Are you a Hoon or Incompetent ?

Submitted: Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:08

ThreadID: 70881 Views:6324 Replies:17 FollowUps:40

This Thread has been Archived

OzTroopy

You will find out in a few weeks time .......

In ref to Oldbaz's ThreadID: 70718 - Driving in NSW with a Lift Kit ??

Given the number of vehicles used by EO forumites, that are not of factory specifications because of clearance, weight carrying and towing duties - Im a bit surprised this topic hasnt had more interest.

Surely all you well seasoned travellers dont think that these new rules ONLY apply to 18yo Joe Bloggs with the chopped, purple, doof doof machine ???

The new rules are so poorly thought out and based on rhetoric and flawed understanding of mechanicals ... that there is an RTA meeting next week, to try and sort out some commonsense to the rules prior to the 01/08/09 enforcement.

Whilst the rules do not appear (at this stage) to be retrospective and will only apply to "new" vehicle registrations after 31/07/09 there are a number of issues that will affect currently registered vehicles ......

Not to mention the defamatory nature of a govt minister labelling all drivers of suspension modified vehicles as hoons.

It is important to note that in the Ministers press release dated the 16/07/09 that as far as he is concerned - not engineers or experts ... but him personally as per his quote ....

"" “These hoons may think their car looks cool, but as far as I’m concerned anything more than a 5 centimetre change in a car’s suspension is dangerous and doesn’t belong on our roads.""

Press Release

In fact the minister is so passionate about his thoughts ... there was not even any consultation with the NRMA, AAAA, or even Aust Nat 4wd Council according to a rep from the N.C.O.P. prior to his instigating the changes ... Contacting the RTA only results in the ministers info being passed on, as the RTA have no further info, as the RTA veh tech section has nothing but concerns on how to implement the changes realistically, correctly and effectively.

One of his classic comments is ..... "" “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,” Mr Daley said.""

Yet a person with a physical height disadvantage, equivalent to the suspension lift, would have the same visibility problems ...... and Mr Daley has obviously no knowledge of headlight adjustment facilities on a vehicle.

What are the changes ????

RTA VSI 50

And there are quite a few underlying ones that will affect "normal" motorists.e.g.

Whilst your current, registered vehicle with suspension adjustments for towing / off road / whatever, may be exempt ... dont let the rego lapse due to ill health, finances or lack of use ... as it will then fall into the new category requiring inspections, testing etc. ... buying and selling currently registered vehicles will not be affected ... at this stage.

The legality of YOU replacing your worn suspension components with new, after the 31/07/09 is suspect ..... So not only are you a hoon ... but maybe incompetent - to use govt terminology.

> " 2. The suspension height must only be capable of being altered when the vehicle is stationary." < ............ Which, after a couple of phone calls - does in fact mean, that factory fitted, computer controlled, stability systems will contravene the NSW ministers new rules.

The more public input to his office, signing circulating petitions, and direct contact with the RTA lower echelons - with "factual" concerns about the regulations ... will provide more substance for the regulations to be modified to common sense levels.

You might be happy with the vehicle you own now .... but what happens when you want a new one in a few years time ... that will be as safe and capable as your currently "majorly modified" vehicle ???

Yes its only NSW at the moment but for how long ???

email your concerns here ...NSW Roads Minister

Or give the RTA vehicle tech section some support for next weeks meeting - here .... 1300 137 302

There are also online petitions etc,. for those that feel they are effective.

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator Share

Reply By: Shaker - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:17

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:17

Sorry, but if it helps to get the hugely lifted 4WDs off the road, then I'm for it!

AnswerID: 375677

Follow Up By: ben_gv3 - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:51

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:51

I wouldn't say a 50mm lifted 4WD as being "hugely lifted".

FollowupID: 643004

Follow Up By: 944runner - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:58

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:58

Under these rules any standard 2" lift would be classed as "hugely lifted", pretty much rules out raising the suspension on any 4WD then. I would say that my 2" lifted Feroza is much more safe than the sagging stuffed suspension that was in there before!

FollowupID: 643006

Follow Up By: ben_gv3 - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 16:01

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 16:01

That's right. Any lift between 0.00001mm - 50mm will now require an engineers cert.

Tyre size increase is still limited to 15mm as well. It's under a different VSI (19 I think).

FollowupID: 643007

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 16:08

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 16:08

Any lift .... is to be regarded as a "major modification" under the new ruling.

Helper springs / airbags because of a new camper trailer ???? ... engineering signatory prior to any other action .... and then probably - pay through the nose for a "competent" person to fit them if approved.

An extra 1/2" when resetting old springs ... ooops ... that will need engineering and a change of vehicle information with the RTA ... and probably the insurer .......

Those are the sort of issues that need dealing with at next weeks meeting ... not whether some doof doof hyundai is to be allowed to bounce along on its bump stops or whether monster trucks can have 40" tyres.

FollowupID: 643009

Follow Up By: allanmac856 - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 17:39

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 17:39

Couldnt agree more Shaker. Some just go totally overboard, whether it be in a 4wd or a normal road car.

Whilst the minister was going a 'little over the top' with his comments, I would think his comments were directed more at those who have the huge lifts/tyres with a large majority of them being the younger ones, who imo dont really give a toss about anything/anyone other than themselves. As well as having totally illegal/unroadworthy vehicles, they are the ones who, again in my opinion, are the ones who play a major part in getting our tracks closed for reasons many of us are no doubt aware. There are many of us who just want to have the 50mm suspension lift, for whatever reason, & also fit larger tyres. Just make it simple; 50 mm lift above standard specs of the vehicle allowed & maximum tyre size being 33's on all vehicles

If these new regs finally do come in, (has been going on for awhile now), while they may say it is not going to be retrospective, I reckon there will be a blitz & many vehicles with the huge lifts/tyres will have a 'little sticker' placed on their vehicle. Anyway just my 2c worth.

FollowupID: 643018

Follow Up By: Max - Sydney - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 17:46

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 17:46

I am a bit confused.

The document referred to says:

"Vehicles intended to be registered for use on roads or road related areas in NSW may be raised to a
maximum height of 50 mm above the original trim height as established by the vehicle's manufacturer
(see Figure 1)."

That seems to allow 2 inch lifts like always have been possible, and certainly copes with pumping up the Polyairs to compensate for a bit of bum drag with increased load.

Or am I missing something?

Max

FollowupID: 643019

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 18:11

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 18:11

allanmac856 ....

These rules of Mr Daley's are not the expected, incoming vehicle suspension regulations.

The process for those regulations to be assessed and formulated, based on engineer reports, public input, and vehicle testing has yet to be completed.

These rules are a quick snatch at publicity.

Those bigger tyres you want ... subtract their additional height from the suspension lift to get your vehicle lift allowance.

Max ....

Vehicle suspension changes now require engineering / certification after 01/08/97 ... No more simply toddling off to opposite lock or somewhere and buying a set of appropriate brand name helper springs or airbags to fit before your big trip ....

Unless of course those sorts of anomalies are sorted at next weeks RTA meeting.

FollowupID: 643023

Follow Up By: 944runner - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 21:02

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 21:02

Max

Technically 2" is more than 50mm

FollowupID: 643055

Follow Up By: BenDiD - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 22:11

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 22:11

Shaker,

Is your post genuine?

It doesn't just get the 4' lifts off the road - it basically gets all of us off the road. How can you post here and be all for that?

FollowupID: 643079

Follow Up By: Shaker - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 22:58

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 22:58

Doesn't it allow for 2" lifts?

All an engineering certificate does is ensure that it wasn't done by some incompetent in his driveway!

FollowupID: 643088

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 23:22

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 23:22

It doesnt appear to say that ".00001 to 50mm" lifts require a engineering cert? Only +50mm?
much as it is now isnt it?

FollowupID: 643094

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 03:59

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 03:59

Shaker ....

Would you mind paying the 6hr travel vehicle transportation fee to my nearest engineering signatory ... which will be in addition to the cost of the store bought helper springs - THIS incompetant, is more than capable of fitting.

fisho ... as per the ministers press release

" Mr Daley said car owners would be limited to raising or lowering their suspension by no more than 5 centimetres from August 1 2009, and all modifications would need engineering approval."

................... and ALL modifications need approval .... According to my solicitors appreciation of the ministers statements and VSI 50 ... "ALL" modifications, includes fitting nyloc nuts on leaf spring U-bolts so your doesnt fall apart on crappy NSW rural roads.

FollowupID: 643100

Follow Up By: BenDiD - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 08:53

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 08:53

Shaker,

The 50mm INCLUDES height increases causes by tyres with a larger diameter than that fitted by the manufacturer.

I have legally fitted slightly larger tyres (they are within the % increase allowed over manufacturers specs) as there is no AT available in the factory plated size. So in combination with my 50mm lift my vehicle will soon be illegal, but for the grandfather clause and provided the rego never lapses. What happens if I fit snow chains? Luckily my ESP can be disaled, but some can't. What if there is no Autosock in my tyre size?

The real issue is the arbitrary & inconsistent nature of it all:

So I need an engineer to approve suspension changes I have done before, but not my work to replace a gear box, CVs, diffs, beaings, gaskets, lights & elecrical.

Engineers have to approve lifts >50mm - where's the science, the hard engineering data, that shows for ALL VEHICLES less than 50mm is safe & more is not? If the authorities were genuine why not allow any lift, but make everything subject to a swerve test?

The sad truth is the soy latte brigade hate 4WDs & their "redneck"owners ("cause, like, OMG isn't anyone not driving a Prius a redneck?") and they don't understand anything about lifts, amount of lift etc etc, they just like to send us a get square for "destroying" the environment. You can't appease these people.

If these changes were really about safety there should be a published empirical study supporting the basis for the changes.

FollowupID: 643111

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:27

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:27

"For a vehicle that has been raised up to 50 mm in accordance with its manufacturer’s specifications and
using parts supplied by the manufacturer or equivalent parts, the certificate must be provided by the
manufacturer or a manufacturer’s authorised dealer, a person competent in such modifications or an
engineering signatory."

Press release matters s++t, its the document that is the one to follow. Do you think the inspection crew will listen to a tape recording of the ministers voice for guigance?

It says a "person competent in such modifications".

FollowupID: 643132

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:07

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:07

Well done fisho ...

You picked up on the specific word I chose to use in the thread title.

One of the Ministers dramas to be sorted by RTA next week is how to establish that level of competency .....

Hence the need for input from the public to maintain their personal vehicle servicing ability.

Personally ... I would like to think that the labelling on a product stating it is for my vehicle and the sales receipt, be certificate enough so as to allow me to fit it.

Im presuming from impressions gained from your postings that you have a vehicle working knowledge and mechanical aptitude.

Will you take kindly to having an enforced situation where you HAVE to go to a approved location .... just to get a pair of shockies fitted ???

Its OK for govt depts ... they just use your tax money to cover servicing costs on their discounted fleet vehicles .... For most vehicle owners ... paying hourly rate charges just because the state govt says so .... for trivial tasks will not be appreciated.

Dont go to bat too hard for these VSI 50 rulings .... have a look at the Federal VSB 14 reccomendations and see how many have been ignored by Mr Daley.

FollowupID: 643138

Follow Up By: The Landy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 14:14

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 14:14

"Personally ... I would like to think that the labelling on a product stating it is for my vehicle and the sales receipt, be certificate enough so as to allow me to fit it. "

Unfortunately there are many things that can be sold legally, that are not necessarily legal to use for the intended purpose......odd I know.

FollowupID: 643158

Reply By: wild dog - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:49

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:49

You mentioned " common sense " OzTroopy ????
Most likely a slip of the finger on the keyboard I think, you were talking about a state govt. dept. weren't you ???
After Little Johnny " I've got the Medal of Freedom " and the gun debacle I don't think common sense and govts. should be mentioned on the same page.

It will be one more useless exercise for the cops with to deal with and only law abiding people will worry about it. Just like the gun issue, massive public expense with no result.

AnswerID: 375680

Follow Up By: BenDiD - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:04

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:04

Hi Wild Dog,

The buy back is a great example - little Johnny actually admitted (in an article published in The Australian) that he rejected a recommendation of the senate subcommittee because the editors of the Sydney Morning Herald would "crucify him" if he adopted it. (The recommendation was to allow crimped pump action shotguns. Yet pump action rifles are OK, because in his mind the public perceive shotguns to be scary and dangerous.)

FollowupID: 643113

Reply By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 17:29

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 17:29

I dont think that the NSW Govt would use the words " hugely lifted"!!! Michael

AnswerID: 375691

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 18:16

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 18:16

Probably a simple misinterpretation given that a 1mm suspension lift will be regarded as a "major modification" after 01/08/09

FollowupID: 643025

Reply By: Member - Tony & Julie (FNQ) - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 17:56

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 17:56

I sent an email - There needs to be consultation - but hey what government does that these days? Arrogant mob of bath plugs most of them.

I do not agree with the comment " If it gets the big lifts off the road then so be it" What rubbish! I am getting sick of paying for others stupidity. Legislate against the stupid lifts. Reasonable lifts can be sorted out with consultation and then we can draw a line.

Cheers Tony

AnswerID: 375695

Reply By: DIO - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 18:58

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 18:58

Yes I agree. Get the 'hoons' off the roads including ALL illegally modified vehicles.

AnswerID: 375705

Follow Up By: On Patrol & TONI - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:24

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:24

Such as ?????????????????????????????????????????

FollowupID: 643030

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:24

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:24

DIO .....

We are all in agreeance about getting "hoons" off the road.

This new legislation fails to take into account things like the simple fact that the only changes between two years production of a particular vehicle production may be the stickers and the tyre/wheel size.

A person with one model vehicle will be illegally modifying it ... if fitting the larger, next years models wheels/tyres offered as factory standard from the manufacturer ... and a suspension lift common to both models.

Probably the reason that there has always been an unchecked 2" variance allowance in suspension systems ... is because someone in the past obviously knew the stupidity of monitoring suspension variations to the millimetre, until past the 50mm limit - due to loaded and unloaded scenarios.

FollowupID: 643031

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:28

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:28

On Patrol & TONI

Hes probably referring to Roachies 4" lifted Hoon machine currently for sale in the trader section .....

Pfffffffft.

FollowupID: 643033

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 23:26

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 23:26

"A person with one model vehicle will be illegally modifying it ... if fitting the larger, next years models wheels/tyres offered as factory standard from the manufacturer ... and a suspension lift common to both models. "

at the moment the rule is that you CAN do this-so long as ALL relevant components are replaced as a whole. I.E if another similar model has 18" wheels they can be fitted as long as with the applicable brakes, swaybars springs etc.
Is this to change also?

FollowupID: 643096

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 04:10

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 04:10

fisho .....

Its not the issue of brakes and swaybars ... most likely unchanged anyway between two years models ... It will be a situation where the first vehicle is supplied with 31" tyres and the second with 32".

Its that the starting heights of the two vehicles will be different and the road authority will be relying on a particular year models specs when they conduct an inspection. They have been building up a 1999 onwards list for sometime.

The similiarities between year models will be of no consequence ... just the specs attributed to the vehicle on the hoist at the time.

FollowupID: 643101

Reply By: D200Dug- Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:39

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:39

We had a 40mm lift and new suspension put in Tilly.

The braking and handling are far better and more stable after the mods than with the factory fitted equipment.

I have no problem with targeting hoons but new laws without increased enforcement are just a joke.

AnswerID: 375712

Reply By: Davo_60 - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:59

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:59

I think 50mm lift is plenty for almost all 4wd tracks in this country. Certainly the most popular places that people tour barely need a 4wd anymore. Bigger lifts are nice to have for sure, a bit like most of the other mods people do. But I can't see how it is necessary to have vehicles lifted more than 50mm.

I do think that less heavily modified vehicles on the road will help take the negative focus away from 4wds from those who lobby against them

Dave

AnswerID: 375718

Follow Up By: S&N - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 20:59

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 20:59

"I do think that less heavily modified vehicles on the road will help take the negative focus away from 4wds from those who lobby against them"
if only this were true! sadly its more likely that once they get these rules passed, they will start on other aspects of a 4x4, mostly because it was easy to get the first set of ban's implemented and it makes it look like they are earning their pay. you watch, after the dust settles on this, the old debate about bullbars really being needed will re-arise!! then where does it stop. you cant have fishing rod holders on the bullbar cause it could hurt a pedestrian, no lift, no bigger tyres, then; no bullbar, also get rid of those awful aerial's that could really hurt someone, roof cage/tent? what happens if someone gets hit and goes over your roof, it will just get worse and worse, you watch!

FollowupID: 643054

Follow Up By: briann532 - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 21:21

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 21:21

davo_69,

I belong to a 4wd club and have a patrol with a 4inch suspension lift in it.
I am hardly a hoon.
I have 2 toddlers and a wife in travel with me.
My 4 inch lift gives me around 2 inches once all my extra weight is added.
Dual batteries, bullbar, winch, roof racks etc.
then add fridge, food 4 people, clothing, tent, sleeping bags, blankets, toys, water, beer, wine, camping accesories etc.

The standard suspension would have blown out long ago, and it would be dragging its posterior.
The lift allowing for sag with weight, gives me adequate ground clearance to safely travel tracks that I would have no hope in a standard kitted 4wd.

I am yet to find a production vehicle that could take all that weight without some sort of modification to it.
Yes the vehicle sits around 3 inches above normal when unloaded, but is certainly not unsafe in any way.

In my case it is necessary to lift my vehicle more than 50mm.
I do so to travel to places like the high country, Flinders ranges, tanami desert etc. We go there for photography, family bonding, holidaying and generally appreciating the bush.

Why should I be tagged as a "hoon" because of it?

My son wears his hat backwards, rides a motorbike and loves hangin out at McDonalds. What is your immediate thoughts on him???
He is 4 years old. Do you give him a label? The government certainly would.
he wears his hat backwards because at 4 it is very funny. He rides a motorbike in Hornsby junior dirt bike club as a junior member in a learning group called kickstart, and have you heard of a kid who doesn't love maccas???

Leave the labelling to the Coles pricing staff and tell the government to stop trying to evade the real issues..............

The only person lobbying against 4wds is Harold Scrubby.
His agenda is biased un generally not realistic.
He too labels us as a danger, even though a statesman has a lower ancap safety index and is heavier than most 4wds.

I'm not a hoon and my car is not dangerous.
This is a democracy, at least thats what I though...................

Brian

FollowupID: 643059

Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 21:58

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 21:58

Just as a matter of interest what does your vehicle weigh when you put all the listed stuff in it.

Bet its more than the listed GVM.

FollowupID: 643074

Follow Up By: Davo_60 - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 22:46

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 22:46

Fair point(s) Brian, for sure modifying at least the rear suspension is almost standard (and necessary) to cope with touring weight. That and a decent set of shocks all round goes a long way towards decent handling. You might be surprised how far a standard height cruiser or patrol will go though, I don't bother lifting vehicles anymore. I do have polyairs on the back on an 80 series though to help keep things level for the reasons you have outlined.

Cheers

FollowupID: 643085

Follow Up By: Ray - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:21

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:21

Yes it sounds as though your vehicle could be overloaded. Why don't you chuck out a couple of the kids? And what sort of parent are you to let your kid hang out at McDonald's. I thought that only poofs wore their caps back to front?????

FollowupID: 643117

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:34

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:34

modifying/lifting suspension and changing the wing mirrors have the same effect on your vehicles legal GVM, unless engineered-

that is---ZIPPO

FollowupID: 643133

Reply By: Member - Jack - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 20:17

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 20:17

If it is the NSW Government, it may not happen. After all they have promised us raiil lines, light rail and a virtual myriad of other things, but NOTHING has eventuated.

Hopefully, this might be the same.

Jack

The hurrieder I go, the behinder I get. (Lewis Carroll-Alice In Wonderland)

Member
My Profile My Position Send Message

AnswerID: 375723

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 05:42

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 05:42

Given the fact that there are already rules in place to deal with individuals who have modified their vehicles without govt engineering approval .......

It does not "need" to happen.

FollowupID: 643103

Follow Up By: Dasher Des - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 16:36

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 16:36

Jack, big difference between what a government promises and a change of regulations is that promises cost them money and changes to legislation earns them money. Which way do you think they will head? I have an inkling that the legislation senario will win out unless an election is looming which means you will get lots of new promises.

FollowupID: 643174

Reply By: Russ n Sue - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 20:59

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 20:59

Discovery 3

Acess height
Road height: Access height + 50mm
Off road height: Road height + 50mm
You're stuck height: Off road height + 50mm
Oh Bugger height: You're stuck height + 30mm

All of this 180mm lift is straight off the showroom floor, not after-market add-ons. Many of these ride heights will change either manually or automatically while moving.

So, what are they going to do, ban new Discovery 3's? (or Disco 4's when they come out in October).

I think this change to the rules is about giving the perception that the Government is doing something about hoons rather than actually addressing a problem.

Cheers

Russ
.

(access height + 50mm)
You're stuck height

AnswerID: 375735

Reply By: Wherehegon - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 21:42

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 21:42

Sounds like I better get the prado in and get it done before the end of this month. Im only going 2 inch which on the old prado gave me around 37mm on front and 50 on the rear.... The difference the OME made on the old prado compared to the sloppy, rolling effect that the prado come with was a huge difference. These clowns have no idea, as said above, next it will be bullbars, arials, brush bars etc, rear step bars blah blah blah.. What a load of crap. They wonder why young people get upto no good, all the bloody doo gooders have nothing better to do then sit on their backsides sipping there latte's wondering what they can whinge about next, tools......... Yes 4,5,6, inch and more is excessive in a lift BUT if you carry extreme weight then some times you need a decent lift so when you are loaded it can handle the weight,, wonder if they will jump on some people who's towbars are almost dragging on the ground as they have the incorrect tow gear set up or van loaded wrongly then you have very unstable stearing and headlights aiming towards on coming vehicles, and you cant tell me this is less dangerous then a patrol/cruiser with a 4 inch lift ??????????????? To me a lot more dangerous !!!!!!!!! Regards Steve

AnswerID: 375744

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 03:44

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 03:44

Left your run too late Wherehegon .....

Issueing of engineering approvals from govt approved engineers - within the guidelines of rules lawful until the end of this month ..... Have already been suspended by Mr Dalys dept, several days ago.

Owners of vehicles who have already outlayed thousands - to meet govt standards, will now be left with an unregistereable vehicle in a workshop.

Bewdy ... one less hoon monster truck says everybody ....

Pfffttttt ............ It also includes the 1940's Ford someone may be building as a wedding car ... someones entry in the The Annual NSW Variety Bash charity run ... A 4wd owner whose 4wd club is actively involved in volounteer firetrail maintenance and bushland rubbish clearing ... or even perhaps an EO member who had a trip to Innaminka planned towing the new heavier caravan.

All the blinkered posters who think that these rules of Mr Daley's only apply to a 3m high, 40series landcruiser on tractor tyres, are in for a big awakening.

Funniest of all is that they also believe that the police will correctly choose which vehicle to target .....

According to Mr Daley .... "Minister for Roads Michael Daley today announced that car hoons who raise or lower their cars’ suspension will have to meet tough new rules."

I do hope that lowered NSW hwy patrol cars will still be illegal ... or at least the occupants will be worthy of respect - being hoons and all .....

FollowupID: 643099

Reply By: allanmac856 - Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 23:17

Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 at 23:17

Rus n Sue, I think you are going slightly over top here in relation to your comments re; Disco 3. The vehicle comes standard with all its 'bells & whisles', so using this vehicle is not really justified.

Like a few others, I cannot understand why anyone really needs to go higher than a 2 inch lift, whether that be suspension or body. I totally agree that standard shocks/spring are pretty average & that aftermarket items improve most vehicles immensely, whether it be handling or the ability to carry extra weight. As I said earlier, an increasing number, (mainly the young ones), are going totally overboard with most of it being for the 'bling' factor only. My vehicle has a 2" suspension lift & running 33's & even though it is not the most capable vehicle around, it gets me everywhere; whether that be fully laden for a touring trip or going out for a fun day on some challenging tracks. Again, why does anyone need anymore than that?.

I am sure that commonsense will prevail, well I hope so anyway, but once again I believe some 4wders are our worst enemies, not the govt etc etc. I still think the simpliest rules would be "50 mm lift, either suspension or body or 25mm of both"& tyres restricted to a maximum of 33". Easy to understand & easy for authorities to police.

AnswerID: 375768

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 04:27

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 04:27

allanmac .....

Refer to VSI 50

Items "2" & "3" of the 'Variable suspension height control (all vehicles)' section - effectively make suspension systems such as the landrovers type described above ... and factory fitted electronic stability control systems illegal in NSW.

Its what happens when consultation with motoring bodies and vehicle manufacturers and politicians doesnt happen.

FollowupID: 643102

Follow Up By: Dave(NSW) - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:34

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:34

allanmac, You 50m lift & 33" tyres will become illegal and need an engineering certificate at a cost of ??

GU RULES!!

Lifetime Member
My Profile My Blog Send Message

FollowupID: 643119

Reply By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 06:27

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 06:27

The far reaching effects of Mr Daleys personal, misguided thoughts on vehicles suspension is obviously being lost on most people.

Quite simply .....

Last month ... YOU could legally make minor changes to your vehicles suspension to make up for bull bar sag, towing weights, better handling etc.,

Next month ... It will involve expensive engineer inspections & certificates, probably vehicle testing costs, and vehicle data changes with the RTA & most likely your insurer.

Last month ... You could, if you had the need or desire - have a govt approved suspension system higher than 50mm for general use. This of course depended on whether the engineer deemed the factory wheelbearings, axles, suspension mounts, etc., were stong enough to support the suspension changes or whether those components needed upgrading as well ... and whether the vehicle met on-road testing standards.

Next month ... YOU dont have that option.

Last month ... Hoons in illegally modified / non engineered vehicles were traffic violaters.

Next month ... Hoons in illegally modified / non engineered vehicles will be traffic violaters ................ and YOU could be one of them.

As for "hugely lifted 4wds" .... not my cup of tea as a 2" lift is adequate for my needs ........ but no one has the right to discredit those vehicles - or complain about them ... IF they have govt approved engineering certificates.

The certificate confirms they are as safe to use on the road - as YOUR own vehicle ....

AnswerID: 375780

Reply By: Member - Oldbaz. NSW. - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:02

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:02

I thought my original "heads up" was quickly passed over too, but you have
made others think a little more on the subject. The ranters will have no affect on the issue or the laws. Those that take the effort to lobby through
accepted means may well influence the outcome. Sub 50mm lifts dont appear to be the real problem so why target them ? Ban over 50mm without the
Eng Cert & jobs right. These laws refer to lowering as well but that is hardly a concern to this forum. Is your current lift notified to your insurer ? If not,
your insurance is void. Will your insurer still cover your lift after Aug 1 ? I dont
know, do you? Is your lift to give your car the capacity to haul all the weight
that you carry ? If so, you may have already voided your insurance due to
GVM issues. These are the practical issues that could cost you a heap under
the new laws. I doubt a 50mm lift will attract the law unless you are being a fool, but have an accident will bring the Insurers & the law too into play. If I
was lifted I would confirm my Insurance, The fine you may cop will be insignificant in relation to no cover....oldbaz.

AnswerID: 375793

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:19

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:19

morning Oldbaz,

Imitially when I read the press release I was offended at the labelling of being a hoon ..... but took the release to be an active stance against the small number of drivers causing the rest of us issues.

After several rereads ... including VSI 50 and comparing Mr Daleys personal supension thoughts and logic against the NCOP VSB 14 ... not too mention existing RTA rules - I quickly came to understand that VSI 50 has nothing to do with the proposed national standard ... but rather - one persons personal set against vehicles that dont look like they do in a sales brochure.

Each of his reasons given are flawed ... and the the unavailabilty of engineer approved lifts over 50mm after 01/08/09 shows Mr Daley places more faith in his own suspension knowledge than that of trained govt engineering signatories ... not bad for a bloke that doesnt even appear to know how to adjust his headlights .....

FollowupID: 643115

Reply By: Ray - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:37

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:37

It's very easy to pass legislation in parliament. It's another thing to be able to enforce it. Police are police, not motor mechanics. Most of them would not know if a vehicle had been modified or not at 50mm but what does stand out are those people, may I say hoons? Who lift their vehicles to a stage where blind Teddy could see it complete with all those spotlight mounted on the roof???????

AnswerID: 375800

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:36

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:36

Hoons is a good term .... If that is their behaviour rather than just the vehicle they are sitting in.

You are right ... the higher lift vehicles are a much easier target ...

They are also easy to process ... Its simply a matter of the costly (time & money ) certificate / mod plate being shown on request by police.

No certificate / mod ... the vehicle goes off on a tilt tray to a holding yard.

FollowupID: 643134

Reply By: JR - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:18

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:18

I might be missing something here, but if you have to keep your vehicles ride height between plus and minus 50 mm of standard.
Id reckon this would require people to upgrade suspensions or fit polyairs to handle GVM weights without lowering vehicle too much?

Additionally if you have permananetly fitted gear which sags vehicle, ie winch, bar, LR tank etc, wouldnt you be OK to uprate suspension as you may be simply regaining standard ride height. Problem is with gear you regularly take out.

I checked with my insurers and they basically dont care what mods I have so long as it is "legal". ie if RTA is happy so are they

I reckon GVM is the largest problem many 4x4 owners have without even knowing it. These rules are in place. If this is ever taken seriously by police and insurers there will be some very unhappy people
JR

AnswerID: 375803

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:26

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:26

As per my previous response: AnswerID: 375780

Last month ... YOU could legally make minor changes to your vehicles suspension to make up for bull bar sag, towing weights, better handling etc.,

Next month ... It will involve expensive engineer inspections & certificates, probably vehicle testing costs, and vehicle data changes with the RTA & most likely your insurer.

FollowupID: 643131

Follow Up By: Nargun51 - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:50

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:50

I read it exactly the same way as you, but obviously neither you nor I are privy to the machinations of the Star Chamber cabal.

Others above have placed the blame for this change on politicians bowing to the pressure from Scrubby and his ilk. Nobody has discussed the other participants in this debate; such as car insurance companies, personal and public liability insurers, medical providers or medical insurers.

These are the ones which have far more accurate information in regards to incidence of accidents of vehicles with lifts above 50mm and the associated cost to their companies and/or the community of accidents occurring with these vehicles. They would be making financial decisions on actuarial statistics and profit margins based on risk analysis.

They don’t raise their concerns through the press, but have a breakfast with the Minister (my conspiracy theory)

PS. The bottom edge of a bull bar on a 2 inch lifted 4WD is probably above the side intrusion bars of almost all passenger cars on the road.

FollowupID: 643142

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Friday, Jul 24, 2009 at 09:07

Friday, Jul 24, 2009 at 09:07

A good list of debate participants Nargun51.

One would think that vehicle manufactures - who provide same models with different suspension variants.

NSW Police because of their "lowered", " hoon" highway patrol cars,

Caravan/Trailer towing clubs and associations,

4wd Clubs and associations,

RTA engineering signatories,

Vehicle enthusiasts / restorer clubs and associations,

Suspension manyuacturing representatives,

Individuals simply wishing to maintain their own personal vehicle servicing abilities,

The NRMA,

The AAAA,

Perhaps even a Federal reresentative to highlight initiatives of the NCOP VSB 14,

Should also have a place at that breakfast table.

Just Mr Daley being chummy, over tea and scones with some medicos who are traumatised by the sights they see in their CHOSEN profession ... would hardly be adequate.

FollowupID: 643316

Reply By: The Landy - Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:47

Thursday, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:47

Without going into the merit or otherwise of this new standard or whether it is well structured……but taking a look at it as it is currently written.

For most of us here (not all!) the interest will mostly be in the ‘up to 50mm’ and I suspect it captures 75% or more of those with an interest.

The VSI states, for changes up to 50mm, on currently registered vehicles, you will be required to have a certificate stating that the modifications conform to the safety standard requirements specified in the regulation, including conforming to the relevant ADRs, and that the safety levels of the modified vehicle, pertaining to both the vehicle’s occupants and other road users, have not been reduced from its original condition.

For a vehicle that has been raised up to 50mm in accordance with its manufacturer’s specifications and using parts supplied by the manufacturer or equivalent parts, the certificate must be provided by the manufacturer or a manufacturer’s authorised dealer, a person competent in such modifications or an engineering signatory.

For all other raised vehicles the certificate must be provided by an engineering signatory.

Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that for changes up to 50mm only, if it is done by an organisation that is competent in ‘suspension modifications’ then they will be able to sign-off on it and provide a certificate stating that it complies.

I would think the likes of ARB, TJM (to name two) and other specialist suspension work-shops will look to be classed as ‘competent’. It won’t require an engineering report, just their name to the paper certifying the work they are doing complies. If they aren’t willing to certify or can’t certify it, then perhaps they shouldn’t be carrying the work out in the first place.

The key is how the RTA will define who is competent, but given the major 4WD drive shops such as ARB, TJM and others have their business built around vehicle modifications, and especially suspension upgrades, it will be in their interest to argue they meet the definition of ‘competent person’.

Most suspension changes are to take account of an increase in vehicle weight, or towing requirements, therefore the height of the vehicle laden may not be too different, but less than 50mm, from the ‘trim height’ of a vehicle in original condition. Under this scenario it should be easy to argue that the safety of the vehicle has not been reduced from its original condition and in fact it may have improved.

For vehicles over 50mm, I guess it is a new ball-game altogether, but am I missing something in my conclusions here?

Cheers......

AnswerID: 375820

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Friday, Jul 24, 2009 at 09:19

Friday, Jul 24, 2009 at 09:19

There's no merit involved in this one Landy ... LOL

From reading your post ........... You seem comfortable with the apparent NEW need to have an paid agent undertake bolt on / bolt off suspension tasks - that are no more ( or less ) critical than tightening the tow hitch and D-shackles on a trailer properly ?

Is this due to an abundance of finacial stability or a lack of mechanical aptitude.

Just trying to ascertain from where you are making your point.

FollowupID: 643317

Reply By: The Landy - Friday, Jul 24, 2009 at 12:47

Friday, Jul 24, 2009 at 12:47

OzTroopy…..

From the outset I highlighted that my post was not about the merit of the new standard or whether it is well structured. Plenty, including you, have already canvassed that there are inconsistencies with it.

You incorrectly assume that I don’t necessarily share the same view as you or others…I didn’t even express one!

It is fine to run around de-crying the Minister for calling you a hoon or yell from the top of your voice that the rule is ill-conceived. But it might just be practical to actually work out in the interim just whom might be affected come 1 August, whether they need to take action now or in the future, or whether, like many other issues that come up from time to time, this is a ‘storm in a teacup’ for most.

My reading of the ‘current’ version of VSI 50 is that changes of up to 50mm may not be any great issue for 75% (probably 95%) of most of us now or in the future, and most likely there will be any number of interested parties that will be classified as competent and able to certify vehicles with modifications of 50mm or less. Otherwise I suspect the ‘bread & butter’ business of the likes of ARB & TJM has just gone out the door, something I doubt will happen. I’ll stand corrected if that proves not to be the case.

Having said that; it seems the intent of this directive is clear – if you raise your vehicle you need to demonstrate it is safe. Most responsible people won’t have a problem with that particularly if the modifications have gone outside the initial design testing by the manufacturer. Importantly, they haven’t said you can’t do it, however it will be good to see some points in the initial VSI 50 clarified.

My take on the future of this directive….unless your vehicle is raised to make it more obvious than ‘tits on a bull’ I doubt there will ever be need for concern, nor will you be cast ‘in irons’ for tightening the tow hitch or D shackles on a trailer.

Good weekend to you….

AnswerID: 375990

Back Moderator