anyone on here

[yng_750 247]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/9435699/The-fast-and-hes-furious

strangely enough i can kind of see his logic but still cant expect to get that ruling overturned.

[gjm 3258]

The presentation of speeds here still makes me smile. Several times I have seen the shock and outrage headlines citing speeds of "up to 130km/h". In the UK, on a clear dual carriageway, you'll probaby not even raise the eyelids of PC Traffic Cop at anything under 85mph, and on a clear motorway it would be entirely dependent on their mood as to whether they came looking for you at 90mph. (130km/h is around 80mph, a very normal cruising speed on UK motorways despite the limit being 70mph.) OK, so this event involves a higher speed (but doesn't mention how that speed was recorded).

Spped doesn't kill, provided it is safely and appropriately applied. Whether the 7-series driver in question was driving in a situation that meant he was being unsafe, I can't say - I don't know the road, or the area. He cites in defence that there was no other traffic around, yet the prosecution continues to say he was a danger to the public.

Judge Venning seems to contradict himself:

"According to the appeal decision released by Justice Geoffrey Venning, he accepted that while there was no other traffic near Fleming's car..."

Then:

"Justice Venning found that if Fleming had at any point lost control of his car, it would have been dangerous to the public."

OK. In the event of an accident, the damage caused and the eventual positioning of the vehicle may have presented a danger to other traffic coming along behind. But if I crash at 75km/h on SH1 around J427, it's more than likely to cause a similar problem.

Sure, the driver was breaking the law. But it seems rhetoric and drama have been used to justify the fine and licence suspension, rather than law.

[E30 325i Rag-Top 2956]

Good to see that a member of the NZ legal system is better qualified to determine the stopping ability of a motor vehicle than all the designers, engineers, and testing officials that made it in the first place!

I would be very surprised if the Judge in question had even the slightest idea about how, ABS, EBD, ESC etc. work on a modern car. Maybe the guy's defence team should ask him what the stopping distance of a 740 travelling at that speed would be (as he knows so much about it) and then see whether he is within half a mile of the right number?

Yes the guy was speeding, but such un-informed comments have no place in a court of law!

[Allanw 1071]

It does say the visibility in the tunnel is only 200M - you MUST be able to stop within the distance you can see, on a road like that (half the distance on some other Roads).

It'd be pretty impressive to see it stop from nearly 200km/h in just 200M!

[gjm 3258]

It does say the visibility in the tunnel is only 200M - you MUST be able to stop within the distance you can see, on a road like that (half the distance on some other Roads).

It'd be pretty impressive to see it stop from nearly 200km/h in just 200M!

The stopping distance is not one easy to work out.

100-0 in a 740i is around 50m, as tested by magazines and depending on model year. (Don't know if this included driver reaction time.) 200-0 is not going to be twice as far; it'll be a lot further. How much further, I don't know and can't be bothered to calculate.

Stop within visible distance is a good rule, imo. However, the comments made by the Judge(s) regarding this, in this context, are likely arbitrary and unproven, given by someone probably unqualified to even estimate what is possible and what is not in those circumstances.

My comments aren't around whether or not the driver should have been punished, only that the reasons given are inappropriate. Simply saying "you were driving at nearly twice the posted legal limit" would have been sufficient; anything more sounds like moral indignation and self-justification.

[aja540i 1906]

My comments aren't around whether or not the driver should have been punished, only that the reasons given are inappropriate. Simply saying "you were driving at nearly twice the posted legal limit" would have been sufficient; anything more sounds like moral indignation and self-justification.

I agree, but it sounds like he is appealing a dangerous driving conviction, not a speeding ticket, so maybe he is correct and just because he was doing twice the limit doesnt mean it was dangerous. Not defending him, just saying...

[yng_750 247]

as much as we can toot about performance of the car, if he got off on that precedent then lambos would be able to do 300kph.

im sure it was low risk compared to other things he could have done but still silly.

[Eagle 1662]

Hard luck getting caught at the end of the day, plenty of people have put the hammer down on a straight road at some point in their life.

[nath 134]

is the type of driver that will kill someone else with his arrogant attitude.

No merit what so ever to his argument.

Couldn't have put it better myself. It is NEVER an intelligent person, who considers other people in his or her actions, who makes a decision like excessive speed.

[Allanw 1071]

They don't account for reaction times.

[richard 384]

Moral of the story: Don't travel at 200km/h on public roads and get court but if you do, get a good lawyer.

[Apex 693]

Hard luck getting caught at the end of the day, plenty of people have put the hammer down on a straight road at some point in their life.

I fully agree. On a motorway with multiple lanes, good weather and visibility, late at night with no traffic on the road it has been tempting to test out the top speed of my car.

I drive at 200kph on public roads all the time though, some as wide as your driveway, 200kph on a motorway is nothing, its like a big wide smooth race track.

Yeah, they do; but even if not and the driver was half asleep the cops testimony is obviously incorrect. He's out by a mile.

Nope. Sorry to disagree but don't drive at 200km/h on public roads period. Whether you get caught (or court) is irrelevant.

Time and a place. The thought of you driving near 70kph through a residential where my family are scares me more than you giving your car a boot on the motorway.

[huff3r 347]

Being able to slow for a corner is one thing, but to prove it wasn't dangerous he would've had to have been able to come to a complete stop in the 200m visibility, so that if there was an obstruction blocking the entire road he would not slow to 120 and barrel straight into it...

[gjm 3258]

This seems to be the crux of the issue, for me.

Driving at 200km/h on a public road is illegal. In some circumstances, it may be safe but that doesn't change the law. There are plenty of circumstances where even 50km/h is dangerous, but the law doesn't necessarily legislate for that, either. This kinda calls for a definition of 'excessive speed', but that's tricky, at best, and quite possibly subjective. Certainly it varies dependent on a huge number of factors. The cop who said "excessive speed is always a factor in serious crashes" is at one level, correct. If the vehicles involved had been going slower, they may not have crashed. However, there are crashes, ergo there is excessive speed. Logic of the worst kind. Even the RTL in the UK proved that most accidents don't have speed as a predominant cause (although it may have been a contributory factor), but the British press, government and anyone similar categorically ignored the results, calling for a different set of statistics to be used.

The driver of the 740i should be penalised, and was. Whether the sentence fits the crime is another matter - it might have done had he sorted a decent defence. Individuals will likely disagree. However, some of the statements given in court appear to be based on rubbish... Poor reporting, or another case of brainwashing the uninformed public into thinking the motorised horseless carriage is an uncontrollable and dangerous beast?

[Allanw 1071]

Edit: he could stop in 150m so the overall visibility of 200m is irrelevant just to make my point clear.

He's travelling over 55metres per second - that gives him less than 1 second to recognise the need to stop, and react - applying the brakes. Those brake tests quoted do not take that into account - they're rating just the braking performance once the brakes are applied. Those tests are probably not on any random piece of road (or entering a tunnel, going over a brow, turning left). They're going to use a flat, straight, dry, clean road (edit... probably a track not road ).

Edited November 24, 2013 by Allanw

[Apex 693]

**Side story:

I've driven both my Mitsi Evo and my e36 Evo at 250km/h and it was a fascinating experience. Both reached the target speed but the Mitsi took a lot longer. It got to 180 faster (16psi of boost) but then really, really struggled to surge past 210. The BMW just pushed all the way to 250 only really starting to reach at about 235.

At 250 in the Mitsi Evi it was PLANTED the areo on those things are astonishing but boy the noise and the air. Hot, hot engine bay air was pushing through every crevice in the dash and absolutely howling, it was quite uncomfortable. On the BMW however, from a sensory perspective you couldn't even tell you were doing 250, it was quite and calm within the cabin. On the other hand, damn did the M3 feel less comfortable... it was lifting and getting light all over the place... not unstable but certainly not reassuring.

Can't recommend these speeds sorry.

I never even knew a Mitsubishi Evolution was geared for those speeds, all I have driven have run out of puff around 200 and are not geared to do much more, they are geared for rally not the autobahn.

Would love to see a old crappy 740 try and stop from 200kph, I have a feeling it would do it once and then catch fire.

[Allanw 1071]

Try stopping your car from 100 and tell me if you get closer to 40 or 80 meters... then you'll know...

Stopping suddenly makes me ill.

Would love to see a old crappy 740 try and stop from 200kph, I have a feeling it would do it once and then catch fire.

Ahhh... you've seen those brakepads too!

[lord_jagganath 421]

Did a 200kph run in an old e34 520i once(before it became the 528i). never again.

[Eagle 1662]

Probably bad\worn suspension and\or tyres. Mine is solid as at 200 even on not so great roads

[Apex 693]

So Pukekohe race track then? Haha

[_ethrty-Andy_ 2132]

owned a 520i, can confirm its out of ideas at 130km/h, so surprised you saw 200km/h….

Edited November 25, 2013 by _Ethrty-Andy_

[NZ BMW 368]

We all know the speed limit and the consequences of breaking it. You live with the choices you make.

I took an S Class to high speed once - the car was fine but I don't know about my ability to react at those speeds....

Given the way the media in this country operates, if the car was of any consequence they could not have resisted putting the year and the value of the vehicle in the article; to get everyone up in arms about this arrogant plutocrat thumbing his nose at society and it's laws. Because they did I assume it's an old POS poorly maintained car with bargain basement brake parts. I don't even want those things doing 100km/h on the roads near me.

Edited November 26, 2013 by NZ BMW