4WDers and the National Code for Mods - Latest info

Anything and everything in the world of 4WDing & Fourby's; if it's 4WD related & not covered by a specific section elsewhere, then put it in here!
ERASER
Need to get out more
Posts: 2770
Joined: August 1st, 2008, 9:37 pm

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by ERASER » September 3rd, 2011, 11:15 pm

whizzo wrote:Yeh look at Roothies trucks both milo and big red mostly travel on 32s or 33s(especially in QLD)....and I would say that both vehicles would be pretty close to if not completly complinat in QLD....Roothy might come across a bit light on and a bit rough , but he aint stupid.

the 45 series would have come with 7.50R16LT on them that are 808mm hyw and 819mm traction in the book and 33s are 826mm hwy and 832mm traction.

So look at the places roothy takes his trucks....and ya recon that big lifts and big tyres are necessary.

What people show in magazines and videos has never represented either law or need...and the media have never been know to be moral giants.

cheers
I mentioned a 80 series in my post not a 40 series. If you know the differance youll know the car im talking about. Why not answer the question asked of you in the other thread............
my lux is only good for driving through puddles and i dont know anything.........
My Hilux

ERASER
Need to get out more
Posts: 2770
Joined: August 1st, 2008, 9:37 pm

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by ERASER » September 3rd, 2011, 11:23 pm

whizzo wrote:the 45 series would have come with 7.50R16LT on them that are 808mm hyw and 819mm traction in the book and 33s are 826mm hwy and 832mm traction.

cheers
oh and when i last went to school the average differances in those tyres sizes were more than the legal limit in qld of 15mm............... there 15.5.................
my lux is only good for driving through puddles and i dont know anything.........
My Hilux

whizzo
Need to get out more
Posts: 4852
Joined: November 22nd, 2009, 10:43 am

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by whizzo » September 3rd, 2011, 11:42 pm

The average difference do not mean a thing, what matters is the specified diameter in the tyre and rim association manual....... and that is where the figures posted come from.

The fact remains neither of roothies trucks are high lifted or fitted with tyres beyond the VSB 14 requirements...in fact I have a very strong suspision that they are both within existing QLD regs.

AND both go plenty of places and both point out that 35 inch tyres and big lifts are a want, not a need.
And the regulators are perfectly sensible in banning both.

cheers

TuffTD42
Here and there
Posts: 32
Joined: June 20th, 2011, 4:43 pm
Location: Orange NSW

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by TuffTD42 » September 4th, 2011, 5:30 pm

I'm running 8" over standard height in my gq lwb & it's all engineered. It drives fine. Brakes,steers,stops & go's around corners without falling over. It has also been on some gnarly angles in the bush & yet to fall over. My combo uses 6" susp & 35" tyres.

I would like to see the NCOP be altered in the way of what combo you can use to achieve that 150mm total lift. I for one are not a fan of body lifts. I think 4" suspension & 35" tyres or 3" susp & 37"s should be allowed.

It seems that some only venture on tracks that only require no more than a 2" lift & standard tyres so they think that's what everybody else should have. Then again I'm out driving those hard tracks. I suppose if I sat at home all day on the computer & blew smoke up everyone's you no what A 2" lift & standard tyres would suffice.

I would like to see roothy drive some of the tracks I drive. I mean drive not winch/drag his rig over the terrain. I give him credit tho he dose well on the tracks he dose drive with the setup he has.

More & more we are being told how to live! What happened to Australia the lucky country? Oh it's now full of do-gooders!
Last edited by TuffTD42 on September 4th, 2011, 6:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

ggreenie
Been here a while
Posts: 471
Joined: November 20th, 2008, 9:49 pm

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by ggreenie » September 4th, 2011, 6:04 pm

peteinoz wrote:
whizzo wrote:

are a want, not a need.

And the regulators are perfectly sensible in banning both.

cheers
well you might aswell ban all modifications to street cars if thats the case, as you point out above, because they are all want and no need.
As well as fishing, skiing, television, alcohol, gambling and motorcycles. In fact anything that is only "a want, not a need." That's the world I want to live in, because banning all that would be "sensible" :rolleyes:

TuffTD42
Here and there
Posts: 32
Joined: June 20th, 2011, 4:43 pm
Location: Orange NSW

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by TuffTD42 » September 4th, 2011, 6:18 pm

I think 90% of people who own 4wds is a want not a need.

whizzo
Need to get out more
Posts: 4852
Joined: November 22nd, 2009, 10:43 am

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by whizzo » September 4th, 2011, 9:36 pm

ggreenie wrote:
peteinoz wrote: well you might as well ban all modifications to street cars if thats the case, as you point out above, because they are all want and no need.
As well as fishing, skiing, television, alcohol, gambling and motorcycles. In fact anything that is only "a want, not a need." That's the world I want to live in, because banning all that would be "sensible" :rolleyes:
That is a completly unreasonable argument.
Fishing is regultated, so is television, alcahol and gambling...probably skiing too.
All have limitations imposed on them, (actully quite heavy ones) for the general good of society.

Compared to the lunitic days of the 60's, 70's and to a certain extent 80's, modification to the extent that are being discussed in this thread have been completly banned for normal street cars in most states for decades.

I think we are very very lucky that we are being allowed the level of modification that we are..and only because its a 4wd.

Face facts, there have to be limitations.....if you cant grasp that you simply do not grasp how society works.

If you were not from the 4WD community, you may very well be asking what possible justification can there be to allow 4wds any sort of special exemptons to the laws that apply to every other vehicle on the road.

Remember everything in our transport system is designed arround certain standardised things about vehicles, one of those critical things is bumper height.....If I run into another vehicle with my standard height 4wd, it will impat on that vehicle at a height that that vehicle was designed to cope with, likewise all our traffic barriers and guard rails are designed arround vehicles in a particular height range, even our lergest and heviest trucks with the biggest wheels have to comply with this.

If government allow too much height increase, particularly in vehicles toward the higer end of the limits we find we would have 4wds capable of causing considerable damage to opposing lower cars, and those trafic barriers instead of retaining or controlling an out of control 4wd, we would find them mounting or overtopping those barriers and rails.

There has to be a limitation........or would you rather live in the wild west where there is no law and order...........if so you are an extreem minority.

cheers

ggreenie
Been here a while
Posts: 471
Joined: November 20th, 2008, 9:49 pm

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by ggreenie » September 4th, 2011, 11:40 pm

Unreasonable argument you say???

There's a big difference between banning something because it's dangerous and banning something just because (and I'm quoting you here whizzo) it's only "a want, not a need". That to me, is an unreasonable argument.

whizzo
Need to get out more
Posts: 4852
Joined: November 22nd, 2009, 10:43 am

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by whizzo » September 4th, 2011, 11:45 pm

The fact is we have to live with reality.

Go on about your nanny state if you like, but where should the limit be or should we be able to fit unlimited lifts and tractor tyres and drive on the road.

There is what is reasonable and has fair benifits compared to the risks involved.

We live in a risk managed society, no point whininging about it, it could be very much worse.

I do not believe my views are opposing to the majority 4wd owners....in fact you will find that the majority of 4wds are infact unmodified.

there are those of us in the middle that beleieve there are moderate modifications that are both worthwhile,yeild good improvement in function and pose very little of a risk for that vehicle or others on the road.

then there is the small minority that want to do what ever that want regardless of how that impacts on others.

Some of what I have been posting is my opinion.....but much of it is simply the way things are going to happen and for very good reason, because that is what is best for the majority good....my opinion matters little in much of this, but I can see the way the wind is blowing and I am not stupid enough to spit into the wind.

As for the aftermarket suppliers going broke...well that is their problem..if they have been promoting products and methods that are marginaly legal or in many cases not legal at all in many states..well they have only themselves to blame.

We all have to adapt to changing times, and all industries have to adapt to changes in regulation....believe me there is plenty of that going on at the moment.

If the accessory companies want to survive, they should have been developing product specificaly packaged to meet these regulations that we have all known were comming.

perhaps now the 4wd market will start using better ,methods to achieve the same results.

perhaps now we will see more demand for vehicles more fit for purpose from point of manufacture.

perhaps now we will see people doing modifications that achieve a result rather than just on the look or for the bragging rights.

Back in the 70's and 80's we were all modifying to acheine more power, better suspension, bigger wheels with lower profile tyres and better brakes...lots of those modifications would be near impossible to do they way they were done then...but most of the standard cars have all those things in a reasonable form from the factory now....yeh I seen it before, and heard the hue and cry..hell I probably made some of those noises myself... but realy it was not all that bad.

Is 150mm of total lift and a 2 inch tyre diameter increase all that hard to live with.

cheers

whizzo
Need to get out more
Posts: 4852
Joined: November 22nd, 2009, 10:43 am

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by whizzo » September 4th, 2011, 11:51 pm

ggreenie wrote:Unreasonable argument you say???

There's a big difference between banning something because it's dangerous and banning something just because (and I'm quoting you here whizzo) it's only "a want, not a need". That to me, is an unreasonable argument.
The fact is that lifting a vehicle more than 6 inches particularly when it is already at the upper end of the bumper height range is dangerous in its self.

Primarily to other users. and that is why it is unlikely that we will see higher lifts approved.

Believe me it will have taken considerable argument and preasure to get the alowable lift up that far...I was expecting far less.

cheers

cockles
Avid Poster
Posts: 684
Joined: July 20th, 2007, 8:02 pm

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by cockles » September 5th, 2011, 12:10 am

whizzo

Opinions are great but don't keep shoving them down everybodies throat and you seem to do this in every thread along these lines. I find that most the guys and girls on here are a great bunch of people and from what you are say hardly any of them are driving a legal vehicles.

I am guessing that you must be in your fifties because you keep referring to you been a lad in the early seventies. Yes we all had some great vehicles back then and had a lot of fun building them up but we were not immune to the police or other government bodies puting them off the road because of defects.It was not a free for all and if you remember safety concerns killed off the Australian factory high preformace car sales because we could not be trusted to drive them.

I don't condone highly lifted unengineered cars but if you think a new VSI/VSB is going to change people from building them,then you are living in a dream world. People wil always push the limits and not take it lying down.


Cheers

whizzo
Need to get out more
Posts: 4852
Joined: November 22nd, 2009, 10:43 am

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by whizzo » September 5th, 2011, 10:28 pm

Its been said that we the 4wd comminity arent getting a fair crack, because we arent organised.

Reading this and similar threads reveals the real reason.......most of the posters do not want to understand how government works nor understand the good reasons why rules and legeslation like this come about.

There is absolutly no point going on with the nanny state, I should be the one making the decisions, it should be bassed on this or that, stuff.

The bottom line is that to have any hope of influencing how this sort of regulation is made, you have to understand what you have a hope of changing and be able to articulate an argument in a way that will be accepted and convincing.

And the same goes for someone on a small scale writting to politicians or up the scale of trepresentatives sitting in the meetings where the details are decided.

The people on the other side of the table, the road safety advocates, the conservative engineers and the others with a conservative axe to grind, most certainly have the ability to articulate a very good and perswasive argument (most of them do it for a living) AND we live in a society where the conservative argument is considerably more favoured.

We have a very worthwhile agenda occuring for standardisation of modification guidelines nationwide.
This is just one of a whole pile of things that are being standarised nationwide, and for very good reasons.
Driver licencing and towing regulations are just two of those things that have occured in recent times.

This national standardisation will come, and it will be stricter than the regulations that have been in some states, and it will be more generous than is currently in some states, that is just the way things happen.

The best we can hope for, it to influence some of those outcomes.

Personally I doubt very much that the maximum 6 inch lift is negociable, likewise any more the 2 inch increase in tyre size is hard to justify against the opposing arguments, similarly a number of other things like the maximum 2 inch body lift and the lane change testing for engineered lifts, either packaged or individual.

What we do have a hope of changing is some of the detail. I believe that it is possible that we may be able to win a total 3 inch unengineered lift including tyres, and we may be able to win a 4 inch suspension lift within the 6 inch total engineered lift.

BUT
We have to be able to articulate that in an acceptable way, and we have to justify it on some sort of basis of need and realistic practice.

In my view a 3 inch unengineered lift being a 2 inch tyre diameter increase and 2 inches by either or both body or suspension lift, would be easy to justify on the basis that the lift is commonly required to allow fitting of taller tyres and the two go hand in hand.

Likewise I can see that it would not be hard to articulate a good enginereing argument that a 4 inch suspension lift within the 6 inch total permissable engineered lift should be alloweed.

But for any hope of that, we have to show an understanding of and sympathy for the rules as they are proposed. Then we have a hope of justifying our proposed changes, on the basis of reasonable need, acceptable risk, public perception and engineering reason.

As for those who are rushing out to get their soon to be noncompliant vehicles, engineered ahead of the changes......those vehicles are insignificant because the vast majority of them will be scrap metal within 5 years.

Those that remain after the changes will continue to be "targets for harassment" and quite rightly so.

Look at the high lifted and big tyres landcruser pictured above..that is what all this is about, the general public and the vast majority want to be "protected" from vehicles like that..and it is very hard to justify such things on a reasonable basis in a forum that matters.....parliment.

In truth most of the general public would not recognise a vehicle with a 3 inch total lift as being modified, and a tastefully done and properly engineered 4 or 6 inch lifted vehicle most of the public would not find threatening.

Think about this when you speak to other people and when you write to your government representatives.

Otherwise we simply confirm their fears and our opinions will be rejected out of hand.

cheers

ERASER
Need to get out more
Posts: 2770
Joined: August 1st, 2008, 9:37 pm

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by ERASER » September 5th, 2011, 10:49 pm

whizzo wrote:As for those who are rushing out to get their soon to be noncompliant vehicles, engineered ahead of the changes......those vehicles are insignificant because the vast majority of them will be scrap metal within 5 years.
LMAO
Heres a little excersie for you. Have a look around for a lc or lj torana thats been engineered with a 350 (something that cant be done anymore) have a look at what their worth. Even if its a rust bucket sitting in someones paddock it will never go to scrap cause its worth to much and will be rebuilt.
Cars that have had the effort of being engineered usually are more looked after and preserved than your stocker run of the mill thats replacable.
my lux is only good for driving through puddles and i dont know anything.........
My Hilux

whizzo
Need to get out more
Posts: 4852
Joined: November 22nd, 2009, 10:43 am

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by whizzo » September 6th, 2011, 1:01 pm

yeh I remember how many of those sort of cars that were arround in the day, truly they are pretty rare these days, and they will continue to be insignificant to the over all argument.

Motor vehicles generaly have a very short life, especially 4wds.

What matters is how the regs are framed and what will be permitted in the future.

cheers

ERASER
Need to get out more
Posts: 2770
Joined: August 1st, 2008, 9:37 pm

Re: VSB14 - National Code of Practice

Unread post by ERASER » September 6th, 2011, 3:33 pm

whizzo wrote:Motor vehicles generaly have a very short life, especially 4wds.
I guess that depends whos hands their in. My daily 4wd is a 1992 solid front and engineered hilux. Its in almost new nick haveing been almost completely rebuilt. Then i have sitting in the garage 1956 and 1957 land rover series 1's.
my lux is only good for driving through puddles and i dont know anything.........
My Hilux

Return to “Anything to do with 4WD's &/or related to Fourby's”