Lower tolerance for speeding in Queensland

BTW.........

"A decade ago" and "4 MPH" do not seem to match up very well.

Have a great day.

Cheers,
Wayne & Sally.

Yes, 4MPH is about 6.5kph.

Some years ago I was booked in Vic for 3kph over. I think they have zero tolerance, which is fair enough given the average speedo over-reads by a few kph.

Hi Frank,

Thanks for your comment, though I will stay with my previous comment.

Too many devices that are able to monitor speed these days for anyone to go......I wasn't speeding.

Cheers,
Wayne & Sally.

How can it be justified that there is zero tolerance on the driver when they still let manufacturers be 10% out on a speedo.

How do you know if you are right on the speed limit if the instrument you are using is only calibrated to withing 10%.

Until they get tough on manufacturers there is no logic.

Because from about 2000 ADRs require speedos to read correct or up to a max of 10% over correct speed - it cannot read under.

So if a modern car speedo is reading under then the vehicle does not meet ADRs and is unroadworthy.

The issue is that time and time again the measuring equipment used by authorities has been shown to be inaccurate despite claims made by police and others.

So the do gooders who constantly bleat if you dont speed you wont get caught well the issue is you may still get a ticket even if you are under the speed limit. Remember the Datsun 120Y that was clocked faster than it was actually able to go - but one example of many.

Garry

Thanks, I thought it was still +/- 10% but what you say makes perfect sense and is consistent with my last few cars.

Oh well, there goes that excuse..... :-(

Wayne. So I got the years wrong. It must have hurt so bad. My point was obviously missed by some. Ah dear me.

It could have been back in 1950 for all I care. I was a smidgin over in Vic which wouldn't have bothered the NSW boys.

I was also booked once for doing "more than" 70 MPH in a tiny Fiat 500 like in the photo. The solicitor stated the maximum speed for the car was (insert a speed here that I can't remember) and the magistrate dismissed the charge. Of course I just went along with the solicitor. Thanks Dad

Please let's not have a Reveniue Raising rant.

The thing that is forgotten by most people is that going over the speed limit is a voluntary tax. Sometimes you pay and other times you dodge it. Sure it is revenue raising, but you have a choice as to whether you want to pay or not.

I have a very fast motorcycle that used to cost me a bit in voluntary tax. Now I put the wife on the back and sit on the speed limit or just under and have saved a huge amount of money.

The choice is yours

DM

DM,

We did 700 kms today, from Emerald to Hervey Bay, and the only bloke taking "taxes" was preoccupied taking a donation from 2 young blokes, at Ban Ban Springs.

Maybe next trip?

Bob

Attitude counts a lot as well when you are being asked if you should pay the voluntary tax. Most young blokes have the wrong attitude and usually get hit with it.

I have heard through the rumour mill that some women with large breasts also get an exemption if they display them appropriately.

Not being a woman, I can't vouch for the methods success rate.

DM

The problem is we have conflicting laws and regulations , vehicle manufactures must by law fit a speedometer that is accurate plus or minus 4% yet now state laws will only permit zero % leeway for speedo inaccuracy , yes speed kills BUT so does having to take your eyes off the road to constantly check you are not going over the speed limit by 1-2 km...

Need an edit function , meant 10% not 4% ,,,,

Alloy,

Thats what I thought, but as per Garrycol's post, the spec at around 100kmph is that the speedo can read up to +10% of the actual speed minus 4kmph but never lower.

Was just looking to see what the regulations say. And this is what is says in respect to vehicles manufactured after 2006.


From 1 July 2006 all newly introduced models of a vehicle available on the market must comply with the following requirements.


The speedo must not indicate a speed less than the vehicle’s true speed or a speed greater than the vehicle’s true speed by an amount more than 10 percent plus 4 km/h.

The speedo must always read 'safe', meaning the vehicle's true speed must not be higher than the speed indicated by the speedo. So if a vehicle travelling at a true speed of 100km/h, the speedo must read between 100km/h and 114km/h.

Another way of looking at this is if the speedo indicates a speed of 100km/h, the vehicle's true speed must be between 87.3 km/h and 100km/h.

But here is the thing, unless you are driving a 1960s EH Holden, or the like, I doubt speedo inaccuracy is a “major” issue with modern cars, unless other things have been changed on the vehicle like tyres or wheel sizes. I picked this example having owned an EH Holden I was never sure how fast it was going vs the speedo reading!

Mind you, I suspect there are many other things that affect drivers of vehicles than getting “pinged” for 1km/h over the speed limit. I mean, how many in this thread have actually been fined for anything between 1-3 km/h over the speed limit?

And for those that have a concern their vehicles speedo might be out and reading incorrectly, have you had it checked for accuracy? It is an option available to you…

No tolerance is shown to alcohol, and rightly so, but are you under the 0.05 limit drinking four beers today, but not tomorrow, perhaps it will only take three to push you over the 0.05? Plenty of ambiguity around that one, so the way to deal with it is exercise restraint and caution; much the same way driving on the road should be approached at all times.

And how many in this thread are driving vehicles that have been modified and are not compliant with the registration requirements in the State of registration? The financial impact of being caught with uncertified or illegal modifications will far outweigh any financial or prosecution risk you have from getting caught 1 km/h over the speed limit.

Always plenty of emotion on this topic, but really, step back and put some perspective on it. I saw somewhere else in this thread that you go from law-abiding citizen to sociopath if caught speeding 1km/h over the speed limit– Oh really, get a grip!

Rant over, its Friday, enjoy your weekend…

Funny not , every time that have ever been pinged for speeding the speed is ALLWAYS an odd number .. but never a number ending in 5 ..

In 2007 I got done for 61klm/hr in a 60 zone while in Melbourne.

I was on the bike heading down North Rd towards Dandenong.


Pretty poor really...... I'm not really interested in taking my eyes off the road to look at the speedo when I'm in traffic on the bike....

Would like to see that ticket mate. Considering there is a legislated allowance of 3 kph for speed measuring devices in Victoria and has been for decades, you were actually doing at least 64 kph. I feel confident that your penalty notice would indicate that as well. I thought that a speedometer was required to be placed in such a location on a motor cycle as to be visible to the rider while in motion. Bad design or simple carelessness, hard to tell ;-)

Lou: I know what you are saying but that's no excuse. I slow down whet it is like that or get out of it.

If you are travelling in an environment where it is too dangerous to take your eyes off the road for just a second then it must have been too dangerous to drive at the speed that you were travelling at, so bad luck, you should have been going slower.

Sorry but I "get out of there" myself. I can't stand be hassled.

I further think that I'd not be happy to trust a speedo to an accuracy of plus or minus 1 kph.
OBJ

So what speed over the limit is not revenue raising ???.

The limit is the limit, any speed over is an offence and you pay.

Limits are placed on roads to reflect the design, safety and condition of the road. Go over these limits and you are placing yourself and other in danger.

So 1kph over the limit is like blowing 0.05 on a breath test. Just over by one. Is that revenue raising, I don't think so.

Cheers Andy

It is hard to look past the statement that it is revenue raising. Seriously being 1 or 5 km over the speed limit is in some cases just the width of the needle on the speedo.
Yet other dangerous situations are not policed as much.
Just look at the stats, how many low level speed infringements are booked compared to mobile phone usage,?not keeping left and allowing frustration to build up in moterist around you? (2 point and $hundreds in fine but very few bookings)
CJ

When you think about all the measurable variables that might contribute to an accident such as driver ability, braking effectiveness, road surface adhesiveness, speed, vehicle design etc there are huge variations between one vehicle and the next. You might have reflexes that at 30% quicker than mine. I might be driving on half worn cheese cutter cross-plys, and you might be driving the latest Ferrarri that could stop on a Lire. Yet the police/government and Andy obsess about 1 kph over the limit (which is neither here nor there in the scheme of things). Why? Its REVENUE, stupid. QLD Gov is broke so they go for the Revenue.

Good post, Bob.

I think NSW has a reasonable approach. There is an acknowledged but unstated margin of error allowed.

Some time ago someone in NSW Police/government decided to do away with it and adopt a zero tolerance approach as per Victoria. I think it was the in the previous disastrous Labour govenment's term.

On being elected, the new Liberal premier, Barry O'Farrel, instructed the police minister to restore the margin. Of course the question was asked - "how much margin?" That has never been publicly revealed, but we do have an acknowledged margin.

Cheers

Strictly speaking, and by the book, yes, 1, 2, 3 or whatever k's over the speed limit is speeding.
So why was a speed limit selected for a particular stretch of road?
My understanding is that a suitable maximum speed is posted for road, traffic and weather conditions being optimal. Reduce any of these factors and the speed needs to be reduced by whatever amount is considered safe by the driver. Obviously this is going to vary according to any particular driver's ability and his/her "reading" of the road.
Assuming all the above criteria are favorable and the posted speed limit is appropriate, I would imagine that a "reasonably" modern vehicle in good roadworthy condition should be able to travel that section of road in "reasonable" safety, driver's ability also being "reasonable".

Question. Did whichever authority responsible for determining the max speed limit judge that, let's say, 80 kph is safe, but 81 kph is unsafe???

Not sure about other states, as I have only spent relatively short periods of time driving in them (maybe a few months at most), but in WA there seems to be a tolerance of up to around 5 kph although no one obviously will state that. Also obviously you would need to not be wandering all over the road or driving in a manner that attracts the attention of the police.

Pop

I suspect they simply judged that 80kph is permitted, 81 isn't...

80kph might be unsafe, depending on the conditions, 90 might be slow under good ones.

And I suspect we wouldn't have speed limits if the bulk of the population could exercise common sense and self-control, seemingly it isn't the case so I guess they draw a line in the sand...

Cross over it and the risk is a fine to remind you to be vigilant.

Cheers, Baz - The Landy

Echucan Bob, The only stupid people are the ones speeding.
You have a choice stay under the speed limit and do not contribute to the revenue. Or speed by 1 kph and pay the price.
You break the law you pay.

So I see it as the only stupid people out there are the ones paying for their crime.

Oh by the way what speed over the limit do you consider ok before it's not revenue raising????? 1,2,3,10,20kph and now can you tell me why you need to travel that fast over the limit.

Speed limits are placed on roads so that the user knows that it is safe to travel at that speed on that section of road. Going over that limit is placing yourself and others in danger.

Roads are speed limited for a lot of reasons such as the amount of exits and entry's per klm the condition of the road surface the amount of traffic etc. So when a road has a speed limit of 80kph there are reasons for this and there is no excuse for going faster, unless you like paying the fine and helping with the revenue.


The reason for variable speed limits on motorways is because at some point of time the merging traffic onto the motorway increases to a point that makes the speed limit normally 90 dangerous and is reduced to 70.

There is just one message I want to get out their
(There is NO such thing as SAFE SPEEDING even 1kph over)

To answer your question Pop, the authority's set the speed limits using a variety reasons. There is a code that determines what the safe speed limit is, and it is placed on that road. Anything over is deemed unsafe. Also this set limit is for good conditions in fine weather. Once it starts to rain that limit should be reduced to your own ability to drive in a safe manner in the bad conditions.

I fully understand the need for speed limits and the conditions that can require a reduction in certain conditions. Because those conditions can be many and varied there is no set formula as to how much reduction is appropriate. This unfortunately is left up to drivers of hughley variable abilities and also to the cars they drive.

My point being, to put it quite bluntly is regarding the supposed "zero tolerance" policy supposedly in place in some states.

To be quite clear, I understand that speed limits are put in place, hopefully, to keep us all safe on the roads.
I fail to see how 80 kph in optimal conditions is considered safe while 81 kph is considered a finable offence. Surely a bit if common sense could be applied.
As far as QLD goes, maybe some should check their facts before spruiking.

What really jerks my chain is the way speed limits are used in lieu of repair and/or maintenance.

A particular section of road, say a culvert or bend, sees one truck rollover, no fatalities. Speed limit is dropped 10 clicks. Within 6 months, the section is resurfaced, fresh paint down the centre and they double the amount of delinears. But nothing is done about the actual problem.......too narrow roadway, rough foundations, tight radius bends, whatever.

And 3-5 years later, nothing has changed, the road is imperfect, but it's "safe" because they make you drive 10 k slower, or you pay the penalty if you're naughty........and get caught.

Bob

Majura Avenue beside Canberra Airport used to be 100 KPH. They spent millions widening it and gues what? They lowered the limit to 90. It's out in the bush with only a few farms on the side. Aggghhhh Now they building a major four lane divided highway. I bet they drop it again.

And by then they will have caught up to the rest of the world and dropped the margin also. You just have to love the pubic servants we have don't you.

Was that a spelling error I see. . . .

"Spelling error"? In my follow-up, Phil? Never!Well, not since primary school anyway............:-)

In my post Bob. Can you see the deliberate spelling error.

The 1kph argument can be used for any 2 consecutive numbers. Is 105 in a 100 zone safe but 106 not safe? It's all about where they draw the line in the sand. Lower tolerance simply means the line is drawn closer to the number on the speed limit sign. There is some sense in that rather than an imaginary non disclosed number.

Ha ha, found it! Very apt description.......

Hey gents - 'gues' is spelt incorrectly however the spelling of 'pubic' is accurate! Might not be the correct word but the spelling is fine.

It's a malapropism if I am not mistaken? Kath and Kim would be proud. :-)

Krooza It takes a while for some to wake up. Or they aren't too sure about saying some things in pubic. Have a good weekend.

I will. Dawn service, a bit of gunfire breakfast (that's coffee with rum added for those who don't know), followed by a short march and a good old chin wag and lots of elbow bending with mates.

"Member Andys Adventures posted:
So what speed over the limit is not revenue raising ???.

The limit is the limit, any speed over is an offence and you pay.

Limits are placed on roads to reflect the design, safety and condition of the road. Go over these limits and you are placing yourself and other in danger.

So 1kph over the limit is like blowing 0.05 on a breath test. Just over by one. Is that revenue raising, I don't think so.

Cheers Andy"

Your right Andy, :-)

This is why when we fly down from the NT to visit friends in Adelaide and they lend us a car I NEVER USE 4th GEAR, 3rd ONLY!
Speed limit is 60km, most people are so scared they travel at 50 or 55 KM/hr.

Revenue raising? I think that it's the way you look at the fine.

If one was to believe one is hard done by then one would naturally think they were revenue raising to try and blame someone else for their error. If one was to simply accept the fine and not dry to one's mates then it's a fine. Those who get on the band wagon and start raving about police states and what tollerance they personally should get if stopped then it's revenue raising.

The limit is a limit and if you go over it and get caught then take it on the chin and stop crying revenue raising.

In isolation your comments are quite correct vk1dx. However it is quite difficult to accept that someone who has reasonable or even perfect driving record cops a few hundred dollar fine for 3 - 4 kmph over the limit on one occasion, but people with multiple assault or even sexual offences regularly get suspended sentences and no other costs or punishment, all while being defended by legal aid with our money. This regularly happened in Victoria.

Reason? Speeding gets money. Jail costs money. Unless you can think of a better reason that this happens. I think that is what peeves people. That is certainly my issue with the whole thing.

Perhaps they're trying to minimise wear and tear on the track, Robin, rather than it being a safety issue on those "faster" sections.

Cheers

I don't think the 40K will be a problem. It may feel like a freeway after our Madigan drive.

What is the difference, I would interested to find out.

Once your over the limit your speeding it's that simple. 1,3,5,10kph over it's speeding no difference.

Totally agree Slow..

In fact this was the reason given by the Queensland government
and that they would not divulge what the tolerance was.

Speed limits are set by the TMR, not the police. The police enforce the limits to what tolerance thier bosses say.

And no the police don't get the money, there is on quota, only hearsay, there is no bonus for booking.
The money goes to the Queensland Government.

It would of course depend on an individual's ability and resolve to challenge a charge of being, let's say 2 kph over a posted limit of say 80 kph.
It would be worth it to some to stand up in court and make a statement along the lines of how exceeding the limit by less than about 3% constitutes unsafe driving as opposed to revenue raising.

Cops are merely puppets doing what the govt wants...get out and make us money!!!

One of the major things is the driver.
How experienced is the driver.
Does the driver have a "real life" understanding of their own driving ability.
Does the driver have a good understanding of the road they are driving on?
Is the driver experienced enough to make an accurate assessment of the road & weather conditions & the effects of those conditions on the vehicle?
Does the driver understand the vehicle they are driving?
Does the driver completely understand the limitations of the vehicle they are driving?


Not long ago I drove from Ularu to Darwin. It was just before the open limit was reinstated, so the limit was 130klm/hr.

One thing I noticed was that the majority of other vehicles I came across were comfortably travelling between 115 & 125. Not many were doing the 130 limit.
I have long believed that 110 to 125 was a comfortable speed range for long distance cruising..... in the car, not in the Troopie. The Troopie is lucky to get above 95...

I thought I kinda did by saying I use a GPS as a speedo on my Motorbike . I also use a GPS for a speedo in my cars , I just didn't bother to mention it .

I've used a gps in both my Falcon sedan and Landcruiser ute, Robyn, and both speedos are so close to actual that I rarely bother now.

However, in the trucks I drive, for which my employer may have paid $3-400K the speedos are rarely close, and for 60 kph areas, definitely not reliable. Use a gps in these, as it is more visible at the bottom of the windscreen, rather than on a level with one's navel. :-)

Bob

The only time when a GPS reads speed accurately is when you are travelling at a steady speed - when accelerating or decelerating the displayed GPS always lags behind true speed by up to a couple of seconds - is simply how the GPS works out speed - it cannot work it out directly but measures distance covered over a set time and calculates speed - so is always displaying a speed of a couple of secs ago not instantaneous - lag depends on the mathematical algorithms used to calculate speed in the GPS unit.

Garry

Garry, that's a complete furphy. GPS speed is determined by doppler shift in the arriving signals. To use position change divided by time would introduce greater error than you would believe - just check the HDOP spec on your GPS receiver at any time and you'll see why.

The lag - which should never be that great - is due to the processing time in your receiver.

Well actually it is a combination of both but we don't want to get get too technically complex on a forum like this.

The point is the displayed speed is not correct there is a lag.

Try coming to a stop quickly and noting what the GPS speed is indicating - I have been stopped with the GPS showing 30kph but decreasing rapidly - same when taking off - can be doing 30kph with GPS still showing 0 before it starts increasing.

A GPS can be very accurate on normal roads but in the bush where you are constantly changing direction, the calculation may not very reliable. In fact if you look at roads with complete "U" turns it can be way off. Just imagine the errors on the Bonang Highway south of the Victorian/NSW border.

We run Oziexplorer most of the time. It doesn't know the speed limit so we don't get the annoying beeps etc. But I do believe it's display and in fact I increased the size of the numbers and made them red.

And ... even IF the GPS thinks it knows the speed limit, it is inly as good as the date of the latest update to their database! I have had a GPS scream at me for exceeding the speed limit when I was under by 20kph! Reason was that the limit was posted at 40kph (yep, a school zone) but the GPS thought that the limit was 15kph! NFI how it got that data, but it went berserk!
I have never trusted a GPS speed limit database since!

As far as a "tolerance" is concerned, the "mobile" cameras operated by MacBank in NSW have a minimal tolerance, are placed at "known blackspots" according to the propaganda (but really are placed at positions where a slight inattention to the speedo - for the purpose of actually driving - will almost certainly result in a slight drift to excess speed. That will result in a bluey!
At least the human operator of the guns/hairdryers whatever you call them, have the option to apply some commonsense. The MacBank computers have no such humanity!

Same here John. We don't trust them and in fact we have never updated ours. We don't even use it. The speeds are displayed for all to see.

From another thread ...

I find it hard to believe that some have been booked for 1k over the limit , they must of been pulled up by a copper that was having a really bad day . Like I said in a post above I have had radar pointed at me many times 5-6 plus K over and never been pulled up
I always use a GPS both bike and car so I know exactly what speed I'm doing , I'm not getting away with it because of speedo error . Just police that have common sence that can see I'm not causing and danger , just cruising not overtaking everything in sight .

I have been booked a few times in Vic there is always the detected speed then the alleged speed , it's the alleged speed you pay for , for me it has always been 2k less than the detected speed in Victoria at least .

I got done in the NT a few years ago on the bike , NT police didn't knock any K's off .

Yeah I know what some of you are thinking , this bloke must be a danger to everyone on the road coz he's been done a few times .

I have had a clean slate for a lot of years now , I have no points against my licence atm . I plan on keeping it that way

Cruise control will over run a couple of Ks when you go over the crest of a hill & the size of the hill determines how far over it goes.

And, to add to the confusion, the determinants include the manufacturer of the CC unit.
I have a fairly decent hill not far away (Moonbis) and several "company" cars have had vastly different outcomes going down there. Always start at the limit at the top, and lift foot completely - some gain a couple kph, others just "give up" once they have gained 5 or 10 (vary between vehicle makes and even models - go figure!) and allow the car to roll on down the hill gathering speed as it goes.
Contrast to the manual Navara - start at the top on the limit and around 2kph increase at the bottom.

Moral of story - don't trust cruise control to save you.

That's right cruise control will not guarantee you will never speed or get booked .

The only person that can guarantee they don't get booked is the one with the foot on the accelerator, I guess...

Cheers, Baz - The Landy