That's a great result cdr. I like it. I think camera capabilities are going up while price is going down, and you now can get this kind of quality for much cheaper than a FinishLynx. Granted, for very important events, the frame rate is just too slow.
Going to 240fps would be great, because you will have to make fewer tie-breaker decisions. I think you could make a standing tie-breaker rule, like whoever was going faster (looking at previous frames) wins, or the opposite (favor the early attack or the late one).
I would recommend you test video size on some vehicle traffic or something (changing scene). It's possible that the 240fps video will be lower quality (more lossy compression or lower resolution) just to move the data around fast enough.
Also, it's possible that you could go to a lower quality and not affect your ability to identify numbers. You could probably have 1/5 the resolution and still be able to make out those big numbers.
Another thing that may help: you can zoom in further if you mount the camera at 90 degrees. You don't need as much left/right road coverage, and the 16:9 ratio will be much more useful on end for this application. Otherwise, you are wasting a large portion of your sensor. You can point your tripod 90 degrees down and mount the camera sideways, then your altitude is controlled by rotating the camera on its bolt -- or you can get or make a cheap L-bracket.
