speed limiter

Caught a news item on radio 4 about a guy with a Subaru Impretza (sp?)
getting off without a speeding fine because he was being accused of doing
138mph but his car was fitted with a speed-limiter set to 107mph.

As reported, the story raised more questions than it answered.

Couldn't find any reference on the BBC News site. I *think* the court was
in Inverness.

Does anyone have any more background on this story?

 

From what I remember (I read about this in one of the Jap performance
magazines) the car was a rally car fitted with slightly lower gearing and
more importantly an aftermarket ECU.

He could demonstrate that the effect of the lowered gearing and the rev
limit programmed into the ECU would've limited the car to the above speed.

 

I've been wondering about this. My bike zxr400 is an import and is
restricted to 112mph or rather it would be if it didn't have a rev booster
on it. So supposing I get a summons for doing 130mph, I then remove the rev
booster and cry foul. Makes you think.

 

So did the case get thrown out?
How was he originally caught?
How did *they* come up with "138mph"?
Does that prove the measurement equipment was flawed?

We need answers...

 

But what's the point? In a competition rally car that may need plenty revs
and not the top speed, fine (maybe), but why have a car lik that and
articificially limit it to a top speed of only 107. For a start a
rally-spec Impreza is going to be able to hit over 150 on (road)standard
gearing - do would you really want to lower it that much. And don't
aftermarket ECUs normally *raise* rev limits.....

It just sounds like the equivalent of taking a GSXR1000 and putting a 5
tooth sprocket on the front and a 75 on the rear for 'better
accelleration'.... But with the revviness of Muck's FZR.... and the fuel
economy of my NS....

On a different note, I do vaguely remember comrade Scargill getting pulled
in his chauffeur driven Jag for speeding during the miners' strike, but
being cleared when he was able to prove that the cruise control on the Jag
was factory set to 70mph or thereabouts and thus proving that the plod wot
nicked him were, for a change, lying through their teeth to try and score
political points....

Dave

 

Seems a bit crap that you can get off for 'only' doing 107

 

WavyDavy wrote:

Maybe it was a programmable one? Like those nice boost controllers you
can get.

How many mpg does your NS do then? The FZR does less than the Bandit
when you go fast, which is crap for a 250. :/

I had a mate who geared down his GSXR1100, and put a 750 swing arm on
it. Much stupid acceleration, but the only trouble being, is he flipped
it shortly after he got it on the road.

I thought that was a Rover, or did he crash in that one or something?

 

The evidence in court has to be reliable or it is deemed inadmissable.

 

Well it was definitely a British car (Muck thinks it may have been a Rover
in another reply...) and I don't remember how they explained it (I was a
teenager FFS, how was I supposed to think of anything but girls, girls and
trying to find offies that'd sell us Special Brew an Strongbow 1080 so we
could get drunk in front of girls. Remembering anything from then is a
bonus for me), but basically he'd had it set at the factory (and, apprently
only the factory could un-set it) so that it would get to 70 and then not go
any faster....

Dave

 

Muck muck@_TEETH_tallbloke.net says...

Somewhere around the 25MPG mark if my old RD500 is anything to go by.

 

Bet that doesn't give much tank range. 25mpg strikes me as quite good
for a 500cc 2 stroke. didn't the 750 Kettle get about 20mpg or something?

 

With the 500 kit fitted I don't have a clue. I got about 25mpg on the way
home with it in December and I could get my old ones down to around 16-17mpg
if I thrashed them. That said I also got 45mpg once cruising up the M40....
ISTR the FZR would return high 30s-low40s which, I suppose is crap compared
to a 250 commuter, but not bd if you compare to to it's Japanese competition
such as the TZR/NSR/RGV/KR1

As explained somewhere above, my recollection is rather vague. I'm sure it
was a British car though as I have the recollection of the factory being
called in to prove that only they could alter the cruise control settings.
Either that or I was so ratted on Special Brew and 1080 that I dreamt it all
in 1984/85....

Dave

 

.... but wait until the 500 kit is run in and I get that
race-tune-for-the-road paired to the hand made spannies and hit the
pencil-thin powerband. If I get more than 15mpg on a regular basis I'll be
fucking happy....

Dave

 

Muck muck@_TEETH_tallbloke.net says...

I don't remember any probs with the tank range, but TBH I didn't do much
touring on it. Salads H1 probably does low teens MPG wise.

 

Since I bought it, I've put 14.5 gallons in it.

It's done 127 miles.

You do the sums.

 

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/index.jsp

Link here to the story!!!

 

16 - 17 mpg, that's about what I got out of my Rover V8. Feck!

Yep, that's about right then for mpg, on a normal ride. I got it up to
64 mpg on a motorway run once, this was at 60mph though. It seems to do
a lot more mpg if you keep it below 10,000 rpm, which is now do-able...
as it'll pull from a bit below 5000 rpm.

 

Most of that ended up on the garage floor due to a leaky tap.

Still on the original litre of oil.

 

Salad Dodger says...

9(ish)MPG FFS, and how much 2 stroke ?

 

....not that he could have chopped and changed bits since he was pulled,
eh...