# What speed do you think this flyby is?



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

What speed do you think this flyby is. 

Yes the camera operator needs shooting. http://www.zen89393.zen.co.uk/Images/flyby.wmv

[edit]

Changed the link


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

ResB said:


> What speed do you think this flyby is.
> 
> Yes the camera operator needs shooting. http://www.zen89393.zen.co.uk/HowQuick.wmv


Don't know, but judging by the way you stamped on the brakes and kept your foot there, it must be quite fast......

..... fast enough for dibble to have you for posting incriminating evidence on the internet?


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

Doesn't look that fast to me, and I don't think the braking looks hard.

60?


----------



## The Silver Surfer (May 14, 2002)

Can't get it to play. It's coming up with "The file name, directory name, or volume label syntax is incorrect!" :?


----------



## steveh (Jan 14, 2004)

Around the ton and you were on the Isle of Man weren't you. :wink:


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Around 90MPH


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

kmpowell / Steveh - It wasn't me.  Just happens to be a car similar to mine.

Clived - It doesn't does it? I believe the braking was gradual your correct. To me it looks like 60mph but I understand it to be just over 170mph...down to the camera man I'm afraid.

Paul - Having a DMS M5 should have given you an advantage, but perhaps not. 

SS - Try this one. http://www.zen89393.zen.co.uk/flyby.wmv


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Honestly does not look or sound like 170MPH but perhaps the wobbly cameraman is to blame. Does look quick but not mad quick.

I've never driven at such speeds so am in no way a good judge  :lol: :wink:


----------



## The Silver Surfer (May 14, 2002)

ResB said:


> SS - Try this one. http://www.zen89393.zen.co.uk/flyby.wmv


Still no joy.  (I'm using an Apple Mac, but do have Windows Media Player installed.)


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

The Silver Surfer said:


> ResB said:
> 
> 
> > SS - Try this one. http://www.zen89393.zen.co.uk/flyby.wmv
> ...


Ah, hang on, so you can play avi's or mpg's then...gimme a min.

[edit]

http://www.zen89393.zen.co.uk/flyby.mpg


----------



## Jac-in-a-Box (Nov 9, 2002)

Let's try a re-run towards the end of the week...I drive, you film :wink: 

Dave


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

I trust the cold (sorry man flu) has gone as we can't be under the weather when you got some serious lady hips to caress. Looking forward to Friday as the Porka should be dirty by then. I cleaned and quick finnished it today and it certainly needs that little extra. Note to myself, "must remember to book Friday off.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

I find it difficult to believe it's 170 mph for the sole reason that you wouldn't want to be doing that speed going into a corner. :?


----------



## ObiWan (Sep 25, 2005)

Looks nothing like 170km let alone 170mph :?


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

ObiWan said:


> Looks nothing like 170km let alone 170mph :?


170yards? :wink:


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

It's not really a corner, more of a bend. A bit of an illusion that view as the bend is still some way off but the driver was taking no chances I would guess. I swear, thats why I posted it, it's genuinely 170 mph. I guess one of the reasons the brakes are on for so long is that at that speed it's difficult to guage distance. It's not a speed you do every day I would guess. 

The more I watch it the faster it gets. lol..... the rear view does look faster than the front approach, just look at the ground its covering.

[edit]

Now this does look like it's moving, but it's in a tunnel and it's dark and the video could have been edited at 1.5 x speed.


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

I've watched it again. As someone who really has experienced 170 from the driving seat, I still don't think this looks like 170. Is there actually any proof?


----------



## Jac-in-a-Box (Nov 9, 2002)

Sitting in the seat at 170 (I've not experienced it) and watching a video clip of something travelling 170 would, I imagine, be two totally different things.

It's well known that asking a group to make an judgement on speed will produce wildy differing estimates.

Not disimilar to watching F1 on TV...you don't appreciate the speed.

Proof? The OP has said its genuine.
Then, having been passengered at 160 I'll have to defer to the wisdom of those who've travelled at "big boys" speeds :wink:

Dave


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

clived said:


> I've watched it again. As someone who really has experienced 170 from the driving seat, I still don't think this looks like 170. Is there actually any proof?


Perhaps he/she will do it again one day soon.  Might be tempting fate though.  We can but wait as I personally have no idea if the person reads this forum.


----------



## sandhua1978 (Sep 11, 2006)

Personally the Porsche is doing nowhere near 170, The skyline on the 2nd clip looks like it is/ was.

If anything as the Porsche does the flyby it looks like he is slowing down already. If anything would say he was doing closer to 100/110


----------



## ObiWan (Sep 25, 2005)

Jac-in-a-Box said:


> It's well known that asking a group to make an judgement on speed will produce wildy differing estimates.
> 
> Not disimilar to watching F1 on TV...you don't appreciate the speed.
> 
> Dave


Thats why there are so many accidents at junctions, people are just not good at estimating speeds.


----------



## KenTT (Feb 20, 2005)

I have to agree with Clive and others, it doesnâ€™t look like the speed itâ€™s purported to be. I used to video a lot of race meetings years ago and I would say itâ€™s probably closer to 85-95 MPH.


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

You gotta be joking right.  It just goes to show that Dave and Obiwan's comments are so right. :roll:


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

ResB said:


> You gotta be joking right.  It just goes to show that Dave and Obiwan's comments are so right. :roll:


Why? As definitive as you've got is "To me it looks like 60mph but I understand it to be just over 170mph..." Were you there? Who was there?


----------



## stgeorgex997 (Feb 25, 2004)

90 down to 40 I reckon, do I win???


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

stgeorgex997 said:


> 90 down to 40 I reckon, do I win???


Nope. Sorry.  It is 170mph. Hence the reason for the post but it doesn't look like that speed for sure. If you play the video at it's original size without enlarging, it gives a better impression of the speed I think. 

Clive - Trust me. It was 170mph.


----------



## stgeorgex997 (Feb 25, 2004)

Wow!! It really doesn't look, or sound that fast


----------

