Outer Limits 4x4 Board

i spoke to an engineer about the changes... he said nobody knows when they will actually be put into place.... the current documents doing the rounds are for discussion only. He also said that the regulations won't be retrospective, so current certificates will be valid. As it stands, apparently there is currently nobody in NSW equipped to do the so called "swerve tests".

We've had word from 2 differing sources in the industry that have stated that it is definately coming in around this time.
The fact that it's from 2 makes me kinda believe it. We'll wait and see.

Cheers,
Ryano

Still no reponse to any of my emails

It's been said a few times before in this thread and I'll say it again:

It's a Code of Practice, or in other words: industry guidlines.

It's not Law, Legislation or part of the Act! It's another one of the govt's stupid grey area's so they can discriminate with mod's.

Mod's will still be approved at each states own transport authorities discretion. They can use the "Code of Practice" as a guideline but it doesn't mean that mods over and above the guidelines cannot or will not be approved.

Look at it this way, if something goes wrong e.g: accident, and mod's have been done with no certificate then the authorities can go to the guidelines (Code of Practice) and see whether the mods should have been engineered or not.

This is how I have interpreted the new Code anyhow, you can lift up to 150mm in the stated combinations without having to get it engineered.

my 2c.

sudso wrote:
This is how I have interpreted the new Code anyhow, you can lift up to 150mm in the stated combinations without having to get it engineered.

Maybe you might like to go back and reread it a little more closely and then see if you still think that

cj wrote:

sudso wrote:
This is how I have interpreted the new Code anyhow, you can lift up to 150mm in the stated combinations without having to get it engineered.

Maybe you might like to go back and reread it a little more closely and then see if you still think that

any lift between 50mm and up to a total maximum of 150mm, using a comination of 50mm max suspension, 75mm max body lift, and 50mm max tyre diameter increase (25mm height increase)......

HeathGQ wrote:

cj wrote:

sudso wrote:
This is how I have interpreted the new Code anyhow, you can lift up to 150mm in the stated combinations without having to get it engineered.

Maybe you might like to go back and reread it a little more closely and then see if you still think that

any lift between 50mm and up to a total maximum of 150mm, using a comination of 50mm max suspension, 75mm max body lift, and 50mm max tyre diameter increase (25mm height increase)......

Read Section 1.2 as it states that a lift between 50mm and 150mm requires certification.

cj wrote:

HeathGQ wrote:

cj wrote:

sudso wrote:
This is how I have interpreted the new Code anyhow, you can lift up to 150mm in the stated combinations without having to get it engineered.

Maybe you might like to go back and reread it a little more closely and then see if you still think that

any lift between 50mm and up to a total maximum of 150mm, using a comination of 50mm max suspension, 75mm max body lift, and 50mm max tyre diameter increase (25mm height increase)......

Read Section 1.2 as it states that a lift between 50mm and 150mm requires certification.

What page no. is it on? I cant find it.

On page 62 it says that lifting more than 150mm is beyond the scope of this Code of Practice.
Does that mean lifts over 150 are covered by another code or approved on a case by case inspection?
The engineer at Vehicle Standards SA said we can go as high as we like here as long as it's engineered, even he said the code is not law.

Ryano wrote:We've had word from 2 differing sources in the industry that have stated that it is definately coming in around this time.
The fact that it's from 2 makes me kinda believe it. We'll wait and see.

Cheers,
Ryano

Ryano,
I too believe it WILL happen.. just when, I think theres another 4-10 years of arguing between states, and departments to go yet

bogged wrote:

Ryano wrote:We've had word from 2 differing sources in the industry that have stated that it is definately coming in around this time.
The fact that it's from 2 makes me kinda believe it. We'll wait and see.

Cheers,
Ryano

Ryano,
I too believe it WILL happen.. just when, I think theres another 4-10 years of arguing between states, and departments to go yet

thats the gist of the message from the engineer i spoke to..... i think we have plenty of time to get our shit engineered.

sudso wrote:

cj wrote:

HeathGQ wrote:

cj wrote:

sudso wrote:
This is how I have interpreted the new Code anyhow, you can lift up to 150mm in the stated combinations without having to get it engineered.

Maybe you might like to go back and reread it a little more closely and then see if you still think that

any lift between 50mm and up to a total maximum of 150mm, using a comination of 50mm max suspension, 75mm max body lift, and 50mm max tyre diameter increase (25mm height increase)......

Read Section 1.2 as it states that a lift between 50mm and 150mm requires certification.

What page no. is it on? I cant find it.

Section LS, Page 5

....and for all you Victorians out there, here is the response I just got back from the Vehicle Standrds arm of VicRoads when querying if and when this would be introduced.

"The code of practice has not yet been formally picked up in legislation but
nevertheless is considered to apply in Victoria. There are no substantial
differences between the code of practice and what prevailed before in
Victoria. I strongly urge you to engage the services of a VASS Signatory
early in your project."

Enjoy

cj wrote:

sudso wrote:

cj wrote:

HeathGQ wrote:

cj wrote: Maybe you might like to go back and reread it a little more closely and then see if you still think that

any lift between 50mm and up to a total maximum of 150mm, using a comination of 50mm max suspension, 75mm max body lift, and 50mm max tyre diameter increase (25mm height increase)......

Read Section 1.2 as it states that a lift between 50mm and 150mm requires certification.

What page no. is it on? I cant find it.

Section LS, Page 5

....and for all you Victorians out there, here is the response I just got back from the Vehicle Standrds arm of VicRoads when querying if and when this would be introduced.

"The code of practice has not yet been formally picked up in legislation but
nevertheless is considered to apply in Victoria. There are no substantial
differences between the code of practice and what prevailed before in
Victoria. I strongly urge you to engage the services of a VASS Signatory
early in your project."

Enjoy

so nothings really changed then? Apart from some states getting a better deal and others going backwards?

Just had confirmation from my Engineer that he won't let me have anything bigger than a 50mm increase over the smallest tyre fitted to my vehicle.

As he said
"The wording of the requirement says that replacement tyre should not be more than 50 mm in dia. from ANY of the specified tyres for that vehicle. "

This code is going to put a lot of people out of a job and make off roading a whole lot more challenging.

I can see a bit of work in shaving diffs being done around town in the future.

sounds to me like some engineers are adopting the code a little too early. Besides, i wouldn't be overly worried..... most modifiied 4WDs are driving illegal at the moment. Not everyone goes to get their lift, or bigger tyres engineered. You only have to look at Qld to see it matters little. I have seen a lot of modified vehicles around the valley, i'll bet my left nut most haven't been engineered. This new "code" of practice means most will continue to drive with unengineered and therefore illegal mods.

cj wrote:Just had confirmation from my Engineer that he won't let me have anything bigger than a 50mm increase over the smallest tyre fitted to my vehicle.

As he said
"The wording of the requirement says that replacement tyre should not be more than 50 mm in dia. from ANY of the specified tyres for that vehicle. "

Did he say anything about the suspension lift being a nominal 2" or do they actual measure it, could be real problem that particular regulation.

Regards Charlie

Here in Tassie, the Transport Dept has adopted the Code and is enforcing it cause, "the Govt wants to get the road toll down". I asked for evidence and they said "lots of SUVs roll over in the US" so... here in Tas ya can't go higher and exceed the limits set in the Code! I guess we are part of the US now? Transport is also planning to adopt the Code under Regulations which means that it will become law. Don't matter though, they have chosen to enforce it now, as is, even though it is "work in progress" and a "living document". I also spoke with a Transport Inspector who just laughed and said how the hell do they expect us Inspectors to know/carry all the factory info for every 4wd out there and make ready comparisions 'tween the original and the mods? Hopefully they will find someone else to pick on, someone who can provide more revenue!

If you look on the web at Dotars this is no longer a "draft" version it's now signed off as a the official national code of practice.


Where previous approval had been obtained (eg engineers cert) that still stands.

http://www.dotars.gov.au/transreg/vsb/P ... eb2006.pdf

Once again there are a number of inaccuracies within the document that were not corrected in draft form that may hinder us - there is still a reference to "26mm" as the maximum 4wd tyre size (diameter) increase for instance.


There is no attempt to quantify how "tall" default unmodified vehicles are either... so the 50mm unengineered limit is a very flexible and open to interpretation. As is the 160mm, as is the maximum tyre size +50mm.

Sorting these out is the responsibility of each state.

Interesting - seems like there's some confusion here. For example Transport rep here said clubs could put in "sensible suggestions" to change areas of concerns to them, eg., on raising lift limits, and advised that the document could be altered at any time, if agreed by the working party. It was also advised that prior engineering approval meant nothing.... essentially if it did not comply with the Code, then too bad. In effect the Code applies retrospectively......

Well considering that I never even got an acknowledgement of my points where I felt that there were "vague areas" it wasnt really open for public input.

I dunno how many people on here actually got of their ass, but I havent heard of ANYBODY getting any form of response. Maybe you had to already have a working relationship with the relevant transport dept (say by being a member of the state's 4wd association) before they'd bother to listen.

I wasnt asking for stuff that is beyond reason either... just that 50mm before needing a swerve test seems a bit silly and that would then require just about any lifted car to have to go through swerve testing (since you generally go to 2" lift to run slightly larger rubber). As such there should be a starting point at 65mm instead so you can run 2" and a +1 tyre (which so many of us have been doing for years). This was basically where the QLD laws were beforehand.

beyond that I have no real issue - but if you need to go through a swerve test for 2" and 33"s then there's something wrong with the rules - because so many people have run it safely for years, and because it IS so common people are not going to go get it engineered because they dont think it's "highly modified".

Im happy to get a 24.6 mm lifted spring set custom made and run my +2" tyres (+25.4" diameter) legally to avoid the cost and effort sweve test. Im also happy to go the full 150mm too.


It's also VERY strange from an engineering viewpoint that 3" suspension lifts are a complete NO GO zone, but 3" bodylift kits are ok.




Removal of prior approval is a very tough thing to do legally.

Reddo wrote:Hopefully they will find someone else to pick on, someone who can provide more revenue!

Same people they have been for years, Truckies.

Just a question on tyre size, My MK patrol originaly came with 7.5 x 16 tyres, seeing that they are no longer on the vehical, does anyone know the overall height of these tyres, in cm or inches???
Hoppy

Hoppy11 wrote:Just a question on tyre size, My MK patrol originaly came with 7.5 x 16 tyres, seeing that they are no longer on the vehical, does anyone know the overall height of these tyres, in cm or inches???
Hoppy

I think that for Highway tyres it is 804mm and for Offroad traction tyres it is 812mm but check the Tyre and Rim Bible at a Tyre shop.

Beastmavster wrote:Well considering that I never even got an acknowledgement of my points where I felt that there were "vague areas" it wasnt really open for public input.

I dunno how many people on here actually got of their ass, but I havent heard of ANYBODY getting any form of response. Maybe you had to already have a working relationship with the relevant transport dept (say by being a member of the state's 4wd association) before they'd bother to listen.

I wasnt asking for stuff that is beyond reason either... just that 50mm before needing a swerve test seems a bit silly and that would then require just about any lifted car to have to go through swerve testing (since you generally go to 2" lift to run slightly larger rubber). As such there should be a starting point at 65mm instead so you can run 2" and a +1 tyre (which so many of us have been doing for years). This was basically where the QLD laws were beforehand.

beyond that I have no real issue - but if you need to go through a swerve test for 2" and 33"s then there's something wrong with the rules - because so many people have run it safely for years, and because it IS so common people are not going to go get it engineered because they dont think it's "highly modified".

Im happy to get a 24.6 mm lifted spring set custom made and run my +2" tyres (+25.4" diameter) legally to avoid the cost and effort sweve test. Im also happy to go the full 150mm too.


It's also VERY strange from an engineering viewpoint that 3" suspension lifts are a complete NO GO zone, but 3" bodylift kits are ok.




Removal of prior approval is a very tough thing to do legally.

What he said.

It basically appears that the NCOP is now in force across Australia. Looks like my 3" suspension lift is now going to be a problem to be engineered.

cj wrote:

Hoppy11 wrote:Just a question on tyre size, My MK patrol originaly came with 7.5 x 16 tyres, seeing that they are no longer on the vehical, does anyone know the overall height of these tyres, in cm or inches???
Hoppy

I think that for Highway tyres it is 804mm and for Offroad traction tyres it is 812mm but check the Tyre and Rim Bible at a Tyre shop.

This is probably the biggest problem I can see... there ISNT anything that tells which 7.50R16 the 50mm maximum size is added to. So if I happen to find a "big" 7.50R16.... then can I start from that size ?

Say this one is 810mm
http://www.simextyre.com/Tyres/LS803.asp

Or do I have to use a standard size for 7.50R16 - whatever that is and how do I find it?

There's mention of tyres manufactured to certain standards as being acceptable. Does that mean I can choose any tyres built to the same standards?



I think though that I have to use the original factory fitted one as the base size (eg If a Dunlop road gripper was my factory fitting 15 years ago then I can use that).

This seems to be the solution now because the words OE have been inserted and the phrase "any tyre designated by the vehicle manufacturer for that model".

As far as I know (but cant prove right now) but Dunlop and Bridgestone were used on the GQ here in Australia so my biggest tyre would be a dunlop or bridgestone 7.50R16. Getting specs on them would be difficult and I can't find it on the internet.

Maybe Ryano would be able to help us out on this one by posting up the largest OE tyre size for the main brands - eg Landcruiser 60-80-100, 73 75 series, Patrol MQ MK GQ GQII GU GUII etc.

Note that most of these would probably be the same anyway.



Of great concern is the way that "any tyre designated by the vehicle manufacturer for that model" is being interpreted that means that the transport offical can choose the smallest OE tyre... thus meaning that a 7.50R16 is illegal on a GQ even though it's factory fitting since the 215/80R16 is only 29" tall.

There was a really good thread on this on the overlander forum where NSW transport agreed that any tyre of the same marking (in this case 245/70/16 was legal.

http://forums.overlander.com.au/viewtop ... &start=360

The thing is that meant that for your nominal 245/70/16 (according to the markings a 749 mm tyre or 29.5") you could still fit a Simex Roadtrekker 245/70/16 which was 805mm...... making 31.7" tyre a stock legal tyre.

You could then add your 15mm (at the time) to that allowing you to run a 32.28" tyre completely legally where 29.5" was stock.

The smallest size in the 245/70/16 range was 725mm....

You get 80mm variation within one size..... that allows under the new rules up to 130mm larger than stock fitting.


Obviously this is something that really needs to be clarified.

Simex tyres site example... remember these are on the same website:


http://www.simextyre.com.au/Tyres/Road_Treker.asp

road trekker 245/70/16 = 805mm.....

http://www.simextyre.com.au/Tyres/at300.asp

at300 245/70/16 = 749mm...


Now I sure know which one I'd be choosing.

I've been thinking about the whole 7.50 x 16 tyre thing as well. Seeing as it was /is original fitment to larger 4x4's, and the code allows +50mm increase, then 35's or 315/75 x 16 should still be allowed by engineer.

I reckon they need absolute maximum diameter limit for each particular vehicle model to enforce the rule fairly.

That requires them to do the research which they dont want to have to do.

The same issue with how tall each vehicle should be. They dont want to have to find out which was the tallest version of every single vehicle (tallest tyre option on tallest specification (a ST Patrol with carpet, A/C and electrics would weigh more than say a DX so would sit lower, even on the same tyres and springs).



To be honest it's already been said in this thread that the cops wont know what size is ok or not so they'll book you regardless and then you have to go to court to defend yourself. It's completely farked..... just like noise restrictions.... where you cna be busted without any form of actual testing.

The problem is this makes for a waste of time in court. How can you prove what height is ok either?

We need something within the guidelines to clearly state what is ok and it just isnt there.




The biggest 7.50R16 OEM equipment manufacturer made tyre I've found so far was the Wrangler TG at 32.4". Stuff like Mickey Thompson and Super Swampers dont count, nor do any forms of retreads (eg Mongrels).

IF you're allowed to do that and choose the biggest OEM rubber, that's a 34.4" tyre legal. Not quite a 35" (most are 34.6).

315/75/16 are too big as well. 305/75/16 and 315/70/16 I cant find anywhere.


Unfortunately in the last 12 months or so most Australian tyre retailers have stopped putting dimensions on their websites for this sort of reason. While generally you can say it's the same tyre sold here in say NZ (where I fgot the Wrangler TG size from) I dont know that this would stand up legally.

305/70/17 is the only common size I can find that actually is a true 34" tyre.