24 replies to this topic

[aekOne]

 

 

Hey guys,

Some of you may find this interesting. It’s the revised NSW Light Vehicle Modifications Guidelines which was released by the RMS on the 8th of November 2013.

 

http://www.rms.nsw.g...ds/vsi/vsi6.pdf

 

You can also see all of the latest vehicle standards information here:

 

http://www.rms.nsw.g...si/vsi_dl1.html

 

Cheers

Aek

[SAV84C]

Love page 4 item 5
 
Note:Fitting pressure relief valves or other devices that vent directly to atmosphere is
not allowed
 

 

Examples not requiring certification:

• Alternative exhaust systems that retain the original or equivalent emission control equipment eg headers, mufflers, complete exhaust systems.
• Alternative engine intake and filtration systems that retain the original emission control equipment eg replacement filter elements/assemblies, intercoolers, cold air intakes (This will be interesting with the boys in blue), snorkels.
• Oil separation systems where no part of the PVC system vents to atmosphere.

 

Item 17 - Replacing single-piston callipers with multiple-piston callipers. - Didnt know callipers had pistons

 

[Cam.]

Thanks for posting Aek. Awesome info.

[R-Y]

So you give the car better brakes so it's technically safer and they make that a defect???

[Shaz]

Great article. Just read through the whole thing. 

 

Its good that they put it in plain english for once. 

[LPM_B4]

+1 to what shaz said

 

might even be handy to carry around with you

[Matt]

finally, something that makes sense....awesome!!

[TSG]

The brake piston law is funny, but is one of the oldest laws around (swapping drums with discs etc etc) remember my dad complaining about it being an issue with his Toranas as they generally came with drums. They just don't want people upgrading their brakes to stop a car modified beyond the manufacturers standard without an engineers certificate. It has always been a stupid law because its not directly related. It doesn't apply to substituting brakes available on that model, but its a grey area. And lets face it, if you're driving beyond the capabilities of the stock brakes... you're not following the road rules are you?

[Liberty]

Awesome Aek, thanks for the information. I agree with you Shaz and I must admit it has crossed my mind, LPM_B4, to print a copy of it out in order to cover my ass in case I was to ever be hard done by (which I shouldn't as everything is stock).

[Cam.]

I'm interested to see what will happen in regards to us installing bigger brakes. (WRX/STI) brakes.

Most of the time they can be installed without modifying anything. I can see brakes being installed using adapters being an issue (Upgrading rear brakes)

[Liberty]

I've noticed there is nothing in regards to windows and tinting... Or have I missed something?

[Jimbo]

So what i get from that, intake and exhaust wise, is that you can modify the crap out of it all, so long as the original emission control stuff is still retained? Im guessing the dB of exhausts law hasn't changed, so in theory you could have a full 3" zorst with a cat to similar specs (who would ever know) of stock and have a quite muffler and your sweet.

Would an airbox be classed as emission control equipment though?

[Shaz]

Rules for tinting doesn't looked to have changed. Still 35% VLT for passenger vehicles according to Aeks 2nd link. 

[SAV84C]

So what i get from that, intake and exhaust wise, is that you can modify the crap out of it all, so long as the original emission control stuff is still retained? Im guessing the dB of exhausts law hasn't changed, so in theory you could have a full 3" zorst with a cat to similar specs (who would ever know) of stock and have a quite muffler and your sweet.

Would an airbox be classed as emission control equipment though?

I'd say that would come under the EPA for noise...

Some cars come with pod filters from factory only theyre just in an airbox like the VW engines.

This amazes me though coz ive heard the popo get some ppl with enclosed pods saying they fail ADR rule XXX

[Liberty]

Rules for tinting doesn't looked to have changed. Still 35% VLT for passenger vehicles according to Aeks 2nd link. 

 

My bad. I didn't click the second link. Cheers Shaz. Read my private message when you get a chance (I know, I'm a pain in the ass).

[Tim.]

I dunno, better brakes have saved me from a couple of accidents. And most likely caused a few from pulling up too quickly.

[Samwise]

So strut braces and uprated sway bars and what not don't need certification.. Didn't some get a defect for one recently?

 

Coilovers look to be fine? It's just if you convert to leaf springs, then you need a certificate.

 

This really clears shit up!

[Beejay667]

Didn't know that a rear diff (ratio) swap required a Eng Cert.

[93tzlegacy]

Didn't know that a rear diff (ratio) swap required a Eng Cert.

in a Subaru it wont, as the speedo output is the same through out all transmissions, the final drive and speedo output  are matched within the gearbox.

 

Examples not requiring certification: • Alteration of gearbox ratio if final drive ratio not affected. • Where speed sensing is independent of driveline. • Where change of final drive ratio includes speedometer correction device or matching speedometer drive and driven gears.

 

 

 

 

people really need to read all the rules before jumping the gun, it specifically mentions you can fit bigger brakes from the same model 
( it uses torana's for the example but its very easy to interpret)  ( wrx - sti , impreza - wrx, etc, forester sti had brembo's, liberty sti also had brembo's, ,

[Tim.]

Coilovers look to be fine? It's just if you convert to leaf springs, then you need a certificate

 

There are requirements around coilovers and changes to the suspension. These are outlined in VSI 50 which hasn't been published yet. This is the document which has been causing so much fuss with the 4WD community and is the one they wish to make mandatory nationwide. There are a few drafts floating around the internet

 

http://www.arb.com.a...ng Vehicles.pdf