Detailed report with calculations by an engineering signatory.


I won't be doing a destructive test for seat belt mounts in the short term, cannot justify it. I stand behind the certifed report I have, but believe they should show the amounts far exceeding the requirements so that there is no doubt on the strength on the mounts. Basically overdesign the mounts so that they are certified as exceeding the requirements by many multiples. I think most, if not all here would trust seatbelt mounts like that for the safety of themslves, family members & friends. Anyone seen what the seatbelt mounts look like in a Korean production car. (shakes head and walks away)

I do believe in some sort of certification for seat belt mounts, it is a critical safety factor. But destructive tests, have the authorities forgotten that we are talking about Individually Constructed Vehicles here, we are getting a lot closer to production car requirements.

Unfortunately it is a fine line between what is viable financially for a scratch built car, the true essence of ICV's, and safety. With the $1000's required to certify & engineer an ICV, well it has cost me $10,000's per vehicle for the certifications I already have, who could justify a scratch built car now. I would hate to see scratch builts disappear.

Thanks Craig.

Sounds like common sense to me. Hopefully the RTA will agree.

I was quoted 3.5k for seat anchors and 8k for seatbelt anchors.

Zedn,

Did they want to do the testing with seats and belts installed in a completed car or are they doing that test with a bare chassis so it is easier to measure movement of the mounts

Has to be done with the body off for them to be able to fit the test rig in. If its a kit where the body cant be removed then it cant be tested so i dont know what happens there.

It gets done with the seats in (they are destroyed), im not sure about the belts but i think they need to be installed.

They said it may or may not deform the chassis depending on how mounts are designed. If you test the actual chassis it could be weakend and not work when needed in real life.

The RTA say they dont want you to have to destroy the chassis they will accept testing on a prototype. That doesnt help though cause the test is super expensive and you need to virtually build a whole new chassis so it can be held in place for the test.

So $11.5k for testing, $500 for some seats to break, $200 for seat belts, $1k to build a prototype. So $13.5k :eek: then add brake test, noise test and engineering inspections and you are getting near $20k for engineering one car plus you dont know if another test will be required when you have the inspection. eg weld testing, additional tests in ADRs etc.

It is amazing that this issue was a 'no go' area for so long on this Forum. However, I'm not sure if Baz is feeling better or worse!

I checked my "Approval (to commence build) Letter" from late 2007 and it makes no statement either way about compliance being required at 'the point of final inspection', except for the engine.

Wow this thread has had nearly 1400 views. Any more people interested in emailing me?

Thanks to those that have already.

It shouldn't be a problem for Baz because his inspections predate this latest round of stupidity.

I wouldn't even consider preguessing what their next move for Baz may be though.

My car hasn't been inspected because my engineer wouldn't commit his report to paper until he had a formal answer from the RTA on these issues and so far they have only been definitive on the ADR 10-02 column.

There is one Cobra in exactly the same boat as me all tests as they were known completed and passed and another guy that I work with is just starting his tests now.

The difference between ultimate worth of a clubbie or Cobra or other ICV is immaterial in this issue, they wish to make it as difficult as possible to get through.

I recall in Baz's post at the time of getting his RTA report that they were requesting the engineer provide test data for the seat belt anchors. Was this the case Baz?

Accident or Fatality Stats for Cobras
 

Hi Liam.

I have been following the thread with lots of interest. Not yet started by project, and all this approval talk had been getting me a bit scared. So am keen to pitch in somehow if I can. Not that I have any practical experience in this area - yet!

I am a keen motorcyclist, and as a minority road user we often believe we get the short end of the VicRoads - or equivalent - sticks. In the motorcycle context, the road authorities' equivalent of "steering column ADR silliness" is the road accident statistics and associated fear tactics - the stats are misrepresented (who would have thought!) in an apparent attempt to discourage motorcyclists at all. One sure way to reduce fatalities I suppose.

But your comments earlier (quoted above) did remind me that I've been meaning to ask the question about road accident statistics. Given there are no categories for ICVs, can we collect any stats at all on replicas or ICVs especially in relation to fatalities. When lobbying the various road authorities I would imagine this would hold sway - especially up to ministerial levels!

This of-course assumes that these stats are good! %/

My son's mate works at Shannon's so I am asking him to do some research for us, he's off work with a broken hip so I'm not sure when he can get data for us though.

Cool suthol. Be interesting to see. I know some peeps (kids-speak) at QBE and RACV too some to think of it, so I'll ask around.

Will be interesting to see what comes of that Dave,

Guye,

As Benjamin Disraeli said. "There are three types of lies. Lies, Damned lies and statistics."

Response to Seat belt Anchorages query by RTA
 

Hi Liam,

My Engineer stated in his original Certificate quote "ADR5. Seat Belt anchorage locations have been measured..... The strength of the anchorages has been assessed and found to comply with the requirements of this ADR.The RTA in reply equested the following:- "Supply all test data for seat belt anchorages." My Engineer responded in his second Certificate to the RTA... "Calculations for the Seat belt Anchroages are attached confirming compliance with ADR5/04 which has a higher loading requirement than ADR5/05." That was sent to the RTA on the 22/3/2011 and we are still waiting for a response from them, preferably a second Inspection date also.

Baz

I have made enquiries with Lumley's Special Vehicles who comprehensively insure my Cobra, but haven't had much success in that department. I was told that as they had only been conducting business with this type of vehicle for a short time, appropriate records are not available on a compartison basis.. I was informed however, that the risk for ICV's is minimal and this is reflected in the low annual premiums they charge. EG My car:- $500 for $100,000. I suggested to my contact at Lumleys that they look at capturing this type of data e.g. crash, malicious damage, damage by weather factors and other statistics that would highlight the risk comparison between a collectable (ICV) or normal road car.

Baz

I was thinking this morning that, of-course, Lumleys and Shannons would be a logical place to check.

In my experience though, insurers are unlikely to release data of this type that their actuaries would use to formulate their risk profiles and hence premiums. But rest assured they DO collect it, no matter what they say!

That's why using internal contacts is the only way to go we probably still won't get complete stats but a raw stat or two mixeed with what we can otherwise discover (number of ICVs submitted, number of Cobras registered, etc) could be very helpful...

Just had an email from the RTA stating that the inspection guys won't accept engineers calcs or FEA to demonstrate seat mount and seatbelt anchor points are ADR compliant, this was after I forwarded an email to them from their higher authority that stated cals or alternative methods such as a fully tested sacrificial chassis provided empirical evidence of compliance.

They also stated that they would not budge on the column and wheel not meeting ADR10-02.

If you are in NSW and buying a kit or in the process of building now you'd better seek advice from your engineer before you progress too much further.

I wish the news was better because this affects me greatly, I have to cut and shut the chassis for the new column for a start.

Regards
Dave King
Suthol VII

I cannot believe what this has come to. Either the guys at the RTA have such a severe case of 'small man's syndrome' or they are jealous they don't have the ability to do what we do. I am so glad I live in Qld and decided to build mine when i did. Best of luck with all this guys!

Actually I meant to ask a question..... If you buy a car (ICV) from another state can you register it in New South Wales?

Yes you can but you will need the engineers report to be rewritten in the NSW format by a NSW recognised signatory and there are some in all the other states.

Then you present to the RTA with the Pink, Blue & Green slips along with the car and a vast number of beer tokens.

At the whim of the RTA it may be called in to be inspected and may or may not be allowed to have a continuation of rego.

Before anyone asks the obvious question, I don't work for the RTA but have been in telecommunications for nearly 50 years just done heaps of research and know a few people.

Regards
Dave King
Suthol VII