Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys, my R34 GTT got a defect notice, fine, and need an RWC to clear all just because of a BOV.

The RWC guy wont pass my POD filter that's secured to the chassis, everything else including BOV he ignored. He said needs the airbox...

1) Does anyone have a spare, or can I borrow an airbox of someone with an R34 GTT for a few hours to get the RWC? (I can drive to you)

2) Will Vicroads check the stuff the cop wrote (BOV)? Or just look at the roadworthy and clear it?

You are allowed one intake modification.

IF:

-you have a factory intercooler then you do not need to put a factory airbox on.

-you do have an aftermarket intercooler, then he is right.

If it's the first line then tell him he is one of the many uneducated RWC mechanics in this world and go elsewhere or simply pull up the EPA documentation about modifications and show it to him.

And no, Vicroads don't check the car, most of the time they don't even know what they are looking at anyway. You just hand the RWC in over the counter (or post it in I believe, but safer to hand it in IMO).

Thanks for the reply, Its all stock intercooler etc. The entire mod list is just BOV + POD Filter.

Ill go see if he will accept the documents... probably won't... I might need to find another proper RWC person, as the guy above me said in dandenong-ish area...sigh.

He could be counting the BOV as an intake modification... I'd reinstall the stock one, they are perfectly good even on modified cars... and less attention from po-po-police

Yup, the car came from Japan with the BOV, I found a stock one recently and will be installing it soon.

He never said anything about the BOV so I'm not really sure... I guess I'll have to wait and see.

Apparently he's just a stubborn person, he didn't give a roadworthy on my old supra because the electric seat motor didn't work and he was too tall to fit inside...

  • 1 month later...

Hey everyone,

I've just been defected in the new year and i just want some clarification as I've never had one before.

Its a major defect, RWC as well, and needs to be cleared within 7 days oh and a fine of $369. :)

The copper took some photos (for evidence obviously) of the engine bay also on the "descriptions area" wrote;

  • Engine - To comply ADR 79 law. <-- what do i have to get done as i have a pod filter and inter cooler which i know i can only have one or the other. which i'll be putting the stock pod back on.
  • Exhaust - Excessive noise to be eliminated. (removed exhaust which i was going to get quite anyway)
  • Tail pipe - to be horizontal or downwards 25 degrees (see above)
  • Suspension - to retain 2/3 original height - lol

He didn't say what needs to be changed, just that my engine is supposed to look like it came out of the factory.

i believe it's not an EPA but just a normal defect and infringement notice.

Q. I have a GTX and a 4" intake, is there a way to get a pipe made to join onto the stock box, since it's 2inch? i cbf taking the turbo off... too much work

Could someone with knowledge shed some light on this please.

Cheers!

FYI: Also was gonna get booked for rear tint for being too dark (but didn't have the tint detector machine in car, apparently a law passed in 2011 saying all windows must be visible and at a certain %.

Edited by Skyline_034

Pretty sure it's 2/3 of original suspension travel, and minimum of 100mm...

Not 2/3 original height.

Cool, so swap exhaust, raise car up, stock airbox with a black reducer to the AFM (or are you running MAP?) if your piping is in the right area

you are correct, my bad, typo. "its To retain 2/3 original travel". <- so this means to raise up? wouldn't they just write "it's low" or something?

my AFM is after the turbo in the cooler line.

Nothing between pod and turbo besides 4" custom pipe.

Thanks for the speedy reply

the 4" pipe counts towards an intake modification, so does the pod, so does the intercooler, so does the relocated AFM

in other words that shouldn't pass roadworthy due to the above you have mentioned? in other words have to put stock turbo back on and relocate the AFM back to infront of the turbo?

Have been lurking for a while and this is my first post so apologies if it is in the wrong place. I owned a GT-R a few years ago when I lived in NZ and am keen to rejoin the club in Vic so have been reading this topic with interest and some dismay.

From what I have seen on Carsales etc, the vast majority of GT-Rs are modified in a way which would probably render them in violation of some law/rule/statute/whatever. E.g. coilovers, ECU, Pods + 1 other intake mod, exhaust that is 90+ but quieter than the bikes that I can hear outside every night. So is it the case that if John Q. Law "asks" you to pop the hood to take a gander and sees something that isn't factory beige, he salivates at the thought of dishing out the defect notice? Or is that overly cynical?

I would prefer to avoid this (obviously) but thinking back to my previous GT-R which had aftermarket turbos (the factory ceramics died a horrible death) it might be defected when the intent was to replace a broken item with something more reliable.

Or is it a case of "suck it up princess" if you want the toys and be prepared to swap parts back to factory as required?

Cheers

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



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • There's plenty of OEM steering arms that are bolted on. Not in the same fashion/orientation as that one, to be sure, but still. Examples of what I'm thinking of would use holes like the ones that have the downward facing studs on the GTR uprights (down the bottom end, under the driveshaft opening, near the lower balljoint) and bolt a steering arm on using only 2 bolts that would be somewhat similarly in shear as these you're complainig about. I reckon old Holdens did that, and I've never seen a broken one of those.
    • Let's be honest, most of the people designing parts like the above, aren't engineers. Sometimes they come from disciplines that gives them more qualitative feel for design than quantitive, however, plenty of them have just picked up a license to Fusion and started making things. And that's the honest part about the majority of these guys making parts like that, they don't have huge R&D teams and heaps of time or experience working out the numbers on it. Shit, most smaller teams that do have real engineers still roll with "yeah, it should be okay, and does the job, let's make them and just see"...   The smaller guys like KiwiCNC, aren't the likes of Bosch etc with proper engineering procedures, and oversights, and sign off. As such, it's why they can produce a product to market a lot quicker, but it always comes back to, question it all.   I'm still not a fan of that bolt on piece. Why not just machine it all in one go? With the right design it's possible. The only reason I can see is if they want different heights/length for the tie rod to bolt to. And if they have the cncs themselves,they can easily offer that exact feature, and just machine it all in one go. 
    • The roof is wrapped
    • This is how I last did this when I had a master cylinder fail and introduce air. Bleed before first stage, go oh shit through first stage, bleed at end of first stage, go oh shit through second stage, bleed at end of second stage, go oh shit through third stage, bleed at end of third stage, go oh shit through fourth stage, bleed at lunch, go oh shit through fifth stage, bleed at end of fifth stage, go oh shit through sixth stage....you get the idea. It did come good in the end. My Topdon scan tool can bleed the HY51 and V37, but it doesn't have a consult connector and I don't have an R34 to check that on. I think finding a tool in an Australian workshop other than Nissan that can bleed an R34 will be like rocking horse poo. No way will a generic ODB tool do it.
    • Hmm. Perhaps not the same engineers. The OE Nissan engineers did not forsee a future with spacers pushing the tie rod force application further away from the steering arm and creating that torque. The failures are happening since the advent of those things, and some 30 years after they designed the uprights. So latent casting deficiencies, 30+ yrs of wear and tear, + unexpected usage could quite easily = unforeseen failure. Meanwhile, the engineers who are designing the billet CNC or fabricated uprights are also designing, for the same parts makers, the correction tie rod ends. And they are designing and building these with motorsport (or, at the very least, the meth addled antics of drifters) in mind. So I would hope (in fact, I would expect) that their design work included the offset of that steering force. Doesn't mean that it is not totally valid to ask the question of them, before committing $$.
×
×
  • Create New...