ausmini
https://www.ausmini.com/forums/

signatory engineers or experienced builder question for NSW
https://www.ausmini.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=80336		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  mini3101 [ Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:30 pm ]
Post subject:  signatory engineers or experienced builder question for NSW
hi eneryone,

Hope question is in right location, apologies if it is not :-)

Ok. been going over the VSB14 document and whilst I feel I have most of it under control, i have not been able to find which ADR rules apply to a 1967 Mini deluxe.

The LH document talks about familiarising oneself with the ADR that apply to the vehicle being modified and if the vehicle is pre 1969 to seek appropriate ADR references through the ADR applicability tables on the RVCS website

The earliest I could find in the RVCS website is 1st Jan 1969 and since I have a 67, not sure how the VSB rules apply so... can anyone please advise where I can find the information for a 67 vehicle that is getting an engine conversion done?

if i can get some guidance i would appreciate it

thanks
Author:  meeni [ Tue Feb 12, 2013 4:21 pm ]
Post subject: 
With my car, and bare in mind I'm from Victoria, I have to meet vsb14 but not ADR as such nor emissions regs as its a 62, just general safety requirements, so retractable seat belts, dual speed wipers and all of that stuff.

Here's one of my first emails from my engineer

The project is feasible with the proposed engine configuration. There would need to be a detailed review conducted of all the modifications and the registration requirements applicable. There are no emission requirements applicable, ie. not cat required, however you would be required to conform with the safety upgrade requirements applicable to a power increase > 20%.

Refer to VicRoads VSI8 & NCOP VSB14 for regulations relating to modifications.

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/ ... _ncop.aspx

As I said I'm not sure about nsw but if that helps then all good, best way to go is to contact an engineer because they are going to be the ones signing off on it. Don't start a build without talking to one.


Cheers

Sean
Author:  mickmini [ Tue Feb 12, 2013 8:39 pm ]
Post subject: 
ADRs won't apply since they were not in force at the time.

The only caveat on that may be that the emissions ADRs applicable for the year of manufacture of the engine may need to be complied with.

I have not been through all of the documentation for the new scheme, but the old rules were always that the later of the car or engine emissions ADRs were applicable.

Since this is all a new scheme, it may come down to passing the attitude test with the engineering signatory.

cheers
michael
Author:  mini3101 [ Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:36 am ]
Post subject:  compliance
hi everyone, thank you for the response.

since posting I have contacted the RMS (old RTA) this week and asked them the questions. for anyone interested, the response was great news:

1) the vehicles do NOT need to comply with ADR requirements. only item they need to comply with is VSB14 safety upgrades that are found on page 37-38 (Under section 3) of the LA document under heading "Mandatory Safety Equipment Upgrades for Pre-ADR Vehicles".
By the way, this is only if the engine upgrade has a power increase of more than "... 20% of the original manufacturers most powerful engine option". These safety upgrades go into installation of seat belts, dual brake system, collapsible steering column and a few other items (all doable). Interestingly, these safety upgrades only need to be certified by the engineer.
the written statement to me states "...the certifier must assess the vehicle on it's own merit, we the RMS would accept a compliance certificate that stated your vehicle modifications all met the standards outlined in VSB14". ie: no actual documented test results required

2) other interesting item is "NO Emission testing OR Noise testing required". when the vehicle is taken to the RMS for final testing, if the inspector feels the noise level maybe higher than the standard maximum, he/she may ask you to have it tested however, the test is not required.

all in all it seems to be better than expected from my point of view. all of the above information was given to me in writing from the "Team Leader Technical Inquiries & Audits - Vehicle Standard and Compliance" (RMS-NSW) this week.

hopefully other members might get some benefit from this information.

thank you again for viewing
Author:  meeni [ Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:40 am ]
Post subject: 
Good to hear because that's the same information I have. Pays to ask the authorities like you have because half the info received from outside sources is total crap.

Now hopefully everyone will stop questioning my use of carbs and no cat converter...
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/