Try not to laugh too hard - am doing mechanics course ...

Hi Panda;

Good on you for undertaking an automotive repaire course , that really shows how brave you are.:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panda

But you we're supposed to say that you were thinking, it was multiple choice, can you explain more fully for me please, I don't get it ...

---

The first answer just insinuated that there were 4 up strokes and 4 down strokes. You've described the process in each of the 4 strokes which is correct, (so there is 2 up strokes and 2 down strokes with each combustion) but the answer selected sounds like you're saying there are a total of 8 strokes in the cycle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

a four stroke engine completes a cycle with 2 revolutions of the engine.

the first rotation comprises of the intake and compression strokes (down then up) the second rotation comprises of the power and exhuast strokes (down then up again)

what you have confused is the definitions of cycle, rotations and strokes.

the cycle is typically defined as being from TDC ready for intake to TDC ready for intake.

In a verbose multiple choice assessment 1 answer will be stupidly wrong so can be discounted, 1 will have the correct term(s) but will either be incorrectly sequenced or numbered, 1 answer will have the correct numbers and sequence but the wrong term(s) and the last will usually be the correct answer unless its a 5 choice answer in which case the last answer will either be all are correct or none are correct.



the true false one is a dicey one, I got it wrong as well but prooved that I was correct by asking them to show me the VIN Plate on a registered series II landy that was on base.

However.

the test was written with only current ADR's in mind and their answer, on that basis, is the correct one. You can't legally register a car without a VIN plate and a vehicle that cant be registered cant be driven (so long as you obey the law) which is what the question is inferring but not what is written (assuming youve quoted the question and not paraphrased).

If you got a pass dont get twisted around the axles about it, If its the difference between a pass/fail then its worth asking the questions about.

---

Pretty much that, its kinda getting into semantics really, as its more a stress on terms when your theory was sound, just the wording was incorrect:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sprint

you dont need a VIN plate to legally own/register/drive a vehicle

quite a few cars have been stolen and recovered with VIN plates either stolen or mutilated, and have had a surrogate VIN issued to them, no plate, just stamped on the block and body

---

One of my cars doesn't have a compliance plate (I assume that's what is meant by VIN plate?). I don't know why, but it was that way when I bought it. Most likely the importer forgot to fit the plate as there isn't anything indicating one has been removed. I checked with the RTA before buying and it all checked out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hoadie72

One of my cars doesn't have a compliance plate (I assume that's what is meant by VIN plate?). I don't know why, but it was that way when I bought it. Most likely the importer forgot to fit the plate as there isn't anything indicating one has been removed. I checked with the RTA before buying and it all checked out.

---

I'm pretty sure VIN and Complience are on different plates??????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slunnie

I'm pretty sure VIN and Complience are on different plates??????

---

Actually, if they look like this, I don't have one

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

...
the test was written with only current ADR's in mind and their answer, on that basis, is the correct one. You can't legally register a car without a VIN plate and a vehicle that cant be registered cant be driven (so long as you obey the law) which is what the question is inferring but not what is written (assuming youve quoted the question and not paraphrased...

---

I hope they do include material about cars that don't have VIN plates, last thing I need is some apprenttis that knows nothing about older cars. My Series IIA hasn't got a VIN plate and only recently passed a RWC and is now regoed...

I also agree about the wording of the question, as far as i am concerned you are correct. Removing the VIN plate from a vehicle does not render it 'undriveable' - you can still get in it and drive it around, nothing phyically stopping this. All they had to do was add 'legally driveable' to the question and this would clear up alot of problems. But then there are the older cars which do not have VIN plates to start with...

It's a vicious cycle :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panda

Q. "A car must carry a vehicle identification plate before it can be driven."

I answered "False."

Correct answer is apparently "True."

Just because a vehicle doesn't have a VIP surely you can still drive it ... I understand that if there isn't one it can indicate it has been removed because of illegal use (for whatever reason), however, aren't there some cases when the VIP can be removed for innocent reasons? Anyway, it still doesn't mean the car couldn't be driven, does it???

---

From a legal perspective, the lack of a compliance plate, VIP, or number plate will not prevent a vehicle from been driven.

Same with missing headlights, seatbelts or even seats for that matter. None of these things will prevent a vehicle from been driven. Even on a public road.

So, technically, your answer is correct.

If the question was "A car must carry a vehicle identification plate before it can be legally driven on a public road." or similar, or if the question related around the registration requiremtents, then that is a totally different kettle of fish.

Considering you only missed out on 2 out of 20 questions, I reackon you did really well.

Anyone who has anything to do with legal stuff, be it law, contracts, standards, OHS&W etc, will tell you that 1 word can totally change the meaning of things significantly. Think about the difference of "must" and "should".

I see where panda got it wrong in the 4 stroke question, however i would suggest that the question does not necessarily test your understanding of the 4 stroke cycle, more it tests your understanding of the semantics of the question.

A shame because its not an english exam.

Nick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hastykiwi

I see where panda got it wrong in the 4 stroke question, however i would suggest that the question does not necessarily test your understanding of the 4 stroke cycle, more it tests your understanding of the semantics of the question.

A shame because its not an english exam.

Nick

---

There are a lot of problems with exam questions. That question wouldn't even test understanding if it were easier to understand, it tests an ability to rote learn (memorise).