Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just got a call from my brother, he was fined for his exhaust being to loud (approx $150). What interests me is that he said there was no test done or measurement taken yet a fine was issued. Apparently he will get an epa notice in upto 6 weeks but we'll wait and see what turns up. Being a green p plater in a sporty car though i've warned him to expect this kind of attention at some point.

This isnt a police bashing thread, just an enquiry into what the process is to be issued a fine for noise. I have done some googling but mustn't be searching the right terms. I know workshops need to test at load and on back off as ive been through it for engineering in the past, I would have expected a similar standard from an officer to be able to issue a fine. If the legal limit is 90 db it is extremely subjective whether a car between 88 and say 92 is over the limit. Especially when a car has only been heard at light load and idle whilst pulled over. By all means send them for a test but an on the spot time seems tough -although i can see the logic behind it.

I'm expecting the whole 'do the crime pay the fine' argument but if I can save him $150 that can go towards a new muffler, then why not at least look into it?

Thanks.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/393882-fine-for-exhaust-being-to-loud/
Share on other sites

Its at the officers discretion, if he/she believes it to be louder than 90db they can issue you a defect notice.

Which normally means you need to prove that it isnt.

Unfortunately you will have to get use to it.

he offered an engineering report with noise readings but i know how little value they are given.

We have a funny legal system, traffic (strict liability offences) are one of the few areas where innocent before proven guilty doesnt apply. Being sent for an inspection at your own cost is one thing but subjective fines is even worse.

he offered an engineering report with noise readings but i know how little value they are given.

We have a funny legal system, traffic (strict liability offences) are one of the few areas where innocent before proven guilty doesnt apply. Being sent for an inspection at your own cost is one thing but subjective fines is even worse.

+11ty billion for truth.

I guess we all agree that an engineering certificate is pretty much useless in proving an exhaust is at legal dB. Is there any indication on the engineering cert to what type of exhaust you have to say its legal, for example say someone had a nismo weldina ne-1 and it is printed on the exhaust tip and stated on the certificate therefore you can say you havnt changed it and its under 90 dB or is that like beating a dead horse?

been done for it before...... got a noise test then elected to go to court .... pleaded not guilty .... and gave the noise test papers over..... fine and charges dropped, if he is legit then follow what i did if it is over and obnoxiusly loud then tell him to cop it and quieten it down :thumbsup:

I'm not sure what model or exhaust he has but in 1991 the std JDM exhaust (rear muffler) failed the ADR stationary noise requirements.

Nissan Australia had to fine tune/ modify the muffler to comply with the rules.

It's always going to be tough when the stock exhaust fails, let alone when an improved flow version is fitted........

Cheers,

Bob.

been done for it before...... got a noise test then elected to go to court .... pleaded not guilty .... and gave the noise test papers over..... fine and charges dropped, if he is legit then follow what i did if it is over and obnoxiusly loud then tell him to cop it and quieten it down :thumbsup:

Cheers for that. Gives some hope. Waiting on him getting a test before seeing how to follow it up.

I can understand the officer "thinking" the noise level could be over the limit and getting your brother to prove them wrong.. but an on the spot fine? Didn't know they could do that.. Learn something new every day!!

I'm guessing he will not only have to prove his car is under the limit but then also have to appeal the fine?

Plan:-

It's time for a new niche market workshop to get set up; called...

"It's Fine With Us"

...specialising in hiring or selling or installing parts that are compliant with laws above and has metering equipment.

Plan:-

It's time for a new niche market workshop to get set up; called...

"It's Fine With Us"

...specialising in hiring or selling or installing parts that are compliant with laws above and has metering equipment.

Its not a bad idea! Help people get their cars legal and still enjoyable! Win Win IMO

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...