very urgent message to all modified car owners, (new laws)

[slow EH]

some of you may not know that there are changes to modified vehicle laws that are about to happen in W.A, this has not been publicised hardly at all, (GEE I WONDER WHY THAT IS? the clincher is that we only have till april 9th then its all over to have any say in the matter. basically they are trying to restrict what we have already even further, the eastern state laws are to fall in line with this also at a later date, so everybody has somethig to loose here. if you are building or contemplating building a modified car you really need to read this urgently as they can change their mind if your car can be registered by the time you have completed it.

this also affects people with cars that are already modified as it states a car can be recalled for inspection at any time and can be deemed unregisterable even if engineered. the mongrels are taking away our right to drive what we like and another peice of our freedom that our diggers gave their lives for.

please dont think SHE'LL BE RIGHT! thats the thinking thats got this country into the mess its already in now. please take the time to read up on this matter, this will also have an impact on the performance and aftermarket car industry, so if you are in that line of buisiness i strongly sugest you read the info suppied and voice your opinion. we cant let them get away with this. info and links are below. they dont want modified cars on the road full stop. please back us up ad lets do something about it while we can. thankyou.

THIS IS CRITICAL TO THE FUTURE OF MODIFIED CARS.

Have a good easter in your pride and joy because next easter things could be alot different.


This quote below is from http://www.pharosalex.com.au/pages/33achome.html


Note:
Builders, modifiers and owners of vehicles need to be aware that compliance with this NCOP does not guarantee that a vehicle will be acceptable for registration in the case of an ICV or for continued registration in the case of a modified registered production vehicle. If, for example, an ICV submitted for approval does not handle or brake satisfactorily or has any other feature that renders the vehicle unsafe or not roadworthy, it is most unlikely that it will be accepted for registration.

It is also important that builders and owners keep abreast of changes to legislation and vehicle registration policy in their jurisdiction, particularly in cases where a project is expected to take some years to complete. Changes to legislation before a vehicle is completed may mean that certain vehicles cannot be registered without appropriate modifications. Similarly, regulations pertaining to vehicle modifications, vehicle standards or registration policy may change causing certain vehicle modifications to become unacceptable in the future.



Take this how you choose, but the way i see it, should they choose, that project your building, V8, 4 linked, tubbed etc could well become a white elephant and never see registration, let alone the road. This has already had an impact on one of my projects, due to track widths and 4 link.

Eastern staters, in the not too distant future could well be in the same position we sandgropers in W.A are already. How about this for an example...

MAXIMUM RIM SIZE FX - HR 5.85 inches. ( but out of the generousity of their hearts they will allow 6 inches )

REGARDLESS WHETHER FULLY ENGINEERED OR NOT, OR SUPSENSION REDESIGNED, ALL TRACK WIDTHS NOT TO EXCEED 25MM GREATER THAN ORIGINAL SPECS, NO TOLERANCE FOR UNDERTRACK.


If you dont give a shit for the future of our hobby, then dont bother reading.
http://www.fbekholden.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5013&start=45&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=



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



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com

[ratbox]

Note:
Builders, modifiers and owners of vehicles need to be aware that compliance with this NCOP does not guarantee that a vehicle will be acceptable for registration in the case of an ICV or for continued registration in the case of a modified registered production vehicle. If, for example, an ICV submitted for approval does not handle or brake satisfactorily or has any other feature that renders the vehicle unsafe or not roadworthy, it is most unlikely that it will be accepted for registration.

if the vehicle doesn't handle or brake satisfactorily or has some other feature that renders it unsafe or not roadworthy it shouldn't be on the road anyway so i don't see a problem there, in NSW we haven't been "legally" allowd to fit 4 link or modify chassis to alter wheel track with out jumping through hoops for years

we get this "world is coming to an end for modified cars"  stuff atleast once a year, and if they were going to change things they would and there's not a thing we can do about it other than "bugger you i'll just drive my car unregistered and you'll have to chuck me in jail to stop me"

[CraigA]

if the vehicle doesn't handle or brake satisfactorily or has some other feature that renders it unsafe or not roadworthy it shouldn't be on the road anyway

Wise words Ratbox. 

IMHO some of the changes will be well overdue. Go to the drags and have a look at the number of 'registered' cars running sub 10 second quarters. Its a joke. These guys are basically thumbing their noses at the authorities who publish the current registration rules.

There is no way these cars are legal so in my mind the heavy modifiers have bought this on themselves, with the downside that the slight modifiers (wider wheels etc) will unfortunately be caught up in the net cast by any new legislation.

[Ed]

what they said...

[FC427]

One of my mates sold his Capri drag car a few months back  huge slicks full cage huge Pro Stock bonnet scoop 2 seater because of the size of the tubs 4 bar with a rear clip and it just goes on and on.... Went to Trick and Manswetto Racing last week to check out there new CNC head machine and there it was with plates on ......Just Wrong .........FC427......

[ratbox]

most of the cars you guys are talking about are either shonky regoed or were done LOOONNNGG ago, the only plus side is alot of them don't see much street use if any
the car you mention FC427 like you said it's wrong and shows that whoever owns it now has more money than brains i really don't understand what the big deal is with having No plates on a drag car   this goes for 99% of the others why shell out $700-$800 a year to the govenment just so you can have No plates on yor car that goes everywhere on a trailer and the only use it gets is on a drag strip

what is being said about WA laws just sounds like they are finally catching up with the rest of australia (as usual )

[slow EH]

if the vehicle doesn't handle or brake satisfactorily or has some other feature that renders it unsafe or not roadworthy it shouldn't be on the road anyway so i don't see a problem there, in NSW we haven't been "legally" allowd to fit 4 link or modify chassis to alter wheel track with out jumping through hoops for years

we get this "world is coming to an end for modified cars"  stuff atleast once a year, and if they were going to change things they would and there's not a thing we can do about it other than "bugger you i'll just drive my car unregistered and you'll have to chuck me in jail to stop me"

this is not about the safety thing i agee on that part, read between the lines people.
this is about NCOP -2 not the current NCOP which we alredy have in WA aswell. you guys are NOT getting the point NCOP stands for national code of practice and that means you not just WA, it is about NCOP-2 it a revised version so the old standard version of NCOP MAY NO LONGER STAND. READ WHAT IS POSTED PROPERLY. THIS ALSO MEANS A CAR CURRENTLY REGISTERED UNDER THE OLDER NCOP MAY BE RECALLED AND KNOCKED BACK FOR REGO if it does not comply to NCOP-2 simple. i urge you to read it fully.

[Paul In Ireland]

Forgive my ignorance but I fail to see how any system can retrospectively refuse earlier given permission. Granted, if you let the rego lapse you'll have to meet the new specs to get back on the road and that could be too much for some cars.

If retrospective refusal were normal, most old stock cars would be refused for having no seatbelts.

You may have a fight on your hands for new projects but at the end of the day I assume this is all about safety for the car user and the public in general. I suppose you can whinge all you want here on a forum but have you ever actually physically gone to meet the govt. dept involved to voice your opinoins? Tried to make a meeting? Written letters? Organised data to prove they are wrong in their new proposed rules? Not other people you know "who are doing it" but personally, yourself, you?

I can sit in my ivory tower as all those cars can be registered where I am, just the way the rules are here.

[Shayne]

Forgive my ignorance but I fail to see how any system can retrospectively refuse earlier given permission.

We used to 'have permission' to drink and drive.  Because we used to do it, doesn't make it right or mean we can continue to do it now.

Times change.  These rules won't really affect too many of us- if your car won't handle properly, or brake properly, whether it is an original 1956 FE or a tubbed V8 powered monster, it shouldn't be on the road anyway.

[EffCee]

this is not about the safety thing i agee on that part, read between the lines people.
this is about NCOP -2 not the current NCOP which we alredy have in WA aswell. you guys are NOT getting the point NCOP stands for national code of practice and that means you not just WA, it is about NCOP-2 it a revised version so the old standard version of NCOP MAY NO LONGER STAND. READ WHAT IS POSTED PROPERLY. THIS ALSO MEANS A CAR CURRENTLY REGISTERED UNDER THE OLDER NCOP MAY BE RECALLED AND KNOCKED BACK FOR REGO if it does not comply to NCOP-2 simple. i urge you to read it fully.

Slow EH
In the current NCOP  it states in the preface (if you bother to read it) that:
"It is also important that builders and owners keep abreast of changes to legislation and vehicle registration policy in their jurisdiction, particularly in cases where a project is expected to take some years to complete. Changes to legislation before a vehicle is completed may mean that certain vehicles cannot be registered without appropriate modifications. Similarly, regulations pertaining to vehicle modifications, vehicle standards or registration policy may change, causing certain vehicle modifications to become unacceptable in the future.

You also state that the maximum variation to a rim size for a 48-215(FX) is 6 inches. I dispute that under the following rules

The tyres fitted to passenger cars or passenger car derivatives must not be 30% wider than the than the vehicle manufacturer's widest optional tyre. the tyres fitted originally to the 48-215 (FX) were 5.50 x 15. According to the chart in Section LS Tyres Rims, Suspension 7 Steering on Page 17 of the Vehicle Standards Bulletin 14, the equivalent width would be (in metric) a 145 mm section. 145mm x 1.3 equals 188.5, the actual tyre size is a 185mm cross section. Rim size (assuming an aspect ratio of 60% or below) would allow a 185/60/15 inch tyre to be fitted, of which, the maximum allowable rim that could legally be fitted to this tyre would be a 7 inch rim. Admittedly the ideal would be either a 6 or 6.5 inch rim.

You also say that the matter has not been publicised. As a person who is undertaking to modify a vehicle I have been in contact with the engineer who will approve the modifications that I make to my vehicle. I have found out what is acceptable and what is not. I have utilised the VSB as areference to ensure what I do is not going to jeopardise the end result of successfully obtaining an engineers report that approves the modifications that I am making.

I check periodically for any updates that is on the VSB site for any changes that might be made that may affect the car that I am modifying. I suggest that you do the same, to avoid the angst that you are currrently experiencing.

At the end of the day if a vehicle cannot be driven safely on the road it just shouldn't be there. If these changes keep a few more overpowered pieces of crap off our roads, then bring it on. I am all for show cars, leave where people can gawk at them, don't drive them on the road, I am all for drag cars with tubs and 4 links, leave them on the drag strip. Don't put these bullshit cars on the roads

[Paul In Ireland]

We used to 'have permission' to drink and drive.  Because we used to do it, doesn't make it right or mean we can continue to do it now.

Times change.  These rules won't really affect too many of us- if your car won't handle properly, or brake properly, whether it is an original 1956 FE or a tubbed V8 powered monster, it shouldn't be on the road anyway.

Sorry Shayne but you were always liable for driving under the influence - only nowadays the limit is strictly enforced. You can still have a drink and then drive - or is it zero tolerance now? Don't think so...

[ratbox]

like i said earlier just sounds like WA is being brought into line with the eastern states, in most cases we haven't been able to tubb a car or fit 4 link for years

IT DOES SUCK that some pen pusher can change things with the stroke of a pen that they can say something is allowd and then turn around and say now that's not allowd, i don't have a problem with super wild show or drag cars being driven on the streets as long as they're done safe and not used as drag cars on the street

i remember years back you could fit up to a 186 in an EK (as egzample) and all you had to do was fit HR brakes not even discs that's it nothing else no engineers, i just registered an EK fitted with a 179 HP motor the car had been unregistered for 2 years but i had an old set of rego papers that said it had previously been regoed with that engine and no probs and that car had never had an engineers report, also used to have an FC fitted with a 202 all on the papers same thing never had an engineers report
funny thing with the EK when i asked the lady if it had ever had an engineers report she said i'de want to hope not cause i'de need to present it, at that point i didn't argue but knew she was wrong