Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

there are ways around it!

i know of some people who have taken thier (r33 gts-t) power/weight fine to court, contested it and won!

and now that they have won once.... they can never be fined for it in their same car again!

....and I know of some people who make up stories to try and look cool.

To R31Nismoid and others, a case regarding the legalities of driving a R33 gtst has been contested in court, and has been proven by the defendant that the r33 is in fact, legal to drive on your P plates.

HOWEVER, this case unfortunately did not create precedent for others, but was argued (and won) with some of the following points:

a) How old the car is...

b) How damn close to the power/weight border it is

c) The fact the car is tuned for 105 octane petrol in japan, so those ""FACTORY"" figures are based on higher performance petrol... where as we have 98 octane, therefore performance level of a stock r33 gts-t brand new in japan vs performance of a stock r33 gts-t 14 years later in Australia are alot lower.

d) The cars REAL weight, tested at a weighbridge

The bloke now can get pulled over wherever and whenever and is legally aloud to drive a R33 GTST on his P plates.

Cost of lawyer: $750

Buying a new tie for court: $80

Driving your pride and joy LEGALLY: $Priceless

Edited by DjeMz
  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's what I was saying! you're the one saying the r33 is already illegal for a p plater so can't be made legal.

if the r33 gtst was made to have less power it would be NO LONGER OVER THE POWER TO WEIGHT LAWS.

you REALLY need to work on your comprehension skills.

as for the costs involved, they are irrelevant at the moment. we're discussing all the ways a p plater can legally drive a r33

;)

How are costs irrelevant?

I will chase it up and let you all know.

Thanks :laugh:

I wouldnt mind checking it all out. I love beating the law thats for sure :)

if you could find that case it would be awesome. id pay double that if i could drive my car legally. off the top of your head, why didnt it set a precedent? i thought any case can be used as a precedent because its up to the second judge to decide if its relevant (yr 10 legal studies talking). and how did he end up in court in the first place? before or after getting dicked?

Precedents can only be set in a higher court.

That would have been heard in the Magistrates court where that cant occur

Not necessarily, the Magistrate could have suggested the case be sent up to a higher court, however over a simple traffic related matter, I don't thing he or she would bother, nor the defendant have the time or resources (to afford a high court lawyer when he/she drives a r33 :D ) to argue much a matter.

The issue MIGHT HAVE (again still trying to chase down the facts) got sent to court after the defendant did not pay the fine and received a court summons to explain why the fine has not been paid or/and the defendant chose to take the matter to court.

Mate there's no need to be such a prick about it.

No one said anything about using sandbags. I was thinking along the lines of adding corner weights.

And for your information:

Straight from http://www.arrivealive.vic.gov.au/c_youngGLS_9b.html

Now who's wrong?

Ass is right, (AGAIN :blink:) The weight is always a factory figure, modifications only refer to increases in power, which again works against you.

Your only option is to upgrade to an r32/r31 etc :w00t:

To get a car Enginereed cost hundreds, if not thousands of dollars.

To get a car ADR Approved (EPA Etc), you can be looking at upwards of $50,000.

It is so unfeasible it is impossible.

This hurts my head. Every post just gets more and more idiotic.

Edited by Mulkers

I'm probably wrong here... but i thought the new laws didnt affect those already on their P's, they just remained on the old system? Maybe im wrong here..? I should be safe enough with my lil 32 tho..!

I'm probably wrong here... but i thought the new laws didnt affect those already on their P's, they just remained on the old system? Maybe im wrong here..? I should be safe enough with my lil 32 tho..!

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...p;#entry3044704

Removing the turbo doesnt constitute having a non-turbo car.

Fact of the matter is its still a R33 GTS-t by the build plate, and EPA to boot.

mkay, now had you actually read what my post was about, you would've read that it was not about making it a non-turbo car in form of registration, but lowering the power to weight ratio in order to make it legal for pre june 30th 2007 p-platers.

from the vic roads site

"If your car is modified, you may also need to obtain an engineer's certificate and do your own calculations. You are also required to notify VicRoads of any significant modification. Penalties for not doing so are tough."

go flame me again im just trying to explain how we do it for the victorians

Edited by lexi bro!

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

    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...