Your all wrong very wrong but i am not right .
OOPS did i say that out loud :1087:
Printable View
Your all wrong very wrong but i am not right .
OOPS did i say that out loud :1087:
Quote:
Originally Posted by johno90
Only applies to older vehicles and be wary of the dreaded Internet as there will be heaps of links to long outdated info ...here is the applicable clause of the ADR 18/03 (pls excuse my boldface for clarity only not shouting) as of 2006Quote:
Originally Posted by johno90
Excerpt from ADR 18/03 Instrumentation
5.3. The speed indicated shall not be less than the true speed of the vehicle. At the test
speeds specified in paragraph 5.2.5. above, there shall be the following relationship
between the speed displayed (V1 ) and the true speed (V2).
0 ≤ (V1 - V2) ≤ 0.1 V2 + 4 km/h
The ADR was changed in 2005 for effect in 2006 to align with other countries. Prior to that, yes, Australia was +/- 10% under ADR's but virtually all vehicles manuf overseas had been complying to the E standard for many years IE they weren't fitting different speedos etc to Aussie variants.
Apologies as i should have clarified that in my earlier post and the "25" typo didn't help :1087:
Shows how behind we are. we had a mazda cx9 showing doing 94 at 100km's and by mazda that was within manufacture specs.
[QUOTE=the evil twin;224959]Only applies to older vehicles and be wary of the dreaded Internet as there will be heaps of links to long outdated info ...here is the applicable clause of the ADR 18/03 (pls excuse my boldface for clarity only not shouting) as of 2006
Excerpt from ADR 18/03 Instrumentation
5.3. The speed indicated shall not be less than the true speed of the vehicle. At the test
speeds specified in paragraph 5.2.5. above, there shall be the following relationship
between the speed displayed (V1 ) and the true speed (V2).
0