Outer Limits 4x4 Board

i've got a pretty nailed bullbar on my 40, was considering cutting it all off, so basically i would have the flat bumper just a little wider than the frame rails...

can i expect to be harrassed by the law due to nothing covering the front of alot of the tires? i.e. how legal is it?

there not protruding, past the bar, then it's all good.

the tires will be heaps past the bar... basically the bar will just cover the gap between the two frame rail horns.

there are flairs etc covering the wheels, just not in front of them...

Thats exactly what I have on my CJ7

When I transfered the rego from ACT to NSW the inspection station gave me some grief over it so I took it to a NSW RTA tech inspector and had him check it he said

" I dont really like it, but I can not see a rule I can knock it back on"

Since then I have never had a problem but it doesnt do too many k on the road so reduces the chances of getting hasseled

I have heard since there is some ADR's related to frontal tyre coverage but never have looked further into it

Its like all things if you make it look professional and dont drive to attract attention it helps (doesnt make it legal but reduces the hassle factor)

Do you mean something like mine?
Peter.

it shouldnt be a prob ...... most issues are to do with projections IE chassis rails that COULD in an accident stab into the other vehicle


i drove my cruiser around (in WA) with the bullbar off .... all i had to do was small bumper between the rails to keep the cops happy

If there was an ADR issue with tyre coverage then surely all the clubman kit cars would not be able to be registered

eg



from http://www.prbaustralia.com.au

Having said that, my Mahindra CJ3B has a full width bumper bolted over the indian factory stubby bumper - could be for ADR or perhaps its the 1990 facelift to the 50's jeep

ditto with motorcycle from mud guards. they don't cover all of the front of the tyre when viewed from the top down. i had a cut down bumper to give room for tyres on the sierra. it was never an issue but the zook chassis does go further forward than the fj40 ones.

From what i understand the fairlead for your winch, recovery eyelets etc ate all classified as protrusions from your bar.

If you look at most of the later model ARB bars the fairlead has a surround that covers the edges. Therefore making it comply with ADR's.

The ADR's do have a section on guards, but the front wheel coverage is not really an issue they are there more to deflect stones & prevent touching the wheels from the side.

http://rvcs-prodweb.dot.gov.au/


In the left column click on new ADR's & the scroll down to 42/04 there is a section on guards there.

Given the vehilce is a 40 the it only has to comply to an ADR appliccable at the time of manufacture, there was no ADR 42 there so you have to look at the Australian Vehicle Standard Rules 1999 which fills in the gaps for older vehicles.

[/quote]

thanks lots of usefull info here.

yes droopypete it'll be like yours (exceptmaybe a touch narrower. it's hard to judge from the pic, as i'm not familiar with suzuki sizes...)

i was thinking about it last night, and agree with what most people have said about the clubman cars etc.

i think i'll do it, and if i get grief, i know where i can get cheap second hand bullbars...

this won't be driven much (although the occasional adelaide - melbourne - vic high country and back trip will occur) and i definately don't drive to draw attention.

thanks guys.

Just make sure the ends of the bar are either turned back or have something covering the edges.

done... wish i had a digi camera. turned out narrower than i expected.

look neater though