I imagined. But the 12 pm start time probably explains why I've never done so. Signature_______ .'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com) \`\ | /`/ `\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10 `\|/` ` >>>> Does nobody read books anymore? >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > TV (e.g. 'Homicide', 'The World at War', and, my latest addiction, 'The > Wire'). /The Wire/ has restored my faith in mankind to make a decent TV series. It is peerless IMO. Good choice. Signaturep BotM#1 LotR#9 >> Been too busy watching TV. In my defence, it's been fairly high quality >> TV (e.g. 'Homicide', 'The World at War', and, my latest addiction, 'The >> Wire'). >/The Wire/ has restored my faith in mankind to make a decent TV series. >It is peerless IMO. Good choice. It is pretty amazing. Nearing the end of season 1, so I'd better download season 2. SignatureChamp Two standard issue crutches To email me, neal at my domain should work. On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:41:29 +0100, Champ <neal@champ.org.uk> said >>>> Does nobody read books anymore? >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >quality TV (e.g. 'Homicide', 'The World at War', and, my latest >addiction, 'The Wire'). Is Homicide still on? RT says it is but my Humax refuses to find it (even though now I've looked, it's still listed if I scroll through). <sets prog just in case> I really want to see season six "Subway" again, it was a brilliant episode. SignatureSnowleopard >^..^< crush >>Been too busy watching TV. In my defence, it's been fairly high >>quality TV (e.g. 'Homicide', 'The World at War', and, my latest [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > ><sets prog just in case> I think it's on ITV4 at 2am, or somesuch. SignatureChamp Two standard issue crutches To email me, neal at my domain should work. > >>>>> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? > >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Some of us do. I will be now I have specs I can f.cking read with...where's that Harry Potter book? SignatureLozzo >>> Higgins spoke: >>>>> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Does nobody read books anymore? I do, and I have read the book in question, but my powers of recall seem to have faded. >>>> Higgins spoke: >>>>>> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I do, and I have read the book in question, but my powers of recall > seem to have faded. Memory can be one of the first things to go. Platypus spoke: > >> Higgins spoke: > >>>> Er... what is this Great Red Shark? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Does nobody read books anymore? Now you've got me googling - OIC! Also, google showed up www.greatredshark.com - some 1990s Merkin band, and looks like all their stuff is downloadable in MP3 SignatureRob_P UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl) FJ1200, CCM130 Benelli Cabiolet Easily confused. > > Er... what is this Great Red Shark? > > http://maserver.org/saab.jpg *disappointed* I was thinking more http://www.murrayco.com/Corvette/red_corvette4.jpg SignatureChris > > > Er... what is this Great Red Shark? > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I was thinking more > http://www.murrayco.com/Corvette/red_corvette4.jpg <waves> Except mine's white & has alloy wheels. It is the only true shark car. SignatureKrusty www.MuddyStuff.co.uk Off-Road Classifieds '02 MV Senna '03 Tiger 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250 > <speedos>[1] > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > from SAABs. The general feel just didn't hold a candle to Volvo or > Volkswagen. Agreed 100%. The bombproof solidity that was a Saab trademark has definitely been ground down a bit by exposure to GM. I really like mine, but compared purely on interior trim lifespan, fit and finish, it's behind the best of the Germans, and a couple of the better Japanese companies. Shame really, coz the car's a belter, but to pretend otherwise would be silly. The upholstery is very good quality though, and the seats still every bit as good. SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport <SAABs> >>We were looking at new cars at the >> weekend and it seems that GM have managed to remove that quality feel [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The upholstery is very good quality though, and the seats still > every bit as good. Oh yes, SWMBO was particularly taken by the seats in the Aero TTiD, or whatever the abbreviation is, but it's just a tad over budget even VAT-free with discount. > <SAABs> > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > whatever the abbreviation is, but it's just a tad over budget even > VAT-free with discount. That's the problem; they're still charging premium prices new for stuff that's not built to the same standard it once was. SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport >> <SAABs> >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > That's the problem; they're still charging premium prices new for stuff > that's not built to the same standard it once was. Indeed, especially when the competition, at the moment, is a V70 D5 with lots of toys at just a sniff under 28,000 Euros. > >> <SAABs> > >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Indeed, especially when the competition, at the moment, is a V70 D5 with > lots of toys at just a sniff under 28,000 Euros. I'm probably going back to beemer for my next car, unless I buy something silly. SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport >>>> <SAABs> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > I'm probably going back to beemer for my next car, unless I buy > something silly. <stereotypes 'r' us> I don't think I'm enough of a c.nt to go that route. </sru> I do have a bit of a Scottish quandary in that I've never bought a new car in my life, almost as a point of principle. On the other hand, the deals are so good that the thought of a bargain is dragging me in that direction. The aforementioned V70 @ €28k seems to be commanding around €23k[1] at three years old. That's the sort of depreciation rate I like. [1]Allowing for the disparity between asking and actual selling prices. > >>>> <SAABs> > >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > </sru> heh. > I do have a bit of a Scottish quandary in that I've never bought a new > car in my life, almost as a point of principle. On the other hand, the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > [1]Allowing for the disparity between asking and actual selling prices. I haven't driven a Volvo for a long time ... not really my sort of thing, but I hear the more modern ones are a lot better, so maybe I should. I just prefer a more driver-orientated car. The Aero Sport is an excellent car, but I do miss beemer RWD silliness. I'm sort of thinking about a late, but not current, M5. But not this year. Maybe early next. SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport >I'm probably going back to beemer for my next car, unless I buy >something silly. I'm still waiting for my 'something silly'[1][2] to be built. Roll on September. [1] R36. [2] Mebbe not everyone's idea of silly, but it tickle my silly-bone, to be sure. Signature_______ .'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com) \`\ | /`/ `\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10 `\|/` ` > >I'm probably going back to beemer for my next car, unless I buy > >something silly. > > I'm still waiting for my 'something silly'[1][2] to be built. Roll on > September. Which Volvo was it you had and, assuming you considered another, how do the newer ones compare? >> >I'm probably going back to beemer for my next car, unless I buy >> >something silly. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Which Volvo was it you had and, assuming you considered another, how >do the newer ones compare? A 1999 V70 XC. Still got it, until the new baby arrives. The later ones got softer suspenders and slightly more off-road bias, e.g. with all-purpose tyres as standard. What I like(d) about mine was that it made a damned fine road car, excellent as a lux cruiser barge, but not too shabby in the twisties either. I had a 2003 model as a rental car in the US, and it seemed OK, but just that bit too soft. Also only available with normal auto box, which was shite, as they all are. If I'd been going for a new Volvo it'd have been the AWD T6 - more power, proper road rider and with a manual box option. Signature_______ .'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com) \`\ | /`/ `\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10 `\|/` ` > >I'm probably going back to beemer for my next car, unless I buy > >something silly. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > [2] Mebbe not everyone's idea of silly, but it tickle my silly-bone, > to be sure. There's no way I'd buy a new car, so that sort of thing is out for me. Interesting choice, mind. SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport >> I'm still waiting for my 'something silly'[1][2] to be built. Roll on >> September. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >There's no way I'd buy a new car, so that sort of thing is out for me. I've had a few cars from new, but it's not an absolute requirement, IYSWIM. We were considering nearly-new and ex-demo ones when we were thinking of the 3.2 model which has been out for a while, but the R36 only became available in April, so there aren't any out there. Of more importance, anyway, was the fact that we can get a 10% 'fleet' discount off a new car, but not off a 2nd-hand one. Only managed to screw another 1.5% off that, but it puts a new one at the same price as a 6-month old one, so it's a no-brainer really. >Interesting choice, mind. I really *need* that extra 50bhp :-) Signature_______ .'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com) \`\ | /`/ `\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10 `\|/` ` > >> I'm still waiting for my 'something silly'[1][2] to be built. Roll on > >> September. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > screw another 1.5% off that, but it puts a new one at the same price > as a 6-month old one, so it's a no-brainer really. I don't think I'd buy any car now that wasn't at least 3 years old - the depreciation hit is too much otherwise ... plus, with no garage at my place, it sits on the streets and gets scratched by schoolkids and their bags, so it'd depreciate even faster. > >Interesting choice, mind. > > I really *need* that extra 50bhp :-) It's the DSG box that intrigues me. SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport >> >> [1] R36. >I don't think I'd buy any car now that wasn't at least 3 years old - the >depreciation hit is too much otherwise ... plus, with no garage at my >place, it sits on the streets and gets scratched by schoolkids and their >bags, so it'd depreciate even faster. Well I'll grant you that, but the rest depends on how long you're planning to keep it. We paid about gbp23k for the Volvo, IIRC (6 months/20k miles, c/w ~gbp32k new) and kept it for 9 years, by which point it's worth next to nothing. Well, we've been offered gbp2k for it in p/x. So that works out to < gbp2.5k/year, which I consider to be entirely reasonable. YMMV. >> >Interesting choice, mind. >> >> I really *need* that extra 50bhp :-) > >It's the DSG box that intrigues me. Tested it only on the 3.2l version, but I was utterly blown away by it. I never thought I'd see the day, but I actually preferred it over a manual. Super-fast changes, executed _exactly_ when I say so, either just using the paddle to override the auto change, in which case it reverts to auto after perhaps 10-15 seconds, or in full manual mode. The latter does still have a kick-down function, but it's only activated by pressing the pedal all the way to the floor, with a very obvious step in the action, making it is possible to apply full throttle in a higher gear than it wants to be in without it changing down. I think I'd prefer it with the kick-down disabled, but it's so obvious it's not a problem. Oh, and I particularly like the way it blips the throttle to exactly match revs on the down-changes ;-) As smooth as a smooth thing with extra smoothiness. Signature_______ .'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com) \`\ | /`/ `\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10 `\|/` ` > >> >> [1] R36. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > it in p/x. So that works out to < gbp2.5k/year, which I consider to be > entirely reasonable. YMMV. Oh sure it is if you're going to do that, but I seriously wouldn't want to keep a car longer than, maybe, 2 or possibly 3 years ... I just get bored with them, plus I drive like a twat, so tend to rack up high maintenance bills as the thing ages, as I like to keep my cars (and bikes, for that matter) in tip-top condition. Plus until recently I do pretty high mileages, so within 4-5 years it'd be getting a bit ratty and leggy. > >> >Interesting choice, mind. > >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > match revs on the down-changes ;-) As smooth as a smooth thing with > extra smoothiness. Yeah I've seen reviews of them on TV, and it does look superb ... one side-by-side test put the DSG box-equipped car ahead by as much as 1.5 seconds a lap, on a 1.5 min lap, which is amazing (same car, same driver, compared to manual version) ... presumably it's nightmarishly expensive when it finally goes wrong/wears out, but then if you're buying from new that won't be an issue for 3 years. SignatureBear 2002 Yamaha R1 Saab Aero Sport > Hopefully, you can see that getting the speedo mechanism to be > accurate is a fair bit more complicated than getting the odo mechanism > to be accurate. > > Of course, everything's digital nowadays, so gawd knowa how it works. Thanks for the lesson, I did know about the eddy current effect. I think you are laboring under a misconception that speedometers are deliberately miscalibrated to the high end because they are inherently imprecise. My point is, the speedos aren't generally all over the map, it's not a case of it being difficult to get them close, IMHO they are deliberately miscalibrated to the extreme high end of their lawful range. In other words it's a normal distribution of error, where the standard deviation is under control, but the mean is biased quite a ways from zero, farther to the positive direction than it would have to be to keep the lower tail of the distribution > 0, IYSWIM. My wife's EX250 speedo fails the +10/-0 percent limits on the high end, it reads a solid 11% over the actual speed. Signature'07 FJR13AW '99 EX250-F13 OMF #7 >I think you are laboring under a misconception that speedometers >are deliberately miscalibrated to the high end because they are >inherently imprecise. I am certainly not. >IMHO they are >deliberately miscalibrated to the extreme high end of their lawful >range. But is seems you are. SignatureChamp ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle To email me, neal at my domain should work. >>I think you are laboring under a misconception that speedometers >>are deliberately miscalibrated to the high end because they are >>inherently imprecise. > I am certainly not. Well, you gave an explanation as to how speedometers work, which appeared to me to be a justification for deliberately miscalibrating them on the basis that they are so inaccurate that it is necessary to bias them far away from nominal to avoid under-reading. "Hopefully, you can see that getting the speedo mechanism to be accurate is a fair bit more complicated than getting the odo mechanism to be accurate." In truth, it's not terribly complicated getting a speedometer to be both precise and accurate (enough), if you can produce a clockspring with good linearity (can you say that about something that works in a twisty way?) the precision is guaranteed by design and the accuray can be dialed in quite simply by adjusting the spring preload. The real problem is the accuracy limits chosen are not symmetrical about zero, so instead of shooting for an accurate speedometer we are reduced to trying for one that is precise. Signature'07 FJR13AW '99 EX250-F13 OMF #7 > IMHO they are > deliberately miscalibrated to the extreme high end of their lawful > range. My counter-argument is that my old company Rover 214SLi would sit all day on the motorway with the needle a gnats whisker under 100mph. One day a nice man in his company car followed me and gave me a ticket verifying that my actual speed was 96.5mph, which was jolly useful and only cost £40[1]. He even commented, "I bet you were sitting with your speedo at 99mph and you've got good throttle control 'cos it didn't waver for the whole mile I followed you". [1] I believe it's gone up since then. SignatureAndrewR, D.Bot (Celeritas) Aprilia RSV-1000R, Honda VFR750F-L, Kawasaki ZX-6R, Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo BOTAFOT#2,ITJWTFO#6,UKRMRM#1/13a,MCT#1,DFV#2,SKoGA#0 (and KotL) BotToS#5,SBS#25,IbW#34, DS#5, COSOC# Suspended, KotTFSTR# The speccy Geordie twat. >> IMHO they are >> deliberately miscalibrated to the extreme high end of their lawful [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >99mph and you've got good throttle control 'cos it didn't waver for the >whole mile I followed you". That's cos it was flat out, wasn't it. SignatureChamp ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle To email me, neal at my domain should work. >>My counter-argument is that my old company Rover 214SLi would sit all day >>on [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > That's cos it was flat out, wasn't it. No, on the local speed test route[1] it batted a truly amazing indicated 130, suggesting that even if the speedo was fairly accurate at 100 it gave up the ghost shortly thereafter. [1] The M45[2] [2] "The greatest danger speeding on the M45 is that you might hit a sheep grazing in the outside lane", J. Clarkson SignatureAndrewR, D.Bot (Celeritas) Aprilia RSV-1000R, Honda VFR750F-L, Kawasaki ZX-6R, Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo BOTAFOT#2,ITJWTFO#6,UKRMRM#1/13a,MCT#1,DFV#2,SKoGA#0 (and KotL) BotToS#5,SBS#25,IbW#34, DS#5, COSOC# Suspended, KotTFSTR# The speccy Geordie twat. >>>One day a nice man in his company car followed me and gave me a ticket >>>verifying that my actual speed was 96.5mph, which was jolly useful and only [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >130, suggesting that even if the speedo was fairly accurate at 100 it gave >up the ghost shortly thereafter. I had a 214 of some generation or other, and the speedo never got near a number like that. >[1] The M45[2] >[2] "The greatest danger speeding on the M45 is that you might hit a sheep >grazing in the outside lane", J. Clarkson heh. The M45 is truly amazing, isn't it. It goes from nowhere to nowhere. SignatureChamp ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle To email me, neal at my domain should work. > Of course, everything's digital nowadays, so gawd knowa how it works. Pixies. Tiny, digital ones. HTH SignatureAndrewR, D.Bot (Celeritas) Aprilia RSV-1000R, Honda VFR750F-L, Kawasaki ZX-6R, Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo BOTAFOT#2,ITJWTFO#6,UKRMRM#1/13a,MCT#1,DFV#2,SKoGA#0 (and KotL) BotToS#5,SBS#25,IbW#34, DS#5, COSOC# Suspended, KotTFSTR# The speccy Geordie twat. >> Of course, everything's digital nowadays, so gawd knowa how it works. > >Pixies. Tiny, digital ones. Hybrid pixies cross-bred with elves for the display. Pixelves, I think they're called. Signature-Pip >Of course, everything's digital nowadays, so gawd knowa how it works. ones and noughts, innit. >>Of course, everything's digital nowadays, so gawd knowa how it works. > >ones and noughts, innit. No wonder you're so valued in the USA. SignatureChamp ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle To email me, neal at my domain should work. > Ace spoke: > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > level ground over a reasonable distance? bends, gradients etc. would > distort the satellite speed calculations? AIUI GPS doesn't average your speed over a distance. It uses the doppler shift of the GPS signal http://gpsinformation.net/main/gpsspeed.htm <snip> > Ob: GPS speed accuracy - discounting the fact that plod repeatedly assert > that they are *not* accurate - shirley they can only be accurate on flat > level ground over a reasonable distance? bends, gradients etc. would > distort the satellite speed calculations? Can't think why as they work on doppler. Try driving around a roundabout a few times and report back :-) > <GPS> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > That's because all speedos are designed to over-read, usually by > around 10%, which is what you're seeing. Not quite. "The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986, as amended, allows the use of speedometers that meet the requirements of EC Community Directive 75/443(97/39) or ECE Regulation 39. Both the EC Directive and the ECE Regulation lay down accuracy requirements to be applied at the time of vehicle approval for speedometers. These requirements are that the indicated speed must not be more than 10 per cent of the true speed plus 4 km/h. In production, however, a slightly different tolerance of 5 per cent plus 10 km/h is applied. The requirements are also that the indicated speed must never be less than the true speed." http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2001-03-12a.59.3 The wording's a bit ropey, but he clearly means "the indicated speed must not differ from the true speed by more than 10% of the true speed plus 4km/h." The ACPO guidelines are extra-generous, as if you're exceeding a 70mph speed limit by more than 10%+2, you're likely to have an indicated speed closer to 90. Signatureogden GSXR750 K4 RGV250 VJ22 > > <GPS> > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > speed limit by more than 10%+2, you're likely to have an indicated speed > closer to 90. If I was doing an indicated 70mph + 10% + 2 I'd be closer to 72mph given the accuracy of my speedo at 70mph as checked against my GPS (which is where we came in I guess) -- Mo > > "The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986, as amended, > > allows the use of speedometers that meet the requirements of EC [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > given the accuracy of my speedo at 70mph as checked against my GPS > (which is where we came in I guess) Yes, but that's the opposite of what I said. If you're actually doing 79mph (126kph) then assuming a maximum permissible inaccuracy of 5% + 10kph (not an unreasonable assumption if my car's anything to go by) your speed will be showing 142kph or roughly 89mph. So, basically, ACPO guidelines work in the opposite direction to the law, in that they allow you to barrel along at an indicated speed far in excess of the actual limit before you're liable to be nicked. Signatureogden GSXR750 K4 RGV250 VJ22 > > > "The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986, as amended, > > > allows the use of speedometers that meet the requirements of EC [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > law, in that they allow you to barrel along at an indicated speed far in > excess of the actual limit before you're liable to be nicked. Well I guess I see your point but how would you know you were doing 79? you only have a speedo that is reading 10% too fast (if my car is anything to go by) Are you worried that people will go faster and faster until they get a ticket in order to calibrate the speedo? -- Mo Mo spoke: > Well I guess I see your point but how would you know you were doing > 79? you only have a speedo that is reading 10% too fast (if my car is > anything to go by) Are you worried that people will go faster and > faster until they get a ticket in order to calibrate the speedo? Swot I did, in 198-something, in a Passat on the M5 near Frankley services one night, Plod followed me into the services and said I had been doing 114mph. I discussed the fact that my speedo never went over 100, they said in that case we will do you for having a defective speedo as well, I said OK guv it's a fair cop, and we settled on 100mph, £60 + 3 stars Then I had the VW dealer check the speedo - their rolling road only went to 60mph, and at that the speedo said 60mph bang on. SignatureRob_P UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl) FJ1200, CCM130 Benelli Cabiolet Easily confused. > > > > "The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986, as amended, > > > > allows the use of speedometers that meet the requirements of EC [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > anything to go by) Are you worried that people will go faster and > faster until they get a ticket in order to calibrate the speedo? Third time lucky: ACPO guidelines effectively allow for speedos under-reading by 10%+2. EU regs dictate that the speedo is not permitted to under-read at all, and may in fact over-read by a fairly significant margin. So there's no technical need for the ACPO guidelines to be anything more than zero-tolerance and, if you stick to doing what your speedo reckons matches the limit, you'll always be comfortably under and therefore never be nicked. Signatureogden GSXR750 K4 RGV250 VJ22 > I've read here that Sat nav actual speed displayed is very accurate, > so I was surprised to see a large difference in displayed speed to > that of my speedo. &nb |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message