Im watching mythbusters about plate blockers and like high speed camera and this i just a random question.

Does anyone kno if any of those like plate blockers actually work?

by theory they are supposed to work because you can only see the plate if you look directly at it. it's designed to block all light and "scramble" the plate when you look at it from above or at a slightly angle,(like the red light cameras)

the spray is even worse as it's supposed to over exposure the flash at the lights. i think the plate blockers work but the sprays don't.
then again i heard that the blockers work and then again they don't work... so i dunno [dunno]

Most of them do absolutely nothing and the plate blockers with the lenses in them technically work depending on the camera angle, but they're illegal and blatantly obvious to policemen. So chances are you'll get a ticket for it before you even get to test it on a camera.

Also they weren't able to out run the camera because they used a flash to illuminate the car rather than ambient light. Most cameras can only shoot as fast as maybe 4000th of a sec. At over 100mph that might blur the liscense plate, but that's only because the duration of the shutter is open too long. Using flash on the other hand, the exposure, more or less, comes from the light the flash bounces off of the car and onto the sensor of the camera, rather than the ambient light coming in while the shutter is open. Basically the ambient light is constantly "on" and bouncing onto the sensor the whole time the shutter is open causing a blur as opposed to just the flash which is only on for like a billionth of a second and about as bright as the sun which freezes the object it hits. It's fast enough to stop high speed bullets dead in their tracks. I hope all that makes sense. [screwy]

Living proof here - They don't work.

Got nabbed by a red light camera a few years ago.

As for outrunning the camera shutter...

The British TV show "Top Gear" ran a speed camera test last year using a Mercedes Benz E55 (AMG Car). They were successful at outrunning the camera shutter, but only after 7 tries. The speed? 147 MPH.

Good luck!

man i knew that stuff is a waste of money

Living proof here - They don't work.

Got nabbed by a red light camera a few years ago.

As for outrunning the camera shutter...

The British TV show "Top Gear" ran a speed camera test last year using a Mercedes Benz E55 (AMG Car). They were successful at outrunning the camera shutter, but only after 7 tries. The speed? 147 MPH.

Good luck!
you didnt watch that episode long enough!

on 10/20/2002, Top Gear aired an episode to try to beat speed cameras. this is before James May joined the cast.
they were finally successful when the Stig raced a TVR Tuscon to a speed of 170MPH. at this speed, the camera was unable to even see it. the boys on Mythbusters are small game. they simply werent going fast enough! c'mon, you arent going to reach top speeds at a 1/4 track!!! you need an airfield. they drove the neon on the airfield, why not the Lambo? Jamey and Adam usually try to replicate the myth, although it has been busted. why didnt they do it here? F'n quitters!

i have heard of products that work but if they make it public i think police might have a problem with it

dont know if you are quoting the right episode.

on 10/20/2002, Top Gear aired an episode to try to beat speed cameras. this is before James May joined the cast.
they were finally successful when the Stig raced a TVR Tuscon to a speed of 170MPH. at this speed, the camera was unable to even see it. the boys on Mythbusters are small game. they simply werent going fast enough! c'mon, you arent going to reach top speeds at a 1/4 track!!! you need an airfield. they drove the neon on the airfield, why not the Lambo? Jamey and Adam usually try to replicate the myth, although it has been busted. why didnt they do it here? F'n quitters!

Yep. That was the one. I was trying to pull from memory. Thanks for the correction. [clap]

http://www.phantomplate.com/

they tried with other cars before the Tuscan.
1. Honda Civic TypeR - 129MPH...camera seen it.
2. Mercedes CL355 AMG - 148MPH...camera seen it.
3. TVR Tuscon S - 171MPH...camera DID NOT see it.

though, i believe the Brits use different cameras than us.

you didnt watch that episode long enough!

on 10/20/2002, Top Gear aired an episode to try to beat speed cameras. this is before James May joined the cast.
they were finally successful when the Stig raced a TVR Tuscon to a speed of 170MPH. at this speed, the camera was unable to even see it. the boys on Mythbusters are small game. they simply werent going fast enough! c'mon, you arent going to reach top speeds at a 1/4 track!!! you need an airfield. they drove the neon on the airfield, why not the Lambo? Jamey and Adam usually try to replicate the myth, although it has been busted. why didnt they do it here? F'n quitters!

Well other than just shutter speed it depends on the camera angle too. If the camera is up high and looking down at too much of an angle or looking across at too much of an angle the car could be out of the frame by the time the camera is triggered, but if the camera is looking down the road it'd be another story. Plus that air field runway was looking pretty run down. 80-100 mph on that runway would be ok, but 150+ would probably be a bad idea. As opposed to Top Gear and their clean
smooth paved runway.

I recall Gordon Ramsey mentioned that going up to the camera and covering the lens with cellophane wrap made it so the camera couldn't get anything. This was when he came in to do his celebrity lap on top gear.

^^i remember that episode.

i have heard of products that work but if they make it public i think police might have a problem with it

I've seen at least one product that actually does work, its basically a slave flash; when the system detects the red light/speed camera flash it fires its own flash directly over the license plate, causing the plate to overexpose and appear as just a white box in the picture. And short of a detailed search, the police would have no idea it was there since its installed inside the trunk lid/hatch (etc.) and is not directly visible. I researched this last fall after I got a bogus red light camera ticket; there aren't too many of them around here, but there's one just outside of Cleveland that has made the news a couple of times because they have the light cycle timed so the yellow light is obscenely short (its on for a second or less,) basically turning it into a red light trap. I was coming into the intersection with a green light, and as I'm about to go through it cycles through yellow and immediately to red, so I slammed on the brakes and stopped just over the "stop here on red" line. The camera fired anyways, and about three weeks later I got a ticket in the mail with a picture of me, stopped at the light. So I took it to court and had it thrown out. I was going to buy one because of this, but instead I've chosen to just avoid that intersection from now on...not really worth it when there's only a handful of the damn things.

One thing I've always noticed with Mythbusters is they always find something to be in favor of the police in car-related myths. When they did the "beat the radar" myth, they only tested methods that were obviously going to fail; they didn't test any of the commercially available radar or laser jammers/scramblers that have been proven to work.

if you have ever seen the old movie "the great race" one guys car has a plate rotator devise on his car that gives you a new plate with the flip of a switch. thats what you need bro. lol