Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

FMIC are an odd one. Most people cut the front bar to fit the pipes. This makes them a nono. If yours is properly fitted with no hacking etc it should be fine.

That's right Sin, if you have changed/modified your chassis to fit a fmic it is defectable but if it fits correctly it is allowed hence the time role have passed through Dickson with fmic. However it the car had a top mount intercooler like WRX's you cannot have a fmic without engineering because your average skyline, Silvia etc has a forward facing intercooler outside the chassis frame oem. Same goes for turbo lasers where they are next to the engine.

I agree and disagree. Cutting the reo bar i agree with being a big no no but when i did it on my old r33 i took the car to a panel beater and ask if there was any issues with cutting a hole in the part near the wheel well and above the chassis to put the pipe through and got confirmation that part of the vehicle if cut will not change the integrity of the strength of the vehicle.

Any one else done the same?

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Dont rely on mechanics to get it right, read your adr's.

The adr's on your compliance plate are the ones you have to comply with.

Hole for pipe needs i think...

3mm reo plate, welded on 100-150 mm all sides from hole.

Something like that, cant remember details.

Not all rules make sense for specific purposes, some are there for general principals.

The hole in that spot on that car may not make the car any weaker, BUT, they want it done anyway cos they cant be that specific in the rules.

Dont rely on mechanics to get it right, read your adr's.

The adr's on your compliance plate are the ones you have to comply with.

Hole for pipe needs i think...

3mm reo plate, welded on 100-150 mm all sides from hole.

Something like that, cant remember details.

Not all rules make sense for specific purposes, some are there for general principals.

The hole in that spot on that car may not make the car any weaker, BUT, they want it done anyway cos they cant be that specific in the rules.

I've heard that since I did it. The car hasnt changed and still passes roadworthys.

I think they need to set the rules so that everything is the same.

Somethings are illegal on one vehicle and on another vehicle its legal.

Something to help people with the silly defects given to some modified cars on the side of the road. Namely Noise Tests on the side of the road.... Print this off and ensure that the officer at the time of the test follows the guidelines set out by the National Transport Commission of Australia. Note that this document specifically mentions the allowed equipment for noise tests angles and distances rpm for types of cars etc

http://www.ntc.gov.au/filemedia/Reports/NatStatExhaustNoiseTestSept2006.pdf

I will be adding up more soon but just advising that they are doing the same blitz through Westfield Woden at the moment and have confirmed with Westfield management that they are no allowed to be there unless invited by Westfield

I will be adding up more soon but just advising that they are doing the same blitz through Westfield Woden at the moment and have confirmed with Westfield management that they are no allowed to be there unless invited by Westfield

Did management confirm they HAD invited them? Your post is a little vague there :P

How about a $40 car cover?

They cant see sht then, they cant see rego or number plate.

Just cover your defects and rego when parking.

And some kind of alarm so they cant f&@k with it.

Or tiny locks so it cant be moved without breaking something, and if they do that....... well, you can imagine.

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

    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
    • That's my life. Past-Duncan has a lot to answer for
×
×
  • Create New...