Printable View
The lean is a BS statement, as suggested swap the springs around and see how you go. Fuel filter, that's the factory spot dunno what the blokes on about. So that makes all RRC post 1986 not roadworthy? What a tool :mad::mad::mad:
Only time I cringe when I get an old Rangie is roadworthy time. At least you only have to do it once.
Trav
I had one RWC inspector say I had to replace the springs in the wiper arms. When I tried to get springs from a parts supplier he asked why? I told him and he suggested the RWC fellow was being ridiculous and suggested I just say they had been replaced.
So, on the day of the next inspection, the RWC tester went through the list. I told him I had replaced the springs with good s/h ones. He lifted the wiper arms and said "Much better."
I got my RWC.
As far as I'm aware they only have to do this if it fails the first time. They do still however have to take pictures of the VIN I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by goingbush
Surely the issue is not whether it leans, but rather how much it leans. There must be a limit to how much is acceptable.Quote:
Originally Posted by lidvii
I always have a copy of the RRC requirements from Vicroads with me when I get any car done. If they say something needs doing I ask them to point out where in the document it says that. Half the time they can't show me, so I ask them to cross that off the list or I will report them to Vicroads.
I have found a reasonable place to get them done now - they only pick on what is in the document and not all that other ****.
Here is the doc -http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/NR/rd...6_1212_WEB.pdf
They can only pick what is listed in here. At a quick glance I can't find anything to say your fuel filter is unroadworthy.
Ive had plenty of horrors trying to get landies roadworthy..Quote:
Originally Posted by goingbush
My favorite was replace the brake pads on a series.
"Sorry mate can you come and show me how you inspected that? I didnt see you put the vehicle over the pit or climb under it"
I did.
"Funny I didnt see you take the wheels off"
You dont have to take the wheels off to inspect pad thickness you just peek in over the top of the backing plate inside the rim with an inspection mirror and a torch. Have you ever inspected brakes before?
"yep, I want you to come out and show me how you inspected the pads, I suspect that if you had you would have noticed something about the rotors too"
yeah, they were a bit thin, Think I'll write you up for them too since your being a smart ass.
(Scribble)
"Go get your supervisor you idiot"
(at that point the conversation degrades into a one on one abuse match till the supervisor comes over)
Whats the problem.
"Apparently the pads and rotors on my 76 series landy are worn below legal limits"
Dont old landies have drum brakes
"Yep, explain that to the numpty thats just officially recorded that my vehicles brake pads and rotors are below legal limits, might also want to tell him to remove fuel leak from carby since its a diesel"
Naturally the rate of crashes, injuries and fatalities due to mechanical defects in those states that have annual roadworthy inspections is far less than the same figures for West Australia.....:angel::angel::angel:
The Vehicle Unit of Monash University have actually investigated this and found that there is no difference of accident rates caused by mechanical failures between jurisdictions that have annual roadworthys and those that don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by superquag
The reasons were complex but the main reason was that in the states with roadworthies drivers tend not to maintain their cars as well and let the tester pick up things once a year and if things like tyres are noticed before hand they are left until testing time and do it then. In states with no roadworthys owners tend to fix things when they pick them up - now these are overall findings and we all know people who do nothing and others who do a lot.
Garry
There is a discussion paper just released in Vic in which one scenario would see the RWC dropped entirely. A more likely one is that RWC would be dropped for cars less than 10 years old.
I can't see them dropping them entirely - maybe it is the start of a push to a yearly check like other states.
Yes, that's exactly it. All talk of springs sagging over time etc is in addition to the factory setup right hand lean. All my cars (japanese and euro) are like this. It compensates for the camber in the road.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzman
But just wait for someone to chime in claiming that higher springs should go in the drivers side to "carry the weight of the driver".
However, in addition to the normal bias, my 85 RRC had the radius arm brackets welded on the front diff not straight. One would sit higher than the other when the diff was removed with arms attached. The disco diff I have in there now has both arms even. But I don't know when exactly they fixed the problem in the factory.
This bracket misalignment causes all rangies of that era to lean more to the right. Even the ones in LHD countries.
With straight radius arm brackets and the right springs they lean ~10mm to the right in RHD countries and ~10mm to the left in LHD countries.
In NZ we have 6 monthly WOF checks. For vehicles under 6 years old it's every 12 months. I just had another today.
With four vehicles I see those guys 7 times a year.