Interesting info from ACA

[greasykitchen]

There's so much wrong with that report it's hard to know where to start.

I wonder how many such roadworthy blitzes take place in areas where BMWs, VWs and Audis (and the like) are more common? And if they occur I wonder if ACA would report on them??

While these cars may technically have defects (in some cases quite minor, it seems) it looks like the police (and ACA) are targetting certain groups of people and areas, but not others.

Also, hitting the front of an old Falcon would probably be more harmful to a pedestrian than hitting the protruding air intake ...

[RolfGolf]

Also, hitting the front of an old Falcon would probably be more harmful to a pedestrian than hitting the protruding air intake ...

For sure ... those cars are in no way made to crumple. You'd be pretty badly damaged as a pedestrian - I'd think a protruding air intake would be the last of your worries if you were unfortunate enough to be hit by such a car.

[wai]

117db is way over the limit.
From memory the noise level has to increase 100% to give an increase of 10db doesn't it?
Surely he would have been able to tell it was too loud.

The decibel scale is logarithmic, so a 3 dB increase is a doubling of the sound pressure level. 117 dB is like the exhaust of a jet engine and would be painful.

The problem is that the majority of the cars that are caught are actually dangerous. Things done are backing off of the rear brakes; fitting of a bake bias adjuster generally with a concealed adjuster; fitting of ultra low profile tyres or tyres that are not suitable for the vehicle; fitting of exhaust muffler bypass devices; protrusions above what is allowed through the bonnet (this is both for pedestrian protection and driver visibility); excessive window tinting; incorrect placement of the exhaust outlets (must be behind any opening window); lowering the suspension; raising the suspension; incorrect lighting; etc. The list goes on.

There is nothing wrong with someone wanting to modify their car. There are rules that have to be followed. Do this and there will be no problems. Unfortunately the majority are done by backyard operators who don't know what they are doing, and they then place other road users at risk. There is no point in complaining if the rules are not followed.

Yes, ACA did sensationalise things, but these operations are conducted on a regular basis. It is only occasionally that the TV cameras are brought in.

[Speed]

I'm glad that I didn't see it when it was on TV, I would have been fuming for days.
What a complete waste of police resources.

Sure I agree with slamming the golf guy - not being able to close his rear door properly but the tints and tail lights on the "subaru" evo,
even the air filter on the XY falcon and especially the valve on the exaust, is hardly going to kill people.

Slow drivers can cause accidents too but you never see police crack down on them.

I was ashamed to be Australian when they had sub titles for the guy that spoke with an aussie accent.

Not a fan of the RMS, especially after what they just put me through. They clearly have no idea about cars and are simply working off a checklist that is very black and white.
Talk about safety, the RMS made me drive 40kms (20 each way), with no plates on the car, just to have the vin no. completed on the 2nd page, even though it was on the first page and in an accompanying letter. I basically could have gone out into the car park and filled it in myself and returned. Complete and utter time wasters.

Absolutely pathethic ratings sham, showing how police have no idea on mods.
I wanted to see someone whip out an engineers report and watch the faces of the present police.

[shakespeare]

Hmmm, never a fan of commercial television current affairs shows as they only report on a snippet of the truth and always they'll broadcast what sells!

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

[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.