New RTA rules for vehicle modifications

[wiso]

is this going to put all the tyre companies out of business? How many people actually fit Original Fitment tyres to there cars? if we put anything on the car now thats the right size will that be classed as a modification? (edit: they may have the same load rating, and waer rating, but the differant material and tread can cahnge the handling of a car), as it might not have the same grip ratings as the original will this require engineering?

Brake pads, you go buy a set of brake pads from repco, these are not alwasy the same spec as your original fitmnet pads. even though the cheap pads comlpy with Australian manufacturing specs they made have a different braking properties to you OEM pads. they may make it a little worse. Do these require certification? how are they going to deal with this?

I agree with what rona said i have had some cars that would not even make 15 consecutive 100km/hr stops when they roll of the factory floor. Look at you base model falcons, they would do maybe 10 stops, then the discs would be soo warped they would not make the next 5 effieciently, (talking EF, AU ish models, they may have improved on BA's, I know the old EF faclons used to warp rotors frequently)

[RONA]

BA still warped rotors and mine would not of coped with 15 quick stops in succession. They would get pretty spongy 5-10 stops in me thinks, beyond that the pedal would be well long and stopping distances would blow out.

[petergoudie]

Some explanation:

1) The RTA test discussed in this thread in an 'abridged test' which means its not the full ADR test.

2) The full ADR test involves more assessment plus a water test where the calipers are flooded with a stream of water (a hose jet) and the brakes tested again to measure their stopping ability.

3) Any car with a full volume compliance plate would have passed the tests even though there is some conjecture in the statements above. You might ask, do I need to modify the brakes at all?

4) The issue the engineers and I have is just obtaining a test site is not straight forward and there is a possibility you will be driving to Victoria for that track. If someone with a 14 day defect notice calls an engineer they aren't going to like the answer that it might take a few months and be very expensive. Even the testing gear costs about $25k. I'm all for safety however the RTA needs to introduce an education process to explain all the issues and consider if there is a balance somewhere inbetween.

5) Try to concentrate on the main issue rather that worrying about your AU Falcon that has better brakes than you realise.

[wiso]

(2) However, a vehicle has not been significantly modified for the purposes of this Division if the modification of, addition of components to or removal of components from, the vehicle:
(a) was the replacement of components with identical or equivalent components for the purposes of maintenance or repair, or
(b) was the fitting of optional parts or components by the vehicle’s manufacturer or the manufacturer’s agent, or
(c) is a modification or class of modifications specified by the Authority, by order published in the Gazette for the purposes of this paragraph.

Sorry Peter, I didn't quite get across the question I wanted, i made it more of a statement. Forgetting the brake issue for the moment. I am not sure I am reading this rule properly, or my mind is going to the worst possible scenario.

Speaking hypothetically: If my car was released with standard gas shock and I put in a Sport gas shock, while this may not seem major, this can be technically classed as a modification. If I put Plus 50 H4 globes in the head lights while the car only came with standard H4 globes this would technically be a modification. If my car had standard brake pad, but I put a better pad in like metal or race compound in this would be a modification (would this require the private braking test, costing up to $30k, just curoius). I used a synthetic oil in the car rather than the original mineral oil This is going away from standard.

These are just examples but you get the picture. this may seem stupid and trivial. but all these will alter the performance of the car away from OEM in some small way. Does this mean the vehicle need to get engineered for these things?

Will we have to have test conducted that prove even with the Plus 50 light globe that the lights are not detrimental to the factory specs.

I mean how far are they going to go with this. Like I said I may just be going over the top with this rule. I have trouble understanding some vehicle modification laws

I hope this cam across a little better

Thanks

[oldcorollas]

start by reading the NCOP for the guidelines of what each "mod" is classed as. (nut no, not every state will adopt all of it, however it seems to be pretty much based on NSW rules anyway)
a lot of modifications do not need certification... just the ones that affect performance (more than 20% extra, etc), emissions, noise, safety..

any change is a mod, but if manufacturers product meets ADR's (ie, the sport shocks and the Plus 50 bulbs) then when installed in your car, your car will still meet adr's and will not need certification (comes under minor mods).

if the synthetic oil increase oil consumption and emissions.. then it could be an issue, but it will never be an issue...

brakes? if you put in metal/race pads that have buggerall friction when not up to temp, then really, the would need to be certified.. and justified for use on roads if they decrease safety during normal driving..

the RTA letter Peter put up is the stick, to try and get people to do the right thing.. or, to give cops the power to actually penalise those that really do flout and fark up the rules...

[oldcorollas]

for example
Hella Plus 50 bulbs
http://db.hella.com.au/cgi-bin/catal...w&flmaint=2031

and Hellas ADR reference chart
http://db.hella.com.au/downloads/3rd_ed_adr.pdf

no issues fitting ADR approved globes into ADR approved headlights...


for brakes..

1.1 MODIFICATIONS NOT REQUIRING CERTIFICATION
The following modifications may be performed without certification:
 Fitting a manufacturer’s optional braking system for the particular make/model; and
 Fitting of additional or substitute in-line brake boosters to pre-ADR 31/35 vehicles.

1.2 MODIFICATIONS REQUIRING CERTIFICATION UNDER LG CODES
The following modifications may be performed under LG Codes:
 Fitting disc or drum brakes that are not a manufacturer’s option;
 Substituting brake master cylinders, wheel cylinders or calipers;
 Fitting or modifying brake balance and pressure limiting devices; and
 Relocating the brake pedal position for left hand or right hand drive.

they go on to say
The aim of all brake system [i]up-grades[\i] in early model passenger vehicles should be to at least meet the deceleration and brake fade standards specified in ADR 31, particularly if an engine modification results in increased vehicle performance.

if your pads don't meet ADR's for your car.. why would you fit them? since they would be worse?

[oldcorollas]

regarding shocks

1.1 BASIC MODIFICATIONS WITHOUT CERTIFICATION
The following modifications may be performed without certification if they are carried out in
accordance with sub-section 2 General Requirements and the total change in vehicle height
resulting from all modifications performed, does not exceed 50mm.
Note: In NSW, although vehicles whose height has been changed up to 50mm do not
require certification by an engineering signatory, the registration authority must be
notified of the modification.
 Tyre and rim substitution carried out within the limits specified in this Section;
 Lowering and raising suspensions (by not more than one third of the original
suspension travel provided the original vehicle height is not increased or decreased by
more than 50mm);
 Raising the vehicle with a body lift kit provided the original vehicle height is not
increased by more than 50mm (refer to sub-section 4.11 for conditions and limitations);
 Shock absorber substitution;
 Spring and sway bar substitution;
 Track rod and strut brace installation;
 Steering wheel substitution (refer to sub-section 4.9 of this Section); and
 Power steering (manufacturer’s option) conversion.

so no, no certification is needed

[wiso]

yeah I know currently these things are all ok by current rules, but if these are new rules, are these going to be the same as current rules? if so why make new rules, I haven't had a chance to sit down and have a good look through them yet, but I will. Thats all I am going to say here.

thanks

[Stomps]

wow, as if you guys getting tested once a year aint bad enough...

fuck this for a joke.. these rules sound completely gay and will undoubtably backfire..

Stomps

[oldcorollas]

yeah I know currently these things are all ok by current rules, but if these are new rules, are these going to be the same as current rules? if so why make new rules, I haven't had a chance to sit down and have a good look through them yet, but I will. Thats all I am going to say here.

thanks

the "new rules" (that maybe no state will fully take up) are just guidelines for modification...

they are basically similar to current NSW guidelines, but more explicit.
overall they seem like a good thing, removing grey areas etc.

the idea was to introduce it is a set of guidelines nationally, to make it easier to move modified vehicles between states, and have a uniform modding guidline in terms of what is required for safety.

some of the new guidlines are better, some are worse, but almost all have a lot more detail of go/no go. anyway, there is a seperate thread for the NCOP...


introducing penalty points for illegally modded cars with major modifications, or illegally approved cars, or just shoddy engineering, is not such a bad thing..

stomps,. it's not such a bad thing to have cars on the road that are actually roadworthy, instead of being held together with duct tape and cableties

[river]

Hi,

Anyway, usually the other states all fall in line. They now have speed limits in the NT and if these rules are adpoted in NSW don't be surprised if, over time, the other states adopt them.

seeyuzz
river

[foamy]

It's nice to see the RTA putting people who cut springs in the same basket as people who want to modify their car in a safe manner. I would also like to see these 'statistics' they have for illegally modified vehicles causing accidents?

I thought they would cause no more then a vehicle which has not been maintained?

[mookschank]

Yep national indeed, COAG have given the go ahead for nationalising heavy vehicles and rail safety regulation....light vehicles will be next when the Feds cough up enough subsidy to compensate lost State based revenue streams from regulation activities....give it time.....

[o_man_ra23]

I think foamy speaks the truth. My fear is that if these rules are over the top, it is likely that the overly practical people who run the bureaucracy of QLD will follow suit, and then cock it up further. Realistically, if I put the brakes from a Lancer EVO 3 onto the front of my RA28, and have suitable rear brakes installed, with a suitable brake master cylinder from a 4wheel disk brake vehicle, why would I need to prove that it complies with the ADRs that it was designed to comply with?? Can this not be signed off in the same manner it currently is... ie that the brakes are suitable in design and a quick road test (possibly at a closed venue such as a drag strip) to prove that the front wheels lock up before the back and the brakes don't have any strange attributes which would warrant further investigation??

I fully agree that dodgy vehicles should be removed from the road, however this does not appear to be a helpful solution.

[petergoudie]

Dear o-man-ra23, the answer is no. The combination of brake components have never been tested as a system which means you will have to test to prove they are OK.