Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

My tyres are rated at 690kg.....  Does that make them above 94?

Yes, they would be rated @ 95!

Anyone wanting to know more about tyres including Load Ratings, Speed ratings, changing rims and matching tyres etc go here: The Wheel and Tyre Bible A very good read for anyone into cars!

yes it is that test....depending on the mods you wont need the full test...ie Shed test.....Just the drive cycle..although you would want to make sure everything is right coz pass or fail...its the same price then the same when its retested.....the paperwork states the modifications on the vehicle and the data retrived from testing........why dont the tune shops you guys use know this information???????hmmm

Luckly, its only a noise test and not a full inspection...i really dont want to go through one of those again

i feel your pain :)

Didnt u already do a full test at mcloud recently and pass noise test?

If so just write a letter to the epa stating this and that you are not willing to waste more time and money getting something passed again which has passed previously.

This is what 1 of the epa guys at mcloud told me coz i asked them what if some hero cop decides to send in a bogus notice again coz i also passed my epa test first shot.

yes do that coz just like the vicroads workers when u go to hand in a rwc and canary to get it removed they know its a load of shit and the only thing the cops r interested in is collecting their $165 fine off ya, now the epa workers know this 2 coz bogus tests just waste their time as well.

Technically...its not a bogus test to say that im well aware of over the legal limit

However, the guys at mcloud are well aware of how we put all the "illegal" modifaction back on straight after passing the test

I need to clear up this rumour of the probationary period after an EPA where if you were to get another EPA notice with (i think) a 4 month period you get a $1000 fine (i know someone with this $1000 fine)

Its been ~6months since my full inpsection

yeah they cant just post you a $1k fine cos some dickhd that knows nothing wants to be a cnt.. i got my first epa going back about a year ago when my car was 100%stock with not 1 single mod.. that was just from a dickhd working at a booze bus writing down my plates

There is also no mention of this on the EPA notice that they give you - so I don't think it could be enforced. But i am also sure that people have been back there many times more than once in 6 months and no fine attached

Man sorry to hear about that, I always wonderd how long it was gonna take (coz or your EBC on the dash and your ricey stickers - which I do like I might add) for them to catch up with you. I agree that the filth are really making things hard for us skyline drivers and it almost imposible to drive a lighty tuned import, it almost puts you off driving one of these cars hey. Where thier logic comes from I honestly dont know and personaly I dont think they have much! I would be very interested to see the ratio of Oz built tuned cars being pulled over in comparison to the number of moddednon-modded imports being pulled over. I think this issue really needs to be addressed but where do we start?

I would be very interested to see the ratio of Oz built tuned cars being pulled over in comparison to the number of moddednon-modded imports being pulled over. I think this issue really needs to be addressed but where do we start?

I think part of the problem [for the import cars] is that the police know how to identify us quite easily - other than the car looking heaps sexier than the locals :D most imports have HUGE exhaust pipes and other stuff [bOV's, BIG wings etc] A lot of the Oz tuned cars are usually fairly sleeperish - their exhaust tip looks stock, their car often looks stock too, I know quite a few modded HSV's that appear standard to the untrained eye, but are 1/4 mile killers :)

Most of the *modified-looking* Oz cars are just RICEY, most of them [NOT ALL] don't have huge power ups. Just have big HOLDEN stickers across the screen but in terms of saftey power isnt a concern for the authorities...A 10 inch tacho, although blocking vision doesnt give the engine any more power...

IMO anyway

hmm, i think its the other way around Elad.. most Commonwhores DO have work done to them, especially the old ones.. and hoon around like nobody's business.

well the side effect of this is not many people can be bothered with the power upgrades these days and we're becoming a nation of ricers. So I guess the cop thing is working on a certain segment of people. Then there will be the people that will never stop modding their car, so they can never really win.

Yeah good points by both. I DO think out sexy ass cars demand more attention and because of this it's more likley that we will get singled out but there is also the point that the filth know that there is a 80% chance they are giong to find something to get us to cough up more money. But then again my dad was pulled over driving my car and they had a quick squiz and said all was fine 2 weeks later I copped a whoping fine but I guess this could also have to do with the officer involved. I still think that us younger drivers have is a lot worse off though.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...