Interesting info from ACA

[leighaus]

dont start ruining a thread with cop bashing mate.

[wai]

It would be interesting to run the same exercise on a bunch of suburban family vehicles to test things like tyre pressures and general maintenance as these issues can be more harmful when you need to emergency stop/swerve etc

Don't worry, they do. It is just that it does not make for good TV. But then look at the outcry when the same authorities ran random checks on taxis for what the taxi drivers consider to be minor breaches of the rules?

It comes down to this. No matter what vehicle you have, you need to stay within the rules. If you don't like the rules, then try and get things changed. Don't for one minute think you can do what you like because you think you know what it is best and then complain when you get caught and penalised.

No matter which group people might belong to, they will complain if they happen to be targeted for breaches of rules.

[Transporter]

Personally, I don't have a problem with that crackdown.

...and the brides who want the burnouts at the wedding, interesting, perhaps he was the car enthusiast of the future who arrived ahead of his time.

[wai]

...and the brides who want the burnouts at the wedding, interesting, perhaps he was the car enthusiast of the future who arrived ahead of his time.

But herein lies the problem. To allow a car to do burnouts and donuts, you have to modify the braking system (an ADR system) by either fitting a brake bias adjuster (crudely done with a manually operated load proportioning valve - bad enough) or backing off or disconnecting/disabling the rear brakes (just plain stupid). Both of these are illegal and highly dangerous.

Again, if a car owner wanted to do this and be legal, they can engage a consultant to re-test the vehicle to the ADR. It will have to be with the braking system in both extremes of the adjustment range, and I can tell you that NO car would be able to pass the ADR with such modifications. Many of the so-called top performance cars only just make it through the ADR testing.

But there will always be people who will try these things, and there will always be people who get caught and then complain.

I mean, take the silencer bypass systems. They are designed to exceed sound pressure levels otherwise why fit it in the first place, yet those who have them fitted complain when they get caught! For those who say they fit a silencer bypass because they compete in club motorsport as well, such a modified car would more than likely fail scrutineering anyway.

[Blu32]

But herein lies the problem. To allow a car to do burnouts and donuts, you have to modify the braking system (an ADR system) by either fitting a brake bias adjuster (crudely done with a manually operated load proportioning valve - bad enough) or backing off or disconnecting/disabling the rear brakes (just plain stupid). Both of these are illegal and highly dangerous..

Agree that the brake bias adjusters are not necessarily ADR compliant but you don't 'have to' modify the brake system to do burn outs & donuts - all that is needed is enough power & away you go.

[Ben J]

Yeah this annoyed me a bit too. The reported didnt have a clue whatsoever. The guy at the start in the car made a good point, saying that its things like this that make people hate the police. I get that there has to be police that moniter traffic and the safety of cars and they cant all be stopping theft and such, but targetting very nicely done cars and labeling the enthusiast whos put 3 years into rebuilding a car a hoon, even if they arent doing anything hoonish except for driving their pride and joy, is pretty pathetic. Most of these nicely modified cars would actually be safer then half the ****ty bomby standard cars out there that people with no idea/care drive about, with bald flat tyres etc, as enthusiasts actually look after there cars. I cant see how an airfilter probably held on with a hose clamp or something would do more damage them a massive steel bull bar with spot lights, rod holders, winch, antennas etc... They didnt even check the tint right, thats supposed to be done from inside the car.. Id bet that 117db exhaust reading was done far to close or something too, as thats just extreme.

If police targetted all the people who cut people off, tail gate, dont indicate, throw "sick" skids in the rain, ran red lights and were just unsafe drivers in general, instead of doing the easy thing and writing up a stack of fines for the enthusiast with his car hes put a lot of time, effort and money into, the roads would be a much safer place.

[schoona]

For a start, it's ACA.

In my trip to work the last 4 weeks I have spotted at on average 2 HWP in a 50km stretch of road targetting speeding. I myself have lost my licence for 6 months previously (and got defected at the same time) in my Mk3 VR6. I understand what I did wrong and that what I was doing was excessively dangerous all things considered (excessive speed on the freeway around other cars not travelling at the same speed and lacking the correct driving training to operate a car at that speed).

I live next door to a police officer, he is a great man and friendly neighbour and has explained the majority of officers let a lot of things go, the trick is dont dig your self a hole or have a bad attitude.

Now back to the purpose of the story...

On the way to work you see cars in fog and rain with no lights on. Headlights smashed. Physical damage to cars. Loads not tied down correctly. Numerous trailers and caravans where wheels have fallen off. All this sort of thing. Much more dangerous and applicable to every single kilometer you drive than a loud exhaust or dark tint (which as stated wasn't done correctly).

Anyone that has seen the news recently (or at any time for that matter) has seen the devastation caused by wet roads (why are ling long tyres ADR compliant and acceptable given their **** performance especially in wet weather and coilovers aren't and are required to be engineered?), as well as managing fatigue.

The dB test was done wrong for me. Apparently a VR6 with a catback (ok it was a magnaflow) read 104dB. As stated on a log scale, he prelude that read 117dB would be approximately 5 times louder than the VR6. Hmm I dont think so. I didnt read 104, and that Honda wasnt 5 times louder than mine.

Those resources could have been much better used preventing innocent people getting their heads kicked in at pubs, sale of drugs to under 18s (if people want to use them they will, make them legal, tax them...they are never going to win that battle), investigating shootings, tracing thieves etc...the real dangers to the community.

For the people that whinge about a loud car, my R32 sounds better than your 3 year old whinging its tits off and crying at the movies, on a plane, in the shopping centre, next door...you have you're priorities out of order and need a bit of a check up. Do I get to initiate laws/rules and regs regarding your lack of ability to control an infant. Are you unfit for parenting like a car or driver can be deemed unfit for the road?

---------- Post added at 12:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:38 PM ----------

dont start ruining a thread with cop bashing mate.

Given the reasons stated by everyone in this thread, as well as comments on the link on Facebook and the ACA website, as an officer how would you reply given the comments about what is actually dangerous on the road, driver training to handle the weather conditions, the significant increase of death from a lowered or loud car or a protruding airfilter (is the law "must be underneath a scoop"?? if so, how is that any safer than onto the air filter of that falcon, given you have already been hit as a pedestrian, not really in a good place to worry about hitting a scoop or an air filter).

[Mk3 AAA]

These shows get to me, they play on negative stereotypes and are not much more than uninformed conjecture. They feed the "f- off we're full" image of modern Australia, and portray our country as racist meat head bogans, I overheard someone talking about this segment and they referred to it as 'on the news' I think my brain flipped inside out when they said that I truly fear that people believe the puke the spills from these shows into our living rooms, I think these horrid shows need to be held to account on their opinions more often, I hope someone is in a position to financial torture them in the future like how in NZ a similar TV personality was taken down for his small-minded and racist comments.

Of course I don't mean this in light of this article alone, it's the whole show.

[5pot]

On the note of exhaust silencer bypasses... Has anyone realised that they come from the factory in the B7 RS4, the C5 RS6, Ferrari F430, etc, etc? It's not illegal to have them but I think it is illegal if, when they're activated, the exhaust sound level exceeds the legal limit.

[team_v]

On the note of exhaust silencer bypasses... Has anyone realised that they come from the factory in the B7 RS4, the C5 RS6, Ferrari F430, etc, etc? It's not illegal to have them but I think it is illegal if, when they're activated, the exhaust sound level exceeds the legal limit.

The 458 Italia has a bypass valve as well so it uses the middle pipe when you are driving regularly and then opens up all 3 when you floor it.

[DonJuan]

i'm just going to put a sick-as bullbar on the front of my car... should be legal and safe when i hit pedestrians???

[jamesatfish]

On the note of exhaust silencer bypasses... Has anyone realised that they come from the factory in the B7 RS4, the C5 RS6, Ferrari F430, etc, etc? It's not illegal to have them but I think it is illegal if, when they're activated, the exhaust sound level exceeds the legal limit.

The 458 Italia has a bypass valve as well so it uses the middle pipe when you are driving regularly and then opens up all 3 when you floor it.

The ADRs used to determine if a car is legal to import (and as used by most states to determine eligibility for registration) specify the conditions under which noise tests must be made - things like throttle opening, engine RPM, test distance etc. There are two tests - one for vehicles in motion, and the other for stationary vehicles. Vehicle manufacturers know these rules inside-out, and will engineer their cars to ensure they pass these specific tests.

For instance, the stationary test requires that the car be tested at 75% of the RPM at which the vehicle generates maximum power, using only sufficient throttle to hold that engine speed. Most variable valve exhaust systems will open the bypass valves only under certain conditions, such as the selection of a 'sport' mode and/or aggressive throttle openings. The ADR test scenarios do not meet those conditions, hence vehicles with variable exhausts as factory fitment will always be tested in their 'quiet' mode.

The ADRs specifically state that if a vehicle's exhaust does not exceed the ADR limits under the specified testing conditions (i.e. with exhaust in 'quiet mode') then that vehicle is deemed to be fully compliant with the ADRs for noise level, regardless of how loud the exhaust may be outside the test scenarios. By extension, your vehicle cannot legally be defected for excessive exhaust noise if your vehicle will pass the ADR tests, regardless of what how loud it is at redline under WOT or when idling in the RBT queue.

In case anyone is interested in further reading... Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 28/01 - External Noise of Motor Vehicles) 2006