Jump to content
SAU Community

Removing Backseat

russ123

By russ123,
in Victoria

 Share

Recommended Posts

Count Grantleyish Grand Master

Count Grantleyish

Posted
Posted

You can't legally remove back seats and trims.

If it is to put in half cage (I.e.Brown Davis cams approved), it is legal but you have to get vicroads to change it to 2 seater.

Rekin Grand Master

Rekin

Posted
Posted

you will need to register it as a 2 seater if you remove the seats. I believe its as easy as going to Vicroads to get it changed from 5 to 2.

However changing back from 2 to 5 is a bit harder as you need to get the seatbelts rechecked or something.

Hope that helps?

russ123 Collaborator

russ123

Posted
  • Author
Posted

you will need to register it as a 2 seater if you remove the seats. I believe its as easy as going to Vicroads to get it changed from 5 to 2.

However changing back from 2 to 5 is a bit harder as you need to get the seatbelts rechecked or something.

Hope that helps?

yeah that dose cheers,do you know do they need to inspect the car or is it more paper work stuff?

bluey33 Experienced

bluey33

Posted
Posted

My experience with it is I could remove back seats though seat-belts and buckles must also be removed.

Had to be taken to VICroads for inspection that is all. I had sound deadener and rear trims removed. Said nothing.

VICROADS REGULATIONS

Cowboy1600 Grand Master

Cowboy1600

Posted
Posted

An Approval Certificate is not required if:

  • the number of original seating positions was less than 10

Nowhere does it say you have to remove belts or anything, but I would assume you would be doing this anyway.

bluey33 Experienced

bluey33

Posted
Posted

Does not say it on VICroads website. I did it anyway and when I took car in he said they had to be removed. That was probably just his opinion as it doesn't say you have to so I gather you shouldn't have to as Aaron has said.

Peter89 Proficient

Peter89

Posted
Posted (edited)

I just removed the seats and didn't do a thing. Not one cop has every said anything about it. The seats that is, they always bring up the fact its stripped.

Of course I never let passengers sit in the back.

Edited by Peter89
shanusr33 Rising Star

shanusr33

Posted
Posted

I drove around with a boot installation in replace of the back seats for a few years, and every time I got pulled over never had a problem.

Once a cop asked about the two seater status, and I had that Vic Roads rule ready and saved on my phone and he was fine once he saw that.

I even called Vic Roads to register it as a two seater once and the guy on the phone asked why I would bother and it doesn't matter or effect anything.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • sinn3r
      R34 Skyline climate control unit transistor

      By sinn3r · Posted

      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
    • Kinkstaah
      Blue slip

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      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!
    • GTSBoy
      Best place to order Authetic R32 Parts in Japan

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      Ethanol Content Sensor - Always at 11%?

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      Blue slip

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      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...