Jump to content
SAU Community

Another thread about defects/engineering mods

Angus Smart

By Angus Smart,
in New South Wales

 Share

Recommended Posts

ranicx Veteran

ranicx

Posted
Posted

im not too sure with all the laws (friend at work has "aquired" a full book of all the laws and owner aproved mods) but as the for the pod and the box. i had my car looked over and the pod was passed because it was enclosed by the box. it was the first thing i did when i got the car.. saves having alot of hassles later down the track.

  • 3 weeks later...
vidospace Mentor

vidospace

Posted
Posted
ok.

cage should be fine if you are keeping it just get the car re-registered as a 2 seeter. the headlight thing is total illegal. sadly, modifying your factory bonnet (cutting support) has made it defectable too. the seat is defectable too as it can't be tilted to get rear access (but if you reg as 2 seat it may be ok too). the wing is defectable and is the most noticable of all the mods, so I'd get rid of that first.

your attitude to cops often has a major role in defect/no defect.

this is my interior. as you can see it has no rear seat at all, or seat belts, and has a half cage, and a fixed carbon fibre seat and no longer uses a normal retractable seat belt at all (harness only). It also has 3 gauges mounted on the dash (though not on the top) and an aftermarket real with quick release. I have been pulled over in this state and not been questioned about any of it. The officer didn't even make a single mention of any of that stuff. The other big thing I have going for me is standard body (i mean completely, no big front lip, no modified/cut bonnet, no big wing, just R33 GTR wheels).

picture023vt9.jpg

picture008yn8.jpg

The other thing I do is if it's going to be a long time between track days is put back the standard seat, and standard seat belt. :P

I like your style. Very well presented car.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • GTSBoy
      Requirements for Xenon Headlights? (Possible Solution)

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      So, if the headlights' cutoff behaviour (angles, heights, etc) are not as per 6.2.6.1.1 without automatic levelling, then you have to have to have automatic** levelling. Also, if the headlight does not have the required markings, then neither automatic nor manual adjusters are going to be acceptable. That's because the base headlight itself does not meet the minimum requirement (which is the marking). ** with the option of manual levelling, if the headlight otherwise meets the same requirements as for the automatic case AND can be set to the "base" alignment at the headlight itself. So that's an additional requirement for the manual case. So, provided that the marking is on the headlight and there is a local manual adjustment back to "base" on the headlight, then yes, you could argue that they are code compliant. But if you are missing any single one of these things, then they are not. And unlike certain other standards that I work with, there does not seem to be scope to prepare a "fitness for purpose" report. Well, I guess there actually is. You might engage an automotive engineer to write a report stating that the lights meet the performance requirements of the standard even if they are missing, for example, the markings.  
    • rahilp
      Requirements for Xenon Headlights? (Possible Solution)

      By rahilp · Posted

      Vertical orientation   6.2.6.1.1. The initial downward inclination of the cut off of the dipped-beam to be set in the unladen vehicle state with one person in the driver's seat shall be specified within an accuracy of 0.1 per cent by the manufacturer and indicated in a clearly legible and indelible manner on each vehicle close to either headlamp or the manufacturer's plate by the symbol shown in Annex 7.   The value of this indicated downward inclination shall be defined in accordance with paragraph 6.2.6.1.2.   6.2.6.1.2. Depending on the mounting height in metres (h) of the lower edge of the apparent surface in the direction of the reference axis of the dipped beam headlamp, measured on the unladen vehicles, the vertical inclination of the cut off of the dipped- beam shall, under all the static conditions of Annex 5, remain between the following limits and the initial aiming shall have the following values:   h < 0.8   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   0.8 < h < 1.0   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   Or, at the discretion of the manufacturer,   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The application for the vehicle type approval shall, in this case, contain information as to which of the two alternatives is to be used.   h > 1.0   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The above limits and the initial aiming values are summarized in the diagram below.   For category N3G (off-road) vehicles where the headlamps exceed a height of 1,200 mm, the limits for the vertical inclination of the cut-off shall be between: -1.5 per cent and -3.5 per cent.   The initial aim shall be set between: -2 per cent and -2.5 per cent.
    • GTSBoy
      Requirements for Xenon Headlights? (Possible Solution)

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      What do these say?
    • Komdotkom
      Torana Lx Gtr Hatch, Lots Of Pictures

      By Komdotkom · Posted

      Amazing
    • Steal01
      Torana Lx Gtr Hatch, Lots Of Pictures

      By Steal01 · Posted

      Looks good!
×
×
  • Create New...