suspension mods killed off by NSW RTA

steptoe · Post by **steptoe** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:48 pm

a mate has just read over the phone an article in a community newspaper refering to the raising or lowering of vehicles being deemed illegal (fines up to $7000 plus GST) unless certified by an engineer, as of 01 August 2009. It has been said to control car hoons and save lives, not taking into account lowering can enhance handling and raising can increase access in 4W's and reduce underbody damage.

This harks back to 30 years ago when authorities were trying to ban aftermarket suspension components.

YouTube · Post by **El_Freddo** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 2:39 pm

Yeah, this has been widely discussed here at offroadsubarus.

Cheers

Bennie

Venom · Post by **Venom** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:28 pm

"Unless engineered" I'm okay with, provided they make the engineering process relatively straight forward. In not all circumstances will lowering improve handling. Like when people lower their cars so much they need to remove the bump stops (i did by request to many cars), or just drive around with the car virtually sitting on them. Or when dead beats take an angle grinder to their girlfreinds exel and chop 3 inches off the stock springs (i've replaced springs in said cars because they're just stuffed to drive). That sort of idiocy is fairly common, and by no means at all does it make the roads safer. That we can do without. I'm sure if you have a set of kings lowered springs or pedders equivilent you won't have problems.

Gannon · Post by **Gannon** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 4:55 pm

I had a read of the new laws on a govt website and the reasons can be summed up as follows

1. Lowering or raising a vehicle changes the bumper is and thus affects how it and other vehicles/pedestrians/crumple zones are affected in a collision (SRS Airbag sensors are placed in crucial places for a reason)

2. Vehicle stability control is affected if the suspension geometry is changed.

3. Raising a vehicle raises the centre of gravity and makes it prone to overturns.

4. Lowering a vehicle makes under body components more vunerable to contact with the road surface.

5. Lost of testing is put into factory suspension setups so they provide predictable traction, changing the suspension makes the car behave differently.

6. Backyard suspension modifications can be very dodgy (like cut springs as mentioned above)

I dont see a problem with changes in suspension (even if they are bigger than 50mm) as long as they are certified/checked by an engineer.

I know most of the suspension mods from users of this forum are of good quality, but i cant imagine anyone would appreciate being hit by a car who lost control because they had compromised the integrity of its suspension.

Anyway, i heard on the radio that the new laws are gonna be reviewed because of the number of complaints received from the 4x4 community.

Hopefully it will be rewritten so that lowering/raising is premitted, but will have to be certified/checked by a qualified preson

AndrewT · Post by **AndrewT** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 5:23 pm

yeah pretty sure this has been completely put on hold....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NSW MINISTER FOR ROADS
MICHAEL DALEY MP
NEWS RELEASE
MINISTER AGREES TO FURTHER CONSULTATION ON
CAR MODIFICATION LAWS
Wednesday 29 July 2009

Minister for Roads Michael Daley today met with representatives from the 4WD community and car industry who asked for the introduction of proposed vehicle modification rules to be delayed and for more time to consult.

Mr Daley said he agreed to put the rule changes on hold and that more consultation was needed following the meeting.

“I’ve listened to feedback from the industry and the community, and have agreed to set up a working party to look more closely at how we are going to address this road safety issue,” he said.

“All of those who attended today’s meeting agreed that safety is paramount and that unsafe modifications of vehicles do need be stamped out.

“The working group will include representatives from the NSW Centre for Road Safety, Four Wheel Drive NSW-ACT, Australian Automotive Aftermarket Association, the Australian 4WD Industry Council as well as other agencies and experts,” Mr Daley said.

Executive Director of Australian Automotive Aftermarket Association Stuart Charity said this was a terrific outcome.
“We’re passionate about road safety and we understand the intent of the regulation is to make the roads safer,” he said.
We’re looking forward to working towards a practical solution that meets road safety objectives while also taking industry views into account,” Mr Charity said.

Greg Redfern from Four Wheel Drive NSW-ACT also welcomed the outcome and said the working group would have their full support.
“We want to eliminate unsafe practices in the driving community and we’ll work with the government to make sure these new regulations meet those objectives without any adverse consequences for the motoring community at large,” he said.

“We all agree that there is no place for extreme and illegal modifications, but the clubs in our association follow a strict code of conduct and ethics, and we want to make sure they’re not punished,” Mr Redfern said.

Contact: 9228 5665

AlpineRaven · Post by **AlpineRaven** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 5:42 pm

Interesting above... Would be interesting to see what happens in the future!
Cheers
AP

discopotato03 · Post by **discopotato03** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 8:16 pm

What the people out there in modification land have to realise is that cars are built to comply to Australian Design Rules (ADR's) to be compliant and registrable - hence the compliance plate .
Once things like suspension is changed often vehicles no longer comply with the build date ADR's so it is no long longer LEGALLY registered and if its not registered your insurance wipes you as well .

Going through a certified mechanical engineer is the only way to been seen to be compliant in a vehicles non std state .

You have to understand that changing a vehicles ride height changes the relationship between the articulated members and the bodies locating points .

When this happens it goes far beyond the altered center of gravity or center of mass if you like . It alter the roll centers and the vehicles overall handling and braking characteristics because weight transfers are now not to the manufacturers design specs - or necessarily within the relevant ADR's .
Once you bolt up the "monster truck" wheels/tyres there's no way they and the suspension is going to fold up and under the body , with the engine and gearbox , should you have a massive front end shunt . Crumple zone failure ?

Wheels and tyres are a HUGE can of worms and personally I'd like to see some of these 3-4 inch lifted cars with wheels WAY beyond the OEM ~ 13 x 5's run past an honest mechanical engineer . The ratio of sprung to unsprung weight would have to change dramatically and I doubt the springs and dampers are altered to suit - let alone the strength of the suspension members or their body mounting points .

Changes to the laws have come about because morons who don't have enough imagination to be scared and have no idea why OEMS design suspensions the way they do think they can make sweeping changes and not kill themselves or others .
To even contemplate cutting springs to alter ride height means that kind of individual shouldn't be allowed anywhere near any vehicle with tools of any sort .

You have two legal choices , you get friendly with an engineer and make allowable changes or you buy a vehicle made to do what you want it to .

Wanting to do it on the cheap is no excuse and won't save you in a coroners court .

A .

steptoe · Post by **steptoe** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 10:01 am

The thing that may be stirring some up is that there are already rules in place with regards to modifications of suspension. As far as lowering, up to 1/3 off the original spec is allowed, so long as 100mm underbody clearance remains. It is the mods that go beyond this such as lower than 100mm ground clearance, removing or reducing bump stops that has drawn the attention of officials. I dunno how often we have cleared a defect on a car that has been corrected (or they tell you it has been corrected and they need to go away and think about it again

) to then see it out on the streets within a week sometimes - lowered too far again or one doodle in a new V8 Commodore - whole rear exhaust off again for Summernats.

As far as lowering and many other owner certified mods I think the current rules are sensible - go beyond that and get an engineer to sign it off - seen some of that stuff signed off I don't like too !

Maybe a review of repeat offenders of defects is needed first.

As for tyre and wheel rim sizes there is also a comprehensive guide in a book that all tyre places should have. Again, it has some flexibility that seems fair to a certan degree. Wanna go beyond that - an engineer.

lovey80 · Post by **lovey80** » Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:14 am

Does anyone know if it is within a Mechanical Engineers power in QLD to certify a lift of more than 50mm? My Brumby build will have to see one anyway, so if I put in a 3 or 4in lift kit can he sign off on it or am I restricted to 50mm?

Cheers

Chris

SUBYDAZZ · Post by **SUBYDAZZ** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 8:21 am

Hmmm, what does it mean for people who have cars that have factory hydraulic or pneumatic height adjustable suspension I wonder?

discopotato03 · Post by **discopotato03** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 9:43 am

Well obviously it meets the ADR's in that form or it would not have been issued with a compliance plate would it ?

A .

SUBYDAZZ · Post by **SUBYDAZZ** » Sat Sep 26, 2009 10:05 am

Good point. But what ADRs relate directly to suspension? - Dazz

SUBYDAZZ · Post by **SUBYDAZZ** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:15 am

Has there been any movement on this at all? Anyone have a link to a government website with the details. I'm always sceptical of what you read in community newspapers, based on previous experience, they tend to print a lot of stuff that they don't check up on first. Actually a lot of media in general do that.

coxy · Post by **coxy** » Sat Apr 03, 2010 11:01 pm

discopotato03 wrote:Well obviously it meets the ADR's in that form or it would not have been issued with a compliance plate would it ?

A .

Well not always Govt departments obviously turn many a blind eye for Big Business something to do with the perception of them having enough money to buy off the distraught relatives so it doesn't hit the public's radar and cause embarrasment for Authorities.
Perfect example of this type of Government thinking is the ADR's state that no changes that can be found detrimental may be implimented to any ADR approved components.
How then can white "Altessa" style blinkers be considered not a retrograde backwards step most people would have come across the issues with these blinkers in leafy suburbs in early morning light where compared to the old Orange blinkers they are almost invisible.
The reality is that the horse has already bolted when it comes to the Government controlling anything in a sane manner as they have allowed it to go too far in many cases