Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Keep in mind that import defects dont account for a majority percentage of defect notices issued. I've had plenty of mates with shitbombs get a nice yellow sticker over the years. Not a valid complaint.

So you have the numbers to prove that????

  • Replies 273
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Are there numbers to prove imports are being picked on?

In the end its all hearsay and stats.

sau cruise anyone haha... JOKES!

Didn't you know SAU cruises are not on! :D

Edited by RubyRS4

Found this during my search. Its a report from 2000, but still interesting:

DefectTest.jpg

So 0.6% of fatal crashes were the result of a defectable vehicle. :D

Edited by RubyRS4
Keep in mind that import defects dont account for a majority percentage of defect notices issued. I've had plenty of mates with shitbombs get a nice yellow sticker over the years. Not a valid complaint.

BAHAHAHA you cant be serious?? :cool::D no stats are needed, just look at the amount of 'quality' cars on the road. i usually think i am at u pull it but then i realise i am driving on the road. hence the reason i don't 'believe' in defects anymore.

theres your evidence for the NSW boys. 240 inspected, 501 not inspected

Running with the trend ... 501 x 1.4% = 7 defectable vehicles that were never identified.

Adelaide has (142 + 25) x 0.6% = 1.002

So only 1 possible vehicle that was defectable in a fatal crash (and that includes motorcycles also). So compared to NSW (and other states) its saying defectable vehicles contribute less to fatal accidents.

Look at it another way (using SA and NSW only, all fatalities):

NSW (240 + 501) x 1.4% = 10.4

SA (142 + 25) x 0.6% = 1.0

Thats prob grounds for SAPOL to argue that mod plates don't make a difference. But this report was back in 2000 anyway.

Thats what's provided in the report anyway. I'm looking for the raw data, so I can crunch my own numbers! Also looking for data on "modified" vehicles contributing to crashes.

Edited by RubyRS4
Running with the trend ... 501 x 1.4% = 7 defectable vehicles that were never identified.

Adelaide has (142 + 25) x 0.6% = 1.002

So only 1 possible vehicle that was defectable in a fatal crash (and that includes motorcycles also).

Thats what's provided in the report anyway. I'm looking for the raw data, so I can crunch my own numbers! Also looking for data on "modified" vehicles contributing to crashes.

NSW win again!

From the ABS website.

At 31 March 2008, the average age of all vehicles registered in Australia was 9.9 years. This is younger than the 10.4 years recorded in the 2003 MVC. Over this five year period, a drop in the average age was observed in all vehicle types except buses. Vehicles manufactured before 1993 (those more than 15 years old) comprised 21.2% of the total Australian fleet. This is slightly lower than the 21.9% of registrations recorded 12 months earlier.

So there are less shitboxes on the road. Average age of cars is getting lower. So by 2010 I should upgrade my Stagea to an R35 :D

From 2006 ABS report: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/bb...F4?opendocument

... if you can be bothered filtering thru all that :cool:

In both 2001 and 2006 the majority of fatal crashes occurred on roads where the posted speed limit was 100 kilometres/hour (km/h) and above (44% in 2006), followed by roads with a speed limit of up to 60 km/h (33%). A further 23% of fatal crashes occurred on roads with speed zones of between 65 km/h and 95 km/h.

In both 2001 and 2006 the highest proportion of fatal crashes was single vehicle crashes (41% and 47% respectively). Pedestrian crashes accounted for 18% of crash types in 2001 and 15% in 2006.

So 1/3 of fatal crashes occur in 60kph and under zones. 44% in zones 100kph (country and freeways). But the safest speed zones were 65-95kph areas.

Single vehicle crashes account for nearly half of fatalities! Wonder why the cops are cracking down on hoons in 60kph areas :cool:

But wait! There's more ...

Total registered vehicles in SA in 2006 were 919,000 and 3,404,000 for NSW.

SA fatalities 148 / Total registered vehicles 919,000 = 0.0161% chance of being killed

NSW fatalities 508 / Total registered vehicles 3,404,000 = 0.01492% chance of being killed

So per capita of road registered vehicles, SA is at a higher risk of fatal crashes than NSW.

Edited by RubyRS4

i had officer neil pick me out of a crowd of cars and came out with a warning about a boost contoller. he was actually a nice person to me and my other half and rather reasonable. he was fairly strick by the book but yet that is his job. ok im not keen as i was picked out but then look at my car, it dont look stock. i was told of officer neil that as soon as he sees me on the rd again he will be pulling me over and that would be to check what we have discussed. i have done what he has asked so im more than willing for him to check it again.

i even seen a SS BOMBadore ute pulled over the other day with the measuring tape out and the guy screaming at the cop. the car was way to low as the rims (not just the tires) were under the guards. but yes its moreso skyline drivers as they are easy targets.

Found this during my search. Its a report from 2000, but still interesting:

DefectTest.jpg

So 0.6% of fatal crashes were the result of a defectable vehicle. :(

i have found similar studies, basically saying the same thing.

if u put up the amount of defects from RBT's, compared to the amount of people done for being over the limit at RBT's, then look at the crashes they cause, it's just rediculous.

not meaning to add to controversy but tonight driving around with mates we spotted in total:

7 cars pulled over

4 were r33

1 was r32

1 was aristo

1 was 91 rolla with p plate chicks (they were decent..... 'sok im young :( )

fair? think not :P

sucks to be us :D

edit: to be fair they were in and around city/hindley st. area mostly so pretty much asking for it but still

Edited by tx3_90
  • 4 weeks later...

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



  • Latest Posts

    • Welcome to !
    • As I've said elsewhere, I am using the stock intercooler piping path in the engine bay, and a return flow cooler, and making ~250 rwkW (without any effort put into trying to turn it up past there just yet) and expect to be able to make some more, and frankly, I would be perfectly happy with 260-270rwKW. This is peak road Skyline usability territory. You go past there and, sure, the car will snap necks more when it's on boost, but it will also break shit all the time, cost a (even larger) fortune in tyres, etc etc. Anyway, I also do not like the over-the-fan pipe path, and you don't have to do it.
    • I see, honestly I’m not too fussed about the looks. The only reason to go plenum is to make the piping easier instead of the classic over the rad etc. 
    • Not easy to quantify wrt something like how many fractions of a second slower it would be over 0-100. But given that a 250-300rwkW car is able to do that launch sprint in 5-6 sec (and faster with appropriate tyres, and surface)..... giving up as much as a second would feel like torture. A ~450HP capable turbo is not going to make lots of boost in the 2000-3000 rpm range. So, whilst with some boost on hand it will be faster accelerating in that rev range than your engine currently is NA, it will not feel like a fast car until the boost is solidly in. You know what your car feels like right now when you open it up at 2000rpm. if you've ever been in an actual fast car, you will appreciate that the NARB25 is.... not exciting. Well, add some boost and it will be better. But shorten the intake runners and it might not be better at all. It might come out better, but it could end up feeling the same. For me, it's not the 0-X km/h sprints that matter. It is easy to fry the tyres with anything over 200 rwkW. You can't use all the power available in 1st and 2nd anyway, you have to modulate the throttle. What matters is how the car reacts when you're driving in traffic in 4th or 5th and have maybe 2000 rpm on board, and you want/need to add some speed quickly, and don't have time for the downshift. It won't make boost, it will be all NA (at the speeds we're talking about - remember how fast you're going at 2000 in 4th! and don't plan on breaking the limit by too much.) So giving away NA torque is not what I would consider practical for a street car. And retaining that NA torque builds boost faster which makes the car faster. The flashy plenum is not actually better, unless you're looking at a track car where you can keep it on the boil all the time.  
    • So how much difference does it make you think? Like 1 second in the 0-100?  I was have smaller turbo so hopefully that spools quick GTX2871.  currently it’s NA so you can imagine pretty slow, but I do want fast accusation a little as there’s not many places I’ll be driving where I go over 80 even near me. So 0-60 and 0-80 targets   
×
×
  • Create New...