Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Shadow wrote:the majority of people on the road do not want to drive nexto a car with 38" tyres lifted 10" in the air.

If you want 38" tyres and a 10" lift, get a trailer.

Who mentioned 38" tyres or 10" of lift? Don't attempt to divert the argument to an extreme.

I wanted 33" tyres on my Pajero, but there was no way I could do it legally in Queensland. So I did it anyway, exactly as many others have done and are still doing.

I came to SA, put it through their engineering process, passed with flying colours. I have paperwork from a qualified professional which states that my vehicle complies with the intent of the Australian Design Rules, but Queensland won't register it.

Perfectly legal in SA (and probably WA, Vic, NSW) but no chance to make it legal in Qld.

And, in case you hadn't noticed, this thread is all about a report that the law in Queensland is about to change.

Why would they do that?

-Scott- wrote:

Shadow wrote:the majority of people on the road do not want to drive nexto a car with 38" tyres lifted 10" in the air.

If you want 38" tyres and a 10" lift, get a trailer.

Who mentioned 38" tyres or 10" of lift? Don't attempt to divert the argument to an extreme.

I wanted 33" tyres on my Pajero, but there was no way I could do it legally in Queensland. So I did it anyway, exactly as many others have done and are still doing.

I came to SA, put it through their engineering process, passed with flying colours. I have paperwork from a qualified professional which states that my vehicle complies with the intent of the Australian Design Rules, but Queensland won't register it.

Perfectly legal in SA (and probably WA, Vic, NSW) but no chance to make it legal in Qld.

And, in case you hadn't noticed, this thread is all about a report that the law in Queensland is about to change.

Why would they do that?

Why do you need 33" tyres?? What is standard for a pajero, 29"??? To fit 33" tyres, did you have to lift your vehicle? (raising the COG, increasing the rollover risk), Did you upgrade your braking? (reduced braking capacity due to larger rolling diameter of tyres) did you strengthen your steering components? (turning bigger wider rubber will stress the steering components more than mitsubishi intended it)

All these things might be insignificant to most automotive engineers. But perhaps the one that set the modification guidlines in QLD decided they are significant.

NCOP is a national system designed to bring all states in to line with the same modification guidlines. Guidlines from queensland are used in the NCOP aswell, does this mean that all the other states were wrecklessly putting lives at risk prior to NCOP??? It's simply a comprmise between many engineer's opinions.

Why would they do that? Well they havent yet, the fact theyve waited nearly 5 years tells us that they are resisting it greatly.

also, you say 38" tyres are the extreme, so who draws the limit then? You? Because you want to fit 33" tyres to a pajero, so 75mm tyre increase suits you, but what about johny down the road who wants 35" tyres. What about mark who wants 37" tyres on his patrol? People will always push limits to the extreme, thats the nature of people. If 37" is the max, they will want 38".

There are cars legally registered in nsw with 8" lift and 37" + tyres. Are these safe? Are they as safe as the same vehicle in factory standard condition? Swerve around a ladder falling off the back of a ute at 100 and tell me they are as safe.

Have you been through the process of engineering a vehicle? Do you understand what it's all about? It certainly doesn't sound like it.

Shadow wrote:Why do you need 33" tyres?? What is standard for a pajero, 29"??? To fit 33" tyres, did you have to lift your vehicle? (raising the COG, increasing the rollover risk), Did you upgrade your braking? (reduced braking capacity due to larger rolling diameter of tyres) did you strengthen your steering components? (turning bigger wider rubber will stress the steering components more than mitsubishi intended it)

My Paj came standard with 30" tyres. Whether or not I need 33" tyres is irrelevant - do you need a 4wd?

What is relevant is that I wanted them, as do many others.

I actually lifted the vehicle for other reasons (body lift to fit a larger long range fuel tank), then fitted 33" tyres simply because I could. The rest of your issues were addressed by the engineer, and found to comply with the intent of the ADRs. Steering, braking and handling were tested on a race track (the exact same race track using the exact same lane change marks that Mitsubishi Australia used when they originally tested my model Pajero) and were found to be significantly better than he expected.

South Australia has tested my vehicle and has declared it safe to travel Australian roads. Queensland wanted to pretend I hadn't modified it at all.

Shadow wrote:All these things might be insignificant to most automotive engineers. But perhaps the one that set the modification guidlines in QLD decided they are significant.

They are all significant, to all engineers qualified to sign off on these modifications. Those that set the guidelines in Qld took the easy way out, throwing it all in the too hard basket, and legislating a simple "no."

So, instead of allowing some leeway, and retaining some control over some modified vehicles they closed their eyes and pretended there was no issue.

This has lead to a significant number of 4wds running larger tyres, with all the attendant issues you have identified, driving around on Queensland roads with absolutely zero input from a qualified person. You think this is a good thing?

Yes, occasionally one will get pulled over and ticketed, but the rest of them continue to drive with what amounts to backyard modifications which have never been checked, which may or may not be safe, because some faceless bureaucrat decided it was too hard to find a workable compromise.

You think this makes Queensland safer than NSW, Victoria or SA?

Don't bother answering. That's a rhetorical question.

Shadow wrote:There are cars legally registered in nsw with 8" lift and 37" + tyres. Are these safe? Are they as safe as the same vehicle in factory standard condition? Swerve around a ladder falling off the back of a ute at 100 and tell me they are as safe.

This indicates that you have no idea what ADRs are about, or the vehicle modification approvals process.

What 4wd do you drive? Lets take that factory standard 4wd and try your swerve test, then we'll do it in my daily driver - I can guarantee my dd will out-handle your 4wd. By your argument, you shouldn't be on the road.

If you want 38" tyres and a 10" lift, get a trailer.

Whats safer, driving a modified 4wd on the road, or driving a stock 4wd with 3 ton in trailer and 4wd on the back. So instead of having to control a 2T modified 4wd you have to try and control 5T +.

Id like to see a 4wd with trailer and 4wd on the back swerve around something at 100k/h.

Also someone running 38's doesnt normally spend too much time on the road cos its too expensive to replace big tyres. It would just be nice to be able to nip around the corner to the bush without having to worry about coppers.

I have a delica if you sverved in that thing at 100k in stock form you would roll it. They come with 29's stock, I have 32's on landcruiser rims so the van is raised 1.5" by the tyres by its 4" wider cos of the different rims so its more stable then it is standard. So in that case having 3" bigger tyres are safer.

Shadow wrote:

-Scott- wrote:

Shadow wrote:the majority of people on the road do not want to drive nexto a car with 38" tyres lifted 10" in the air.

If you want 38" tyres and a 10" lift, get a trailer.

Who mentioned 38" tyres or 10" of lift? Don't attempt to divert the argument to an extreme.

I wanted 33" tyres on my Pajero, but there was no way I could do it legally in Queensland. So I did it anyway, exactly as many others have done and are still doing.

I came to SA, put it through their engineering process, passed with flying colours. I have paperwork from a qualified professional which states that my vehicle complies with the intent of the Australian Design Rules, but Queensland won't register it.

Perfectly legal in SA (and probably WA, Vic, NSW) but no chance to make it legal in Qld.

And, in case you hadn't noticed, this thread is all about a report that the law in Queensland is about to change.

Why would they do that?

Why do you need 33" tyres??

If you want to argue this point then bugger off to some other forum.

So you dont need 33" tyres, they are a wank factor, I lso have 33" (measure 32.4") tyres on my landcruiser. Except, my 33" tyres comply with the +15mm law in QLD, and i didnt have to lift my car to fit them either.

My daily driver is a 2wd hilux, My 4wd is a 89 landcruiser that gets driven once or twice a week to keep everything moving, and used for camping and fishing and towing the trailer to the dump. In the process of updating to a 100series...

Significantly better than he expected?? So did it perform better or worse than when mitsubishi built it? My bet is worse.

I am more than happy to comply with QLD's modification laws, As are the majority of drivers. It is the MINORITY that want the laws changed. Governents do not set laws to serve the minority.

good to see qld comming forward a bit.

Shadow wrote:So you dont need 33" tyres, they are a wank factor, I lso have 33" (measure 32.4") tyres on my landcruiser. Except, my 33" tyres comply with the +15mm law in QLD, and i didnt have to lift my car to fit them either.

My daily driver is a 2wd hilux, My 4wd is a 89 landcruiser that gets driven once or twice a week to keep everything moving, and used for camping and fishing and towing the trailer to the dump. In the process of updating to a 100series...

I am more than happy to comply with QLD's modification laws, As are the majority of drivers. It is the MINORITY that want the laws changed. Governents do not set laws to serve the minority.

Why are you buying a vehicle, by your logic, the majority of australia does not want you to be driving?

Has the government banned these vehicles because the majority might not like driving on the roads with them?

They're certainly not a neccessity for most people. Hell, beach driving, fishing etc - you've quite possibly chosen the worst vehicle for this. LC100's and even pootrolls are big fat things and hopeless on the sand compared to a much smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient Prado/Hilux/Pajero etc. And even a prado/pajero has similar interior space - usually better designed - to suit your family better.

Hypocrite.

Yom wrote:

Shadow wrote:So you dont need 33" tyres, they are a wank factor, I lso have 33" (measure 32.4") tyres on my landcruiser. Except, my 33" tyres comply with the +15mm law in QLD, and i didnt have to lift my car to fit them either.

My daily driver is a 2wd hilux, My 4wd is a 89 landcruiser that gets driven once or twice a week to keep everything moving, and used for camping and fishing and towing the trailer to the dump. In the process of updating to a 100series...

I am more than happy to comply with QLD's modification laws, As are the majority of drivers. It is the MINORITY that want the laws changed. Governents do not set laws to serve the minority.

Why are you buying a vehicle, by your logic, the majority of australia does not want you to be driving?

Has the government banned these vehicles because the majority might not like driving on the roads with them?

They're certainly not a neccessity for most people. Hell, beach driving, fishing etc - you've quite possibly chosen the worst vehicle for this. LC100's and even pootrolls are big fat things and hopeless on the sand compared to a much smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient Prado/Hilux/Pajero etc. And even a prado/pajero has similar interior space - usually better designed - to suit your family better.

Hypocrite.

I just want one.

They arent a neccessity for me either, neither is aircon, Neither is beer.

I dont do alot of beach driving, but I do usually cart around 5 people when I go camping. 5 people plus camping gear for 5 people is a squeeze in my current landcruiers. No way it would fit in a pajero.

Refer to my edit.

You're buying a vehicle for the exact same reasons Scott wanted his tyres. Plus I'm guessing scott does less damage to the environment now by keeping his diffs higher off the ground hence crushing less small animals.

And just to add more:

We know for a fact the 100 series is unsafe. All 4wd's are unsafe to other road users. Whats more likely to kill a pedestrian? An LC100, Scott's Paj on 33's illegally upgraded from 29's or the K12 micra without a front numberplate?

By government's logic it is the K12 micra without the front numberplate, but we all know this is not the case.


PS: you're stirring and doing a bad job of it this time round


edit: pack less shit. a boys weekend away shouldn't contain a single change of clothes.

Yom wrote:Refer to my edit.

You're buying a vehicle for the exact same reasons Scott wanted his tyres. Plus I'm guessing scott does less damage to the environment now by keeping his diffs higher off the ground hence crushing less small animals.

And just to add more:

We know for a fact the 100 series is unsafe. All 4wd's are unsafe to other road users. Whats more likely to kill a pedestrian? An LC100, Scott's Paj on 33's illegally upgraded from 29's or the K12 micra without a front numberplate?

By government's logic it is the K12 micra without the front numberplate, but we all know this is not the case.


PS: you're stirring and doing a bad job of it this time round

The car i am buying will comply with all ADR's and all qld modification guidlines, When scott wanted 33" tyres, it was illegal for him to have them. So whilst our motive is both driven by want, my want is legal, his wasnt. So this is not the apples to apples comparison your argument would hope it is.


4wd's pose a greater risk to other road users than normal cars, thats why my daily driver is a 2wd hilux (its actually cause thats what the company gave me, but lets just say im conscious of other road user's safety).

"We know for a fact that the 100series is unsafe". Realitive to say an 08 holden commodore i would agree the 100series is less safe for both occupants and other road users. Now lets lift the 100 series 3 " and fit 75mm bigger tyres and fit an *** steel winch bar with a **** 10,000pound winch to the front. Which is more safe, the OEM 100 series, or the modified 100series????????? We all know that answer aswell but its bad juju to admit it.

Dont even know what a k12 micra is so I wont comment.

A cars safety has more to do with the driver then the car itself. If you hit someone at 100k/h in a mini it will do less damage then hitting them with a pajerio on 33's but either way they end up dead.

On this train of thought a 50cc scoota must be the safest thing on the road, they are small and the tyres are tiny.

Lets all get scootas with nobbies

-Scott- wrote: So, instead of allowing some leeway, and retaining some control over some modified vehicles they closed their eyes and pretended there was no issue.

This has lead to a significant number of 4wds running larger tyres, with all the attendant issues you have identified, driving around on Queensland roads with absolutely zero input from a qualified person. You think this is a good thing?

Yes, occasionally one will get pulled over and ticketed, but the rest of them continue to drive with what amounts to backyard modifications which have never been checked, which may or may not be safe, because some faceless bureaucrat decided it was too hard to find a workable compromise.

You think this makes Queensland safer than NSW, Victoria or SA?

Don't bother answering. That's a rhetorical question.

Sorry, cant help myself.

YOur again arguing that because people illegally modify thier cars, we should make it legal? Thats not how the law works.

You then tried to argue (few posts back) that the laws should be made to meet the standards of the community, not the other way around, If we took a vote, you think the majority of australians would vote to allow 3" bigger tyres etc?? The majority wouldnt care, but if they had to decide, im quite sure they would vote no.

-Scott- wrote: This indicates that you have no idea what ADRs are about, or the vehicle modification approvals process.

What 4wd do you drive? Lets take that factory standard 4wd and try your swerve test, then we'll do it in my daily driver - I can guarantee my dd will out-handle your 4wd. By your argument, you shouldn't be on the road.

I have a pretty good understanding of what ADR's are about. If it was possible to make ADR's retrospective year to year, they would.

Unfortunately motorcars are a big investment, and to have your 3 year old car deemed unsafe is ridiculous. So compromises are made. So yes you can drive your less safe vehicle until it dies, but you drive it with the knowledge that it is less safe than the currently available model.

The vehicle modification approvals process, must be a southerners term, the QLD term is just "NO".

Qld allows many modifications to motor vehciles outside the booklet they release, these approvals are based on a needs assesment. If a 40 tonne allterrain crane needs to drive from job to job on road, and still maintain the all-terrain ability of the vehicle, they need some pretty tall aggressive tyres to do so, QLD recognises this legitamate need and approves 44" off-road tyres for use on these vehicles.

In SA your vehicle is deemed safe, in QLD its a dangerouse man killer. I find this just as ludacris as you do, but I am no comfortable simply saying QLD has got it wrong and all the other states are right.

Shadow wrote:So you dont need 33" tyres, they are a wank factor, I lso have 33" (measure 32.4") tyres on my landcruiser. Except, my 33" tyres comply with the +15mm law in QLD, and i didnt have to lift my car to fit them either.

My daily driver is a 2wd hilux, My 4wd is a 89 landcruiser that gets driven once or twice a week to keep everything moving, and used for camping and fishing and towing the trailer to the dump. In the process of updating to a 100series...

Significantly better than he expected?? So did it perform better or worse than when mitsubishi built it? My bet is worse.

I am more than happy to comply with QLD's modification laws, As are the majority of drivers. It is the MINORITY that want the laws changed. Governents do not set laws to serve the minority.

I'm going to illegaly fit 33inch tyres to my GQ. My NEW main reason for this, is so that on the off chance i go camping on the same weekend as you and just happen to be in the same area, I'll be able to drive go just that little bit further away and it'll make my weekend just that little bit better.

Personly i don't care if the laws change or not. i'll still have my 33s. if they change, i'll get it approved. if breaking that law is the worst thing that i ever do, well i'm probably doing pretty good.


Being a mechanic, i've seen more unsafe standard cars than i care to remember. They are unsafe purely because the owners just don't care. one lady a few weeks ago go quite mad that i as part of servicing her car i did a mechanical/safety check and gave her the report. A MAJORITY of customers do not want there cars fixed and choose to drive unsafe cars.
at the risk of sounding just like you. what worse a paj with 33s a patrol with 35s, or a commodore with a leaking brake master cylinder, 4 bald tyres less then 2mm of brake pad left and a badly rackend?

joeblow wrote:good to see qld comming forward a bit.

but most others are going backwards

brad-chevlux wrote:

Shadow wrote:So you dont need 33" tyres, they are a wank factor, I lso have 33" (measure 32.4") tyres on my landcruiser. Except, my 33" tyres comply with the +15mm law in QLD, and i didnt have to lift my car to fit them either.

My daily driver is a 2wd hilux, My 4wd is a 89 landcruiser that gets driven once or twice a week to keep everything moving, and used for camping and fishing and towing the trailer to the dump. In the process of updating to a 100series...

Significantly better than he expected?? So did it perform better or worse than when mitsubishi built it? My bet is worse.

I am more than happy to comply with QLD's modification laws, As are the majority of drivers. It is the MINORITY that want the laws changed. Governents do not set laws to serve the minority.

I'm going to illegaly fit 33inch tyres to my GQ. My NEW main reason for this, is so that on the off chance i go camping on the same weekend as you and just happen to be in the same area, I'll be able to drive go just that little bit further away and it'll make my weekend just that little bit better.

Personly i don't care if the laws change or not. i'll still have my 33s. if they change, i'll get it approved. if breaking that law is the worst thing that i ever do, well i'm probably doing pretty good.


Being a mechanic, i've seen more unsafe standard cars than i care to remember. They are unsafe purely because the owners just don't care. one lady a few weeks ago go quite mad that i as part of servicing her car i did a mechanical/safety check and gave her the report. A MAJORITY of customers do not want there cars fixed and choose to drive unsafe cars.
at the risk of sounding just like you. what worse a paj with 33s a patrol with 35s, or a commodore with a leaking brake master cylinder, 4 bald tyres less then 2mm of brake pad left and a badly rackend?

you might fiund 33's are legal on your patrol, as most 33" tyres actually measure closer to 32.5", and the factory split rim tyres that came on landcruisers (and patrols? 7.50R16) is actually specced close to 32" for an offroad tread pattern.

phil94delica wrote:

If you want 38" tyres and a 10" lift, get a trailer.

Whats safer, driving a modified 4wd on the road, or driving a stock 4wd with 3 ton in trailer and 4wd on the back. So instead of having to control a 2T modified 4wd you have to try and control 5T +.

Id like to see a 4wd with trailer and 4wd on the back swerve around something at 100k/h.

Also someone running 38's doesnt normally spend too much time on the road cos its too expensive to replace big tyres. It would just be nice to be able to nip around the corner to the bush without having to worry about coppers.

I have a delica if you sverved in that thing at 100k in stock form you would roll it. They come with 29's stock, I have 32's on landcruiser rims so the van is raised 1.5" by the tyres by its 4" wider cos of the different rims so its more stable then it is standard. So in that case having 3" bigger tyres are safer.

What a BS arguement! There a hell of alot safer in the car that isn't 10"+ of the ground. If they were driving there lifted car at 100km/h it would FLIP easily, and as a "Daily driven" car many more people would be in this situation than towing a illegally modified car on a trailer.

Yom wrote:

Shadow wrote:So you dont need 33" tyres, they are a wank factor, I lso have 33" (measure 32.4") tyres on my landcruiser. Except, my 33" tyres comply with the +15mm law in QLD, and i didnt have to lift my car to fit them either.

My daily driver is a 2wd hilux, My 4wd is a 89 landcruiser that gets driven once or twice a week to keep everything moving, and used for camping and fishing and towing the trailer to the dump. In the process of updating to a 100series...

I am more than happy to comply with QLD's modification laws, As are the majority of drivers. It is the MINORITY that want the laws changed. Governents do not set laws to serve the minority.

Why are you buying a vehicle, by your logic, the majority of australia does not want you to be driving?

Has the government banned these vehicles because the majority might not like driving on the roads with them?

They're certainly not a neccessity for most people. Hell, beach driving, fishing etc - you've quite possibly chosen the worst vehicle for this. LC100's and even pootrolls are big fat things and hopeless on the sand compared to a much smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient Prado/Hilux/Pajero etc. And even a prado/pajero has similar interior space - usually better designed - to suit your family better.

Hypocrite.

Your telling him what car he should of bought? You sir, HAVE problems

GRPABT1 wrote:

Shadow wrote:

-Scott- wrote:

Shadow wrote:the majority of people on the road do not want to drive nexto a car with 38" tyres lifted 10" in the air.

If you want 38" tyres and a 10" lift, get a trailer.

Who mentioned 38" tyres or 10" of lift? Don't attempt to divert the argument to an extreme.

I wanted 33" tyres on my Pajero, but there was no way I could do it legally in Queensland. So I did it anyway, exactly as many others have done and are still doing.

I came to SA, put it through their engineering process, passed with flying colours. I have paperwork from a qualified professional which states that my vehicle complies with the intent of the Australian Design Rules, but Queensland won't register it.

Perfectly legal in SA (and probably WA, Vic, NSW) but no chance to make it legal in Qld.

And, in case you hadn't noticed, this thread is all about a report that the law in Queensland is about to change.

Why would they do that?

Why do you need 33" tyres??

If you want to argue this point then bugger off to some other forum.

what a stupid reaction to a perfectly valid question. So many people get sucked into "I read it on a 4wd site that I have to big tyres so therefore I'll get them" without having a clue as to why they might actually need them, what ramifications it will have. Sometimes people need someone to ask them a question like that to actually get them thinking about what is the best solution for them.

But hey bugger off to another forum if you think actually trying to find out all the relevant info is a waste of time

Shadow wrote:I have a pretty good understanding of what ADR's are about. If it was possible to make ADR's retrospective year to year, they would.

Unfortunately motorcars are a big investment, and to have your 3 year old car deemed unsafe is ridiculous. So compromises are made. So yes you can drive your less safe vehicle until it dies, but you drive it with the knowledge that it is less safe than the currently available model.

No.

Meeting ADRs had nothing to do with whether or not a vehicle is as safe as it could be. They're about whether or not the vehicle is safe enough to drive on Australian roads. That's why we're not all driving Volvos.

Now, you're worried about my 33" tyres making my 4wd a roll-over risk? How about this?



You would prefer I take out my long range tank, so I can carry an extra 40 litres of fuel on the roof, rather than 45 litres under the floor?

Shadow wrote:So you dont need 33" tyres, they are a wank factor, I lso have 33" (measure 32.4") tyres on my landcruiser. Except, my 33" tyres comply with the +15mm law in QLD, and i didnt have to lift my car to fit them either.

OK, 33" tyres on my 4wd are wank factor, because they're not factory standard - but they are 100% legal.

You run 33" tyres too. They're not factory standard - but they are 100% legal. I guess yours are wank factor too.

-Scott- wrote:

Shadow wrote:So you dont need 33" tyres, they are a wank factor, I lso have 33" (measure 32.4") tyres on my landcruiser. Except, my 33" tyres comply with the +15mm law in QLD, and i didnt have to lift my car to fit them either.

OK, 33" tyres on my 4wd are wank factor, because they're not factory standard - but they are 100% legal.

You run 33" tyres too. They're not factory standard - but they are 100% legal. I guess yours are wank factor too.

i definantly have not needed the extra 15mm that my 33" wank tyres provide, but i did feel a bit bigger when i asked the tyre guy for a set of 33's i must admit.