The Epa Thread/Roadworthy Thread

[wht510]

11 posts

northern suburbs

vy ss wagon

sounds factual.

So back on topic...

[Mangune]

Yeah basically.

And if you fail the test - you've done your dough and have to pay the fee again. I wish it was just a simple IM-240 test like NSW (a 15min job), rather than full ADR testing we VICs have to deal with

Yer i was lucky enough when i took my car there guy just said come back again, didnt take my money which was handy so i didnt need 2 tests lol

[R31Nismoid]

You paid for full ADR testing for a R34 GT-t?

Sounds like yours was just a simple EPA fail/retest - which is not what we are talking about here

[Mangune]

No sorry yes i was mistaken i only got done for noise not the whole kit and caboodle.

[Dan_J]

just wondering whats the deal with drilling small-ish ?

thinking about drilling two 3cm or so holes where the battery tray/ ripples start and where the tubs finish to mount a bigger oil cooler... if i plan to

thanks

[Sunkist]

avoid it all together.. run longer lines? would be my vote.

[Dan_J]

nah, would need to run it that way due to core dimensions, not lines being to short

might just ask my rwc guy sometime

[Sunkist]

You'll find by having holes in the tray will hurt when it comes down to selling it..

[R31Nismoid]

just wondering whats the deal with drilling small-ish ?

thinking about drilling two 3cm or so holes where the battery tray/ ripples start and where the tubs finish to mount a bigger oil cooler... if i plan to

thanks

If the car has ABS - it's a flat no-no.

If the car is non-ABS, as long as you reinforce the underside of the holes, it's no problem.

[HotPlates]

I just got a RWC report done on my R33 and it states "Exhaust system cat back too low" which I don't believe to be true as I've got standard springs and the car passed the last RWC to which I haven't changed anything since. I questioned the RWC workshop and they said I would need to produce evidence of this.

So I called Vic Roads to ask them if they could run the height clearance trolley under my car and issue a report to which they said they can only do this for defected cars. I then asked the operator what the required clearance is but she didn't know exactly, but said to use the height of a 'Coke can' (130mm) as a guide.

I did a bit of digging around and according to Vic Roads VSI 8 under Section 4. Ground Clearance:

The ground clearance of a vehicle measured from a horizontal road surface to any point

on the underside of the vehicle except the tyres, wheels, wheel hubs and brake backing plates

shall, with the vehicle in its loaded state as specified by the manufacturer, be not less than:

• for any point in the width of the vehicle which is within one metre fore and aft of any axle, 100mm;
  
• for the mid-point between any two consecutive axles, the dimension in millimetres obtained by multiplying the distance in metres between those two axles by 33.33.
  

I checked the ground clearance and the lowest point on my car (cat back) is 105mm.

Second to this, I calculated the mid-point clearance by multiplying the distance between the axles (2.8m) by 33.33, which equals 93.324mm

Therefore, by my calculations I am within the legal ground clearance requirement. Or is there something I am missing???

[wht510]

Firstly good on you for actually going to the effort and checking the Vicroads information and giving them a call. it's refreshing to see this being done!

The last time I checked, the test is done with the car having the driver and a passenger and 30kg of luggage. Perhaps this will change your readings and provide you with what the RWC place got?

[Miguelone]

If the car has ABS - it's a flat no-no.

If the car is non-ABS, as long as you reinforce the underside of the holes, it's no problem.

Curious, why does ABS change this?

[R31Nismoid]

You are altering the chassis. It makes no real difference for small holes, but from an engineering point of view it's not tested/signed - hence you get pinned for it.

[Miguelone]

I understand that, why does ABS make it an instant no vs. non ABS being just reinforcement needed?

[R31Nismoid]

Because of the ABS sensors and the chassis being modified beyond the configuration in which ABS was tested.

[Miguelone]

Fair enough.

[HotPlates]

Firstly good on you for actually going to the effort and checking the Vicroads information and giving them a call. it's refreshing to see this being done!

The last time I checked, the test is done with the car having the driver and a passenger and 30kg of luggage. Perhaps this will change your readings and provide you with what the RWC place got?

Cheers. I'm trying to be as thorough as possible as the workshop I went to has come under new management since I last visited and they come across as dodgy; so I'd like to have the facts on hand.

A few years ago I got a yellow canary for the car being too low (the car passed Vic Roads new import inspection on the same springs!). So I had to get a RWC which included putting on standard height springs and take it to Vic Roads to get the height checked. The Vic Roads inspector simply had me sit in the car (no passenger) and ran a height check trolley under the car & it passed. I haven't changed anything to the ride height since I was cleared which baffles me as to why I'm now being told it's too low?

Do you know where I can find an official Vic Roads reference as to requiring a passenger and 30kg of luggage? (Vic Roads themselves don't seem to know too much)

[Dan_J]

If the car has ABS - it's a flat no-no.

If the car is non-ABS, as long as you reinforce the underside of the holes, it's no problem.

cheers for that,

Q:

reinforce, bit of 1mm scrap with same hole drilled on tacked/ stitched welded on underneath or exhaust tube type reinforce ?

wondering if this would be a common thing cops would defect and rwc would pass in the same state....

thanks

[W0rp3D]

Cheers. I'm trying to be as thorough as possible as the workshop I went to has come under new management since I last visited and they come across as dodgy; so I'd like to have the facts on hand.

A few years ago I got a yellow canary for the car being too low (the car passed Vic Roads new import inspection on the same springs!). So I had to get a RWC which included putting on standard height springs and take it to Vic Roads to get the height checked. The Vic Roads inspector simply had me sit in the car (no passenger) and ran a height check trolley under the car & it passed. I haven't changed anything to the ride height since I was cleared which baffles me as to why I'm now being told it's too low?

Do you know where I can find an official Vic Roads reference as to requiring a passenger and 30kg of luggage? (Vic Roads themselves don't seem to know too much)

I have had to have 2 defects cleared for to low, both times there was no request to be in the car, they just ran there roller under it and cleared the defect.

[W0rp3D]

I checked the ground clearance and the lowest point on my car (cat back) is 105mm.

Second to this, I calculated the mid-point clearance by multiplying the distance between the axles (2.8m) by 33.33, which equals 93.324mm

Therefore, by my calculations I am within the legal ground clearance requirement. Or is there something I am missing???

You are missing the fact that in victoria you are guilty untill you prove you are innocent, might sound a little sceptical but when you look at things like an epa notice for noise and emissions, they make you prove your innocence, if you dont prove it your automatically guilty (if you dont get it tested and cleared you get fined), the cops do what ever they like and its up to you to prove they are wrong.