Outer Limits 4x4 Board

i stumbled accross this while web wheeling and thought it might be of some use to NSW people who want to LEGALLY run 44" tyres. at the very bottom of the page is a link to a PDF of the engineers report to legalise the procedure.

http://www.4x4offroads.com/toyota-land-cruiser-australia.html

this is slightly outdated, mind you...

The engineers passed 12" rims, where the ADR's now state that you cant run wider than 8" on a truck over 1.2t I think it is, and there is no scope for engineering approval on this. Its the same as suspension lift. 1/3 metal to metal is you lift, irrespective of the engineers. Increase in track etc.......

yeah, but did you actually read it?

he went to a lot of effort and many things are just straight not legal, but he worked the system, and after outlaying what would have been lots of dorrah's he passed it.


a little note for others... this is the 80 series truck at fourby's at mooroka

Yep, I certainly did read it, but an engineering cert doesn't necessarily make it legal if the ADR guidelines don't allow for that scope. His point is that people just whack on big tyres, get busted and get it passed again with small tyres rather than having that stuff approved and complying with the ADR guidelines.

I read it too, I was interested as I had probs with my 35's

I found it interesting that the only mod to brakes were that the front brake line was replaced with a hilux one and then in the brake test the rig pulled up as well as it did with standard tyres

Hmmmm

Slunnie wrote:His point is that people just whack on big tyres, get busted and get it passed again with small tyres rather than having that stuff approved and complying with the ADR guidelines.

I agree however it is one thing getting away with 31s instead of 29s or the like but have you seen this truck?
There is no way he would get out the driveway without attracting unwanted attention. Plus it is a show truck for his business so I am sure he wouldn't risk his business driving it around the countryside illegally.

Utemad wrote:There is no way he would get out the driveway without attracting unwanted attention. Plus it is a show truck for his business so I am sure he wouldn't risk his business driving it around the countryside illegally.

Pretty sure I read about this truck years ago. And the article said that it had been to the cape and done the simpson desert and a couple of other outback trips.

You can legally run wider than 8".

The proviso is on a new vehicle design ie: kit cars etc. They are engineered from conception. Thereare also some exotic road cars with wider than 8" too. ie. Merc SLK230 with AMG wheels.

(My new ride )

Bazzle

RTA guidelines we received at work a few years ago stated that you could go 2" wider on your rims from the widest factory set up. To me that means you can run 16x10's on a patrol legit...

How do you get around these though? (at the risk of a big VSI snip)
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/registration/ ... 9_rev4.pdf
(edit for correct link)

An important requirement for all replacement wheels is that the wheel track must not be increased by more than
25mm beyond the maximum specified by the vehicle manufacturer for that vehicle.

Wheels up to 26mm wider than the largest optional wheel recommended by the vehicle manufacturer for the
vehicle can be fitted without the need to notify the RTA.

Replacement wheels requiring an engineering certificate
Wheels that exceed the diameter and width limits for minor wheel changes must be assessed by a signatory. If the
signatory finds that the wheels are safe for your vehicle, you will be issued with an engineering certificate.

There are limits on the size of wheels that can be certified by a signatory.
These limits are as follows:

Four wheel drive vehicles
Except where the original manufacturer provides to the contrary, the maximum width of front wheels is the lesser
of the maximum width for rear wheels or 204mm (8 inches), the front and rear wheel widths must be the same.

There are alot of things not considered in this report, eg forces on the bearings stub axles and the like, there is no mention on the lights being higher of the ground, (he did however menton that they were in the original position)

I think the enginner that did this was doing someone a big favor, and would like to know if he is still doing this work today

in relation the The morroka fourby's rig, it drives on road, and ive seen it, fair enough it does attract attention, but it still drives

You guys are missing the point.

If he got Toyota to see that their car could legally abide by the ADR's by doing certain modifications, then Toyota themself could release a factory modified version of the 80 series - hence complying fully with the ADR's and allowing anyone to run 44" tyres on the road with a factory 10" lift.

All they had to do was take that information on board and the DOT couldn't have done shit.

It's like SPOA is illegal in QLD, but hilux's arn't (they are factory SPOA).

By DOT's reasoning, all hilux's are a danger (they are I guess but yeah you get the idea.

The only real argument the DOT has against modifications is when the manufacturer doesn't support the mods.

Fernando at 3rd's Productions has an F250 legally registered and engineered with 40in tyres and a 6in lift with 12in wide rims. Looks awsome and some of you would have seen it at tough truck in the tough dog tent. Mind you he had 44's on it then.

I havnt missed the point, the fact is that toyota aus, who didnt even desighn the thing would not want to allow you to run 44inch tyres, how the hell would the wheel bearings hold that extra load, or the diffs or the axles for that mater, all car companies care about is keeping the car in one piece so it lasts its waranty period, there is no way a car with 44inch tyres is going to not have extra stresses on it. Unless it was designed for these tyres it would not have been enginneer(eg designed reliably) for them

The point was how to go about getting these sort of mods legalised not how reliable the car is.

Obviously if it was adopted they'd make sure the car held together for at least 3 years (that's all a warrenty is these days).

Even a crappy Toyota will last for 3 years before it needs work

Fair enough 44x18.5 tyres will wear shit out fast, but a lot of people would be happy with engineered 33's or 35's.

At the moment 33's are against the rules, and you can't tell me that 33x12.5's are going to hurt much.

slunnie's got the point that i think a lot of ppl miss....

just cos it's engineered, doesn't make it legal. u might be able to engineer something, but if the ADRs say u can't do it, then u can still get pinged for it.

it's like engineering 37's.... might be able to, but it's still illegal to run them on the road

This really worries me about how some people think they can get away with so many mods.

It's soooooooo illegal it's not funny. Take a few guys from the circles lately - they've got 1-2 year old cars with awesome high-tech, fully engineered expensive lifts and gear that's perfectly legal onroad in the US. Then they piss someone off who dobs em in and they've got to show up and get it looked at and they fail.

It's just not worth it imho unless you want to trailor it everywhere.

I disagree with it completely as it's usually the nice new rigs that get stung and the old crappy dangerous ones that get away with it.

foad wrote:You guys are missing the point.

If he got Toyota to see that their car could legally abide by the ADR's by doing certain modifications, then Toyota themself could release a factory modified version of the 80 series - hence complying fully with the ADR's and allowing anyone to run 44" tyres on the road with a factory 10" lift.

All they had to do was take that information on board and the DOT couldn't have done shit.

It's like SPOA is illegal in QLD, but hilux's arn't (they are factory SPOA).

By DOT's reasoning, all hilux's are a danger (they are I guess but yeah you get the idea.

The only real argument the DOT has against modifications is when the manufacturer doesn't support the mods.

thank god someone got the point of this thread

stumped wrote:slunnie's got the point that i think a lot of ppl miss....

just cos it's engineered, doesn't make it legal. u might be able to engineer something, but if the ADRs say u can't do it, then u can still get pinged for it.

it's like engineering 37's.... might be able to, but it's still illegal to run them on the road

but it is legal you boofhead. it complies with ADR's that toyota set, for this project. read the damn article and understand it.

I am sure the Fourbys rig is very reliable. It has joined some big '4x4 Australia' trips. There was an article in the magazine about them doing some Len Beadell tracks which this 80 series went along on recently.

Not so sure where they would find a spare tyre out there for it though

Well, I can tell ya where the spare lives, up on the roof rack, along with the crane used to get it up there.

Ignoring the ADR requirements for a moment. I was told by a guy, who wanted to get his cruiser ute engineered with huge claws fitted, that some Toyota parts for other countries allow these types of mods to be made. He was referring to Iceland, where apparently, wider wheels are used. Covered by wide factory flares. If these come with, say 10 inch wheels from factory, then it could be done, maybe? Or do the ADR's override everything?

BundyRumandCoke wrote:Well, I can tell ya where the spare lives, up on the roof rack, along with the crane used to get it up there.

Yep, I've seen that too. I was refering to a 2nd spare as I am sure that tyres that size would be very susceptible to staking. Although he might run low pressures due to the size which may counteract that somewhat.

specified by the vehicle manufacturer

MODIFICATIONS is the big word here, in terms of modifying from original factory specifications.

Sure, the SPOA is illegal in QLD, but the hilux is made with spoa in the factory, it is standard with spoa, and i can bet they spent a WHOLE lot of money in handling, braking, and crash testing in the engineering process, as with any standard vehicle.

If a car was meant to be safe on the road with 44" tyres, it would come with all the tested and engineered components and parts that are strong enough and safe enough to run 44's from the factory. And if it did, you would be paying alot more for a new car.

Sure, manufacturers have to think about road safety etc, but their main goal is to sell the cars. Not everyone wants a monster truck to drive around in. And not everyone wants to spend that kind of money on a stock car.

I cant think of anyone whos willing to crash test their car in order to get it engineered. And i cant see the point of getting anything engineered if the Australian Standards say that it CANNOT be ie a 25mm wider wheel track, or 1/3 increased bump stop height.

Damn i hate how we have to pay the government taxes so they can pay for police to hassle us about our cool cars

there, ive had my rant.

foad wrote:You guys are missing the point.

If he got Toyota to see that their car could legally abide by the ADR's by doing certain modifications, then Toyota themself could release a factory modified version of the 80 series - hence complying fully with the ADR's and allowing anyone to run 44" tyres on the road with a factory 10" lift.

All they had to do was take that information on board and the DOT couldn't have done shit.

It's like SPOA is illegal in QLD, but hilux's arn't (they are factory SPOA).

By DOT's reasoning, all hilux's are a danger (they are I guess but yeah you get the idea.

The only real argument the DOT has against modifications is when the manufacturer doesn't support the mods.

Wrong, if the manufacturer cannot make the vehicle comlpy then it wont get registered.

As mentioned before it wouldnt make the height requirements for lighting.

I would like to bet the indicators a more than 400mm inboard too.

Rear reflectors must be no more than 900mm from the ground.

It also looks like the front guards foul the geometric angles of the side indicators as well.

These are just a few thing which would stop compliance, I think he was just lucky when it was registered in NSW & once registered then QLD Transport would have assumed that NSW had checked evarything.

I doubt he would get it registered today.

The ADR's do not cover what width wheel a manufacturer must fit to a certain sise of vehicle, more the construction if the wheel & tyre combination & they refer back to the Rim & Tyre standards manual & other assiciated international standards (ECE for example).

Toyota would have spent millions designing the Hilux with its SOA, do you think an MQ Patrol which wasnt designed this way is safe after some bloke spent two grand & no research into doing the conversion?

Have a look at the big difference in the complete designs of the vehicle & that should tell you.

De-lux wrote:

stumped wrote:slunnie's got the point that i think a lot of ppl miss....

just cos it's engineered, doesn't make it legal. u might be able to engineer something, but if the ADRs say u can't do it, then u can still get pinged for it.

it's like engineering 37's.... might be able to, but it's still illegal to run them on the road

but it is legal you boofhead. it complies with ADR's that toyota set, for this project. read the damn article and understand it.

Did Toyota do this? I thought it said that Toyota was enthusiastic about , despite giving him a car to work with, and thats about all of their input into the project apart from Toyota Iceland supplying parts.
Toyota deal with new car ADR's, whereas this one falls under the vehicle modifications guidelines in addition to the ADRs, perhaps it may be fine with the ADR's, but not the mods guidelines which is what makes it pingable.

Slunnie wrote:

De-lux wrote:

stumped wrote:slunnie's got the point that i think a lot of ppl miss....

just cos it's engineered, doesn't make it legal. u might be able to engineer something, but if the ADRs say u can't do it, then u can still get pinged for it.

it's like engineering 37's.... might be able to, but it's still illegal to run them on the road

but it is legal you boofhead. it complies with ADR's that toyota set, for this project. read the damn article and understand it.

Did Toyota do this? I thought it said that Toyota was enthusiastic about , despite giving him a car to work with, and thats about all of their input into the project apart from Toyota Iceland supplying parts.
Toyota deal with new car ADR's, whereas this one falls under the vehicle modifications guidelines in addition to the ADRs, perhaps it may be fine with the ADR's, but not the mods guidelines which is what makes it pingable.

what he said i read the article mick, take a chill pill and have another drink

toyota's involvement with the rig would only make it legal if it came like that from the factory, approved. the fact that it is legal in iceland means nothing. the fact that toyota approved the mods and supplied parts means nothing. it may be engineered and safer than my junk on the road, but if the RTA wanted to take it off the road something as simple as headlight height would let them do it.... it's still illegal.




anyway, despite all that legal wrangling, i don't care that much... i've seen the rig and it looks awesome!! if they can get away with that on the road, big ups to them

on a related issue....

what dictates the ADRs?? car manufactures don't create them do they, cos they've still gotta adhere to aust'n standards for safety n stuff like that....

something like the merc that comes out with wider rims is legal cos it's factory and approved, how does that fit in with ADRs that say it's gotta be 8" or less?

stumped wrote:how does that fit in with ADRs that say it's gotta be 8" or less?

Where in the ADR's does it say that?

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/registration/ ... 9_rev4.pdf
Its the mods guidelines, but it also says unless the manufacturer has otherwise supplied. ie, if it came with 10" rims, you can change to other 10" rims.