Gatsos and GPS detector debate

[elfa7]

We covered this a while back, and I think it was Pottsy who came up with the answer. Right foot -- middle pedal.

[Bungle]

Originally Posted by stu_iow

Not seen much about this on this fourm, so thought i would ask.

I am lead to believe that the honda windscreen is ok to use with GPS, my clio was a nightmare for that!

Just wondering what detectors are best to use.

I guess radar, laser and GPS are all needed for the UK.

I want a detector that also tells you the speed limit of the road your on. (this often gets me when i see a camera on the side of the road and you have no idea on teh speedlimit) as i find these days, the limits are all over the place, one second your in a 40 then 60 then 40 then 30 then 20!! That a 2 miles stretch of road near me!! good example me thinks!

As i said on a similar topic a while ago. People who have camera detectors are 3 times more likely to get a speeding conviction.

If you really don't want a ticket, keep an eye out for speed limits and stick to them. It's all well and good using the detectors, but you get caught out as soon as a camera is installed that it doesn't know about, or mr policmean times you between markers or has a speed gun.

To answer the original question, GPS works fine through the Civic wind screen, no problems with my Garmin GPS.

Edited to chand 300 time to 3 times more likely. My bad, got cunfused with 300% more likely....

[Trekker308]

Umm - yes, if all speed limits were absolutely right for the road location where they are imposed nobody could argue with the 'middle pedal' solution, but I find myself in areas where the speed limit bears little relationship to the actual situation - no residential area, good road conditions - 40mph! What!!!

I live next to a large National Park that has an overall 40mph limit imposed because of grazing animals and I don't have any problem with that, or the normal limits imposed in obvious residential areas, but sometimes, no frequently, I find limits imposed that are out of kilter with reality - I for one would welcome any input on detectors that are effective and legal (is that possible?)

[Bungle]

I totally agree that some speed limits are unreasonable, and sometimes it is not as obvious as it should be, but there have been numerous speed limit changes to roads near me, which would instantly make the system out of date. I don't know how often the databases are updated, or how much they cost to keep updated (quite a lot I assume). What would worry me is that you become so dependant on the detector to tell you the speed limit, that you don't look out for changes and that could get you into more trouble.

I thought about getting one a while, when I got annoyed at getting a letter through the door for a fixed penalty (62 in a 50, on a motorway), but came to the conclusion that paying attention and keeping to the limit is the easiest and cheapest way (and arguably the safest way, until you start getting dangerously overtaken) to avoid the cameras.

That's just my thought on the topic. Just the fact that by having one you are fam more likely to get caught is reason enough for me to steer clear.

[stu_iow]

Originally Posted by Bungle

I totally agree that some speed limits are unreasonable, and sometimes it is not as obvious as it should be, but there have been numerous speed limit changes to roads near me, which would instantly make the system out of date.

Good point

[BrianI]

Anyone with a satnav who need an uptodate safety camera database see this site

http://www.pocketgpsworld.com/modules.php?name=Cameras

Updated at least one a month for a very small cost and free if you find a camera not on the database

Brian

[WoolyCiv]

I always try and keep within speed limts especially the lower ones but I am in agreement with stu_iow, I just want to know what the limit is on unfamiliar roads especially just after seeing the sign warning of speed cameras. So for this reason and this reason only I bought a MicroFuzion GPS unit. This cost about £95 with free lifetime updates and before anyone asks I cannot define 'lifetime'.

[GlenMH]

Originally Posted by Bungle

As i said on a similar topic a while ago. People who have camera detectors are 3 times more likely to get a speeding conviction.

I am intrigued to know where you get that stat from. Recently I have seen news reports of speed camera detector users being 6 times LESS likely to get a ticket than those without and they have a lower accident rate per mile travelled as well.

I have been far more aware of my speed since I got a GPS detector 3 months ago....

Glen

[Pottsy]

Yes, I've seen that too. Mori claim 6 times less likely to get done and 3 times less likely to have an accident.

Ooop north, where roads are emplty and police forces are strapped for cash, camera detectors are a useful backup to your regular eyeball/brain combo. They just add to the the wealth of information that help you drive at a safe speed for the conditions.

Talex are meant to be very good - might be worth a look. No detector system tells you the speed limit on every road, they only tell you the limit at a camera or blackspot location. I really think that the best way of knowing the speed limit are those big red and white signs dotted around the roadside.

Driving at a sensible speed is of course the best option, but the detectors are worthwhile to highlight areas that may look safe but have a hidden danger.

I seem to have done ok, last and only ticket was 72 in a 60 (0300 on an empty main road in northern Scotland), back in 1987.

[WoolyCiv]

Pottsy you can say that again and Im sure big chris will support me after his spell up here. The north of england must have added a lot of profit to the manufacturers of Gatso's. Sometimes it seems as if you cannot drive more than a mile in any direction before seeing one of them. On my drive to work 8 miles, mainly on dual carriageways I pass 1 red light camera 2 fixed speed cameras and 4 mobile camera positions. Some mornings they are all fired up.

[Trekker308]

I might not live up North, but I'm ordering a MicroFuzion GPS + Laser/Gatso module in the morning - I'm up for any solution that goes some way to helping you to concentrate on the job in hand - driving!

I know that it's a product of summer time in rural areas, but a lot of the limit and repeater signs in this area are partly or wholly obscured by foliage - I guess cost-cutting by local councils is the cause....

[richierich]

The whole speed camera debate could run and run, I think they have a place, but typically if you have a detector it is to allow you to speed, and to make sure you don't get caught. Its not like they don't make speed limits easy to check. If there are street lights and you can't see reminder signs its a 30, if there are street lights and reminders the reminders give you the speed, they are placed at fairly close intervals. If there are no street lights then the road is a natinal limit, unless it has reminders, which again state quite clearly the speed. I am not being all holier than thou, I do exceed the higher speed limits, motorways and national limits, when the view is good. But the safest way to avoid a ticket is not to speed on unfamiliar roads, I came down the A5 on Friday from Daventry to Towcester, stuck the cruise on at 62mph and passed 3 camera vans, I didn't need to worry as I knew I wasn't speeding, me jumping on the middle pedal could cause more problems. It was boring as hell though, thats a nice road.

One thing I do is to actually tell myself the speed limit as I see a sign, sometimes outloud. It confirms it in your memory easier, it is often easy to forget the speed limit, espcially on these stretches of cross country roads they are carving to 50mph. But if you tell yourself every time you see the sign it does help.

[basegreen]

I have one for occasional use (via tomtom) or the PC World cheapy one.

I dont speed (new driver, 6 points and I get a ban!) but it definitely serves as a good reminder to be aware of what the local speed is. I do a lot of driving on unfamilar roads and sometimes it can be easy to accidentally do 50 in a 40 with changing limits.

A lot of the speed signs get nicked, too.

There's a good example in a village here, which goes from a 60 to a 30, and there's a forward facing truvelo literally 50 feet into the 30 zone. There is ONE 30 sign before the camera, and there's an iffy junction which requires attention at the point of speed change, then the camera is after it. It only needs the driver to be concentrating on the road/junction rather than the speed sign for a few seconds and you're done! Braking from 60 to 30 in that distance can be dodgy too... it's ridiculous to say the least.

[Trekker308]

It has never occurred to me that ownership of a detector "allows you to speed" - I have just placed my order for a Microfuzion unit so that I can add to the existing tools of eyes and brain in order to maximise compliance with the limits!

If it turns up tomorrow as promised, it will go straight into the Civ for my trip to Scotland tomorrow night...

[elfa7]

You'll need it, after that peculiar drink !! By the way, I like Glenfiddich .

[Bungle]

OK, OK, I can't quote my source for the 3 times more likely to get done for speeding thing, I heard it about a year back and it stuck with me.

The ONLY point I was trying to make was that generally speaking, people who have the detectors are seriel speeders. Generally these people will continually exceed the speed limit and rely on being told to slow down at the so called 'accident blackspts' aka fixed camera positions.
The habit of spending most of their time driving too fast means that many will eventually get caught out.

I am not saying people shouldn't get the detectors, just that paying attention and driving sensibly is cheaper and safer for those who speed.

With regards to the actual cameras themselves, I have noticed a few go up recently that are VERY sneaky. Normal Gatso cameras look at the rear of vehicles, and when they detect you speeding, they take a picture as you pass them. The white lines on the road are a backup or 'proof' of your speed, as two photos are taken at a set time interval.
I have seen more and more forward facing cameras being installed with white lines painted behind them!. This is obviosly an attempt to fool motorists into approaching the camera speeding, then slowing down to pass the white lines the other side of the camera. If you don't know what to look out for it is easy to get caught!

[Ancient Nerd]

Originally Posted by Bungle

I have seen more and more forward facing cameras being installed with white lines painted behind them!. This is obviosly an attempt to fool motorists into approaching the camera speeding, then slowing down to pass the white lines the other side of the camera. If you don't know what to look out for it is easy to get caught!

It really does make a mockery of any claims that the cameras are there for safety reasons, not to generate income.

[allan40alt]

I'm sorry, but have I got this wrong? Why all the fuss over speed cameras? Road safety experts have decided a speed limit that they consider 'safe'. Why do people consider that they know better by speeding and then moaning if they get caught?

Sorry, I'm a boring old fart I know, but I reckon they should double the amount of cameras and impose even more fines!!!

..ahhh, I can feel a thousand replies being typed.

[Bart]

Ancient Nerd,

The white lines painted behind the cameras are probably because the camera is bi-directional, a camera of this type is a Truvelo. The head can be rotated around, which is excellent for catching motorcyclists.

Speed limits and safety cameras are there for a reason and the reason is to reduce the numbers of killed or seriously injured. Speed limits are set in accordance with current criteria and if everyone adhered to them then cameras could be located on every road and nobody would get caught.

I get annoyed with idiots who say they are there to generate revenue - bo*****s I say to you. I hope that a close member of your family or a friend isn't killed as a result of a road traffic collision. Maybe you too would be campaigning for a reduction in the speed of a road or advocating the use of a camera if you lost someone.

In my humble opinion I hope that legislation is brought in to make it illegal to own a device that alerts you to the location of a safety camera. All they allowyou to do is to speed then slow down on the approach to a site so that you won't get caught.

B.

[Ancient Nerd]

Bart,

I find your comments seriously offensive, as well as ill considered.

Originally Posted by Bart

The white lines painted behind the cameras are probably because the camera is bi-directional, a camera of this type is a Truvelo. The head can be rotated around, which is excellent for catching motorcyclists.

The Truvelo is a forward facing camera that does not require the multiple lines used by the older rear facing Gatso type cameras. It has three parallel lines just in front of the camera, and very close together.

Bidirectional cameras can be either Truvelo or Gatso types.

Originally Posted by Bart

Speed limits and safety cameras are there for a reason and the reason is to reduce the numbers of killed or seriously injured. Speed limits are set in accordance with current criteria and if everyone adhered to them then cameras could be located on every road and nobody would get caught.

No, that is the justification, not the reason. If it were the reason, then current criteria need changing. I have seen far too many cases where speed limits are quite ridiculous - both ways. I have also seen enough examples of appalling road design to convince me that much traffic planning activity needs external review before changes are put into place

Originally Posted by Bart

I get annoyed with idiots who say they are there to generate revenue - bo*****s I say to you. I hope that a close member of your family or a friend isn't killed as a result of a road traffic collision. Maybe you too would be campaigning for a reduction in the speed of a road or advocating the use of a camera if you lost someone.

That was the really offensive part. I get equally annoyed by people who say that they aren't there to generate income, but I try not to swear to make the point.

If the interest was safety, money would be spent on Traffic Police, who would be able to identify both speeding and bad driving, including the motor bikes that are not identified by any of the current camera systems. Unfortunately, the police don't generate income as effectively as speed cameras, so their numbers are being reduced.

I also hope that a close member of my family or a friend isn't killed as a result of a road traffic collision. However, I have little faith that installing a speed camera will have much effect. Those drivers that speed will continue to speed and brake for cameras, conceivably more dangerous than the original speeding.

Originally Posted by Bart

In my humble opinion I hope that legislation is brought in to make it illegal to own a device that alerts you to the location of a safety camera. All they allowyou to do is to speed then slow down on the approach to a site so that you won't get caught.

Fortunately, no-one in a responsible position takes the same view. I believe that many Police Forces actively encourage the use of GPS based systems, and provide details to those that maintain the databases.

And before you continue to humbly pontificate, I do normally keep within the speed limit, I have no tickets or endorsements for any kind of traffic offence, and nor do I expect to acquire any. I use a camera warning device at times because I think that it is becoming progressively more difficult to be sure of maintaining the correct speed when there is often considerable inconsistency in the manner in which limits are marked.

Edit: Basegreen: If as a moderator, you find this post, or the one I'm answering out of keeping with the standards of this forum, I am more than happy to see both deleted.