ABS a requirement for ICVs in NSW

[Treeve]

And how is it configured? How have you then proven that it meets the full segment of the ADR without the required testing? How do you know that all of the components will operate together correctly.

THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE SAYING "IT'S EASY JUST DO THIS..." LISTEN UP:

It's not a requirement of the ADR. It's not a requirement for Low Volume Vehicles. It'ss going to add a load more cost to your project if you can find a certifier who will sign off on it, and that the RMS will accept their testing.

So: how about we do the right thing and actually reject this? Otherwise the RMS is back to kicking goals by moving the goal posts for you with no legal right whenever they want. We are back in the bad old days, that's for sure.

[Gaz64]

Technically, the donor ABS system needs to come from a vehicle with the same track and wheelbase.

The recipient vehicle needs to run the same rolling diameter tyres on all four corners, unless some smart aftermarket programming can be employed.

A little story:

Customers car a few years ago.
ABS warning light on, logging codes for rear wheel speed sensors, all next steps were separate jobs, new rear wheel speed sensors, run new shielded harnesses to rear wheels from ABS module away from other wiring, replace ABS module.

Eventually we worked out the fault did not occur until full lock applied while performing a U-turn.

Ends up being programming parameters too stringent for the different wheel speeds while turning. All vehicles of that model then receive a recall notice for ABS module programming update.

Gary

[Hail427]

Originally Posted by Treeve

And how is it configured? How have you then proven that it meets the full segment of the ADR without the required testing? How do you know that all of the components will operate together correctly.

THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE SAYING "IT'S EASY JUST DO THIS..." LISTEN UP:

It's not a requirement of the ADR. It's not a requirement for Low Volume Vehicles. It'ss going to add a load more cost to your project if you can find a certifier who will sign off on it, and that the RMS will accept their testing.

So: how about we do the right thing and actually reject this? Otherwise the RMS is back to kicking goals by moving the goal posts for you with no legal right whenever they want. We are back in the bad old days, that's for sure.

I agree with Treeve lets tell RMS “Worst idea since someone said ‘yeah let’s take this suspiciously large wooden horse into Troy, statues are all the rage this season’.”