New RTA rules for vehicle modifications

[oldcorollas]

receipt to prove parts were not stolen? same as you need for a car when getting a blue slip or new rego now anyway.

it depends on their classification of modifications..

(a) ensure that the modification complies with any requirements specified by the Authority by order published in the Gazette that are applicable to the modification concerned, and

would be the requirements specified in the NCOP or equiv?

is it such a bad thing that cars have to continue to meet ADR's? that is actually the case now too, just everyone ignores it, and there are no specific penalties for it(?)

most change hands privately which would require the person requesting a written receipt which would be a pain in the arse.

is it really hard to write a receipt, with both your names, the date, and the amount they were sold for?
harden up

edit: not testing on public roads is ghey, but with the state of public liability in aus, it is not that surprising...

[petergoudie]

Four documents for comment were released by RTA for comment. I have attached two pdfs but the Toymods forum system won't allow me to attach two other Word documents because the are too large for it to handle.

Pamela Radford is the RTA contact person who sent the mesage below. Send me your email address and I send you the Word documents.

HOWEVER IF ANY OF YOU CONTACT PAMELA PLEASE ALL REALISE SHE IS JUST A SMALL LINK IN THE CHAIN AND HER JOB WAS JUST TO COLLECT THE COMMENTS SO DO NOT TAKE ANY OF YOUR FRUSTRATIONS OUT ON HER,

I'm only repeating her message because in the text it says the drafts have been released for public comment.

**********************************

Attached are the draft Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Amendment (Certification of Vehicles) Regulation 2011 and Road Transport (General) Amendment (Certification of Vehicles) Regulation 2011 with an invitation to comment and templates for people to set out their comments.



An additional document Guide to the Draft Regulation should assist you in providing your comments.



These have been prepared in draft for public exhibition and your comments are invited.



Comments must be received by 27 January 2011 addressed to the email address [email protected] or the North Sydney mailing address on the invitation



Regards





Pamela Radford







Pamela Radford

Regulatory Strategy & Reform | Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW

Lvl 15 101 Miller Street | North Sydney | NSW 2060

( 02 85884446 | 7 02 8588 4153

* [email protected]

[oldcorollas]

re 160km tests..
page 16 and 17 here in V2 NCOP
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roa..._01Jan2011.pdf

For all vehicles, other than certain ICVs, test speed is either 100 km/h or 0.8 Vmax,
whichever is the greater. The maximum test speed is limited to 160 km/h for all vehicles
including those vehicles that have a Vmax in excess of 160 km/h. This is described in the
Table LG5 as Test Speed = 80% Vmax ≤ 160; and

 For tests 2, 4 and 5 ICVs may be tested at 100 km/hr if the mass of the vehicle to be
tested is less than the mass of the vehicle from which its brake system was sourced

the table for ADR vehicles on page 17 looks a bit crap... but.. the idea is that the cars should still satisfy ADR... those tests = cheaper than a proper ADR test?

re: Vmax.. if you car can do 200, then it will be tested from 160km/hr....
but if it was electronically limited to 125km/hr, the test speed will still be 100.

[stidnam]

From what I can make out all this is linked to the new VSCCS scheme which is replacing the current engineering scheme used by the RTA called ECS.

I did come across this is one of their documents


Working as a VSCCS licensed certifier
The work of a VSCCS licensed certifier includes
• inspecting and testing vehicles
• assessing the compliance of vehicles with the applicable standards
• deciding whether to certify a vehicle.
The VSCCS does not prescribe how certifiers go about these activities. It relies on the training,
experience and professionalism of its certifiers to determine how best to do this. Similarly, the
VSCCS does not specify which tests must be carried out or what equipment should be used: it is
up to the certifier to decide how to assess a vehicle’s compliance with the applicable standards.
However, to ensure the integrity of the scheme, the VSCCS does expect a certifier to:
• abide by a code of conduct
• follow the scheme’s administrative procedures
• use the VSCCS IT system to issue certificates.
A certifier is also expected to maintain the currency of their knowledge and competence

I note in particular the part about the scheme not prescribing how certifiers go about certifying vehicles and I imagine this would extend to braking systems etc previously discussed.

Its the same with engineers today. If you ring one engineer up they'll tell you you need to do full brake tests where as another one will be happy to assess the components as they stand and another one will tell you that you can't use anything but the donor vehicles brakes, diff etc.

stidnam

[egamirrorim]

Disregard, question answered above

[oldcorollas]

as above, the brake tests in the NCOP are pretty specific, even for pre-ADR vehicles....

i'm in two minds abotu it all.. it will be harder for legit modders to do their thang, and more expensive...
but.. it may also deter the really dodgy kiddies and engineers out there... and there are some pretty shit cars on the road atm...

maybe it will encourage modders to have more pride in their work? to do things properly?
the point of it seems to be to prevent cars from getting WORSE than the original ADR's specify....
why would you want to make a car handle or brake worse?? would we really do that? (emissions is another story )

[oldcorollas]

Do the word documents mention needing to have custom brake setups tested at private facilities? I didnt see that in either of the PDFs...

what 100km/hr public road is suitable and safe to do repeated stops? (maybe if roads were allowed to be blocked off for "testing days"?
what roads are legal to drive up to 160? probably none... but again, if the cops were in on it, and roads blocked off for testing days (at considerable expense of course) then not too bad?
means blocking off a section of a highway? on an airport?



edit
15 fade test runs @ max 45 second intervals
– slowing vehicle from 100 km/h to 0 km/h or
to 50% of test speed if the higher test speed
is used *

farkin!!

[MR22ZZ]

re 160km tests..
page 16 and 17 here in V2 NCOP
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roa..._01Jan2011.pdf



the table for ADR vehicles on page 17 looks a bit crap... but.. the idea is that the cars should still satisfy ADR... those tests = cheaper than a proper ADR test?

re: Vmax.. if you car can do 200, then it will be tested from 160km/hr....
but if it was electronically limited to 125km/hr, the test speed will still be 100.

FFS if you use Wakefield Park for the test circuit, my car doesn't even reach 160 down the straight.

this has just given me more cause to just take my car off the road and use it as a perminent track car.

[oldcorollas]

Or everyone will just do it illegally totally defeating the purpose of this ignorant approach.

maybe they are going for the JDMspec approach?

in japan is impossible to get the kind of mods done in aus legal..
the paperwork for a mate just changing from an auto to manual gearbox was nuts... had to mechanically prove the strength of the driveshaft was suitable.. even though the auto and manual ones are same part number (but manual not available in japan....)

maybe we will all end up going jdmspecdorifto and no-one will bother to engineer anything??? (bit of a difference in "enthusiasm" of enforcement between the two countries tho.... )

[oldcorollas]

FFS if you use Wakefield Park for the test circuit, my car doesn't even reach 160 down the straight.

this has just given me more cause to just take my car off the road and use it as a perminent track car.

if your Vmax is less than 160 (is that worked out from a certain distance of accel??) then your test speed would be 80% of Vmax... not 160?

yeah, it's not lookin so good for the planned rolla mods....

might be good for car trailer builders, and people selling falcons on gas

[petergoudie]

Stidnam, it is not as you say. RTA is cleaning out those 'anything goes' engineers and requires testing or clear cut proof. The engineers quoting the higher prices are the ones who are doing it correctly.

Old Corollas raises NCOP and whilst your comments are generally correct for the brake test RTA has said it will not adopt the NCOP (in regard to VSB 14) in its entirity and will using parts of it and issuing specific RTA standards for the other parts it is not in agreement with.

[RAAAH23]

As i am part of the future generation of car modifiers. I can almost guarentee the number of illegally modified cars on the road will increase due to the new restrictions.

You drive to KK/Harrys at liverpool on a Saturday night and see what kind of mods these P-Platers are doing to their cars. POD filters, cut springs, speakers hanging off the rad supports, welded diffs and cannon mufflers.

As they grow older they just have more money to spend on fast bits without doing the important stuff. The number of these kids who have dads tools at their hands and our very own step by step conversion threads would be significant, its only making it easier for us to self-modify our cars without ever having to get a blue slip done.

These days there are numerous mechanics who will pink slip a car without even seeing it. Heck my dads 260Z thats sitting on a rotisserie passed its pink slip 2 months ago and there you have it everyone will just keep their cars rego'd without motors or boxes because the hassle of getting a blue slip isnt worth the money and the yearly rego/pink slip is. Thus totally deafeating the purpose of these reforms. Well done RTA

[egamirrorim]

Did anyone see a proposed commencement date for the new rules or are they not at that stage yet?

[cri_ag]

is anyone preparing a submission? we need a car enthusiasts union type organization to lobby on our behalf on issues like this. id be more than happy to pay my yearly membership and no longer be a soft target.

[river]

Hi,

76AL Meaning of “significantly modified vehicle”

(1) For the purposes of this Part, a vehicle has been significantly modified if the vehicle has been modified, or components have been added to or removed from the vehicle, in a manner that:
(a) alters the performance characteristics of the vehicle such that those performance characteristics are not as intended by the vehicle’s manufacturer, or
(b) affects the vehicle’s occupant safety systems, or
(c) affects the safe handling of the vehicle, or
(d) is specified by the Authority, by order published in the Gazette, as a modification or class of modifications for the purposes of this paragraph.

(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.

I'm more concerned about the blue section above.

This implies that putting a TRD gear knob (for example) in my car means it has been modified, according the Section 2b. Or, replacing worn suspension with new equivalent suspension is also a modification, according the Section 2a.

Adding air con, new radio/head unit, different wheels, spoilers etc etc, whether they are from the vehicle manufacturer or from a reputable legal company, are regarded as modifications that require engineering or some cost to validate their safety??????

seeyuzz
river