Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 120

Thread: Spot or Flood light bar up under roof rack? NSW roof light legality?

  1. #101
    DiscoMick Guest
    Queensland doesn't have annual inspections, you just get a notice and pay the bill.

    Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

  2. #102
    Homestar's Avatar
    Homestar is offline Super Moderator & CA manager Subscriber
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sunbury, VIC
    Posts
    20,105
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoMick View Post
    Queensland doesn't have annual inspections, you just get a notice and pay the bill.

    Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app
    Same in Vic which is why I suspect there's so many stuck to the top of the bullbars. I'm even thinking of doing this myself as there's no room below for one now on the mighty Hilux, although I probably don't need it, I think 'want' sums it up better.
    If you need to contact me please email homestarrunnerau@gmail.com - thanks - Gav.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    South Yundreup,WA.
    Posts
    7,468
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Not_An_Abba_Fan View Post
    In WA it is actually legal to have a roof mounted lightbar as long as it is covered while on the road and not activated by high beam. It is deemed an off road or "work" light.
    Yep, but most dont run covers at all and a big majority are wired up to high beam. Often get blinded by idiots with these as they hit you well before they see your lights coming toward them before they dip the high beam.
    I have my second set of spots mounted on top of the bull bar and have never had an issue, but they dont interfere with the drivers vision. From what I understand they are supposed to be in line or below bonnet line and not obstruct view in anyway.
    2011 Discovery 4 TDV6
    2009 DRZ400E Suzuki
    1956 & 1961 P4 Rover (project)
    1976 SS Torana (project - all cash donations or parts accepted)
    2003 WK Holden Statesman
    Departed
    2000 Defender Extreme: Shrek (but only to son)
    84 RR (Gone) 97 Tdi Disco (Gone)
    98 Ducati 900SS Gone & Missed

    Facta Non Verba

  4. #104
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tatura, Vic
    Posts
    6,336
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Have most of you read the article in my link in the OP?

    If you have, then most are suggesting that they have got it wrong.
    Dave.

    I was asked " Is it ignorance or apathy?" I replied "I don't know and I don't care."


    1983 RR gone (wish I kept it)
    1996 TDI ES.
    2003 TD5 HSE
    1987 Isuzu County

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Western Victoria
    Posts
    14,101
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by d2dave View Post
    Have most of you read the article in my link in the OP?

    If you have, then most are suggesting that they have got it wrong.
    I did.
    It's their opinion and interpretation.
    To see the truth, you have to look at the source document. When you do, you find even that is open to interpretation.

    for example, from the ADR:
    7.3.4.3 In length: at the front of the vehicle and fitted in such a way that the light emitted does not cause discomfort to the driver either directly or indirectly through the rear-view mirrors and/or other reflecting surfaces of the vehicle.
    One interpretation is, if they are mounted on the roof, over the driver, who in in the front seat, and do not reflect back into the eyes of the driver, they are mounted in the front i.e. the front part of the vehicle.

    If you disagree, then the standard headights on a Landrover do not conform to the ADRs. That is because they ar behind the bumper bar and therefore not at the front of the vehicle.
    People (and police, vehicle inspectors and other people in authority) should practice a little common sense. As long as it's not dangerous, what is wrong with it?

  6. #106
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tatura, Vic
    Posts
    6,336
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Here is an extract from the magazine.
    The magazine has stated what they claim they were told by the relevant states authorities.

    To me it is not the opinion of the magazine.


    Dave.

    I was asked " Is it ignorance or apathy?" I replied "I don't know and I don't care."


    1983 RR gone (wish I kept it)
    1996 TDI ES.
    2003 TD5 HSE
    1987 Isuzu County

  7. #107
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Dalyellup
    Posts
    165
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Although it is hear say, and not admissable in court.....

    Any rule or regulation is interpretation. You can argue roadside noise testing too, the police that have a noise meter and do a noise check on your car are not doing it according to the regulations, therefore their "test" is not correct you can't be issued a defect, doesn't stop them though.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tatura, Vic
    Posts
    6,336
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Not_An_Abba_Fan View Post
    Although it is hear say, and not admissable in court.....
    Fully agree, however a magazine like this surely should have some credibility
    and you would expect their information to be accurate.

    I wonder how this scenario would go. There is a fatal accident which is attributed to a driver been blinded by a roof mounted light bar.

    Driver is charged because car has roof mounted light bar that the police deem illegal.

    Chain of responsibility suggests that the magazine could also be found to have contributed to the accident, due to the driver believing that it was legal.
    Dave.

    I was asked " Is it ignorance or apathy?" I replied "I don't know and I don't care."


    1983 RR gone (wish I kept it)
    1996 TDI ES.
    2003 TD5 HSE
    1987 Isuzu County

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Western Victoria
    Posts
    14,101
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by d2dave View Post
    Here is an extract from the magazine.
    The magazine has stated what they claim they were told by the relevant states authorities.

    To me it is not the opinion of the magazine.


    And magazines get it right all the time?

    What is the journalists motto, "Never let the thruth get in the way of good story."

    For me to take that article as fact, I would want to know the names of the people in the various registration authorities and the positions they hold. I wouldn't hold the opinion of the cleaner in Vicroads HO in high regard when it comes to motoring rules.
    I've had conflicting advice from the people at the counter. That usually is the catalyst for an interesting discussion amongst Vicroads employees.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Perth WA
    Posts
    1,423
    Total Downloaded
    0
    [ame]http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/mediaFiles/licensing/LBU_VS_IB_132A.pdf[/ame]

    This is the current regulations for light bars in WA. It is an exemption notice and current for 3 years from 8 August 2015.

Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!