ESC mandatory

[Rebel1]

Originally Posted by Merv and Sharon

I guess when the kit manufacturers are busy filling orders they see no need to look further. Seems shortsighted as this country has a capacity to create rules for everything - unlike any country I have ever lived in (except Sweden).

Merv

I guess you're right Merv re the Manufacturers. I was not the Queensland co-ordinator of this initiative but was requested to start the ball rolling as I had the "contacts" at QT and to pass details to the actual co-ordinator.

I felt the initial discussions were quite positive.

What I can say is this ..... I totally agree with Johns view ie. Have the States create a new Classification (John suggested a REPLICA category) because the Classification of ICV if a definition which the States continue to require and they don't like creating exemptions to an already defined standard.

The Hot Rod Federation was successful in convincing the States to create the Hot Rod classification to cater for their vehicles.

Bureaucrats don't like setting standards and then hand out exemptions to those Standards. It's a little like Legislation.

EDIT: For your interest Merv, The object of the exercise was to also set an approved standard of engine emissions and to "lock" those into the new classification. Carby engines were out. The 5Ltr Windsor, either standard injection or mass-flow, 351 Windsors with mass-flow, as well as later model of Ford and GM engines were contemplated. The mass-flow folks provided us with sufficient proof their system would meet requirements.

[Merv and Sharon]

Interesting. The new classification idea is a good one, where we/they could specify a 'type' within a range the features of the replica/s. Could mean of course that we would have to use an all Ford designation in Cobras - small block that is, if a single 'type' was established for traditional Cobras? (Those modern GM motors are the ones to blame for this slide to modernity and all its regulations????)

Seriously though, this seems the right path as you have described it above, and should be the take off point for any future moves. Perhaps at the coming Nationals the State Presidents could get together and discuss some strategies and how the issue could be progressed so that future builders have greater confidence that their vehicles are registerable and feasible from a construction perspective?

Merv

[boxhead]

Hey there Baz,
The rules for the NT are as follows.
First step is to fill out paperwork to apply to build the car, this is called :Approval in Principal"
Once a month the board sits and one of there "jobs" is they go through these forms and either approve or advise on requirements for your build.
Once you have approval for the build (Ie this form is returned to you advising all is ok) then you have 3 years from this date to complete your build.
If you do not get this completed in this time frame, you can apply for an extension, extensions are approved for a further 2 years.
From my understanding this can go for as long as you need (there is a GT40 being built in town that has been ongoing since late 80's and is approved to run quad webbers)
The application is free of charge and so are the extensions.
Of note is that once you make this application, you can then straight away apply for a Vin number (so there is no waiting for this once the car has been engineered)

Regarding street rod rego, I honestly feel this is the way that the Cobra community should be going, I think the cut off year is 1948?
I did look into the idea of street rod rego of my Cobra as a hot rodded AC Bristol, but the Bristol was not old enough.

[sambo]

Edit: Boxhead answered my question, re 1948 cut-off for street rods. I wonder where they got that year from and whether they can be paid to change it?

[Rebel1]

Originally Posted by sambo

Edit: Boxhead answered my question, re 1948 cut-off for street rods. I wonder where they got that year from and whether they can be paid to change it?

Actually Sambo, a little more complex than that:

Definitions
Street Rod: The definition of a Street Rod used in this document is the same as that which appears in the Australian Vehicle Standards Rules, i.e.: “A Street Rod shall mean a vehicle that has a body and frame that were built before 1949, that has been modified for safe road use, or a replica of a vehicle the body and frame of which were built before 1949.”

Notice the subtle replica reference.

[sambo]

Les, and what if in my attempts to create a replica of a Model T Ford, I got the styling a bit wrong and it came out looking more like a 1965 Cobra?

It would be very hard to generically define "replica" without some degree of subjective interpretation.

[Rebel1]

Originally Posted by sambo

Les, and what if in my attempts to create a replica of a Model T Ford, I got the styling a bit wrong and it came out looking more like a 1965 Cobra?

It would be very hard to generically define "replica" without some degree of subjective interpretation.

I think that degree of subjective interpretation would/could only happen in Vic ..... ahmmmm .... Damn, I promised to be good.

Seriously tho, as has been said, it is only the year cut off point which prevents cobras from inclusion with Street Rods.

[sambo]

Then has anyone considered the effort in getting the cutoff year changed for street rods, versus creating a whole new "replica" category?

[boxhead]

Sambo, I dont think this will gel with the street rodders.

Easiest way will be to apply for Cobra clubs to allow Cobra replica's (and there derivatives Daytona) to be treated in the same guise as the street rods.

[sambo]

Well, best of luck to those who are pushing for the new 'replica' category - we all stand to benefit from the effort.

[martrogers]

I made sure I had the emission compliance rule from the NSW RTA in writing before I started my build.

They said that I would have 3 years to complete the build after the build date of the complying donor car. I therefore needed to find a relatively recent write off.

My donor car was build date Oct 04 so I had until Oct 07 to "complete", which I just managed.

They didn't define "complete" so I got my engineer to agree it was complete before he even started testing (which it was). It was actually nearly 12 mths after completion when I finally got number plates, but thats another story.

Of course, they change the rules regularly so this may not be the current rule.

The state system is detrimental to many industries, if the UK can have unified rules and laws for 60m people why can't Australia - unbelievable.

[Zedn]

martrogers,

I believe that is still the current rule, i spoke to Kevin (engineer) in June and he said the same. Now i am not sure what happens when you use a crate motor, i think that it just has to be a current series motor.

When i move the car in about a month to the new house, i am going to organise to take my chassis in for testing whilst i have the car trailer. Im hoping this will be a good opportunity for me to ask some questions about motors, ESC, and i also need to find out about the brakes. Apparently you need to have the entire system from the doner car. Hopefully if i need to use the jaguar master cylinder i can install an adjustment valve of some sort as an unbalanced brake system will make for an exciting 160kph brake test!

In regards to the replica category, i think that is a good idea and i am happy to help make up numbers. Unfortunately i am like any other builder that is not retired and have very little time to spend yelling at a brick wall. As has been previously stated its the Kit Manufacturers that should be thinking about this as it is their full time job. I reckon that if it got to the point that registration was getting too difficult then there might be some action but at this stage everyone seems to get through eventually so maybe its not that bad. No matter what the rules are there will always be hurdles and problems to solve, thats part of the fun. Yes we are limited in what parts we can use but to be honest most of it is for our own safety. Personally i wouldnt install a carby engine even if i could because i find them a PITA (who wants to mess around with setting up floats and drilling jet blanks). Only real thing that worries me is what Baz says that goal posts can move mid build but that seems to only be NSW.

Liam

[Rebel1]

Liam, If I could give you any advice, it is this:

Your engineer is your key to this whole experience. Pass everything past him that has to do with ADR's and compliance.

It is he who will eventually sign the car as compliant to get it registered.

[Baz]

Originally Posted by Rebel1

Liam, If I could give you any advice, it is this:

Your engineer is your key to this whole experience. Pass everything past him that has to do with ADR's and compliance.

It is he who will eventually sign the car as compliant to get it registered.

Les,

I involved myself in this topic with all the good intentions of trying to do something for any person who is contemplating building an ICV in the future, you know, to provide them with a simpler and fairer system, knowing that when you started your build, if you followed certain established guidelines and current ADR's, then Engineering and Registration would only be a formality.

After reading the background of what transpired in the past, I really feel sorry for blokes like the former National Cobra Club President, John Staynski.

He had the guts to speak up while everyone else who would benefit from his hard work, just sat back and waited for a positive result, reluctant to get involved in case they offended someone.

John was representing the Australian Cobra Collective. Unlike the Cobra Collective, the Street Rod Federation planned their action together as a highly cohesive group, each member aiming at the same target and not caring who they offended in order to achieve their desired objectives.

Well I'm a quick learner. I've been through this hoop before and I don't plan on going there again. A lone voice is nothing. It achieves nothing except frustration. On the other hand a large group or organisation which carries with it a number of Electoral Votes speaks far louder. If John Staynski couldn't achieve his dream as the National President, how can I achieve mine as a lone voice.

It's obvious that I'm wasting my time, time which I was prepared to donate to make future builders lives a lot easier.

Liam. Rebel's correct. Talk with your Engineer.

Baz

[Tenrocca]

In NSW now you need to pass an emissions test, which in theory (??) cancels out the need for a engine of a certain era. As long as you can get a particular engine to pass then it is OK to use.

[boxhead]

Baz,
I would not say it is waisting time, but maybe with the Nationals around the corner, a meeting can be organised where all kit suppliers and club presidents who are in attendance can get together for a chat around the round table and try to nut out if as a collective group, they are willing to back someone (like yourself) putting the time, effort and proposals forward to the Australian Gov and make something happen.

[Rebel1]

Baz, You have the fire in the belly which is what is needed to get this thing rolling.

Like you, I'm not backwards when it comes to eyeballing politicians and bureaucrats. My thoughts are that there is no better time than now as many State Governments are a bit on the nose and are looking at expanding their support base. ( read votes)

State governments also have a preference to out-source as they realize in doing so also removes from them the likelyhood of criticism.

John Staszynski knew what was wanted. He was sadly let down by complacency in the various States.

Baz, If you have a desire to take this further feel free to give me a call.

Les

[Rebel1]

Baz, I have just read all the posts again and felt you may have taken offense at my suggestion to Liam to stick with the engineer. That certainly wasn't the case.

My suggestion had nothing to do with your assistance to Liam. In fact goodonya for helping him.

Sadly, some folks ask for assistance on here, do the work, then find the suggestion not to comply with local engineers.

Until this standards fiasco is sorted then many more builders will have similar problems.

[Baz]

Originally Posted by Rebel1

Baz, I have just read all the posts again and felt you may have taken offense at my suggestion to Liam to stick with the engineer. That certainly wasn't the case.

My suggestion had nothing to do with your assistance to Liam. In fact goodonya for helping him.

Sadly, some folks ask for assistance on here, do the work, then find the suggestion not to comply with local engineers.

Until this standards fiasco is sorted then many more builders will have similar problems.

Totally incorrect Les. I haven't taken offence to any of your suggestions, as a matter of fact I welcome them with open arms.

Baz

[*Cobber*]

http://www.kit-cars.com/Kitcarhtml/lawbook.html

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring...le/DG_10014246

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring...cle/DG_4022105