For those with dash cams - do you enable or disable speed recording?

JustAnotherSaver

z1a wrote: »

Not bothered about speed recording but have audio recording off. Reason being I could have incriminated myself a year ago when a driver catching me up rapidly from behind, and was about to undertake me by using a cycle lane. I was watching him and made sure he couldn't, when we got near traffic lights I braked rather heavily, saying to my passenger who was also watching him in door mirror, "I'll have this winker"
Sure enough he ran into the back of me, writing off his BMW. Police called, by him, who advised him that whatever the circumstances he is at fault.
Only when I viewed the recording did I realise that my comment to passenger was loud and clear!

Interesting angle. I had one at the weekend ... my music was up quite loud (Stevie Wonder - Superstition for anyone semi interested) and i was indicating to turn off the main road. There was no oncoming traffic. I noticed a guy on the pavement & he was walking in the direction of walking across the junction i was about to turn in to but he was on the pavement & was looking forward.

So i began to turn (as i had been indicating) yet he didn't stop. He stepped right out in to the road and i had to swerve round him. Beeped my horn, told him to watch where he's going the silly willy-head & carried on my way.

Watched the recording back to see whether i'd missed it & he was well on the road - no i hadn't missed it, no he wasn't on the road, he was on the pavement when i started to turn but he stepped in to my way anyway, but anyway despite the loud music you could hear me clear enough.


So i've wondered about turning the audio off :rotfl:

Warwick_Hunt

Tarambor wrote: »

Not at all. Count the number of central white lines you pass in a second. The distances between them are known. Page 4 of this document. Between the start of one and the start of another on the short dashed lines it si 6000mm or 6 metres. Easy to extrapolate your speed with a bit of rudimental maths.

If you are on a motorway and pass say 5 in a second that is 30 metres you've travelled in a second. 3600 second in an hour so you would have travelled a total of 108,000 metres or 108km in an hour so was driving at 67.1MPH in that second.

Unfortunately it's not that simple.

Mercdriver

Tarambor wrote: »

Not at all. Count the number of central white lines you pass in a second. The distances between them are known. Page 4 of this document. Between the start of one and the start of another on the short dashed lines it si 6000mm or 6 metres. Easy to extrapolate your speed with a bit of rudimental maths.

If you are on a motorway and pass say 5 in a second that is 30 metres you've travelled in a second. 3600 second in an hour so you would have travelled a total of 108,000 metres or 108km in an hour so was driving at 67.1MPH in that second.

Is Joe Blogg's dashcam type approved then?

Car_54

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

So i began to turn (as i had been indicating) yet he didn't stop. He stepped right out in to the road and i had to swerve round him. Beeped my horn, told him to watch where he's going the silly willy-head & carried on my way.

Do you think perhaps you could have anticipated his actions?

Sounding the horn as a warning before the event might have saved your having to swerve.

System

z1a wrote: »

Not bothered about speed recording but have audio recording off. Reason being I could have incriminated myself a year ago when a driver catching me up rapidly from behind, and was about to undertake me by using a cycle lane. I was watching him and made sure he couldn't, when we got near traffic lights I braked rather heavily, saying to my passenger who was also watching him in door mirror, "I'll have this winker"
Sure enough he ran into the back of me, writing off his BMW. Police called, by him, who advised him that whatever the circumstances he is at fault.

But the video would have shown that you braked hard for no reason as well, it would have shown the nose of the car dipping considerably and a rapid slow down in speed so there being no audio would have made no difference.

And you're no better than a crash for cash scammer. Did you decide to do this just because he was driving a BMW?

neilmcl

z1a wrote: »

Not bothered about speed recording but have audio recording off. Reason being I could have incriminated myself a year ago when a driver catching me up rapidly from behind, and was about to undertake me by using a cycle lane. I was watching him and made sure he couldn't, when we got near traffic lights I braked rather heavily, saying to my passenger who was also watching him in door mirror, "I'll have this winker"
Sure enough he ran into the back of me, writing off his BMW. Police called, by him, who advised him that whatever the circumstances he is at fault.
Only when I viewed the recording did I realise that my comment to passenger was loud and clear!

So you've just admitted on a public forum to an alleged offence of dangerous driving, well done. :T

custardy

z1a wrote: »

Not bothered about speed recording but have audio recording off. Reason being I could have incriminated myself a year ago when a driver catching me up rapidly from behind, and was about to undertake me by using a cycle lane. I was watching him and made sure he couldn't, when we got near traffic lights I braked rather heavily, saying to my passenger who was also watching him in door mirror, "I'll have this winker"
Sure enough he ran into the back of me, writing off his BMW. Police called, by him, who advised him that whatever the circumstances he is at fault.
Only when I viewed the recording did I realise that my comment to passenger was loud and clear!

Yes thats the way to drive safely.
Well worth having a camera to show how you are justice on the roads...................

iolanthe07

I was watching him and made sure he couldn't

That wasn't very clever, imho. It's not up to you to punish bad driving by upping the ante. It would have been better to have just let him go. If people drove more defensively, whatever the provocation, there would be fewer accidents.

z1a

"And you're no better than a crash for cash scammer. Did you decide to do this just because he was driving a BMW?" - No.

But the video would have shown that you braked hard for no reason as well, - There was a reason - traffic lights turned red so I stopped.

So you've just admitted on a public forum to an alleged offence of dangerous driving, well done. - OK, report "z1a" then.

Yes thats the way to drive safely.
Well worth having a camera to show how you are justice on the roads....
- It was my kind of justice.

That wasn't very clever, imho. It's not up to you to punish bad driving by upping the ante. It would have been better to have just let him go. If people drove more defensively, whatever the provocation, there would be fewer accidents. - Suited me because my car was old, and insurance payout would have been better than current value. As it happens, no damage to mine, so no claim.

And, yes, insurance co. was notified.

JustAnotherSaver

z1a wrote: »

dangerous driving, well done. - OK, report "z1a" then.

I've always wondered when people say things like that.