63 replies to this topic

[Bigfella237]

Where is that quote from moot?

 

That is certainly news to me and doesn't read at all like the NCOP for Light Vehicle Construction and Modification.

 

And it's definitely not like dear old NSW to relax a regulation!

[Bigfella237]

Ah, thanks mate.

 

What your quote didn't include was that he's talking about ICVs!

 

From the same FB page:

 

Just before Christmas, RMS released Vehicle Standards Information Sheet 53, which defines whether a vehicle is considered to be an Individually Constructed Vehicle or a Modified Production Vehicle. It largely formalises the rules as they already were.

 

As previously explained ( in the quote above ), the "capacity limit" rule that used to apply under the NSW Code of Practice, and the similar rule that is still in the National Code of Practice, is not part of the new definition of an ICV. This means that an increase in engine capacity alone will not make a vehicle individually constructed.

 

As I stated earlier in this thread (post #7), ICVs aren't subject to the same capacity limits as modified production.

 

But I wasn't aware that NSW hadn't taken up the National Code Of Practice (yet), bloody typical...

[Bigfella237]

Damn this gets confusing...

 

From the NSW RMS website, the Vehicle Standards Information No 6 ( download .pdf here ), page 2 says:

 

CODE OF PRACTICE FOR LIGHT VEHICLE MODIFICATIONS

Vehicle Standards Bulletin (VSB) No.14 National Code of Practice for Light Vehicle Construction and Modification outlines the minimum design, construction, installation and performance requirements for modifications to light vehicles, for building individually constructed vehicles (ICVs) and for the certification of certain imported vehicles. Following the guidance provided in VSB 14 will help ensure that work undertaken will meet the standards set down in NSW regulations. Most of the modifications listed in the Order have corresponding practical guidance in VSB No.14.

 

VSB No.14 is available on the [Commonwealth] Department of Infrastructure and Transport website – see page 18 for contact details.

 

This sounds to me a lot like NSW RMS is directing me to look at the NCOP??

[lakeside]

Is anyway of making 400sbc look like a 350sbc so no one could tell difference?

[lakeside]

They do look the same, but the 400 has one less welch plug on the side of the block. 
 
Honestly no one would pick it. 
 
But thats besides the point....

Not all 400's have 3 plugs, some have 2 like the 350

[TempesT]

It reads like that but its not just for ICVs. There are lots of 'loop holes' at the moment. I suggest you talk to a few engineers. You may be surprised

 

correct nsw is a mine field and its all down to what your engineer is willing to take on.

 

It is hard however as the NCOP is being treated like a code of practice or guideline doc. Certifying engineers dont need to follow it word for word but theu have to cross their t's and dot their i's soo much more so when it all goes wrong their ass is covered. Most will just direct you toward the NCOP to keep it easy and relatively low $$$. 

 

Be interesting to know what hoops your being made to jump through following the larger engine capacity route moot

[SamBam]

The 400 block i have is a shp dart block so to answer about welsh plugs ive got 10 in total, with 3 on each side. Bit hard to see in this pic but I'll take another tonight for those interested

Ok so the pic didnt work off my phone ill jump on the lap top tonight and upload it