Dangerous modifications. What’s your mind set?

[Tombie]

This is to keep other threads from being contaminated!.

I read the build threads on this site and find many of them truly works of art. High quality workmanship, fantastic eye for detail etc.

And then there are those modifications, you know the ones... ADRs won’t like them, your local Constabulary may well frown upon them etc etc.

These tend to fall into a few categories:
1) Engineerable - well thought out, safe, sensible. A quick engineers check, some $ over the counter and all good.

2) Questionable! Poorly executed, impacts handling, performance etc things like huge wheels on stock brakes, ridiculous lift kits that make the vehicle handle like a Hippo giving a lap dance, let alone make an emergency manoeuvre.

3) Potentially fatal... There have been a few of these over the years. And the owner / constructors seem to be willing to take huge risks, both to themselves and others around them.

A common example is custom fabricated / non-SRS tested / non complianced Front Bar work:

Now, some of this work is phenomenal, top quality, great designs, you name it. But what doesn’t get considered is what happens in an impact - Off AND On road.

Off road, that stump or rock could now trigger the bags unexpectedly.
On road, in a collision, it could change the crash pulse with one of 3 scenarios - all potentially fatal.
(1) bags don’t deploy, inertia belts don’t retract.

(2) Bags deploy early, occupants have only just begun to lurch forward and the bags are already in deflation and provide no safety restrain.

(3) *this one really hurts* the bags deploy late... I can’t stress how dangerous this really is...
SRS systems deploy with the force of a military claymore - yes - that explosive, and that powerful.
It’s the reason (primarily) women or those with shorter legs and sit closer - often end up with broken ribs in an event resulting in bag deployment. SRS have also punctured lungs, broken jaws and noses.

If your loved one sits closer than needed to safely control the vehicle; ask them to adjust their seating position - it may just save their life.

And if you have a passenger that likes to do feet on the dash - DONT... without bags it’s highly risky, with them deadly.

Who here would drive with a Claymore attached face up on the steering wheel? We see collisions everywhere everyday. What makes it unlikely to be you? If you’re that confident, Why do you have insurance?

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180702/8bc80751827af50699c08f2e33bf48cb.jpg

Home modifiers can to some level test braking and handling. But none build a Bar and then crash for fun or to test it. How can you be sure it’s truly safe?

Which leads to Duty of Care etc... let’s see what scares you more [emoji6]
If you crash, and the compliant bar was fitted, the bags may not trigger (insufficient velocity/decel etc) and you may be able to steer out the collision. What happens if the untested bar triggers the bag, taking hands off the wheel and making a mild accident worse.

Or the “would you like to work for me?” Scenario.

Legally - you’re no longer insured, or allowed to have that vehicle on the road.
So you have a collision (even if it’s not your fault - it is now because your non-roadworthy vehicle shouldn’t be there).
What’s worse - you broke your nose and ribs, and those of your passenger - and insurance won’t cover the bills, or pay for ongoing treatment.
Then you realise you hit a top end Euro, your insurance is void and you now owe several years wages to the other driver. Except they want their money now - so you lose your other cars, toys, house, savings... and in that impact you broke the passengers leg and ribs - so you’re being sued for the injuries and ongoing medical issues.

Yes it does happen. I’ve seen it happen. I know assessor who look for this sort of thing.

Is your life, your families, or ANY other persons life worth a non-tested bit of steel fabrication (in this case)?


Please think before you lose sight of the REAL risks.

You wouldn’t drive with that Claymore on your wheel and the trigger across the front bumper as a trip wire. So why would you treat the SRS system with such contempt?

For your viewing pleasure: (only difference is these fools don’t have it in front of them whilst driving)
YouTube (https://youtu.be/HcbAjopKLOs)

[DieSchnelleKafer]

In case anyone is wondering, Tombie has taken the effort to write all of this in reply my comments on my build thread. see this page:

Project Roverkill D2a (https://www.aulro.com/afvb/projects-and-tutorials/235630-project-roverkill-d2a-5.html)

I stated later on in that thread that i do not have the energy to deal with this topic. I have faith in the engineering, design and thought process of my work.

I post to this forum the work that i do in hopes people may take something from it and gather some ideas for themselves. What really happens is that i post my work and then someone like Tombie decides that he will devote his WHOLE MONDAY NIGHT to chopping it down and asserting his moral authority upon it.

Christ dude, give it a break.

[Tombie]

Actually nothing of the sort...

But if that shoe fits, lace it up and wear it.

Yes, your thread prompted the question, and I made a thread to avoid debating it in your build space.

However - argue / debate away -

How about sharing with us if you will what Engineering / modelling was done on your fabrication to ensure that the crash pulse remains consistent with factory crash parameters.

As I said on YOUR thread - I’m concerned - that people such as yourself - don’t give the risk the due diligence it deserves, but rather just a bit of lip service like another’s response “pull the fuse”.

I’m also concerned that people may go on to replicate such designs without realising risks...

You do realise what is posted here has potential repercussions on those providing advice should something go badly. Hence builds need continual comments advising people who may feel compelled to replicate certain things.


And in context of “letting it go”... as a general rule I do - I figured this one was an important topic to discuss and bring to the fore.

I hope I never meet one of these types of vehicles, that one time, when it all goes wrong.

If you work in a role where You have liability you’d more than understand what I’m saying.

Be safe.

[p38arover]

I've already had to delete one post from this thread.

Keep it civil chaps.

[Tombie]

Whole Monday night? Calm Blair...

Took about 5 minutes to write, between shed time, looking after the Grandson, and having dinner.

The fact you’ve gone on the outright attack - dobbed your thread in - would suggest it may have struck a chord....

Just be safe... nobody is saying your work isn’t top shelf.

[Tombie]

I've already had to delete one post from this thread.

Keep it civil chaps.

Yeah got the email notification... much amusing!

[DieSchnelleKafer]

Whole Monday night? Calm Blair...

Took about 5 minutes to write, between shed time, looking after the Grandson, and having dinner.

The fact you’ve gone on the outright attack - dobbed your thread in - would suggest it may have struck a chord....

Just be safe... nobody is saying your work isn’t top shelf.


i give up. You are not right in the head.

[Tombie]

i give up. You are not right in the head.

An interesting observation.... care to elaborate?
Or is this just your normal modus operandi?

It would seem you’re a bit Triggered at the moment; my apologies for creating a thread on risk aversion and our hobby.

You could actually contribute constructively, if you wished - the design you came up with, considerations during construction etc. your mechanical engineering background would be an asset in this regard.

We can even move it onto other commonly available items out there... it’s not all about you Blair.

[Eevo]

I have faith in the engineering, design and thought process of my work.

great, go get an engineering cert for it and put us all at ease.

[Tombie]

great, go get an engineering cert for it and put us all at ease.

Whilst I agree, let’s keep to general discussion please.

Why do people perceive certain risks as “non-critical”.

An example: I never want the potential to be sued and lose everything I’ve worked towards in my life. Or be saddled with debt going forward should something go awry.

Hence all my builds have been certified and plated where required.

[p38arover]

i give up. You are not right in the head.

I said keep it civil! :bat:

[prelude]

Although it does worry me a bit I must say that I do not know what the alternative is?

I have a P38 range rover and ARB has very long since stopped making a bar for that vehicle, no one makes one and to put it simply: I can not go without one. The plastic POS that does a good job of correcting the aerodynamics of that container on wheels a tad bit does nothing else of value (ok perhaps looks) but it will not survive a few days of bush (been there, done that) not to mention I need to mount my winch somehow?

So, yeah, airbags are the only thing I worry about. Specifically: them going of when I do not want them to so I have considered disabling them all together. Not sure how to do that and certainly not without the dash lighting up like a christmas tree which will give me trouble with the next MOT so I left it as is for now.

Other that that I think that weight is the biggest problem on custom build vehicles. I am of the opinion however that when one uses his or her brains you can get things build quite well without added risk.

-P

[Homestar]

A couple of points to the original post, the bit about not being covered as far as injury goes is wrong - just like work cover, traffic accident insurance is a no fault system - if you were in a registered vehicle at the time, no matter if it is legal or not you will be medically treated to the extent it covers (what that is and how farit doesn't go is a different matter), the insurance to cover damage is a different story.

As for insurance assesors, yes most will look for these sort of things if the vehicle is at fault, not too much scrutiny is given to the other vehicles that I've seen or heard of from a couple of people I know, but in general insurers will look for ways to avoid paying.

Now, what am I prepared to do? Well, none of my own vehicles have airbags so thats a moot point, and I will be having a VERY bad day if I'm involved in an accident in the 101 that's for sure, but my driving style takes this into account. I've modified the brakes to improve them, I'm happy within myself knowing what I've done and how it was done. I don't recommend the things I've done to people that ask too many questions because that to me shows they aren't up to the task if they need to know every detail, but that's just me.

I do think in general that we have turned into a pack of sooks and nannys when it comes to this sort of thing to be honest, you can't and shoukdn't try and protect people from themselves IMO. Driving a motor vehicle is inhenently dangerous to start with, we all know this and we all still happy to jump into one every day. How many people actually die from badly modified vehicles in the grand scheme of things? Very few compared to everything else going on in the world. If those that modify their vehicles are happy with what they are doing, who am I to argue?

Should we crucify those that make decisions different to our own? No, I wouldn't. Different people are happy with different kevels of risk. Be that with how they modify thier vehciles or anything else in life.

[trout1105]

I have an ARB winch/bull bar fitted to my D2a and it is attached to the truck using specially designed "Crush Cans" to enable the air bags to deploy correctly in the event of a frontal impact, I can't recall seeing anything like these "Crush Cans" fitted on home made/self engineered bull bars.
Maybe If the home made bars were to designed so that these specially designed crush cans can be used to fit it then that would make them a lot safer as far as the deployment of the air bags are concerned?

[ozscott]

I recall when fitting my TJM winch bar to my D2 the same thing Trout noted with his ARB - removal of the alloy crush cans and replacement of those with TJM steel bracket plates that had a wave design. Both companies did a lot of design and testing to keep the air bag deployment the same as a stock front end.

I hope our SA mate keeps posting because his work is first class but at the same time Tombie's post raises some good points (although as Homestar says it doesn't necessarily cause issues with CTP insurance in Qld at least and the argument that an insurer can deny indemnity on the basis that the vehicle should not have been on the road in the first place due to being unroadworthy is questionable - but given that Qld CTP doesn't cover you in all places - like private property - and a fixed bar to chassis might reasonably increase property damage (and therefore loss) and insurer might well have a good argument to deny or reduce indemnify for property damage and as such personally I would not have a vehicle that wasn't roadworthy in terms of front bar work).

Cheers

[djam1]

I agree with Mike its all fun until someone gets killed
Ever had the Coroner go through a company or situation when someone gets killed?
Not good, D2s are cheap if you trash it buy another one and live on

[bsperka]

I agree with Mike. Any mod that compromises safety is unacceptable. That's why the car based road toll is so low now compared to 20 years ago - proper engineering. Pedestrians, cyclists and motor bike riders make up a bigger percentage than previously though.

[DAMINK]

Interesting thread.
My first thought was, well im guilty of doing exactly as thread indicates. Working outside whats "acceptable". My bar is not legal, my rear bar was totally made by me. Among other things.
My second thought was what about all the cars that get sold which are faulty? You complain about a front bar that may effect the air bags right? What about the gazillion NEW airbags that are infact deadly!
There are always recalls over faulty cars.

[vee8auto]

In response to the original query: what's my mind set? I know the forum would be a better place if people didnt take it on themselves to be the Sheriff on matters such as this.

If someone disagrees with your input, and they may have knowledge or genuine experiences that contradict yours, dont take it as a throwing down of the gauntlet, or a slap in the face, and then proceed to chase them all over the forum for years afterwards. Just practice a bit of wisdom and personal control and let their own experience take them wherever it goes.

The balance is knowing when you have moved past legitimate input and into the phase of vengeful malice.

What I see in this case is another example of why I rarely come on this forum anymore. I have just witnessed an escalation of a rebuttal and it turning into a thousand word spitting multi-post hammering. So, tombie, have a bit of honesty with yourself, who has really been triggered here?

Meanwhile the moderators are either too blind or too closely tied to the perpetrator to man-up and deal with the rot that permeates the forum.

I called it out recently, Tombie is the forum Troll, and its to the detriment of the forum.

[Tombie]

Interesting point of view.

No Sheriff in play - Nothing about ceasing any work occurred, concern was expressed about their safety.
Then to keep it away from the aforementioned build thread this one was created so that the thread stands on its own to avoid contamination of the other.

All it asked, was what do people consider as acceptable risk, and the SRS discussion is one of the most common facing modern vehicles being modified.

The other poster then took it as an afront to their sensitivities and went on the attack. Yet they have Mechanical and Engjneering aptitude And could provide great insight into their methodology.

Are you missing the ongoing recognition of their quality of work?


Perhaps if a few of you had to scrape a person out of a vehicle or a piece of plant, to pick up the broken pieces that once were part of a human, or participating in ICAMs and investigations due to death and injury - you may just understand how it plays out in this modern world. It’s not pretty at times.

Sure there are plenty of poorly maintained and certainly more dangerous vehicles running around out there, that’s not the core of this post - it’s to understand how and why people arrive at the choices they do with regards to risk - perhaps even why people choose to thumb their nose at some legislation whilst abiding by other parts of it.

Personally I think if consideration is made during design, then it’s likely not a public problem as it’s impact is only on the vehicle operator and occupants, not the general public.

There are risk takers in this world, adventure seekers there are also cautious people. There are those who like the freedom of creating their own work or bending rules where perceived to be acceptable.

That is what this thread is about. Understanding those factors - not attacking individuals for creative builds.

It also highlights some interesting legal potential - forum owners are quite protected under legislation. But what if, Somebody recommends a course of action or modification, and you do it and something goes wrong?
We touched on it in the Gunshot thread - there are liability issues.

There’s an old saying that contains “Walk a mile in their shoes”.
I probably need to heed that also.

(Back to the Bridge)

[ozscott]

Tombie is far from a Troll. Blunt he is but that's a good thing in my view. It's a good thread he started and he did it away from the build thread. I dont always agree with what Tombie has to say (often I do agree) but I like that with his experience and logic he continues to contribute. Ps. D2's were the best 4wd LR made and you know it Mike. [emoji847]

Cheers

[Tombie]

Interesting thread.
My first thought was, well im guilty of doing exactly as thread indicates. Working outside whats "acceptable". My bar is not legal, my rear bar was totally made by me. Among other things.
My second thought was what about all the cars that get sold which are faulty? You complain about a front bar that may effect the air bags right? What about the gazillion NEW airbags that are infact deadly!
There are always recalls over faulty cars.

Excellent response.

Only correction - I'm concerned about SRS, not complaining - the only people it can injure are the vehicle occupants.
Its more about understanding the risk acceptance on certain things - SRS is just one of the most applicable for modern 4wd enthusiasts when it comes to customising.


And yes, those recent airbag recalls are seriously concerning! I know a few people who refused to drive their vehicles until the bags were replaced.

[DAMINK]

To more directly answer to your questions. As im a guilty party as far as mods is concerned.

I am unemployed. On a nutter pension infact. Father of 4 so money is not my friend.
I have mates who have all the "Kit" and beast cars. I know im never going to afford to buy a new 4x4 with all the arb stuff. Just not gunna happen.
So i find myself where i am. I want a bullbar but cant afford a "Real" one so i get a cheapy and mod it to suit.
Cant afford to pay a professional to do the work so i do it myself. Cheap and nasty at times. This applies to all mods on my car basically.

My wifes car is a little different. I do all the mechanical work but we dont do risky stuff like i do on my car. Anything that needs replacing gets replaced with original.
That car drives the family around on a day to day basis though.

Now to address the risks.
Most of the time i drive my car offroad. Its basically built for that. And to be honest im glad i have done what i have done. My work has saved the car many times.
An after market incorrect bullbar has moved on roos that would otherwise have damaged my car. Its taken the bark off trees more times that i can count.
Serves as a good mounting point for things that otherwise could not be mounted.

My rear bar has smashed into rocky sides of the mountain on countless occasions. Hit countless trees etc etc. Its a beast and has saved my rear every time.

I get to have my fun like others do on a shoe string budget. Yea i break the "rules" but hey.

[Tombie]

Tombie is far from a Troll. Blunt he is but that's a good thing in my view. It's a good thread he started and he did it away from the build thread. I dont always agree with what Tombie has to say (often I do agree) but I like that with his experience and logic he continues to contribute. Ps. D2's were the best 4wd LR made and you know it Mike. [emoji847]

Cheers

Still have our D2 in the family! Its my sons vehicle now. And you're correct, they are a fantastic vehicle.

Thanks for the kind words Scott, I do troll occasionally - to shake things up, or **** stir the pot and get things being discussed a bit. if other users disapprove thats perfectly understandable too. Some **** stir in their posts, some in their profiles...

The best thing about this place is the mix of knowledge, experience, careers, qualifications and age diversity.
We have Doctors, Engineers, Scientists, Fitters, Mechanics, Stick Burners, Accountants, Lawyers, Low Voltage Plumbers, Miners, Road workers, Electricians the list keeps on going.
We have subject matter experts in all things "Rivet Counting" and those who know the later vehicles very well.

We have those who are very elequent wordsmiths, and those that are blunt like a hammer.

It takes all sorts to make a community - even the court jester!

[Eevo]

My second thought was what about all the cars that get sold which are faulty? You complain about a front bar that may effect the air bags right? What about the gazillion NEW airbags that are infact deadly!
There are always recalls over faulty cars.

and the manufacturer is legally liable.

[DAMINK]

and the manufacturer is legally liable.

Im only 45 so a pup here but in my short time i have seen the big car companies dodge responsibility time after time.
There willingness to hide faults despite knowing of the consequences and reluctance to abide by decisions made.

Dunno man thats just my view, i could be wrong.

[Tombie]

Im only 45 so a pup here but in my short time i have seen the big car companies dodge responsibility time after time.
There willingness to hide faults despite knowing of the consequences and reluctance to abide by decisions made.

Dunno man thats just my view, i could be wrong.

I like your responses and views, you share experiences openly, very refreshing.

And you clearly explain your reasoning.

I appreciated your contributions - you certainly made me consider a few of my positions in the Legal thread!

[p38arover]

Meanwhile the moderators are either too blind or too closely tied to the perpetrator to man-up and deal with the rot that permeates the forum.

I take that as an insult and an attack on my integrity.

I've never met Tombie, and, until yesterday, had no correspondence with him nor do I have any ties to him. You obviously didn't see the post I deleted.

[Homestar]

Meanwhile the moderators are either too blind or too closely tied to the perpetrator to man-up and deal with the rot that permeates the forum.

I called it out recently, Tombie is the forum Troll, and its to the detriment of the forum.

Not cool at all mate, way out of line IMO. If you have an issue about something that is said here, report it and discuss it with the Mods. Knowing someone on this forum does not make them immune to the rules which has been shown time and again. I would consider what you've said here an attack on the Mod team which is a huge no no. Also verges on a personal attack but my guess is Tombie has a thick enough skin to shrug this off with a bit of a giggle and nothing more, but still out of line.

[Disco-tastic]

Saw this a while ago. highlights the split second timing required for an airbag to work effectively


https://youtu.be/QS6ywFGcLSk

[101RRS]

Is it too late to get the popcorn :ehigh5::ehigh5:

Garry

[Homestar]

Is it too late to get the popcorn :ehigh5::ehigh5:

Garry

Not at all, go get a bag, find a comfy chair and enjoy...

[Tombie]

Is it too late to get the popcorn :ehigh5::ehigh5:

Garry

Probably. [emoji6]

I hold no malice towards anyone who has taken task of what I wrote.

Out of every 10 people there are at least 3 who don’t like me and I’m good with that.

Please, just keep to the discussion of your opinions on risk... where do you draw the line etc.
Things like un-encased Heim joint suspension links, big lifts, unapproved modifications etc.
Reasons why you believe what you do - or why you’re willing or not willing to chance certain things.

Another example is riding motorcycles without full PPE.
Around town I wear closed footwear and a helmet with jeans and T-shirt; I consider that acceptable. On the highway it’s all the gear, all the time. Strange hey!

[scarry]

Tombie is correct about sitting close up to the dash or steering wheel causing injuries from air bags.
My SIL has one permanently badly damaged eye as a result of exactly that.
The ambos did say sunglasses often save eye injuries,but for some reason that day she didn’t have them on.Whether that is true(about the sunglasses),or not,who knows.
She was in a Stock GU patrol,head on into another GU,stock.Both towing large vans.

Good thread,keep up the (sensible) banter[biggrin]

[Gordie]

Probably. [emoji6]

Another example is riding motorcycles without full PPE.
Around town I wear closed footwear and a helmet with jeans and T-shirt; I consider that acceptable. On the highway it’s all the gear, all the time. Strange hey!Wow...going by your other h & s views, I am amazed. [wink11] I have come off a bike at about 40kph, and at the time had all protective gear on, jacket, Kevlar pants, gloves, helmet....I only suffered broken ribs...the aggresive surface of the road I was on, would have given me some pretty bad scrapes.....am really glad I had that gear on and even on a stinkin hot day, won't go in just t shirt.

[DAMINK]

Wow...going by your other h & s views, I am amazed. [wink11] I have come off a bike at about 40kph, and at the time had all protective gear on, jacket, Kevlar pants, gloves, helmet....I only suffered broken ribs...the aggresive surface of the road I was on, would have given me some pretty bad scrapes.....am really glad I had that gear on and even on a stinkin hot day, won't go in just t shirt.

I dropped my old Gixxer 1000 doing 100kms on a road. Highsided and slid down the road for a long way and into a car which was stopping after seeing the accident.
Cut my hand ever so slightly, did wear a hole in my pants bum that wore into my leather wallet.

Was wearing a jacket and steel caps, normal pants and no gloves. Some people are lucky and some are not.

[Gordie]

I dropped my old Gixxer 1000 doing 100kms on a road. Highsided and slid down the road for a long way and into a car which was stopping after seeing the accident.
Cut my hand ever so slightly, did wear a hole in my pants bum that wore into my leather wallet.

Was wearing a jacket and steel caps, normal pants and no gloves. Some people are lucky and some are not.Sounds like one of the luckiest days in your life mate!! And it would seem your leathers did save your butt!![thumbsupbig]

[DAMINK]

Sounds like one of the luckiest days in your life mate!! And it would seem your leathers did save your butt!![thumbsupbig]

And i still own that exact wallet. Cant get rid of it.

141858

To add to the story as i just cant help not tell it as it shows there are loads of good people everywhere.

I dropped my beloved bike and slid down the road. People behind all come to a stop. I had to do the walk of shame back to my bike. I will NEVER forget that walk.
A lady runs up to me and checks to make sure im ok, she tells me she is a nurse and is here to help me. Then proceeds to help me move my bike off the road!
We are standing there and she is chatting away with me when i say, damn not sure how im going to get my bike home.
She says "Its ok when you fell off i called my husband and he is on his way!"
No fooling 5 minutes later he is there with a trailer and bang bike is on and there driving me home! I got home 20 minutes later than i normally would!

They would not accept any money for helping me. Just the goodness of there hearts!

[incisor]

Meanwhile the moderators are either too blind or too closely tied to the perpetrator to man-up and deal with the rot that permeates the forum.

i will not tolerate people having a shot at the moderating team on AULRO.com and vee8auto has earned a deserved weeks holiday....

a statement like the above just shows that some people have absolutely no idea how the moderation process works on AULRO.com

no one is above the guidelines on AULRO, even i cop it at times..

if you have an issue with a post or the way something is handled, report the post and the moderators have to deal with it.

thank you for your time

[Pedro_The_Swift]

Meanwhile the moderators are either too blind or too closely tied to the perpetrator to man-up and deal with the rot that permeates the forum.




Wow, come home from work to this--

Nothing like insulting 30 odd Forum volunteers hey,,

There are many Mods/Admins here that spend many hours a week keeping this place open and up to AULRO standard.

They dont deserve to be insulted by anyone,,,



You have a problem with something on this Forum vee8auto ??

REPORT IT.

[Tombie]

Wow...going by your other h & s views, I am amazed. [wink11] I have come off a bike at about 40kph, and at the time had all protective gear on, jacket, Kevlar pants, gloves, helmet....I only suffered broken ribs...the aggresive surface of the road I was on, would have given me some pretty bad scrapes.....am really glad I had that gear on and even on a stinkin hot day, won't go in just t shirt.

I know right [emoji848], it’s an anomaly in my thinking for sure. It’s the core of this thread.

I’m a road rider only, never was game to really give dirt bikes a go after coming off as a teen. And I’ve never (touch wood) put a bike down or come off in 30 years of road riding. (I’ve popped a knee cap clipping a car in my teens)

My reasoning (for lack of a better term):
I ride only in the 60 or less zones around home,
Traffic here is very light even at its peak,
Lycra mob only wear Lycra and a little dot of foam and reach similar speeds - nobody sees their PPE as substandard.
If they come off at 60 and so do I, my only concern is the mass of my bike.

Add to that it’s bloody hot a lot of the time.

As soon as I go to head anywhere faster - all the gear.

[Eevo]

i

a statement like the above just shows that some people have absolutely no idea how the moderation process works on AULRO.com

there is a moderation process?

[Gordie]

I know right [emoji848],
My reasoning (for lack of a better term):
I ride only in the 60 or less zones around home,
Traffic here is very light even at its peak,
Lycra mob only wear Lycra and a little dot of foam and reach similar speeds - nobody sees their PPE as substandard.
If they come off at 60 and so do I, my only concern is the mass of my bike..Just to clarify, it was a bitumen rd I was on, and I was very glad to be sliding across it in my jacket! I was actually peeved that my new jacket was getting scraped!! Pretty sure had I not had it on, instead of getting up, straightening the handle bars and heading home, I would have been in hospital.

[AK83]

Also used too follow the D2a build thread. The OPs attitude changed that tho(more so in this thread too tho).

But it took all of about 3 sec to search for bullbar ADR specs, one pdf link quickly found relating to WA DoT specs.

While the OP(I think it was Blair?) may think he's confident his bar is fine, the WA DoT regs clearly state it's not!

WA DoT bullbar design specs (https://www.transport.wa.gov.au/mediaFiles/licensing/LBU_VS_CI_112.pdf)


" ... The front face of the bull bar should not lean outward from the vehicle."

And as Trout said, and I immediately noticed too, no crush zone on the mount to the chassis!
Brother has a TJM bar on his D2(came on car), and as already said, it has a wave pattern mounting section to replicate the D2 crush cans .. and a separate winch carrier(as I think I remember it).


.... I have faith in the engineering, design and thought process of my work.

I post to this forum the work that i do in hopes people may take something from it and gather some ideas for themselves. What really happens is that i post my work and then someone like Tombie decides that he will devote his WHOLE MONDAY NIGHT to chopping it down and asserting his moral authority upon it.

....

Confidence is a great thing as a personality trait, helps to get 'stuff' done .... as was the case with the home made bull bar.
But when that 'stuff' becomes menacing to the rest of society, it morphs the notion of confidence into one resembling arrogance.
Arrogance and safety are usually mutually exclusive notions.

Hopefully for Blair the late deployment of the airbag won't turn the front occupants heads into smashed watermelons at some point in the future.
More worrying tho is going to be the bars impact on any errant pedestrian, and already mentioned insurance issues on the driver.

The hope will be that if at any point where he doesn't alter the bar, at the least it's removed from the vehicle if he ever sells the car in the future.

And you should learn to practice the idea of introspective Blair.
For one thing, I've had my differences of opinion with Tombie's comments, but have never viewed him as a troll. Robust discussion is always a healthy thing to have.
But Blair denigrates one person for highlighting the obvious defective design aspect to the bar and calls it "moral authority", yet on the other hand, hopes that his project inspires others!

Serious? You want, or hope that other people produce clearly defective accessories?
Is that the kind of 'moral compass' you want the general population to live by?

Have a look that the bullbar pdf linked.
And more so that rethinking the design of the bar .. rethink the attitude and learn to differentiate between what constitutes confidence and arrogance!

[Gordie]

Been mulling on the opening question of this thread. I think I am prepared to take risks here and there, as is the OP by his own admission on motorbikes without enough safety clothing. I drive and have driven cars, landy's, trucks and trains that aren't at all 'user friendly' to anyone who would be unfortunate enough to be hit by same.

As for Mr Die Sneller Fella, I feel for him a bit, he has taken the time to post his pics etc of his build. All of a sudden he feels he is under attack for his build. Of course he reacts defensively.

I have seen posts on here where people think it is ok for unsafe or unregulated things to occur, lifting points on bullbars of perenties, replacing chassis numbers to name a couple that spring to mind. So lets not get too 'high n mighty' with him.

At one end of the spectrum we could all be driving around in Series Landy's which are about as unsafe as you can get by todays standards. At the other end, well, I read an article today about a kids tree fort that has a council order to be pulled down...because it doesn't meet safety standards...hand rails etc, and I say to myself...pleeeeease, can we just find the middle ground!

[incisor]

there is a moderation process?

bend down and touch your toes eevo [biggrin]

[Eevo]

bend down and touch your toes eevo [biggrin]
is it in yet?
[bigwhistle]

[Mick_Marsh]

lifting points on bullbars of perenties
Interesting point.
You, of course, realise the Perenties complied with the ADRs at the time of manufacture, otherwise, the compliance plate would not have been affixed. Nor would the civilian "Tanami" model have been sold.
I wonder how they could have manufactured a brush bar in 1990 to 2002 standards (oh, and I have a copy of that standard).

Maybe all the vintage and veteran cars should be put off the road because they do not comply with next years ABS and ESC ADRs. They don't even comply with the current brake test standards.

'73 S3s and '86 110s should be put off the road now because they will fail today's lane change tests.

[incisor]

is it in yet?
[bigwhistle]

i wondered why your nickname was bucket.....

[Tombie]

Interesting point.
You, of course, realise the Perenties complied with the ADRs at the time of manufacture, otherwise, the compliance plate would not have been affixed. Nor would the civilian "Tanami" model have been sold.
I wonder how they could have manufactured a brush bar in 1990 to 2002 standards (oh, and I have a copy of that standard).

Maybe all the vintage and veteran cars should be put off the road because they do not comply with next years ABS and ESC ADRs. They don't even comply with the current brake test standards.

'73 S3s and '86 110s should be put off the road now because they will fail today's lane change tests.

This ones interesting - as I am informed that to register them for civilian use in WA they required either the points removed/bar removed or a fabricated set up fitted to round it all off before they could be registered.

They also required figment of key locks and ignition.

Go figure on that last portion!

[DAMINK]

Thinking forwards here.

I expect every vehicle of todays standards will become totally obsolete very quickly. Illegal to drive apart from "specialty tracks"
Substituted with some sort of electric automated car supplied/rented from the government or private company.
Cars no one owns and cars that are maintained by companies. Like a taxi sort of. Need a car one comes to your door then you hop in an tell it where you want to go.

Seems a logical step given the road fatalities. Only problem is governments wont be able to generate revenue anymore. Thats a big incentive to not push this sort of technical advancement.

[Gordie]

They also required figment of key locks and ignition.

Go figure on that last portion!Ahh that's a safety precaution.....so that any ol jo blo can't fire er up, and go run down some pedestrian crossing the street without their govt issued cotton wool suit...and be poked to death by the lifting points on bull bar!

[AK83]

.... can we just find the middle ground!

Fair enough, BUT!

1/. if the designer of the bar in question read the comment as derogatory, then he's read an emotional aspect into the comments that any self respecting designer would never do.
Constructive criticism is a crucial part of any design environment.
The designer in question here assumes his design is up to scratch .. why? ... because he's studying engineering? That in itself doesn't make anyone immune to criticism, nor openmindedness.
If he'd taken the time to check out the regulatory specs for designing his bar, he'd have obviously noted the need to refrain from any forward leaning aspects of the bar.

FWIW: I never felt that the comments came across as an attack, as they were clearly impressed with the quality of the workmanship. What was in question is the design element, and mounting type.

2/. in the case of the council taking down the treehouse. How many kids does it take to fall and die, or get seriously injured to make it OK to leave it as is .. cos it's good enough. If the treehouse was built with any thought towards safety, we wouldn't be living in a 'nanny state'.
Kids are not smart. No one is smart, until they've experienced enough to know better. You are told that something is not safe, and if you ignore it then you are doomed to suffer the consequences of that action. Kids just don't care. What parent would build a treehouse that has minimal to no safety for their kids? .. and we're reduced to complain when someone pulls them up on it. Maybe it would have been more appropriate for the council to have steel star pickets cemented into the ground just under the treehouse?
When I built my kids cubby(not tree) house, I made a point to try to eliminate as many points of concern for injuries. eg. I used plastic sheet strip on the inside edge of the door so that they wouldn't jam their fingers in there. Perspex windows(even tho I had the perfect glass pieces for it) .. etc.

3/. yes, a series vehicle is about as dangerous as can be had, and that's what instigated the nanny state in the first place. The powers that be felt compelled to regulate the industry .. and why we now have ADRs that are far more restrictive then they used to be.
Imagine if the car industry were actually responsible back in the day, and designed cars to have been as safe as they are now, without being forced to comply with regulations. Almost certainly we wouldn't have as many ADRs as we currently do.
The point being that if manufacturers, designers, engineers, or the general public acted a bit more responsibly, there would be no need for a nanny state mindset.

4/. if I sound like a safety nazi in any way, then the intent of this reply has been misunderstood. in no way am I a safety nazi .. but some things just make sense. to help explain this point, when I looked for a D1, I made it a point to take as much time as necessary to get one without ABS and airbags. Dragged on for a few months due to those two specific points, but finally got there.
Sometimes I may have to do stoopid things(as I've done) like use a chainsaw one handed(no option at the time), or do a quick spot of welding without a mask(yep, paid dearly for that one) .. and so on .. so I'm the last person you'd judge as a 'nanny'
But I won't do something 'socially irresponsible'(ie. that affects the safety of others!) or get angry when some criticism is direct my way if I do so.

[Gordie]

I get what you are saying Arthur. I am just pleased I grew up in an era when kids could be kids, injuries and all. PS, the tree house is in a private back yard, only came to councils attention because the precious neighbours complained that their privacy was breached.

[DAMINK]

I get what you are saying Arthur. I am just pleased I grew up in an era when kids could be kids, injuries and all. PS, the tree house is in a private back yard, only came to councils attention because the precious neighbours complained that their privacy was breached.

When i was a kid my old man let me build my own treehouse.
"You know where the tools are" sort of attitude.

Turned out a pretty damn good tree house if memory serves.

And im not gunna lie to you guys. I let my kids build tree houses too! I let my kids do backwards somersaults off the no net trampoline.

MY KIDS LOVE IT but its risky i know. But i loved it when i was a kid...... So conflicted.

When i was a tradesman i treated everything i did as if i had an apprentice watching me. Just my way of being on check all the time.
As a parent i guess i dont do this....... Perhaps i should i dont know. I dont want to limit my kids fun and growth just because i fear them getting hurt.
Getting hurt is part of growing up i thought.

Yet again just me chiming in....

[rangieman]

Wow...going by your other h & s views, I am amazed. [wink11] I have come off a bike at about 40kph, and at the time had all protective gear on, jacket, Kevlar pants, gloves, helmet....I only suffered broken ribs...the aggresive surface of the road I was on, would have given me some pretty bad scrapes.....am really glad I had that gear on and even on a stinkin hot day, won't go in just t shirt.
I`m enjoying this thread by all yes we can get a bit passionate on a few thing`s[thumbsupbig]

I do agree the workmanship in that build is first class and love it but yes it does concern me safety and legality wise .

Tombie is very aware of my my opinion on this very subject ppe and motor bikes and im coming from first hand experience many moons ago when one was young and dumb[bigwhistle].

All i will ad is when ever i get on the bike it is gear up and if not i`m in the car instead [wink11]

Keep it respectful and mature guy`s and as stated on several occasions no personal attack`s[thumbsupbig]

[Mick_Marsh]

This ones interesting - as I am informed that to register them for civilian use in WA they required either the points removed/bar removed or a fabricated set up fitted to round it all off before they could be registered.

They also required figment of key locks and ignition.

Go figure on that last portion!
Well, whilst we are on the WA theme, they also do not allow rear seats, even in Series 2 '59 shorties.

[workingonit]

I've been watching Eevo and Incisor going hammer and tong at each other...is there a moderator who can nip humour in the bud...to much laughing hurts.

I've bought stuff off a vendor on here, unrated, but made with the same materials and an exact copy of another manufacturer who does rate their gear. It's a critical component in off road activities, and in hind sight I find some some clubs won't accept you unless this bit is rated. Hmm...

I avoid airbag and ABS vehicles. If I ever become really worried I'll get multi link seat belts and some light head protection.

I only carry third party property because my vehicles don't cost much.

I'm not in favour of macho stuff on vehicles - the bull bar that will mow down a herd - suspension systems so soft that the wheels are on the ground but the drivers door is parallel to the road, and they can't stay in their lane. I'm also not a fan of the 'destroy the track/good bush' brigade. I'm not against those machines and the great tech, but go to an off road park.

Forums where you can test your ideas and show your builds, getting useful input on the way are much better than walking off and doing it hidden. However, you have to be sensitive to consensus that says "don't", but that consensus also has to prove it's bona fides and is not just giving offhand 'opinion'.

If I do make something I try to get informed - but even then experts disagree. Bull bars, as I understand, at least those as OEM, are supposed to match the profile of the vehicle. Other professionals have shown that, for four wheel drivese, maybe an upright bar catching hip and thigh is better than being knee capped by a shaped bar. Older airbag systems sometimes don't go off when the tree comes dead centre of the front because there's no central sensor - solution, no cans and very stiff front bar to transmit the force to the rails - maybe more modern airbag systems have this covered - otherwise choice of go off in no so critical instances or not go off at all when critical. Sometimes there are no certified improved products specifically for your vehicle so you have to design your own solution, my interest being mainly around the Tdi300 which has a couple of horror ancillaries.

[Homestar]

Wow this thread is moving fast...

Regarding motor bikes - I'm the same as Tombie - around town minimal PPE for the reasons stated - yes, I've come off a pushbike at 50KPH and was scraped up pretty bad, but happy to take that risk. Out of town, full kit.

I drive a 101 at speeds up to 110KPH - in fact quite a bit quicker coming dowm the Pentland hills once (think I overtook Mick in his that day). 😇 You can't be risk averse and do that. 😆.

I had several tree houses as a kid - quite high and not much in the way of rails either. Council did want to knock one down once - the tree was on the side of the road they were widening and it was on the hit list but me and my friend from up the road convinced them to leave it. Also had an underground cubby too we dug over many months. Those were the days. 😊

As far as cars go, I've done plenty of not quite legal stuff over the years including fitting a steering column from a Corolla to my old Torana so all the switches were on the stalks. This involved modifing the mounting and the shaft where the flex joint was. On that vehicle it was just a slip joint with a bolt through one side accross a flat section - shaft was shortened, turned down and the flat cut with a grinder before fitting. Worked great for years. Not legal, not a perfect solution but I was happy enough with it.

Also almost completed an electric power steering conversion in the Series 3 - no details will be put up here as I think if you need to ask you probably shouldn't be doing it. I may get this engineered yet, not sure - it's a straight bolt in with no mods to the vehicle. Have had shafts professionally splined for this one though.

Also have a power steering conversion to do on the 101 as the steering box in mine is shagged and this will be easier and stronger. Doubtful that will get engineered. Maybe it also has a brake booster out of a D1 in it as well - But I bet no Cop or Insurance assessor would know what was supposed to be in there and it looks for all the world like it's been there forever. Easy conversion, improves brakes no end.

[DAMINK]

Also had an underground cubby too we dug over many months. Those were the days. 😊


I made one as a kid and it was 3 rooms. Me my stepbrother (*****) and a lounge haha. Took hrs to build. Digging and tin roof and what not.
That day i learned about petrol.
Needed light right? Lived in the country at the time so had 2 tanks one standard and one diesel. Big tanks for the tractors and stuff.
Decided it would be a bright idea to burn small amounts of petrol to light up the under ground cubby.
Yea it caught fire and i had to jump up smashing the roof to get out hahahhaahhaha.

Fun times as a kid fun times.
Never tried that again though.
Petrol confined spaces and lighters combined with kids = a bad mix.

[Disco-tastic]

Fair enough, BUT!
... If the treehouse was built with any thought towards safety, we wouldn't be living in a 'nanny state'.
Kids are not smart. No one is smart, until they've experienced enough to know better. You are told that something is not safe, and if you ignore it then you are doomed to suffer the consequences of that action. Kids just don't care. ...

Speak for your own kids but I've found kids are very smart and very clever - they may not understand high school maths or physics (I started explaining atoms to my 4yr old son today - you could watch the cute little cogs turning in his head!) but there sense of awareness and common sense develops very quickly. My four yr old will climb trees until he feels unsafe and will call for help when he thinks he's overcooked it.

I had an emotional (for her) discussion with my MIL after my boy fell off the top of his fort (over 2.5m above ground) and landed on his face in the grass (that in itself is another story). She was very upset that I let him climb all over it and the risks involved and I responded along the lines of "that's what I did as a kid, and I learned to find my limits and assess risk. My concern for his safety is real, but I can either set all his limits for him, then let him loose on the world when his 18, or let him find some of them himself, so that he has some chance as an adult.

Anyways, this thread is interesting. Except for maybe Eevo's and Inc's little romance - that I don't need to know about [emoji14]

[Tombie]

My Uncle and his 2 mates back when they were about 11yrs old tried to make a cubby in sand once.

One of the mates managed to get out when it collapsed and run for help. Unfortunately by the time my Uncle and the other lad were found and pulled out of the sand they were both dead.

In my youth I was fortunate to survive - I gave fate so many chances to end my life - sadly quite a few of my mates succeeded in their quest for death by misadventure.

I’m not sure what the answer is to be honest because nothing seems to work.

[Mick_Marsh]

Maybe it also has a brake booster out of a D1 in it as well - But I bet no Cop or Insurance assessor would know what was supposed to be in there and it looks for all the world like it's been there forever. Easy conversion, improves brakes no end.
It's interesting how these things are handled overseas.
For example, what came out on the 101 forum is in the UK it is easy to fit a D1 brake booster. No engineering required for that modification. Yet, it is downright dangerous to get an original brake booster repaired. If you do, the vehicle should be put off the road, according to some.

[Homestar]

It's interesting how these things are handled overseas.
For example, what came out on the 101 forum is in the UK it is easy to fit a D1 brake booster. No engineering required for that modification. Yet, it is downright dangerous to get an original brake booster repaired. If you do, the vehicle should be put off the road, according to some.

Why does that not surprise me with that lot.... 😁

[loanrangie]

I would be interested in statistics from the US where its almost an open slather on modifications.

[rangieman]

I would be interested in statistics from the US where its almost an open slather on modifications.
Why any one can jiggle statistics to suit what ever they want to hear[bighmmm]

[Disco-tastic]

Why any one can jiggle statistics to suit what ever they want to hear[bighmmm]Did you know that 73% of statistics are made up?

[loanrangie]

Of course but in the land of litigation there can't be many deaths attributed to modified vehicles otherwise they would be restricted.

[trout1105]

I wonder why we can do whatever we like to our boats and yet many simple modifications on our cars require a mountain of paperwork with the associated Gov fees.
Also changing ownership of a boat costs a mere fraction of the costs for the same value car even though in the West you do the changeover at the same Gov office.
Maybe the car is overlegislated and everyting to do with them is just a cash cow for the Gov.
Personally i think old mates bullbar was very well constructed and if it was fitted with a set of engeneered crash cans it would be as good if not better than some of the commercial offerings.
Common sense needs to prevail But i see absolutly nothing wrong with people moking their own hardware as long as they know what they are doing.

[Tombie]

I wonder why we can do whatever we like to our boats and yet many simple modifications on our cars require a mountain of paperwork with the associated Gov fees.
Also changing ownership of a boat costs a mere fraction of the costs for the same value car even though in the West you do the changeover at the same Gov office.
Maybe the car is overlegislated and everyting to do with them is just a cash cow for the Gov.
Personally i think old mates bullbar was very well constructed and if it was fitted with a set of engeneered crash cans it would be as good if not better than some of the commercial offerings.
Common sense needs to prevail But i see absolutly nothing wrong with people moking their own hardware as long as they know what they are doing.

And if vehicle manufacturers shared the required data then I would suggest we may be able to have it modelled to be compliant.

ARB for instance get this data. Model a prototype and then mount it on a jig that does the impact test to ensure it meets the requirements.

So unfortunately a few must be destroyed to ensure that timing pulse is correct.

[Zeros]

Obviously safety equipment mods need certification. Bullbars for evample are massive heavy things, I don’t want a homemade one coming towards me in an accident. But what concerns me most is all the day to day things I see that can’t be certified and never seem to be picked up by police, like fuel cans tied to roof racks with string, hi-lift jacks mounted on bonnets in front of the windscreen, externally mounted gas bottles on homemade brackets, tradies with a jumble of heavy tools in a ute moving all over the place, a stack of timber tied down around the outside but loose on the inside, or ladders, pipe, etc. I’m amazed how people ignore the potential hazards without considering what might happen if you need to slam on the brakes.

[Homestar]

Obviously safety equipment mods need certification. Bullbars for evample are massive heavy things, I don’t want a homemade one coming towards me in an accident. But what concerns me most is all the day to day things I see that can’t be certified and never seem to be picked up by police, like fuel cans tied to roof racks with string, hi-lift jacks mounted on bonnets in front of the windscreen, externally mounted gas bottles on homemade brackets, tradies with a jumble of heavy tools in a ute moving all over the place, a stack of timber tied down around the outside but loose on the inside, or ladders, pipe, etc. I’m amazed how people ignore the potential hazards without considering what might happen if you need to slam on the brakes.

Not sure why it is obvious but obviously your opinion. [emoji6]

I’ve got home made bullbars and other things on vehicles I own or have owned - no dramas. I wouldn’t consider a bullbar to be safety equipment anyway - all bullbars actually impede the protection the OEM has designed into their vehicles anyway making them unsafer by fitting them but people are still happy to for a variety of reasons.

[Gordie]

. . I wouldn’t consider a bullbar to be safety equipment anyway - . I dunno, made me feel a lot safer when crossing the Nullarbor in the dead of night, surrounded by swarms of roos!

[101RRS]

That is why for some time now they have needed to be compliant so they do not hinder OEM safety built into a vehicle and provide the best possible safety to pedestrians if they are hit. In some vehicles, compliant bull bars actually provide better protection for pedestrians than the vehicle does with out a bull bar - basically designed to lift pedestrians up and over rather than down and under like the old 5 poster bars were designed to do.

Garry

[Homestar]

I dunno, made me feel a lot safer when crossing the Nullarbor in the dead of night, surrounded by swarms of roos!

Exactly - make you FEEL safer. In a collision they actually hinder the performance of the vehicles crumple zone regardless of being compliant or not. Australia is one of only a few Countries any more that even allows bullbars to be fitted to modern vehicles.

[Homestar]

That is why for some time now they have needed to be compliant so they do not hinder OEM safety built into a vehicle and provide the best possible safety to pedestrians if they are hit. In some vehicles, compliant bull bars actually provide better protection for pedestrians than the vehicle does with out a bull bar - basically designed to lift pedestrians up and over rather than down and under like the old 5 poster bars were designed to do.

Garry

OEM's and bar manufacturers know and readily admit that bull bars reduce the protection to the occupants and pedestrians - If you were going for the safest possible vehicle for the occupants or pedestrians, you wouldn't have a bull bar fitted. [emoji6]

[Gordie]

Exactly - make you FEEL safer. In a collision they actually hinder the performance of the vehicles crumple zone regardless of being compliant or not. Australia is one of only a few Countries any more that even allows bullbars to be fitted to modern vehicles.Beg to differ, I WAS safer, or my truck was...Tried my best to avoid them, but when unfortunately one was hit, it lessened the damage to me. Not so good for mr roo, but for a pedestrian or mr roo, my truck hitting them would have had the same result, bull bar or not!!

[Tombie]

Exactly - make you FEEL safer. In a collision they actually hinder the performance of the vehicles crumple zone regardless of being compliant or not. Australia is one of only a few Countries any more that even allows bullbars to be fitted to modern vehicles.

Where do you get that info/claim from Gav?

As for countries not allowing them - only the top posts/hoops are banned - you can still have the blade bars.

[Homestar]

Beg to differ, I WAS safer, or my truck was...Tried my best to avoid them, but when unfortunately one was hit, it lessened the damage to me. Not so good for mr roo, but for a pedestrian or mr roo, my truck hitting them would have had the same result, bull bar or not!!

Ah - different story about your truck being better off, that's not what I said - a lot of us fit bars to prevent minor or sometimes not so minor damage and it works, it's about the vehicle being safer in a decentprang when the airbags are needed which is what this thread started about.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti bullbar - almost all of mine have them, I'm just playing devils advocate here which appears to be like shooting fish in a barrel...

[Homestar]

Where do you get that info/claim from Gav?

As for countries not allowing them - only the top posts/hoops are banned - you can still have the blade bars.

I thought not in most European countries on post MY15 (I think or somewhere about then) vehicles but will have a look. In Old Blighty limited bars are still ok on new vehicles. Good old US of A is open slather - stick a sharpened spike out the front and you're still sweet. 👍

My information comes from the most reliable sources off course - the Internet! 😆😆😆

[Meccles]

I’ll be getting Engineering cert for two mods to my car front seats and belts on “B” pillar. Have to anyway to get it registered. Was going to fit OL bar to my RRS brought it in fact but bailed when Garrycol posted about them not being really legal. So yeah I’m a wuss in that regard wasn’t some years ago but today? I wouldn’t want to be associated with Dreamworld management they are going to get hit really hard.

[Zeros]

Interesting, all bullbars - no one’s concerned about the really dangerous stuff - the day to day missile mods?

[stevo]

I have done a few mods to my rig over the 20 years I have owned it, one of the first to do the repairs on brake modulator and it is still going strong. Fitted a hydraulic winch and bumped up the pressure to 3000 psi it is fast and strong had to make my own mount to secure the winch.

have also made and fitted my own bull bar it has no sharp edges and is all curves and used the crush cans from the TJM bar that was fitted to it has the clearance so cans can fully collapse before hitting winch.

Probably the next car will not be able to modify as to much electronic gizmos on it ( have ordered a D5 lux ) but will keep the D2 for a couple more years as want to do Cape York.

there has been some bloody good projects on this forum and it is good to see and yes there has been some dodgy things done too, when I was an apprentice had an old CA Bedford van turned it into a sleeper, ripped out the old 4 cylinder motor and fitted a motor out of a stock race car (186 Holden motor fully worked) this envolved a lot of chassis mods to get it to fit but made it strong, not something that can be done now (was living in a place called Invercargill in NZ ) cost me $600 to do but could beat the V8s in town easily.

[rangieman]

So it seems time to fess up and admit to ones sin`s[bigwhistle]

I once modified a non winch ARB bar to accept a winch on my old RRC[thumbsupbig].

oh im so bad and so sorry precious one`s :tease:

[Eevo]

the day to day missile mods?
missile mods?

[Zeros]

missile mods?

As sbove, homemade poorly conceived restraints for: jerry cans, gas bottles, hilift jacks, loose tools in utes, ladders, pipes, etc etc.

[ozscott]

I think in offset frontal collision a steel bull bar you must get better protection because the chassis rail on the side that is not struck shares some of the force by the bar dragging on it. Every bit helps. An inch or so less intrusion due to the bar helping to disperse the impact to both rails may mesn tbe difference between keeping or losing your patella, hip or life. Cheers

[manic]

Nannies little helpers up in here!

If you want to play around with custom modifications, better to get an older 4x4 with less legal restrictions. Or tack on a bar to your D5 if you are feeling special - why should I care?

Id rather share the road with a jacked up humvee with fake rocket launchers welded on the sides, than a tesla driver on ice in insane mode.

If you wanna risk your house/life/liberty on illegal modifications, go right ahead. Just do us a favour and dont drive like a dickhead!

[Disco-tastic]

So it seems time to fess up and admit to ones sin`s[bigwhistle]

I once modified a non winch ARB bar to accept a winch on my old RRC[thumbsupbig].

oh im so bad and so sorry precious one`s :tease:I once installed tarago bench seats in the back of a Suzuki 800 hatch (hatch version of the mighty boy). It had a restraint bar to fix the seat belts to (the previous owner put a baby seat in the front seat and needed a restraint point), but there was no head room. Everything was securely fixed but no eng cert as i was ignorant to what was required at the time. its apparently passed the rego inspection many times since then...

[strangy]

So it seems time to fess up and admit to ones sin`s[bigwhistle]

I once modified a non winch ARB bar to accept a winch on my old RRC[thumbsupbig].

oh im so bad and so sorry precious one`s :tease:

I fitted a screen door in place of a windscreen on an RRC[bigrolf]

[DeeJay]

Gosh, reading all these posts, I feel like I need to fess up to driving around - for the best part of 8 years- with two 20 litre Jerricans fitted to the front of my first Land Rover.
Like the state of art driving light? well for the early 70's it was acceptable.

[Rick1970]

Have made a bullbar or two for my cars. Would they comply to every reg?.....Maybe, but probably not.

Would i attempt a front bar for a car with SRS? Noooo

If you wanna play around with important bits that may seriously effect your cars ability drive in a straight line, go around corners and stop...and keep the diifs from falling out.....fine, but at least get it approved. If they wont approve it, they may just be a good reason for that.

I understand that some mods get done by some more than capable people that never get signed off. Dosn't necessilary make them unsafe, but may cause someone dramas later if the unthinkable happens.

Then there are some that would be better off left to a life of a trailer sailor or bush truck......

My old boss had a C30 dual cab chev, low as you could get it....on airbags. Rear chassis was chopped above diff and raised a bit......moved straight up with a couple of bits of flat bar, no bracing what so ever. Rear airbags were on rocker arms due to lack of space, rockers were a piece of 2" SHS with a 1/2" hole drilled in the middle for a pivot bolt...no bush welded in, no crush tube or the like, not even a flat washer. Front wheels rubbed on the top of the inner guards, had car low profile tyres with a load rating no where near the weight of the chev unloaded.
This was all done in the USA, and went through engineering here in this state after they done the RHD conversion. Not really sure how.....
Rear rockers and tyres lasted a few 1000 km at best.

While he was in the US buying this prime piece of automotive misery, he got pix of a 32(??) Ford at a car show. Blown BBC, beam front axle, rack and pinion steering bolted to beam axle, socket extension type uni joints connecting rack to steering coloum . Aparently wasn't an uncommon way to do it over there [bighmmm]

Missile mods?....Bunnings down the road, see plenty drive outta there [bigrolf]

[manic]

A pair of headlights that were not adr approved... living on the edge there.

285/75/16s on 7 inch wide rims.... would have been ****ed if they were flagged in an accident. They gave good service, even down to 8psi.

Might have been over GVM once [emoji56]

Tombie throwing stones in a glass house?

[Ancient Mariner]

It all comes down to what risk you are prepared to accept .I have 350g of bang gas in the AC, carry a 2kg and a 1.25 kg LPG bottle in the 110, one bottle in test the other just out 10 years ago[bighmmm].If it all turns to crap I will at least had a hot feed and shower and a preview of where I will end up[bigsmile1]

AM

[350RRC]

It all comes down to what risk you are prepared to accept .I have 350g of bang gas in the AC, carry a 2kg and a 1.25 kg LPG bottle in the 110, one bottle in test the other just out 10 years ago[bighmmm].If it all turns to crap I will at least had a hot feed and shower and a preview of where I will end up[bigsmile1]

AM

I regularly carry up to 58 litres around in the back of my POS.

DL

[harro]

Jeez, I think of all the station vehicle I have seen out west with any number of home made mods.
Most probably by necessity not choice, and engineered?:Rolling::Rolling:

Bullbars, Rollbars, Spottie mounts, spare mounts, bodgie lifts, etc, etc.

Does it concern me? not in the least, more dangerous on a pedestrian crossing up here.

Paul.

[tact]

Exactly - make you FEEL safer. In a collision they actually hinder the performance of the vehicles crumple zone regardless of being compliant or not. Australia is one of only a few Countries any more that even allows bullbars to be fitted to modern vehicles.

Does this apply to my 2013 Defender? Would fitting a bull bar to my barge hinder the performance of its crumple zones? [bigwhistle]

[Mick_Marsh]

Does this apply to my 2013 Defender? Would fitting a bull bar to my barge hinder the performance of its crumple zones? [bigwhistle]
Certainly would. It might prevent them from being called upon.

[Tombie]

A pair of headlights that were not adr approved... living on the edge there.

285/75/16s on 7 inch wide rims.... would have been ****ed if they were flagged in an accident. They gave good service, even down to 8psi.

Might have been over GVM once [emoji56]

Tombie throwing stones in a glass house?

Not at all.

Just a thread of interest. To help understand the mindset that makes us who we are when it comes to taking risks and what we perceive those risks to be.

I recently worked in a role that could have easily cost me my house, my savings etc because people wouldn’t support the systems and regulatory requirements.
Whilst it was unlikely anything would happen; it definitely could happen. And then it would cost me everything.

In your example - tyres - what if one had popped from a rim, at speed, sending you into another vehicle?
Because you fitted what are deemed globally as oversized tyres for your wheel width, you are now deemed to have been driving a non-roadworthy vehicle. Your insurer can then walk away leaving you to pay for any and all damages - road surfaces, vehicles, property etc.

For the sake of $400 in wheels you could be sent to the cleaners. It does happen.

Am I throwing stones in a glass house? Well, all my vehicles had engineering and compliance where required. Were fully signed off (lane change tests are interesting) and all parts fitted are approved or meet requirements.
This has applied to all my 4wdrives, not so much my earlier street cars.

My vehicles are even under GVM [emoji41] access to a weighbridge helps.

My only breaches in recent years would be infractions of the posted speed limits, even then I’m very tame by comparison to what I once was.

[Tombie]

I notice a lot of people are tending to perceive risk as physical injury.

What about financial? I haven’t worked to this point in my life to end up with nothing. And I don’t intend to put myself at risk of this.

[ChookD2]

Well to be perfectly honest about this thread, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's views and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and everyone's valid opinion, I honestly believe that, **** I completely forgot what I was going to say!

[Mick_Marsh]

Well to be perfectly honest about this thread, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's views and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and everyone's valid opinion, I honestly believe that, **** I completely forgot what I was going to say!
I find this post really, really offensive.
How dare you!

I'll be huffing and puffing all afternoon.

[Tombie]

Well to be perfectly honest about this thread, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's views and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and everyone's valid opinion, I honestly believe that, **** I completely forgot what I was going to say!

Hahaha!!!!!

Hell no [emoji41] offend people - nothing happens if people are offended. It’s just an emotional state.

Play the ball, not the player and you can say what you like.

[Mick_Marsh]

Interesting point.
You, of course, realise the Perenties complied with the ADRs at the time of manufacture, otherwise, the compliance plate would not have been affixed. Nor would the civilian "Tanami" model have been sold.
I wonder how they could have manufactured a brush bar in 1990 to 2002 standards (oh, and I have a copy of that standard).
I was reminded of this little gem of a document in a discussion on facebook last night.
Please note it's date. Also note it's use of the word "forward". Also note this document is mentioned on the "blue slip".
http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/documents/business-industry/examiners/vib-05-protrusions.pdf

[Gardi01]

Whilst I agree, let’s keep to general discussion please.

Why do people perceive certain risks as “non-critical”.

An example: I never want the potential to be sued and lose everything I’ve worked towards in my life. Or be saddled with debt going forward should something go awry.

Hence all my builds have been certified and plated where required.


Yes Tombie. Thanks for pressing the line of thought.

[Tombie]

Well if I can do it anyone can... [emoji41]

And I rest easy knowing I’ll be financially ok should the worse happen.

[manic]

It was all certified and plated officer...

Aint gonna help you if you load up over GVM, drive DUI or speed. And those are the main offenders, the last two most likely to cause accidents, kill or render you destitute.

Im not worried about people driving around with custom bullbars or bullbars in general. I dont think there are many people on this forum, if any, that are posting from prison or have dropped offline because of the modifications they made to their land rovers.

[Tombie]

Agree with those comments.

And yes, those well over GVM etc are a much greater concern.

I think of more concern is ICED drivers in recent times; but that’s a different discussion I guess.

[Zeros]

Have you seen the new ARB ad? With the blue Hilux...the ARB bullbar is wobbling so much it looks like it’s about to fall off!

[Homestar]

Have you seen the new ARB ad? With the blue Hilux...the ARB bullbar is wobbling so much it looks like it’s about to fall off!

I don't have to watch the ad - I see the bullbar on my work Hilux wobble around every day when I hit a bump. 😉

The amount of flex in it is alarming at times but it hasn't fallen off... yet...

[prelude]

Interesting topic this has turned into, aside from a few side-steps into tree houses and motorcycles :)

In the Netherlands, one of the most difficult countries in the EU to get vehicles engineered, a bar on the front of a work vehicle is not allowed unless it has a EU certificate. To be precise about the term work vehicle: this is a category of vehicles that has to conform to certain parameters like cargo space, entry size to said space etc. So anything from a 18 wheeler truck down to a van is considered a work vehicle. What is allowed is a "device" to protect whatever item you have mounted to perform work on the front of your vehicle. This is often used to explain the bar, to protect the winch.

This however is where it gets interesting: certain vehicles comply with the parameters set for a work vehicle, ie the cargo space of a station wagen and the door accessing it can be large enough to re engineer the vehicle from what we would consider to just be a car to a van effectively. This is done a lot with 4x4's since they are big and heavy and are often used by people with a profession that requires them to lug big stuff around, a carpenter for example. Also they are capable of pulling a 3500kg trailer which is useful. So, when I buy a defender and keep it as a people mover, I can bolt pretty much anything to the front as long as it has no sharp parts etc. but if I put that same vehicle on the road as a work vehicle the rules of the game change instantly.

On note: road tax in the Netherlands is based on the weight and fuel type of the vehicle and if you run a work car the road tax is A LOT less, hence the re-engineering.

Having said all that, I do firmly believe the nanny state exists because it had to at some point. Manufacturers always have but one thing in mind: money. And probably rightfully so. If they can do something on the cheap they will. ABS, SRS and a bunch of other useful options have existed for a very long time. Even adaptive cruise control was already in development in at mercedes at least since the very early eighties, maybe late seventies. We did'nt see those options come in until the naughties because they were expensive and people spoke with their wallets. Governments need to sometimes motivate both people and companies to make an option mandatory because if left to their own devices, they will not choose to do so. I am also convinced though that governments do interfere with our daily lives to much, let policies be decided by popular opinion and lobbyists.

Let me be clear: I am NOT against pedestrians, the environment, etc. but we DO pay a very hefty price for all these developments. Modern petrol engines are forced to run so lean and clean that the engine itself is paying the price. air intake valves coke up for instance and let's not even talk about diesels! These things choke up like it's nobody's business. It used to be that a proper engine could run 100's of k's, diesels even millions of k's and these days they are pretty much worn out at 100k, maybe 150 if you are lucky. Also pedestrian safety has made vehicles so soft up front that a minor accident will break pretty much everything in front of the windshield. Have we ever thought about the costs of all that? casting a new aluminium engine is a terribly expensive business in terms of the environment. I think a bit more pollution from the exhaust would offset the enormous pollution of building and recycling vehicles :)

Conclusion (mine) I do take care of what I do to my vehicle, I do think about my fellow humans and nature alike but there is a point where I feel it is all going a bit overboard. I guess though that if our governments have lost their common sense, it is reasonable to assume that at least some part of the population has also lost theirs :( and thus rules are a necessity for them and perhaps a hindrance to the rest of us.

Cheers,
-P

[Tombie]

Nicely put.

[Zeros]

...Let me be clear: I am NOT against pedestrians, the environment, etc. but we DO pay a very hefty price for all these developments. Modern petrol engines are forced to run so lean and clean that the engine itself is paying the price. air intake valves coke up for instance and let's not even talk about diesels! These things choke up like it's nobody's business. It used to be that a proper engine could run 100's of k's, diesels even millions of k's and these days they are pretty much worn out at 100k, maybe 150 if you are lucky. Also pedestrian safety has made vehicles so soft up front that a minor accident will break pretty much everything in front of the windshield. Have we ever thought about the costs of all that? casting a new aluminium engine is a terribly expensive business in terms of the environment. I think a bit more pollution from the exhaust would offset the enormous pollution of building and recycling vehicles :)

Conclusion (mine) I do take care of what I do to my vehicle, I do think about my fellow humans and nature alike but there is a point where I feel it is all going a bit overboard. I guess though that if our governments have lost their common sense, it is reasonable to assume that at least some part of the population has also lost theirs :( and thus rules are a necessity for them and perhaps a hindrance to the rest of us.

Cheers,
-P

Interesting points well made. Especially in terms of what is regulated and what isn’t. It’s similar to the supermarket plastic bags debate, whereby the quantity of plastics used in all the packaging is ignored as long as they’re carried home in a furry hemp bag!

The move to hybrid vehicles will surely improve reliability of engines as well as reduce emissions, while full electric cars don’t make sense unless they are plugged into 100% wind, hydro or solar power. But we seem to be gradually heading that way, albeit slowly as there seems to be a constant supply of oil. ...hopefully recent fuel price rises are a sign that investment in renewables will increase.

The crumple zone vs bullbar debate will continue to be biased towards City centric priorities. Weirdly our cities are growing despite the fact that they are part of the environmental problem. Country areas are less desirable as technology takes over our lives (which makes them more desireable to me!).

The lack of autonomy of humans is the real discussion here IMO. The more reliance on digital and mechanical automation, the less freedom we have to make our own physical and mechanical mods. ...out of interest, is anyone making their own digital / ecu remapping mods? How does the legality of these compare to homemade bullbars?

Treehouses and side tracks are often the unexpected pathways to new solutions, unless they’re just rants, so I’ll stop now 😎 cheers 🍻

[mick88]

Interesting, all bullbars - no one’s concerned about the really dangerous stuff - the day to day missile mods?

Yep,
in the event of sudden deceleration or a head n crash, everything that is not secured becomes a missile and attempts to exit via the front windscreen and whizzes past the head of anyone sitting in the vehicle's as it does so.
Something as small as a pair of pliers can cause a life changing event for someone.

Cheers, Mick.

[Mick_Marsh]

YSomething as small as a pair of pliers can cause a life changing event for someone.
Just interested, how many car accidents have you attended in which an occupant had a pair of pliers embedded in their skull from flying from the rear parcel shelf.
Yes, I am a little concerned about a roll over as I drive along with an Engel sitting on the front passenger seat, however, I remember The Mythbusters proved the killer box of tissues to be wrong.

[JDNSW]

One of the issues that needs thinking about is the concept of risk.

Nothing is completely risk free. Rules need to consider when regulating something just how high is the risk involved versus the cost of the regulation. This applies in all sorts of areas, of course. Related to this is the question of enforcing rules - if the level of enforcement is not enough to prevent rule breaking, you need to consider the cost of enforcement as part of the cost of regulation.

A good example of this is perhaps the question of house owners making wiring changes to their houses - in NZ, which shares the same wiring standards, this is allowed, but is not here. But the accident statistics do not show a difference attributable to this. Clearly, either the rule against it here is either unnecessary or ineffective. In either case, it seems difficult to justify the cost that the rule imposes on at least the law abiding citizens.

As a society, we tend to not be very good at assessing risk, usually tending to make assessments based on the latest headlines. For example, a recent child death resulting from an elderly driver resulted in all sorts of proposals to further restrict older drivers - ignoring the simple fact that statistically they are the safest age group - way better than under twenty-fives.

[tact]

One of the issues that needs thinking about is the concept of risk.

Nothing is completely risk free. Rules need to consider when regulating something just how high is the risk involved versus the cost of the regulation. This applies in all sorts of areas, of course.[...]

Absolutely. But really one must also add to that risk element assessment- an assessment of the consequences associated with the risk, should the risk/event happen.

i.e. the risk of something happening may be high or low. Adding consequences to the mix - Compare these two situations:
- Risk of an event happening is high but the consequence is a stubbed toe
- Risk is low, but the consequence of the event happening is a life snuffed out

To my way of thinking the cost benefit analysis will say that the high risk, low consequence, event gets very little funding or attention. But the low risk, high consequence event gets funding that far outweighs the low risk assessment.

No rocket science in the above - its basically how society operates. Just highlighting you cannot take the consequence element out of the equation and say that risk is low so its not worth the costs associated with regulation and enforcement.

[JDNSW]

Absolutely. And society recognises this, for example in that higher standards apply to buses than to cars, or commercial aircraft as opposed to private aircraft. But, we still tend to have very poor estimates of risks, particularly for events that have a low probability. This makes it very difficult to make the cost/risk assessment realistic. Good example of this in the news this mornning - somewhere, I think in Victoria, they have turned off all the public drinking fountains in the city, because the water from them is above the allowable limit for lead, probably leached from the plumbing. But as one commentator points out, nobody gets a large proportion of their water from these - much more of a risk from home plumbing that is almost certainly just as bad. And turning them off inconveniences the residents and visitors, and undoubtedly leads to increased sales of bottles water with all the negative impacts of that. (The levels measured are not substantially above the allowable limits)

[Eevo]

I notice a lot of people are tending to perceive risk as physical injury.

What about financial? I haven’t worked to this point in my life to end up with nothing. And I don’t intend to put myself at risk of this.

easily fixed with a swiss bank account and a cayman islands business name.

[matti4556]

The more reliance on digital and mechanical automation, the less freedom we have to make our own physical and mechanical mods. ...out of interest, is anyone making their own digital / ecu remapping mods? How does the legality of these compare to homemade bullbars?



I for one am interested in the legalities of "tweaked" ECU's. Has anyone on this forum researched this enough to give an educated opinion of whether an insurance company would look for this sort of thing is a vehicle was involved in an accident that may have been attributable to the modification? - or even if its legal?
Cheers - Matti

[Mick_Marsh]

A good example of this is perhaps the question of house owners making wiring changes to their houses - in NZ, which shares the same wiring standards, this is allowed, but is not here. But the accident statistics do not show a difference attributable to this. Clearly, either the rule against it here is either unnecessary or ineffective. In either case, it seems difficult to justify the cost that the rule imposes on at least the law abiding citizens.
Not a good example.
Last I looked, any domestic wiring requires a safety certificate issued by a REC.
Anyone can do the wiring but it cannot be used until a safety certificate has been issued.

So, you can actually do the electrical work if that is your goal, but it will need to be inspected by a qualified tradesperson.

[Mick_Marsh]

On the subject of unapproved modifications that need approval, I was just reading a facebook group I am a member on.
Apparently, registration authorities are looking at modification posts on social media. They are noting registration numbers and investigating. It was mentioned some people were asked to present their vehicles for inspection and their registrations were canceled when the vehicle was not presented or failed.
Could be true, could be fake news. Either way, food for thought.

[loanrangie]

It was all certified and plated officer...

Aint gonna help you if you load up over GVM, drive DUI or speed. And those are the main offenders, the last two most likely to cause accidents, kill or render you destitute.

Im not worried about people driving around with custom bullbars or bullbars in general. I dont think there are many people on this forum, if any, that are posting from prison or have dropped offline because of the modifications they made to their land rovers.

Hey dont go bringing any logic to this discussion, that belongs elsewhere.[bigwhistle]

[tact]

I for one am interested in the legalities of "tweaked" ECU's. Has anyone on this forum researched this enough to give an educated opinion of whether an insurance company would look for this sort of thing is a vehicle was involved in an accident that may have been attributable to the modification? - or even if its legal?
Cheers - Matti

This does not answer your question at all - just adding another curly question that I don't expect you to have an answer for: Why would any performance increase attributed to an ECU tweak ever be considered as contributing to an accident?

Bear in mind:
- Inappropriate use of the power available to a vehicle with factory stock tune can contribute to an accident.
- Even if the stock power were enhanced significantly - it will still take inappropriate use of that power to contribute to an accident.
- The maximum power that a vehicle has on tap is just a "potential" thing, until the loud pedal is "actually" pushed as far as it will go.
- Even while driving a 1000hp super car, one doesn't HAVE to use all 1000 neddies.... all the time.

[Tombie]

On the subject of unapproved modifications that need approval, I was just reading a facebook group I am a member on.
Apparently, registration authorities are looking at modification posts on social media. They are noting registration numbers and investigating. It was mentioned some people were asked to present their vehicles for inspection and their registrations were canceled when the vehicle was not presented or failed.
Could be true, could be fake news. Either way, food for thought.

It’s a thing! A few “hot car” guys I know have had the message to present for inspection.

[matti4556]

Why would any performance increase attributed to an ECU tweak ever be considered as contributing to an accident?

.

Yeah - understood Tact - but I was more coming from the angle of "software recalibration" that may induce glitches, faults, dead spots, sudden rapid and uncontrollable acceleration etc.. or any other coding issue that an insurer might hang onto in order to get away with an insurance claim should the car behave in an unexpected manner causing an accident. I think you get what I mean. Sort of like the mechatronics failure issue that plagued earlier VW DSG gearboxes (dead spot causing a truck to rear-end the car). I know that was caused by oil contamination of the wiring, but its the "glitches" that may exist in "tunes" that I am referring to here.
I'm guessing common law takes over and the tuner goes to court? But its still on the same topic of "risk of modifications" that the OP is discussing and looking for our opinions of what "risk" is acceptable to us. Cheers - Matti

[twr7cx]

I have no time or forgiveness for those that don't comply with the safety rules and regs, particularly when it can effect other innocent road users.

My D2a is fully engineered and has the mod plate on it. It's on the maximum for lift and tyre size that can be legally engineered in this state. The front bullbar is an ARB as I believe their designs have the R&D behind them for the airbag, hence why they're so expensive. Having tapped the front bar twice now and had to replace the crush cans I'd say it works in not setting the airbag off when it shouldn't go.

In saying all the above, I have two non compliant issues on my rig at the moment due to the location that some driving lights are mounted. I'm currently reconsidering my options with these but am confident they won't cause any issue to my driving, other road users or worsen a crash.

[tact]

Yeah - understood Tact - but I was more coming from the angle of "software recalibration" that may induce glitches, faults, dead spots, sudden rapid and uncontrollable acceleration etc.. or any other coding issue that an insurer might hang onto in order to get away with an insurance claim should the car behave in an unexpected manner causing an accident. I think you get what I mean. Sort of like the mechatronics failure issue that plagued earlier VW DSG gearboxes (dead spot causing a truck to rear-end the car). I know that was caused by oil contamination of the wiring, but its the "glitches" that may exist in "tunes" that I am referring to here.
I'm guessing common law takes over and the tuner goes to court? But its still on the same topic of "risk of modifications" that the OP is discussing and looking for our opinions of what "risk" is acceptable to us. Cheers - Matti

With you on that.... (tunes if causing operational issues that result in accidents being a real nasty).

Lightheartedly: The BAS tunes remove some ugly aspects of the stock tune on Defenders (kangaroo'ing etc). Perhaps we should get reduced price insurance BECAUSE of the aftermarket tune! [biggrin]

[JDNSW]

Not a good example.
Last I looked, any domestic wiring requires a safety certificate issued by a REC.
.......

Not in NZ, as I understand it, where the work is carried out by the owner. It still needs to meet the wiring codes. The typical example is the replacement of a switch, power point, light fitting etc, where Australia requires it to be done/signed off by someone with a ticket.

[harro]

Not in NZ, as I understand it, where the work is carried out by the owner. It still needs to meet the wiring codes. The typical example is the replacement of a switch, power point, light fitting etc, where Australia requires it to be done/signed off by someone with a ticket.

Sometimes I think this is more about trades looking after their ’territory’ than actual risk.

Any joe blogs with no formal training can attempt to bleed his brakes, **** it up and cause an accident but domestic electrical wiring is a big no no.

Not that I am encouraging anyone to play with 240v and yes I do my own brakes!

[Mick_Marsh]

Have a read of the electrical cable thread. As has been discussed, it's all about risk. The insurance companies do not want to expose themselves to that risk. And the governments don't want to expose themselves to risk. When a number of houses burn down for the same reason, and the insurance companies turn their back, who are you gonna turn to?

[Homestar]

Sometimes I think this is more about trades looking after their ’territory’ than actual risk.

Any joe blogs with no formal training can attempt to bleed his brakes, **** it up and cause an accident but domestic electrical wiring is a big no no.

Not that I am encouraging anyone to play with 240v and yes I do my own brakes!

Maybe a ittle from column A but there are more people killed doing their own wiring each year (about 10 a year in Australia but dropped dramatically from the early 2000's) than from bleeding the brakes wrong (can't find a single one, but they would be rolled into the road stats anyway) - if you don't get your brakes right, you know about it before scooting off down the road at 100KPH but when dealing with 240 volts, you usually only get one chance - and you don't know anything is wrong until it bites you and it's too late. 9 out of 10 people who die of electrocution are non electrical workers and the general public.

[scarry]

Maybe a ittle from column A but there are more people killed doing their own wiring each year (about 10 a year in Australia but dropped dramatically from the 70's) than from bleeding the brakes wrong (can't find a single one, but they would be rolled into the road stats anyway) - if you don't get your brakes right, you know about it before scooting off down the road at 100KPH but when dealing with 240 volts, you usually only get one chance - and you don't know anything is wrong until it bites you and it's too late. 9 out of 10 people who die of electrocution are non electrical workers and the general public.

Actually,retired electricians,and electrical engineers also make up a large proportion of people electrocuted.

[prelude]

@zeros I see plastic bags is a thing down under as well :) What has surprised me the most is that over here in europe people do tend to look after their plastic stuff (at least, western europe). The UK is a bit of a mess but other than that we usually take care of it. So now we have this tax on plastic bags in a part of the world where it does not really add anything usefull, except money in coffers. When in brazil however when you go to a supermarket there is a guy (or girl) per lane that will put your groceries in a plastic bag for you. 4 items in one bag and they take the next one, why? I don't know. IMHO this measure to reduce plastic in the oceans (which IS a good thing mind you!) should be enforced in those countries, not in those where they make hardly any difference...

Onto hybrid vehicles and such, I think we can write a whole topic on this. We have had hybrid's around in large amounts since... I think 2009. The government sponsored these "clean" vehicles and with tax rebates on company cars everyone leased one. The honda civic hybrid for example looks like a decent sedan and is actually quite a nice car when compared to the stereotypically hideous prius. What happend was that your average lease driver came blowing by at full throttle just to get some performance out of the car resulting in fuel consumption figures that were quite laughable. They never leased them for the environment to begin with. When after 4 years these cars came onto the second hand market, they got picked up by russians (or something close by) in droves because they to had a program that incentivized clean cars but over there it would also apply to a second hand car.

The effort and more importantly MONEY involved in cleaning up the total car inventory of the country by making sure that on the top more clean cars came in that would filter down to the general public after the lease period was enormous, the benefits were near zero. These days hardly any priusses are left on our roads, they've become really rare. Honda hybrids are seen more often since they were I guess easier on the eyes? :) In any case people bought other vehicles as company cars after the hybrids were no longer subsidized. The latest trend has been tesla's. However, from next year on the fiscal rebate on these cars is going to be severely limited and I am willing to bet that the business would will respond by buying audi Q7's and what not again. It was never the environment to begin with, it was cheap.

This leads us nicely into electric vehicles. My information might not be up to date entirely so forgive me if I get some assumptions wrong, however. A tesla is supposed to be a very environmentally friendly vehicle because it drives on electricity. My problem with this premise however is that it costs a HUGE amount of pollution to produce these vehicles, especially the batteries. That is NOT taken into account by those driving or promoting these vehicles. Also, the battery is guaranteed for 8 years but let's say that after 10 years you need to replace one. A car that cost (down here) 100K euro's is by then worth, maybe 25? of that. A new battey pack costs 40K usd. Your car is now "totalled" or a write off. Also, recycling lithium polymer batteries is by far not as effective or efficient as lead acid batteries which has been on a level of something like 98.5% since the seventies! (because there is money in it, industry picked up on that very early)

The short on this: with hopefully the best intentions legislation is passed to help the people and the planet they live on, often enough though the people writing this stuff up are not hindered by any form of knowledge. :(

For those who got this far :) thanks for your patience, back to the issue of safety !

Electric vehicles are registered but in accidents they are far more lethal than any of the other vehicles on the market. Yes even LPG or hydrogen vehicles. Shorting a lithium polymer battery causes fires that can smolder on for a very long time, the chemical composition of the battery makes it so that it produces it's own fuel to burn so it does not matter what you do to it. Over here, I kid you not, fire departments don't dare touch a tesla that has crashed, without someone from tesla telling them it is safe to touch it. People have been stuck in crashed cars for hours because it was to dangerous to touch them. One guy died btw when he hit a tree with 160kph on a 50kph road through a town... If you do that in a ferarri or whatever we would never hear the end of it, this was just highlighted as the first real crash of a tesla in this region. In fact, local fire brigades now have invested in large (certified) containers in which they simply submerge a crashed car in for a week so that any change of spontaneous combustion is eliminated.

I am not against electric propulsion, I have been a fan for years because of the torque and smoothness but I do not believe that batteries are a good solution. I prefer hydrogen. The point I was working towards here is that a tesla might be a pretty safe car with crash avoidance and what not but when things DO go wrong they are potentially more lethal than a roobar. Over here it used to be fairly easy to modify an existing car to electric but the rules and regulations have become so extremely complex that a private person will have a hard time complying. So where does this leave us?

Regarding custom ECU's; I have and still am seriously considering replacing all the computers in my P38 with self made units. For one the lucas stuff is notoriously unreliable (though I have not had any big problems yet) and second it is not very water proof ;) Replacing the BECM is quite an easy job, there is a wire from every switch and to every user. Replacing that with any other kind of unit is just a bunch of programming and soldering but that's it. Using an arduino for example would make it trivial to replace when it breaks on the road, a $50 board, plug in laptop or move over the memory card, done. A megasquirt for the rover V8 is really esay since thousands of people have done it. Replacing both fixes the problem of the BECM and ECU needing to communicate with each other for the code that allows it to start. changing just one of the units will cause trouble. However, since everything communicates through the BECM I might need to look into the hevac, EAS and so on. I draw the line definatly at the ABS and airbag unit, they will remain as they are since that is not something I feel one could reliably reproduce.

Am I reckless in doing so? Is it an increased risk? Would anyone blame me for it? IMHO they are all secondary systems, yes even the ECU. if it should go haywire, turning off the ignition will kill all those devices. Also, cars are supposed to have breaks that can stop the car EVEN when an engine is in a runaway state. Local law here stipulates that you can change the output power of your engine up to 40% without having to re-engineer the vehicle. Without changing the brakes that might be... a bit too much already ;) My point here is; someone pointed out that incorrect use of power is what can cause an accident, but as far as I am concerned I think one should take into account what that extra power CAN do if things go wrong. Adjusting brakes and potentially stiffening up the suspension is a mandatory thought exercise as far as I am concerned. Oh, and please implement it when you feel it necessary :D

Well, this got a bit longer than I had anticipated, sorry, next beer is on me! Let's see if I can get some work done today

Cheers!
-P

[Homestar]

Actually,retired electricians,and electrical engineers also make up a large proportion of people electrocuted.

Could be, I'm only going off the national stats - it only breaks it down to electrical and non electrical.

[Vern]

Actually,retired electricians,and electrical engineers also make up a large proportion of people electrocuted.I have wired 4 new houses for different electrical engineers. 1 was great, he just couldn't be bothered doing it. The other 3, wow, just wow! They should stay behind the computer and not out in the field!

[JDNSW]

Maybe a ittle from column A but there are more people killed doing their own wiring each year (about 10 a year in Australia but dropped dramatically from the early 2000's) than from bleeding the brakes wrong (can't find a single one, but they would be rolled into the road stats anyway) - if you don't get your brakes right, you know about it before scooting off down the road at 100KPH but when dealing with 240 volts, you usually only get one chance - and you don't know anything is wrong until it bites you and it's too late. 9 out of 10 people who die of electrocution are non electrical workers and the general public.

Actually, vehicle defects of any kind are way down the list in contributions to accidents (bearing in mind that all accidents have multiple contributors), and I suspect that of vehicle defects only a tiny proportion are the result of home mechanics. The most common (by far) dangerous defect detected in random checks is tyres - either excessively worn or very wrong pressure. Despite this, only a handful of accidents are attributed to tyres.

I have actually seen at least two where the major contributor would almost certainly have been tyres, but I would guess that in both cases they would have been listed as excessive speed. And yes, they were both going a bit fast for the conditions - but should have been OK if the tyres were good. One came to rest upside down, with four bald tyres clearly visible!

[Mick_Marsh]

One came to rest upside down, with four bald tyres clearly visible!
Nothing wrong with racing slicks. More rubber in contact with the road surface.

It's when they get down to the steel belts that things get skatey.

[scarry]

Nothing wrong with racing slicks. More rubber in contact with the road surface.

It's when they get down to the steel belts that things get skatey.

Or a bit of moisture on the road....[bigsad]

[Ralph1Malph]

I sum this kind of discussion in the following manner:

Here in Australia, for a variety of reasons, we have been raised to believe that 'unless explicitly stated that you can, you CANNOT'!
Whereas many progressive countries believe that 'unless explicitly stated that you cannot, you CAN.'

We are a over governed, over regulated, risk averse nation.
Yes, I know that rules and regs are there for safety (although more and more they're for something other than HUMAN safety) however often, as stated previously, the priority or awareness or risk profile is out of kilter.

My fave example here is that more Australians die in Bali than Afghanistan and Iraq. Depending upon which way this is sliced it's either irresponsible or negligent.

There are those that say that by ratio there have been more Australian deaths per visitor in Iraq and Afghanistan than Bali. This suggests that there is a ratio that is acceptable hence the Govt and DFAT irresponsibly treat the two locations differently. Point here is, if there is an acceptable ratio of deaths, then why do we apply it to tourists, but not electrical work, bullbars or beach visits?

The other way to slice it is to say that any Australian tourist death is bad and rules and regs should be applied and enforced to eliminate them. On this basis, travel to Bali should be banned and the Govt an DFAT are negligent in not regulating it.

Closer to topic, as a tradie and more recently an engineer, what is often neglected is explanation and education as to why a certain 'thing' is like it is. Eg, it's explained and educated why cigarettes are bad (cause heart disease etc) but not explained or educated why low profile spare tyres are limited to 60/80 km/hr for 1-200km. (tread, grip and handling dynamics).

Cheers
Ralph

[trout1105]

As with anything else when making any modifications to your vehicle common sense Must prevail.
If the modification is going to affect the handling or safty of the truck you have to think of ways to do the mod so that these are minimised as much as possible and do you Really NEED the mod in the first place.
I see lots of 4WD's with insane lifts, huge tyres and dodgy looking bar work getting around the tracks and i think to myself that maybe choosing a different vehicle more suited for the job would be a better/safer and cheaper option.
As far as frontal protection goes I would think that unless you are competent enough to engineer and build your own bullbar so that it wont affect the cars safty and handling leave it to the experts.
As far as driving around on bald tyres goes, Don't do it.
You are not only putting you and your passengers lives at risk, You are also putting other road users lives at risk as well.

[Disco-tastic]

Meanwhile, in 'Murica
YouTube (https://youtu.be/oMo_yhDjmC8)

[Mick_Marsh]

Or a bit of moisture on the road....[bigsad]
Remembering, of course, what gives you grip is the surface area of rubber in contact with the road. Adding grooves (tread) to a tyre will reduce the area of rubber in contact with the road, therefore, less grip. When you add a bit of moisture, this acts as a lubricant, so it is important to have as much rubber as possible in contact with the road. When a significant amount of water is on the road, this will cause the tyre to aquaplane, thus reducing the area of rubber in contact with the road. Then, you add groves to the tyre to pump the water out (allow an escape route for the water) to allow the maximum possible area of rubber to be in contact with the road.
In normal dry driving conditions, there is no need for tread. It's just that when it does rain, we all can't dive in to the pits to swap the slicks for the wets.

So, a bit of moisture, the slicks are still just fine.

Oh, unless you were making an understatement, then ignore my post.

[350RRC]

I quite like this thing in the US:

Updated picts on 42's/portals - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum (https://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/land-rover/560516-updated-picts-42s-portals.html)

Engineered? Dunno

Dangerous? Dunno

Has plates though. [biggrin]

DL

[Mercguy]

I quite like this thing in the US:

Updated picts on 42's/portals - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum (https://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/land-rover/560516-updated-picts-42s-portals.html)

Engineered? Dunno

Dangerous? Dunno

Has plates though. [biggrin]

DL
Things were different 11 years ago....

Still. Who wouldn't run portals if given the chance.

[drover81]

Hmmm... such an interesting little thread!

I've been reading Adrian Newey's book 'How to build a car'. He makes a good point that in his initial days as a car designer, he was constantly caught between making the car faster and compromising safety to the driver. He goes on to note that the FIA have done a great thing and removed the safety related burden from the designer and placed it at the feet of the regulations.

It was a simple way of looking at it, but I agree - the laws, rules & regulations in place are there to protect everyone. That's the best place to have safety managed.

That said, if there isn't something written, the onus does come down to the 'designer' to see what options are available and seek to implement the safest solution - easiest way to achieve this is to canvas other's experience and opinion - herein lies the great value in forums like AULRO!

My 2c.