More "hoon" laws

[Hi Octane]

Daily telegraph page 9

Car hoons risk losing rego if there cars are lowered or raised more than 5cm from standard


The changes from August 1 mean all mods will now require engineering approval...


Fark waht next


Rs4 here we come!!!!!!!!!

[SHANESVZSS]

i just saw the article , it still isnt clear to me, (unless doing something wrong) who decides weather your a "hoon" or not?.. the article didnt say "if cought speeding "ect ect.. so are they of the assumption that if your car is lowered the your a hoon? :confused:

[Ryzz]

Cant find any mention of that one the RTA Website. You sure this is a new law and not just some write up on hoons? Besides i cant see what raising a vehicle by more than 5cm has to do with being a hoon. Im sure most 4x4 clubs would be spitting chips at that one!

[C4B]

This law would be great for Disco3 / Range Rover owners. (air suspension that can raise or lower a mile). :)

[whitels1ss]

This law would be great for Disco3 / Range Rover owners. (air suspension that can raise or lower a mile). :)


They are hoons because they have adjustable hydraulic suspension!
In my opinion they should defect some of these for the Bull Bars and fishing rod holders on them! :soap:

[SimoVXSS]

Thats just ridiculous . How can the height of your vehicle show that your a hoon? Do they intend on the family car being banned from taking long trips? Fully loaded car with family and gear will drop the height of a vehicle as well.

[cygnet]

If it is going to be a law, how do they know what the stock hight of the vechial was?

Also most hiway patrol cars are lower in the rear then any of ours, all the gear they cary! Are they going to defect themselves?

[Hi Octane]

^^^ That the problem, Id say anyone will be a target if they have mags, are young ETc,Its all about revenue raising......

This is the reason i dont drive my rexxie, Its such a target & i dont have a bonnet scoop, i have stock wheels, Hi tech quiet exhaust......

[RaDz]

Snippets from the Heraldsun........

"From August 1, car owners will be limited to raising or lowering their suspension by no more than five centimetres, and all modifications will need approval from Roads and Traffic Authority engineers.

Any vehicle that is raised or lowered after August 1 will have to carry a certificate stating that the modifications confirm to safety standard requirements. "

[Angelo_XLR8]

if thats true im in serious trouble

ssl's would be a fail,

cam would be a fail

exhaust would be a fail

intake would be a fail

should i just sell now lol

[Clubb'N]

so 2' drop ... is this from across the range ...
like can execs base it off a hsv gts?
As long as it has 100 mm (10 cm/4') ground clearance, what's the issue?

[King Nothing]

Here's a news article about it. Everyone is in trouble here.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25790506-26103,00.html


NEW laws making it an offence to raise or lower a car's suspension without proper approval is about saving lives, New South Wales Roads Minister Michael Daley says.

From August 1, car owners will be limited to raising or lowering their suspension by no more than five centimetres, and all modifications will need approval from Roads and Traffic Authority engineers.

Currently, a car can be raised or lowered by up to five centimetres without approval and by up to 15 centimetres with approval.

Mr Daley says while drivers may think a lowered car looks "cool" it really is dangerous and any adjustment of more than five centimetres doesn't belong on the road.

"I don't want to see young hoons putting their lives or the lives of others at risk, just because they think their car looks better 15 centimetres closer to the ground," Mr Daley said.

"Raising or lowering a vehicle's height can put the driver, passengers and other road users at risk.

"It can affect handling, braking and safety features such as electronic stability control."

Any vehicle that is raised or lowered after August 1 will have to carry a certificate stating that the modifications confirm to safety standard requirements.

[deverson1]

I dont understand how lowering a car properly is dangerous.
My car is low and it is by far more predictiable and safer than it was at stock height.
Some cars at factory height bounce all over the road at 100kmph yet still pass a roadworthy.

[livewildcard]

Well here's the article

http://www.streetcorner.com.au/news/showPost.cfm?bid=11286&mycomm=ES

[goofafidamedes]

Maybe I'm just ignorant, but I thought speed was the big killer on our roads?

Not a fraction of the car population with lowered suspension?

I'd love to see some hard data on how many accidents lowered suspension has caused.

[NefariousLS1]

Looks like i wont be on the road for much longer then lol

[Ewok]

Oh for god sakes. Since when was the last time ANYONE reported an accident was because a car was too ****ing low? What a load of crap! Also they have stated that any car lowered AFTER August 1st needs permit etc. How the hell are they going to know you havn't lowered it 2 months or even 2 years before hand?

[Hi Octane]

Id say its more the fully sik crowd with the hectic lowered rexxies. 180's with 20 inch rims are the culprits but they have to blanket the whole item...

[NefariousLS1]

Oh for god sakes. Since when was the last time ANYONE reported an accident was because a car was too ****ing low? What a load of crap! Also they have stated that any car lowered AFTER August 1st needs permit etc. How the hell are they going to know you havn't lowered it 2 months or even 2 years before hand?

How are we ment to proove that sh1t

[The_Plague]

Maybe I'm just ignorant, but I thought speed was the big killer on our roads?

Not a fraction of the car population with lowered suspension?

I'd love to see some hard data on how many accidents lowered suspension has caused.

Yes, but you need to diversify your revenue raising when your state is financially insolvent.

[SHANESVZSS]

how the hell does lowering a car affect stability control? any ve owners heard of this?.... they should be targeting thoesr little coralls , pulsars ect who use grinders to cut their springs..they are the unsafe ones..

[Clubb'N]

how the hell does lowering a car affect stability control? any ve owners heard of this?.... they should be targeting thoesr little coralls , pulsars ect who use grinders to cut their springs..they are the unsafe ones..

Don't you mean vl's and vn's :D

[King Nothing]

I don't think it's saying cars that are modified after august 1st need a certificate, I think it's saying ALL CARS after august 1st need a certificate.

[The_Plague]

Looks like i wont be on the road for much longer then lol

I wouldn't stress too much Nefarious, between the bullshit laws, the draconian regulations and the impossible to meet pollution requirements, there wont be ANYONE left on the road shortly.

Therefore, being defected and without road registration will be the norm, not the exception, think of it as natural attrition leading into a belated protest :)

The good news is that I hope they apply all these bullshit measures to actual driving standards, hell if they want to police crap like lowering cars, how about policing the 500000 ****heads who shouldn't even be on the road and remove them from it.
Then maybe I can have a decent ****head free trip to work for once and by default the only people left on the road will be the enthusiasts (us) as we tend to be a higher class of driver, or we would be, if we all hadn't been defected off the road, instead the NSW govt will turn to issuing you a fine for fashion crimes and worshiping the wrong god to make up with the money they lose by having no one on their roads.
The End.


how the hell does lowering a car affect stability control? any ve owners heard of this?.... they should be targeting thoesr little coralls , pulsars ect who use grinders to cut their springs..they are the unsafe ones..

Agreed, for the most part lowering a car improves the centre of gravity and therefore handling does it not?

Our NSW govt, once again defying / ignoring the facts in the name of the almighty dollar.

I hear next week they are banning flash photography because it steals your soul and they are going to burn witches at the stake again.

Bunch of backward ****ing retards.

[Clubb'N]

I just actually read the article properly.
Do these guys realize how low 15cm lower than standard actually is.
even an exec with 4wd suspension slammed on some ssl's would have trouble claiming its 15cm lowered.
jeebus.

[V8Wagon]

START RANT: Fcuk Fcuk Fcuk Iv'e had a gutful of hoons being confused with car enthusiasts. Surely someone in the media owns a "hotted up fully hectic lowered commodore", hell, even peter garret owns a gas hoon. What is wrong with Australia - Hello me robot me bend over for you and you ram!
How about starting with 10yo POS cars that have never had a dollar spent on them. They can be just as fast but a hell of a lot more dangerous by a country mile - they are naturally lowered through a lack of maintainance, more likely to get out of shape/ spin wheels/ blow more smoke/ chew more fuel. I could go on and on. So given these rules I might just get my grinder out and cut 45mm off the springs without any other changes and I'm not a hoon....:flipoff:
It just means ADR approval for more products - hence more expensive
I for one would not have a problem with an annual RWC on any car over 5yo. I bet that the non LS1/CAR ENTHUSIAST and especially the DICKHEAD DRIVERS R US community would be shitting bricks! I'm also sure that any mechanics would turn a blind eye to a properly modified and sensibly driven car over a 10yo fully hectic never spent a dollar on it other than sterios and rims and look at my neons.:soap:
END OF RANT - now back to topic!

[The_Plague]

I think on quiet a few cars 15cm would have the side skirts well and truly scraping the road wouldn't it?
Thats V8 Supercar low.

[King Nothing]

I've just been on the phone to the RTA. Apparently this is the go

- There has been no official word (suprise suprise)
- The bloke I spoke to said that the paper has got it wrong
- At the moment they are looking at limiting how much a car can be raised, not lowered.
- Currently the existing 100mm ground clearance / 1/3 suspension travel is still in place
- Any changes would most likely affect any new installations i.e. anyone with changes done befoe August 1st would be ok

This is just what the bloke has told me.

[livewildcard]

Apparently your more dangerous with looks of your car rather than the speed your doing...........

I think I lowered my seat slightly in my ve ute today to get a bit more comfy, mayb'e i'll need an engineers certificate for that soon too.............

[Luke_]

I think what the RTA is trying to stop is people doing things like this, in our workshop just the other week (funnily enough in a CE Lancer with rims, bodykit, etc...):

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc155/sswsp/IMG_2470.jpg

[WOMBIE]

:shock: WTF :rofl:

[redbelly007]

:flipoff: Is this guy for real or what these politicians have nothing better to do than sit in there office and say mmm today we may as well make a law for lets see mmm anybody that lowers there car more than 15cm they really need to pull there head out of there ass so are the copers going enforce this law every time they pull over a car get out a tape and say nar its 15cm to low or 10cm to low and defect the car :flipoff:

[the big fist]

15cm is a f*ck load of height. Thats 150mm.
At the end of the day, have a tissue ladies, just because you talk about doing the right thing on a public forum and say you're an enthusiast doesn't mean you are. :rofl: And, the majority of work already done to cars is technically illegal and requires engineering approval so just chillax. media hype per normal.

[Angelo_XLR8]

Looks like i wont be on the road for much longer then lol

not with our custom ride heights lol, but considering your diff dumping exhaust aaron you were on a fine line anyways

[Luke_]

Can you imagine some cars where the wheel is underneath the guard from factory?? (mostly older cars)

[Big_Valven]

Any vehicle that is raised or lowered after August 1 will have to carry a certificate stating that the modifications confirm to safety standard requirements.

They've made their own rule useless. "No officer, this was lowered ages ago, don't need a certificate." How the hell are they going to prove you lowered your car after august 1?

Dickheads.

[The_Plague]

They've made their own rule useless. "No officer, this was lowered ages ago, don't need a certificate." How the hell are they going to prove you lowered your car after august 1?

Dickheads.

I'm sure they will twist it in their favor with some kind of burden of proof.
Probably ask for receipts on the work done, but then if you purchased the car with it already done, then that's one hell of a cluster****.

In other news cluster**** is my new favourite expression.

[Big_Valven]

In other news cluster**** is my new favourite expression.

+1. Hear here

[boyley]

15cm is a f*ck load of height. Thats 150mm.
At the end of the day, have a tissue ladies, just because you talk about doing the right thing on a public forum and say you're an enthusiast doesn't mean you are. :rofl: And, the majority of work already done to cars is technically illegal and requires engineering approval so just chillax. media hype per normal.


bloody hell, i dunno anymore either Big Fist, we're all hoons lets face it.

[V8Wagon]

START RANT: Fcuk Fcuk Fcuk Iv'e had a gutful of hoons being confused with car enthusiasts. Surely someone in the media owns a "hotted up fully hectic lowered commodore", hell, even peter garret owns a gas hoon. What is wrong with Australia - Hello me robot me bend over for you and you ram!
How about starting with 10yo POS cars that have never had a dollar spent on them. They can be just as fast but a hell of a lot more dangerous by a country mile - they are naturally lowered through a lack of maintainance, more likely to get out of shape/ spin wheels/ blow more smoke/ chew more fuel. I could go on and on. So given these rules I might just get my grinder out and cut 45mm off the springs without any other changes and I'm not a hoon....:flipoff:
It just means ADR approval for more products - hence more expensive
I for one would not have a problem with an annual RWC on any car over 5yo. I bet that the non LS1/CAR ENTHUSIAST and especially the DICKHEAD DRIVERS R US community would be shitting bricks! I'm also sure that any mechanics would turn a blind eye to a properly modified and sensibly driven car over a 10yo fully hectic never spent a dollar on it other than sterios and rims and look at my neons.:soap:
END OF RANT - now back to topic!

[macca33]

Seems a few here have just thrown the baby out with the bath water.......:jester:

A proper read of the article, reveals that the proposed legislation will allow for 5cm from stock without approval and up to 15cm from stock with engineering approval.
Maybe some need to get down off their :soap: and read more thoroughly......There are reasons why we cannot have fooly sik cars running around at 50mm ground clearance. 100mm is more than reasonable.

cheers

[Clubb'N]

I'm sure they will twist it in their favor with some kind of burden of proof.
Probably ask for receipts on the work done, but then if you purchased the car with it already done, then that's one hell of a cluster****.

In other news cluster**** is my new favourite expression.

been watching heartbreak ridge have we ...

This mission is a complete cluster**** :D :goodjob:

[Tecca]

Im so over these stupid fuking laws....my car is lowered so im classed as a hoon WTF?

[Luke_]

Maybe some need to get down off their :soap: and read more thoroughly......There are reasons why we cannot have fooly sik cars running around at 50mm ground clearance. 100mm is more than reasonable.

cheers

100mm is reasonable in certain vehicles. Have you seen how high 2wd Hilux' sit in the rear? Or even the rear of a VE Omega ute :lol:

[bigdogdazza]

Haha F**k EM ALL I say! Honestly guys it doesnt take much to stir up a hornets nest on the ole forum eh? 1 journo prints some crap and everyones out for blood! Who gives a flyin f**k what they do to their laws! Look at tinted windows for instance, yes they are legal up to a certain percentage BUT you can be defected for darker/mirror/coloured etc. I have had ALL of my 23 cars I have owned tinted in the darkest not legal tint I could get my mits on and NEVER a prob! Yes I have been booked for doing some pretty stupid things in the past But not that. Had a rotary 13b turbo not runnin a cat, race fueled etc and pulled by plod cause he wanted to admire the thing up close! Dont sweat it guys honestly and if you do manage to get done for something so rediculous as this then I for one say you deserve it as the LONG list that you were actually pulled for will have something to do with it!:rofl:
I read the article as just givin the cops some more ammo to fire at illegal street racers and types like that. Not us guys. Just tryin to make it easier to get the ricer crowd with the wheels/ steza/neons off the street, and I for 1 am happy with it!

[WOMBIE]

From one Dazza to another I agree with you dude!

[planetdavo]

Seems a few here have just thrown the baby out with the bath water.......:jester:

A proper read of the article, reveals that the proposed legislation will allow for 5cm from stock without approval and up to 15cm from stock with engineering approval.
Maybe some need to get down off their :soap: and read more thoroughly......There are reasons why we cannot have fooly sik cars running around at 50mm ground clearance. 100mm is more than reasonable.

cheers

Why should certain people learn to read at this stage in life macca33? :jester:

Simple fact is this thread has gone exactly the way most of the population would expect! Minority internet forum members that predominantly think it is their god given right to stick their middle finger up at whoever the hell they want and modify their cars in whatever (likely already highly illegal anyway) damn way they feel like! And, of course, when the police pull them over and canary their pride and joy, they often then get on the internet and b!tch about police harrassment!
Calm down people. We're talking fairly serious heights for a road car...:teach:

[mustanger]

From what I understand, we are talking 5cm (50mm or 2" ) from standard , which I think is a fair amount . Your car will still need 100mm ground clearance, so I don`t see what the problem is :confused:.

I think it is good idea.

I mean you can`t just go and severely change the geometry and suspension as you please.

If you want to and need to change it, you will need an engineers certificate :goodjob:.

[Red Beard]

It seems to me, this law is aimed at the dodgy backyard boys who chop their springs and generally go for looks over purpose. There shouldn't be a single member on this forum who would even consider doing this to their ride.

On my second Commodore, a VL with 270k on the Odo, back when I was young and foolish, I had it lowered, single rate production car racing springs. It was absolutely incredible on a dry road, add a bit of moisture, and it was twitchy as hell. It did teach me a lot about car control though. Lucky for me though, I didn't hit anything, but it surely was illegal.

As we probably all know, a properly engineered suspension set-up is the safest way to go. Next time your loved ones are behind the wheel, or crossing the road, do you want some idiot with chopped springs speeding towards them. Of course not.

[Pedders]

If anyone is interested I have posted the Australian Automotive Aftermarket Association's (AAAA) response to it members regarding the Ministers release on our Sponsors site under redbelly007's "A Question For Pedders" thread.

[Tecca]

It seems to me, this law is aimed at the dodgy backyard boys who chop their springs and generally go for looks over purpose. There shouldn't be a single member on this forum who would even consider doing this to their ride.

On my second Commodore, a VL with 270k on the Odo, back when I was young and foolish, I had it lowered, single rate production car racing springs. It was absolutely incredible on a dry road, add a bit of moisture, and it was twitchy as hell. It did teach me a lot about car control though. Lucky for me though, I didn't hit anything, but it surely was illegal.

As we probably all know, a properly engineered suspension set-up is the safest way to go. Next time your loved ones are behind the wheel, or crossing the road, do you want some idiot with chopped springs speeding towards them. Of course not.

Yeah i used to have a VN and when i bought it of the the guy who owned it he had cut springs in it lol. You used to hit a pebble and it felt like the car was going to flip. I agree with all of this and they should be illegal offcourse but what shits me is the word Hoon. It gets used for everything:vpo:. Soon they will classify people as hoons if they have carmats in the car

[TUFGN3]

cluster**** BAHAHAHAHAHA, thats the funniest thing ive heard in ages!!!! Im sorry but im stealing that

[MJR-57T]

IMHO its just a way to make people (the non car enthusiests) look up and say "hey people up high are doing something about it".

The 100mm law has been around since day one and we all get away with it.
Obnoxiously loud exhausts drive past every day
20's on a car that had 15's as stock
How many commodores have cams???? Dont they need to be engineered to be fully legal???

Go do a search on this forum for all the new laws that were supposed to come in pver the past few years.
We ranted on for a month or so then like the rest, they died out. Went to the too hard basket.
I recon this one will be the same.

I wouldn't worry too much

[R8tourer]

Anyone seen this...(might've been posted)

Seems pretty strict.

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/registration/downloads/vsi/vsi_50_raising-and-lowering-vehicles_17-july-2009.pdf

[signature coupe]

pretty much says that any car that has been lowered at all has to get an inspection,thats bullcrap,

[dmenace]

You just need a blue slip... Not that hard really if your car is legal.

[TUFGN3]

seriously there are more important things out there to worry about then some minority of morons doing stupid shit in there cars, im sick to death of the government using the car community as a scapegoat to all their problems.

its just bordering on insanity now with the extent things are getting to, i dont condone driving irresponsibly but it seems these days that if you lose a bit of traction leaving the lights in the wet by accident all the other cars around you are screaming for blood.

[bigdogdazza]

Pretty much the same sort of crap was passed with anti biker laws recently in wake of the rouble thats been happening of late. It is now illegal to a member of a biker club which infact will affect guys like ullysies, hogs, veitnam vets etc etc not just hells angels, rebels etc and I dont see the police harrassing all these guys just maybe the ones they see who are causing a drama.

[MJR-57T]

Pretty much the same sort of crap was passed with anti biker laws recently in wake of the rouble thats been happening of late. It is now illegal to a member of a biker club which infact will affect guys like ullysies, hogs, veitnam vets etc etc not just hells angels, rebels etc and I dont see the police harrassing all these guys just maybe the ones they see who are causing a drama.

Thats coz they got bigger :outlaw: :machinegun: :guns:


Anyone seen this...(might've been posted)

Seems pretty strict.

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/registration/downloads/vsi/vsi_50_raising-and-lowering-vehicles_17-july-2009.pdf

Alot of it has to do with raised vehicles which really doesn't apply to us here.
There will be signs in towns similar to "limit compression braking" saying something like "Lower vehicles fitted with adjustable suspension to 103.28mm for this town"


Ground clearance* - Lowering a vehicle decreases its ground clearance, which could cause the under
chassis to impact the ground when travelling on uneven or rough surfaces, or simply when driving
over standard road features such as speed humps, culverts or kerbs.

Who in their right mind drives fast over speed bumps.
If you lower you car, you usualy know where and where not to go.
Only thing in danger is your exhaust and front bar at the expense of your own pocket

Trajectory of headlights* - Altering a vehicle’s height alters the trajectory of its headlights, which could
cause them to dazzle other road users either by shining directly in their eyes or by reflecting in rear
vision mirrors.

Change the angle of your headlights............ 2 little screws, its in the hand book for a reason.

These RTA officials need to pull their heads out of their ass but i can sort of see the corwd that they're aimed at.
The young ones that have a BBQ, get pissed, cut 3 coils off and fit a cardboard bodykit

[SL1_LS1]

Hey

has anyone seen this petition???

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/94/help-save-the-future-of-modified-cars-

[MrSuave]

I just recently purchased my Adventra which IMHO sits up too high. My plan was to always lower the car, not ridiculously low, but 60mm. That would have left me with a ground clearance of around 140mm and improved the handling characteristics substantially (doing shocks, springs & bushes).

Under the new legislation, this will be deemed illegal as Im lowering the car 60mm. So after consultation with Pedders and an Automotive engineer, my suspension package which previously would not have been an issue, will now render my car unroadworthy.

Furthermore, the car trailer that I own (dual axle low line) wont be able to be towed by the Adventra as the towball hight is too high for the trailer.

So as a summary, the new car I have only just purchased for the purpose of towing is rendered useless. If I lower the car-its illegal, if I still choose to tow with the car-it will be dangerous as the nose of the car will be pointing upwards and therefore wont steer correctly, if I modify my trailer to suit the Adventra-I cant get my other car onto the trailer.

All of the above could be easily avoided if the NSW Government would allow me to spend $1500 on an upgraded suspension package with correct wheel alignment and deem it legal as the legislation was previously.

End of rant

Petition signed by both my wife and I

[NefariousLS1]

Interesting

http://you-have-to-be-kidding.blogspot.com/2009/07/car-hoons-news-release.html

[Ryzz]

Here is the Blogpost posted here, please feel free to follow the link to provide any feedback or comment on the Blog Site.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Thursday, 16th July 2009, NSW Minister for Roads, Michael Daley MP released a News Release titled Tough New Rules for Car Hoons.

The intent of the announcement was ostensibly to crack down on "car hoons" who drive vehicles that the minister thinks are unsafe.

Unfortunately, the content of the news release is factually inaccurate and the minister (or whoever wrote the news release for him) clearly either does not know or understand the content of the NSW RTA Code of Practice for Light Vehicle Modifications, the Australian Design Rules and Schedule 2 of the Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 2007, or is misrepresenting that code of practice and those legislative instruments.

The majority of the "car hoons" that the minister seeks to regulate more strictly are driving vehicles that are not legal. That's right, not legal. Some may have documentation that makes them appear legal, but proper inspection would reveal either that the vehicles are not consistent with that documentation or that the documentation has been issued in error. So, if the people that will be affected are not these "car hoons", who are they? The answer is almost everybody else.

Examples of people affected include ordinary motorists who replace sagged, worn out suspension springs in their vehicles; infrastructure corporations such as rail maintenance and electricity companies; farmers and hunters who have their vehicles raised for normal day to day farm operations; grey nomads who have heavy duty springs and tyres fitted to their 4WDs so that they can tow their caravan or camping trailer to visit remote parts of the country; predominantly family oriented 4WD enthusiasts and clubs; charity groups who are helped by 4WD clubs to take terminally ill children to places that they couldn't otherwise access; environmental rehabilitation groups who are assisted in removing rubbish by 4WD clubs; emergency response groups including SES; 4WD tour operators; participants in charity bashes; the residents of remote communities for whom 4WD tourism is the basis of their local economy; hot rod and modified car owners and all of the industries that support these people in their activities.

What is the minister's definition of a "car hoon"? Elsewhere, he refers to "young hoons". Given that some of the people affected are senior citizens, what is the minister's definition of "young"?

The real problem is that the government have starved the RTA and Police Force of the funding required to effectively operate, let alone training Inspectors for Vehicle Regulation (IVRs) and Police Officers, and to assist in ongoing review and training of Engineering Signatories to ensure that the existing system operates as intended. This is not just my personal opinion, but is based upon public and private statements made by IVRs, police officers, RTA staff and other signatory engineers since the current labor government, then led by Bob Carr, came to power in 1995.

For example, a few years ago, a Highway Patrol police officer stated in a usenet news group that they couldn't get funds to purchase paper for their photocopier, but that they could use petrol that cost more than the paper and waste considerable time to drive to another station and back to collect a ream of paper, because the fuel was in a different budget.

As an engineering signatory, I have offered to run a training "question and answer" sessions for local Highway Patrol Police Officers several times over the past decade. The officers and Patrol Commander that I suggested it to were positive about the idea, but it went no further because there is simply no funding available to do it.

So we have unsafe, illegally modified vehicles being driven on the roads, with the Police and RTA not having the resources and training necessary to detect and defect all of those vehicles. The minister's solution is to change the rules, thinking that the vehicles are actually legal because they haven't been defected. The new rules can only be described as draconian, misguided and almost certainly unworkable. The irony is that they won't have the slightest effect on the illegally modified vehicles that were ostensibly the target. Drivers of illegally modified vehicles will continue to operate those vehicles outside the law, regardless of how strict those laws are made.

So lets take a look at a few statements from the news release.

"At the moment, vehicles can be raised or lowered by up to 5 centimetres without approval, and by up to 15 centimetres with authorised engineering approval."
The statement is completely and utterly false. It may have come about from an attempt to simplify the actual rules, but the result is nowhere the truth. Under the existing Code of Practice, vehicles can be raised or lowered by up to 1/3 of the original suspension clearance without requiring certification. This is a direct function of the vehicle design, varying from less than 20mm on some cars to around 70mm on some 4WD vehicles.

The 15cm limit with an engineering certificate does not exist in any way, shape or form. To raise or lower a vehicle by more than the 1/3 of suspension clearance described above, the design of suspension must be changed or an entirely different suspension fitted in place of the original. In these situations, the design of the suspension and the position of that suspension relative to the chassis rails will determine the resulting height of the vehicle. This means that there is no defined 15cm limit. For example, a light commercial vehicle from the 1920s to 1950s that is fitted with more modern suspension components might be lowered by more than 15cm, bringing its front bumper bar to around the same height as a modern vehicle, and hence improving not only its handling and braking but also its compatibility with modern vehicles in a crash.

If the existing 1/3 of suspension clearance rule is replaced with a blanket 50mm limit with certification, as proposed, many cars will now be able to be lowered further than is presently legal, and well beyond the vehicle manufacturer's recommendations. The initial version of Vehicle Standards Bulletin 50, the RTA policy document that attempts to implement this ministerial directive is ambiguous on this point.

"I don't want to see young hoons putting their lives or the lives of others at risk, just because they think their car looks better 15 centimetres closer to the ground."
This statement is remarkable in how it shows how out of touch with reality the minister is. For cars newer than the 1960s, it would be a genuine struggle to physically lower them by 15cm without major modifications. Even ignoring for a moment the legislated requirement for a minimum ground clearance of 10cm (or more depending on wheelbase), the physical modifications required to lower a car 15cm would essentially require the removal of the entire suspension and could certainly never be legal. On a few models of 4WD passenger vehicles, lowering them can be physically possible because they are a raised version of a normal height car, but they cannot be legal at that height because they change ADR category (MC to MA) due to that lowered height, and they cannot be shown to comply with the ADR requirements for that changed category.

Perhaps the minister can name a model of car popular with "young hoons" that has an original ground clearance of at least 25cm, such that it can be lowered 15cm and still comply with the ADRs and maintain the legally required 10cm?

"It can affect handling, braking and safety features such as electronic stability control."
A correct statement, but the assumption that the effect is automatically negative is remarkably naiive, as is the assumption that vehicles where these are negatively affected will be legal.

Many older vehicles that are lowered are done so as part of modernising the suspension and improving the vehicle dynamics including handling and braking. Such vehicles usually have their other safety features improved at the same time, such as by fitting seatbelts, a collapsible steering column, windscreen washers and demister and improved windscreen wipers. Encouraging such vehicles to continue to be driven without these modifications would be to discourage safety improvements.

Modern safety features already limit the extent of modifications that can be carried out on vehicles. For example, because the dynamics of how the front of a vehicle collapses in a crash are critical to the operation of SRS airbags, 4WD vehicles that are equipped with SRS airbags cannot be fitted with a body lift, (spacing the body up on the chassis) unless it is possible to prove that the SRS system will not be adversely affected by the body lift. To date, I have never seen such proof for any vehicle model, and body lifts are not legally fitted to any SRS airbag equipped vehicle that I know of.

For vehicles where ESC is fitted, a similar situation applies, with alterations in suspension height and tyre diameter being restricted. As I understand it, aftermarket companies in the USA now offer "piggyback" computers to re-tune the ESC system to compensate for suspension height and tyre diameter changes. Aftermarket companies in Australia already offer re-tuning kits for ESC on several models of car. This needs to be addressed specifically for ESC equipped vehicles rather than trying to apply a rule relating to ESC to vehicles that are not fitted with it. When there is an Australian Design Rule that mandates the performance of ESC, such recalibration will be mandatory for continued ADR compliance.

"Raising a vehicle's suspension can also reduce the driver's ability to see pedestrians and cyclists, and higher headlights can startle other road users,"
Is the minister allowing Harold Scruby to write his speeches for him?

Raising a vehicle within the limits of safe and predictable handling and within the ADR prescribed limits for light heights, including the ADR prescribed legal maximum height for headlights effectively limits any adverse reduction in vision of pedestrians and cyclists close to the vehicle while improving vision of people and objects further away.

For vehicles 1994 and newer, ADR 8/01 also prescribes a Primary Vision Area, and legal raising of such vehicles is limited by the ability to maintain compliance with that requirement.

An ADR compliant headlight installed at a height within the prescribed limits of the ADRs and adjusted in accordance with those rules is legal in NSW according to the Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 2007.

Again, the minister appears to be confusing illegally modified vehicles with legally modified vehicles.

If the minister is genuinely concerned about vehicle lights startling other drivers, it would be far more productive for him to act upon the continued widespread illegal use of front and rear fog lights and the failure of the checking of headlight aim during registration inspections. It is over a decade since an RTA IVR told my then employer to "at least wipe the dust off the top" of his headlight aim testing machine "so that it looks like it has been used". Judging by the number of vehicles driving around with obviously misaimed headlights today, this problem appears to remain widespread.

"Mr Daley said any vehicle being raised or lowered would require certification stating the modifications conform to safety standard requirements."
This proposal means that many vehicles that presently wouldn't require certification will require certification in the future. Leaving aside the issue of how it is determined whether a vehicle was raised before or after the implementation of these new rules, there are the connected issues of the fact that many new vehicles are raised within this range by rural new vehicle dealers before delivery, and the availability and distribution of engineering signatories across the state. Quite simply, the economic implications of requiring certification of these vehicles are staggering and the limited availability of signatory engineers makes it virtually impossible to implement.

"The changes also mean any modifications must meet specific requirements such as the vehicle having at least 10 centimetres ground clearance."
This is a misrepresentation of the current situation. Regardless of whether a vehicle is certified or not, the 10cm minimum ground clearance requirement is already an enforceable requirement within Schedule 2 of the Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 2007. It is not a new requirement. I also understand that regulations governing licensed vehicle repairers makes it an offence for them to modify a registrable vehicle such that it does not comply with the ADRs or state regulations. Again, the minister appears unfamiliar with the existing legislation and appears to be confusing illegally modified vehicles with legally modified vehicles.

"Vehicles raised above the 5 centimetre limit will only be granted conditional registration for use under specified conditions like competing in an off road competition."
This assumes that vehicles raised by more than 5cm are not "daily use" vehicles. That is an assumption that many people in rural NSW would dispute. During the debate about banning bullbars in urban areas a few years ago, one farmer who had to travel to Sydney on a regular basis to take his then pregnant wife to see a specialist asked whether this would mean that he would have to unbolt the bullbar from his vehicle and chain it to a post on the side of the Great Western Highway on every trip. Conditional registration that limits the use of raised vehicles in the city, as Mr Daley's policy advisor has apparently stated as being part of the intent, would seem to imply that rural people would have to change their suspension during each trip. An obviously absurd and impossible proposition.

This also assumes that the vehicle owner is rich enough to pay to buy an additional vehicle and pay for registration and insurance on an additional vehicle. So much for the Aussie Battler.

I note that the method of implementation of this announcement is by way of a policy document issued by the RTA, and not by legislation. It is extremely worrying that the rule has not been the subject of parliamentary scrutiny and has not apparently been the subject of any consultation with any affected groups outside the RTA.

I call upon the minister to immediately order that Vehicle Inspectors Bulletin 50 be rescinded, and given that the minister appears to have displayed gross incompetence and appears to have lost the confidence of a significant portion of the voting population of NSW, I call upon the minister to resign.

[benniemc]

wow, that takes incompetence to a whole new level.

Almost as good as Conroy's "Think of the children" spiel.

Why dont' they stop beating around the bush and just ban all modified cars altogether, that's what its coming down to. :(

I'm just glad I don't live in NSW!

[blakout]

WOW what a BULL@#$% idea that is ! :flipoff:

Hope they dont do the same down here in Good`ol SA :bow:

[VX2VESS]

its not any vehicle being modified after the date, its any vehicle that is already or will be modified. So all cars etc...


a real PIA for series 4WDs who need extra clearance for the real rough stuff. its like sorry you can't enjoy that sport anymore you might tip over. really ifyou have a real 4wd with real 4wd wheels at $900 each you don't speed around corners on the roads, not that they are that fast anyway. but its easier to drive a tank to go off roading than tow it.

So more dangerous to pedestrians, no just duck and you go under it, better than over... really they are not higher than trucks FFS....

RTA centre for half baked ideas

starts this weekend

so super lows are a no go from then i guess?


Seems a few here have just thrown the baby out with the bath water.......:jester:

cheers

so thats where he went

[chook]

Here's the link to the RTA Doc
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/registration/downloads/vsi/vsi_50_raising-and-lowering-vehicles_17-july-2009.pdf

[Pedders]

For those of you who are not aware of this, the Minister met with representatiives from various aspects of the motoring community and has agree to delay the introduction of the proposed regulations. See press relase below.

Pedders are very happy with this decision as there is a now an effective process in place that allows for consultation with all parties working towards the same end.


NSW MINISTER FOR ROADS
MICHAEL DALEY MP
NEWS RELEASE
MINISTER AGREES TO FURTHER CONSULTATION ON
CAR MODIFICATION LAWS
Wednesday 29 July 2009


Minister for Roads Michael Daley today met with representatives from the 4WD community and car industry who asked for the introduction of proposed vehicle modification rules to be delayed and for more time to consult.
Mr Daley said he agreed to put the rule changes on hold and that more consultation was needed following the meeting.

“I’ve listened to feedback from the industry and the community, and have agreed to set up a working party to look more closely at how we are going to address this road safety issue,” he said.

“All of those who attended today’s meeting agreed that safety is paramount and that unsafe modifications of vehicles do need be stamped out.

“The working group will include representatives from the NSW Centre for Road Safety, Four Wheel Drive NSW-ACT, Australian Automotive Aftermarket Association, the Australian 4WD Industry Council as well as other agencies and experts,” Mr Daley said.

Executive Director of Australian Automotive Aftermarket Association Stuart Charity said this was a terrific outcome.

“We’re passionate about road safety and we understand the intent of the regulation is to make the roads safer,” he said.
We’re looking forward to working towards a practical solution that meets road safety objectives while also taking industry views into account,” Mr Charity said.

Greg Redfern from Four Wheel Drive NSW-ACT also welcomed the outcome and said the working group would have their full support.
“We want to eliminate unsafe practices in the driving community and we’ll work with the government to make sure these new regulations meet those objectives without any adverse consequences for the motoring community at large,” he said.

“We all agree that there is no place for extreme and illegal modifications, but the clubs in our association follow a strict code of conduct and ethics, and we want to make sure they’re not punished,” Mr Redfern said.

[R8tourer]

That's great news! Good to hear :)

[ls1ozstyle]

What happened with this? Did it get passed? Had a cop trying to give me a canary today, because according to him my car is more than 5cm lowered from standard! Reckons its the new standard and the whole 100mm clearance thing is out. My car probably does attract attention (usually positive though) but is of no means over the top or offensively riced up! Furthermore I am no spring chicken, hence when my undies are showing I tend to pull my pants up!


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[pah]

15cm is a f*ck load of height. Thats 150mm.
At the end of the day, have a tissue ladies, just because you talk about doing the right thing on a public forum and say you're an enthusiast doesn't mean you are. :rofl: And, the majority of work already done to cars is technically illegal and requires engineering approval so just chillax. media hype per normal.

Sounds on the money to me. The cops and EPA could nab just about every car with a PCM edit and an after market exhaust.

Don't Insurance Co's have strict limits on maximum mm's lowered? From memory, my Co would allow 25mm max. There was a question mark over whether the minus 25mm started at Executive spring height or whether I could go 25mm lower than FE2.



PAH

[Pedders]

Sorry for the late response but I had to wait until the holiday break passed to catch up with some to ask regarding ls1ozstyle's question.

The information I have is that the issue is still going through the consultation process.

Scott

[kangavxss]

The law is an A S S!!!! What a bunch of morons we have running this country. Most people who care about their cars would try and improve the mechanicals over the standard factory fitments so actually make the car safer (ie: brakes, suspension, better wheels/tyres etc). Money hungry revenue raising p ....riks.

[kangavxss]

Communists!!!!!!!!:flipoff:

[Micks]

"Most people"

We do need protection through these laws though to ensure the "others" to do the right thing!

Cheers
VYT

[kangavxss]

So we have to suffer for the "others".. BS

[Micks]

I'm referring to how these cars are lowered!

Cheers
VYT

[caaf]

Furthermore, the car trailer that I own (dual axle low line) wont be able to be towed by the Adventra as the towball hight is too high for the trailer.

So one of these wouldn't save all the agro?? Considering you knew the height of the adventura prior, seems pointless to lower it and then worry about suspension linkages ect

http://www.adjustableballmounts.com/uploads/2/6/5/8/2658143/6794450.jpg