INFO for court case
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 6,592
Likes: 0
From: Yorba Linda, CA
Originally Posted by Sabre,Dec 1 2009, 09:47 AM
If only he had made it to 88mph. He could have tried to travel in time to a point before the ticket in order to stop himself from speeding.
Splat.
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,119
Likes: 47
From: Wildwood, TN.
Originally Posted by wickedwiggles,Nov 29 2009, 11:20 PM
Alright I got a speeding ticket for 66 in a 45 which I wouldn't really care about except it nulls the deferment of previous speeding ticket and me being a young male...well you can just imagine what the insurance company will do to me(PS I don't have any accidents on my record)
Anyways I need to know the distance a stock 2001 s2k needs (f20motor) to travel in order to reach 60mph (I think the time is 5.5 seconds on a straight away?) or 66mph.
My figuring is that from the turn i was at to the point where the cop could have radared me is not a long enough distance for me to make it to 66mph I mean I drove it and it was .1 mi distance from my start to where he radared me. Also if you could link to manufacturer sites or anything I print and site b/c I am gonna have to present this in front of a judge.
And no I don't know how fast I was goin when he got me but I am starting to get suspicious as this is the second time the cop has cited me for 20 over and first time I wasn't too worried as it didn't go on insurance but now I am thinking this isn't a coincidence.
Links and facts/specs are what I need I can find the time for 0-60 but not the distance.
Anyways I need to know the distance a stock 2001 s2k needs (f20motor) to travel in order to reach 60mph (I think the time is 5.5 seconds on a straight away?) or 66mph.
My figuring is that from the turn i was at to the point where the cop could have radared me is not a long enough distance for me to make it to 66mph I mean I drove it and it was .1 mi distance from my start to where he radared me. Also if you could link to manufacturer sites or anything I print and site b/c I am gonna have to present this in front of a judge.
And no I don't know how fast I was goin when he got me but I am starting to get suspicious as this is the second time the cop has cited me for 20 over and first time I wasn't too worried as it didn't go on insurance but now I am thinking this isn't a coincidence.
Links and facts/specs are what I need I can find the time for 0-60 but not the distance.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by magician,Dec 1 2009, 11:21 AM
If it takes, say, 8 seconds to hit 60 mph, then, assuming a constant rate of acceleration, you get:
88 ft/sec ÷ 8 sec = 11 ft/sec².
d = ½at² = ½(11)(8)² = 352 ft. = 0.0667 mi.
Even with a 0 - 60 time of 8 seconds - slower than anyone's claimed here - you can still hit 60 mph in 2/3 of the distance he measured off. To reach 66 mph would take 8.8 seconds, and:
d = ½at² = ½(11)(8.8)² = 426 ft. = 0.08 mi.
That's hitting 66 mph in 4/5 the distance he measured off, assuming really, really sluggish acceleration.
The upshot's the same: his argument that it's not possible that he was going 66 mph is fatuous.
88 ft/sec ÷ 8 sec = 11 ft/sec².
d = ½at² = ½(11)(8)² = 352 ft. = 0.0667 mi.
Even with a 0 - 60 time of 8 seconds - slower than anyone's claimed here - you can still hit 60 mph in 2/3 of the distance he measured off. To reach 66 mph would take 8.8 seconds, and:
d = ½at² = ½(11)(8.8)² = 426 ft. = 0.08 mi.
That's hitting 66 mph in 4/5 the distance he measured off, assuming really, really sluggish acceleration.
The upshot's the same: his argument that it's not possible that he was going 66 mph is fatuous.