Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Fair Registration for Modified Vehicles. NSW

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Kermie, Jul 14, 2010.

  1. At this point there is no mention of this being applying to modified bikes, but knowing the govt im sure it will follow on.


  2. I hate the RTA and their crusade against modified cars. I used to own a Skyline with a few minor mods, exhaust, front mount intercooler, new ecu etc.

    Being pulled over and defected for crap like that is just stupid. Young guys have been modifying their cars for decades, it's all part of car ownership. Hell the movie Grease is about a bloody street race with a modified car!

    I bet these individual compliance thingys will cost a bloody fortune to obtain and I bet you have to pay for the test regardless of if your car passes or not, which it won't because they will make it stupidly hard.

    I have not once heard a viable reasoning behind the illegality of POD style air filters.
    The excuses they give are so bad its almost funny.

    1: They could catch fire in the engine bay because many have an oily coating.
    The flashpoint of even the most flamable oils catch fire is well above the melting point for the plastic most car airboxes are made out of. In other words, if your ambient engine bay temps are hot enough for the POD to catch fire, well trust me, that's the least of your worries.

    2: Noise pollution
    Right....because the sound of air being sucked into an air filter is so much worse than the sound of the engine itself or the exhaust, or the truck engine braking next to it or the harley going past.

  3. They really are twits arent they

    i feel sorry for modified car owners, some pour their heart and soul (and wallet) into them and it is a never ending struggle to keep them on the road

    Question - define modified? Does it include all mods? What about factory fitted extras. Once again i think the gov have missed the point entirely with this one
  4. Mods are reasonably defined as it stands - I'm doing up a little fourby to be mildly capable offroad, and you can do anything that doesn't affect the chassis, engine, power, handling, steering etc and that obviously doesn't make it unroadworthy. Basically cosmetic stuff.

    There are thresholds where things like bigger wheels/tyres, wider wheel track, ride height, etc can be 'self-certified' - but for example with my car you can fit 2" taller suspension with no dramas, but a 2" body lift has to be signed off by an engineer. You can fit 15% (I think) bigger tyres yourself, increase the track by wider wheels, tyres, or both within similar limits.

    Much more extreme stuff can be engineered, but the amount of consultation required would add up.

    The issue with the new proposal is the compliance with current ADRs. Think about a classic car, say a late 60s Corvette Stingray that someone might be restoring and doing up. They are expecting a 40+ year old car to be brought up to current manufacturing standards? This would include stoopid stuff like the number and position of lights/indicators, those nice classic shaped bumpers with the pointy bits would probably fail... It's ludicrous.
  5. True.

    I was working as an official at a 24 hour race at Winton many years ago and one of the Rotary cars was having trouble meeting the noise limits having added baffles and packing into the muffler with no success. The Clerk of Course then suggested putting a thicker air filter on it and bingo the noise level dropped to well below the limit, so much so some of the baffles could be removed from the muffler.

    Sometimes the induction noise from the air being sucked in is just as loud as the air being pushed out of an engine.

    Believe it or not =D>

    There's also some serious work being done in NSW to get a so called Rally Rego scheme up and running similar to what we have here in Victoria. Rally cars are built with full harnesses, roll cages and intrusion bars which mean they no longer comply with the ADR's (but are safer for the occupants??), the Rally Rego scheme allows limited use of these vehicles on the roads so they have TAC coverage when not actually blasting through rally stages (where the event insurances covers that stuff).
  6. If memory serves me right, from 2013 Electronic Stability Control becomes mandatory under ADRs. If the RTA has its way, better be handy with electronics before touching that Stingray or Skyline...
  7. Seems to me they're trying to legislate older vehicles off the road. Iether you leave your classic bone stock - which can be a problem when it comes to some parts, or modifie the fnck out of them, but that's the piont then?

  8. Before I got into bikes I was heavily involved in the modified car and cruising scene and it always amazed me how the cops would target us who lowered our cars but better tyres and rims on, modified the engine, changed the seats and steering wheel. A lot of stuff that would make the cars safer we were getting fined for yet the big fourbies with 45 degrees of boody roll or the young mums and hippys in the beat up car with the cracked windscreen would drive right by.
  9. I used to modify cars all the time

    One of my rx3 coupes had a 18 page engineers report on all the modifications ( I think the car was an ex group c racer at one stage in the 70's)- there was not one part of the car that was not modified - I am talking rose jointed suspension - bigger 4 wheel disc brakes , wide body kit and wing , turbo charged engine etc etc etc

    -- when I was pulled over to get defected I showed them the report -- they would make an interest of reading through it ( just flicking actually ) and you could see the disappointment in the cops face that they just lost out on a "motherlode" for defects.

    why did I get an engineers report - well the engineer is trained in this and knows the physics etc involved better than I did - and most importantly BETTER THAN ANY COP EVER WILL KNOW.

    thus it was my insurance premium -- the amount I paid the engineer was easily saved in fines defects and general harassment by the fascist enforcers.

    Plus the satisfaction of basically legally saying "farrrk you fascist" was well worth the money paid to the engineer
  10. I believe its nothing to do with engine bay temps, its to do with backfire out the intake. Air fuel mix can get back up the intake and ignite. Definitely flammable enough if that happens. Not saying it happens a lot, but safety regs are always like that.

    Just do it legal and enclose your pod and stop bitching.
  11. I've heard many people with engineers certs still get stickered and when they say "What about this report?" the cop just says, "Show it to the inspector".

    You still get screwed and have to pay for the inspection even if they find that its all legal.
  12. If this is so and it was happening regularly then I would be taking further action

    Its been 20 years but I think the RTA computer database had the details of the engineers report etc and stamped by the RTA -- if a carnt I mean cop can not check via radio etc then in my view its harrasment
  13. Re: Induction noise is loud.
    +1 to this. +1000 even.

    Our F-SAE car passed the F-SAE noise requirements (with a forward-facing podfilter intake) by more than 8dB(a).

    The subsequent year used a rear-facing podfilter intake for packaging/layout reasons, Wollongong-university style, and bitched to me no end about how my muffler/exhaust design wasn't passing the noise standards. [-(

    Induction noise is super-loud when the throttle bodies are open, when you take all the resonator/airbox chambers out of the intake.
  14. Yup, and, although it doesn't affect the legal position, on a bike it tends to affect the rider more than exhaust noise. A loud pipe almost seems to be left behind at speed, but the drone from beneath the tank remains prominent at all times.
  15. Hi
    The applicable ADR's for ICV's are far, far less restrictive than the ADR's for regular passenger vehicles. The way i understad it there 3 main points for ICV compliance, engineers inspection, linear and torsional chassis test, and emissions, use an ADR compiant engine and you wont even have to do it. Some engineers use their own discression and will allow older engines without testing.

    No one has actually said what the "modified vehicle" has had done to it for them to justify calling it an ICV. Its hard to comment based on assumptions, but this might not be all bad.

  16. hmm I recall a ICV of a mazda mx5 imported from Japan and then used as a donor car for transplanting a v8
    Done by a company in QLD

    apparantly not that easy if I recall

    Think it was called the mazda bullet

  17. I broke it down into 3 main points, i didn't say it was simple.
  18. In the case of pre ADR bikes,in a lot of cases whos to say what is factory standard.I dont like there chances picking whats been modifyed on my Laverda.BTW the open Jota for want of another word muffliers are standard,same with Contis on Bevels,love my pre ADR bikes
  19. When you look at the ADRs applying to bikes in detail, apart from the noise regs, they're not actually that onerous. Aside from radical chops (which are already, basically, illegal) and really ancient stuff with original brakes, pretty much anything that can be safely ridden on the roads could be made to comply.

    For once, we seem to be seeing some proposed legislation (and I'd be interested to know what the reaction of the other states has been, given that we're supposed to be harmonising or regs) that actually favours bikes over cars.

    That said, I'm agin' it.
  20. For the life of me I don't know who let those clear blinkers pass ADR,there bloody hard to see,at least there letting so leeway with the distance between blinkers,having them hanging out there is painful,happy medium between safety and appearance would be nice.