• Upgrade to XenForo 2.2.15 has completed

Proposed NSW lift standards?

Barry

Forum Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
1,775
Location
Melbourne, Vic.
I received this today from Andrew Stoner.
https://leaders.myelectorate.com.au/crm/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=131&qid=171209
Those in NSW might already be across it. I would assume that whatever goes down in NSW will ultimately affect the rest of the country.

Without wishing to start a 'flame war' (not that it happens on this site, but certainly does elsewhere) but from my perspective the proposed standards seem reasonable for modern vehicles with air bags, etc, like my 05 Outback and later. Even more so for up-market versions with ESC, etc.

Having said that, I'd also reccon that up to 4" would be reasonable for older models without such protection systems.

The advantage, of course, woulb be that, by limiting the 'monster truck' brigade, the rut depth will also be limited. By the time the trucks use their diffs to clear the centre mound we should be able to get raised Subies most places! :biggrin:
 
So - here's a couple of great posts copied here with the writer's permission. Those in the Subie Club will recognise the origins.

"Righto...about time we had an interesting topic on here.
I read the proposed changes. yep, the whole thing.
It is absurd.
VSI50 allows me to self assess my Hyundai Excel and report happily to the RTA that I lowered it 50mm. Oh the joy of driving my excel with tyres sticking through the bonnet. LOL
Now raising my Pajero 50mm...so what? The ride is stiffer as original springs sagged and became ordinary under load. The Polyairs make towing great and simply provides better balance and handling for the vehicle under varying loads. My vehicle doesnt nose dive now when I hit the brakes. Has to be safer than a Ford Fairmont towing a van with standard suspension or a boot load of cement bags...
But based on VSI50, if my pumped up air bags are not immediately deflated after disconecting my van putting me over the 50mm limit I am driving illegally.
If I have this wrong, please correct me.
So the question I put to the current minister for putting small things in paper bags is What precisely is the RTA trying to achieve? Simple question and I never received a response.
Is it safety? BS
Is it better information? Maybe...but to what end?
Is it to impose a compliance regime to simply Camry people off? You bet
Will there be a cost for the RTA to record the modfications? absolutely
Will this give the RTA the ability to increase compliance reporting costs and price us out of our sport and lifestyle? You can see it coming like Julia's pre election "its all about moving forward"
Will this information (Which includes part numbers for components) allow the RTA to, over time, attack those components resulting in a slow but effective change? Yep
Will the 4x4 mod companies make a lot of coin re-modifying vehicles to comply? Absolutely!
Will the 4x4 mod companies then make a ton of coin providing compliant equipment and use the compliance requirements as an excuse to increase pricing? Yep
Does all this suit the Green Agenda? Yep
Does it suit the Pedestrian Council's agenda? Yep
Is Scruby cuddling up tot the RTA and Givernment ministers? Sure is. Clover Moore recently stated that she and the RTA had engaged the Pedestrian safety council to consult on the bike lanes and traffic solutions in the Sydney CBD.
Do the "intellectuals" in the various parties have a single clue? Nope
Did the guy interviewing Stoner ask a stupid question? Nope
Did he look like an inbred? Nope
So, we all agree to shut up and negotiate clandestinely with the 7th roads minister in 6 years and the Zealots in the RTA. Great! I hope they achieve something. I am sure a lot of effort is going into the discussions to reach a compromise...but why is there a need to compromise?
As rough as it is that a child was killed...IT HAPPENS! Was it the nut behind the wheel? Did the parents fail to properly supervise? did the parents fail to teach their child proper road skills? Were there other circumstances that contributed to the crash? Very likely. But its the ammo that some of these people in the RTA have been itching for. It doesnt matter that 4x4's are under represented in crash stats.
Its no different to the communications minister wanting censorship for the internet and publicly statiung that if you dont agree you must like kiddie porn. Its a trump card people. Everyone shuts up! no different here. A child was killed...what if it was yours? Everyone thinks the worse and shuts up. The RTA have noted an intersection near me as a black spot due to 2 fatalaties. It was a street race gone bad and the poor couple were T boned, The twit behind the wheel was doing 180kmh at impact and it was a v6 stock commodore. he lived in my estate sadly. But does that make the intersection a black spot?> nope, but its the justification they need to whack a safety camera up.
So some inarticulate bloke froma 4x4 magazine goes and ruffles a few feathers. Good on him! Are we only meant to present articulate suit wearing lawyer types when interviewing politicians and putting our views forward? No, Our sport / lifestyle attracts people from all walks of life. He was probably more honest and sincere than the politician he was interviewing. Should we be embaressed? No. he didnt swear, pick his nose, use useless inuendo or cliche like Julia the first or second....he just asked the questions...albeit nervously. Good on him! Took guts if you ask me
So what if the politicians dont like it. If there is some threat that this type of pressure (Free speech?) is going to effect negotiations then that is fraud in my opinion and an abuse of power and should be reported to the media and the ICAC.
I wonder what would have happened if everyone said FO to the Government, we are not going to suffer your clandestine meetings, we are going to spend a LOT of money taking the Camry out of you clowns at an individual and collective level until you punt Soames and Scruby and the rest of the clowns in the RTA and fringe dwellers...and provide a decent framework for modifications based on common sense and not knee jerk reactions to coroner reports.
But we are all scared. Why should we be? and a select few properly feel great that they are being asked for their opinion despite a decision probably already being made by the RTA. A few Canapes and Latte's and we are hugging each other LOL.
VSI50, from what I read, requires self analysis and reporting to the RTA. Heaven forbid if you get it wrong, have an accident then need to make an insurance claim. It really gives the insurance companies something to argue with. they currently accept a 50mm lift without any real question...but what will happen now? I thought that was an excellent question from the guy.
Now maybe I am being a tad cynical. Probably...but when you have minister 5 telling the media we are all hoons and coming up with the compliance regime that has the potential to price us out of our sport and lifestyle, and given the history of the current State Government and fringe dwellers like Scruby I am probably well within my rights to be cynical.
Lets see what happens. The Minister for roads # 7 didnt respond to my email. Note that I have an impeccable driving record and drive 40,000kms to 50,000 kms a year on Sydney roads. Bet I have a better driving record than Scruby (Who ran over a pedestrian many years ago I hear) and any of the 7 ministers for roads.
Yours cynical
Craig"
 
and:

"
Now self assesment is terrific...but it also means self liability. You tell them your vehicle is 50mm and you have an accident and kill someone...and your vehicle is at 60mm and the coroner says that you didnt assess properly...guess who is up for the bucks???
The green slip will cover the person run over, but then the insurer has the right to go you - and they will. I know because I have chased people for debts for this type of liability - but they were extreme cases. You need to remember what the motivations are:
1/ The NSW State Government want to increase motorist taxes - one way or another
2/ The NSW " " want to appease the greens and Scruby
3/ The RTA is full of zealots that dont give a Camry about road safety (If they did then they would get rid of the S bend on the M4 where the old toll plaza was for a start). They want 4x4's out!
When I had the Exploder I had to get the pink slip due to size. I recall asking the RTA at the time over the phone why when the vehicle was less than the 3 years old (It changed after that). The bloke on the phone became very caustic and said "Thats what you get for driving a big and heavy 4x4". Word for word. I asked to be put through to a manager and the call was terminated.
That is the mentality we are dealing with. Safety camera's with an A3 size sign. If the accident is a black spot...lets see flashing lights. School zones on multi lane roads where you dont see a kid all day...but the RTA tells the police to police those spots knowing this is the case. Will they re-assess these zones? Nope. Its a cash cow
It reminds me of the great whitch burning in Salem. Not that I was there but xxx may recall the news from that time. Everyone was trying to outdo the other with accusations and pretend fits etc in order to see someone they didnt like, some innocent party, burned at the stake or hung while the lying filth that concocted it all got away with it entirely.
Where is the difference? "
 
Mmm, a Subi club members who hates a Subi owner . :p (On some other sites I frequent it is almost a crime to drive the same brand of vehicle as the said pedestrian. :raspberry:)

On a more serious note, it would seem to make sense to have both minimum and maximum heights for front bars / grills. Logically this these heights would relate to 20 percentile pedestrian height - i.e, the height which 80 percent of pedestrians are taller than.

There seems some logic in attempting to ensure that grills / bars / guards arent at a height that would result in head injuries - or block short people / kids from view. Likewise, surf rod holders forward of the bar.

HOWEVER, all of these are different issues to lift height.

Provided the car is confirmed stable by an engineer and safety features (e.g. air bags) still operate, there is no reason why lift heights (body and/or suspension) should be limited to a total of 2" / 50mm from standard.

Not that I intend to, but a full bullbar with a 2" strut & an additional 2" body lift on my Outback should be pedestrian safe.

Likewise, larger wheels, while not constituting a lift, can significantly raise the height of the vehicle relative to pedestrians.

Standards are one thing, arbitrary figures another.
 
Last edited:
A pedestrian friendly car- that will never make sense to me. Anyone willing to be run over to test the friendship?
 
Back
Top