fbekholden.com

Mick wrote: don't take anything i'm saying as an arguement it's just disscussion and thinking out loud, it's good to hear from someone that knows what the rules are

No problems here, all good sensible debate.

Dr Terry

Dr Terry wrote:
You are correct, however the Sam Barris cars were one-off seriously modified cars & were not 'era typical' of cars of the 50s. Even they were, they involve serious modifications, which need engineering approval, so obviously they are not acceptable on H-plates. If engineered, they will probably qualify for the new scheme. As I've said a couple of times now, the word 'modified' does not appear in the RMS H-plate rules.

I don't want to go into the 'nitty gritty' of the problem with the Victorian model, but there are several serious issues down there.

Victoria does not have yearly NSW pink slip type inspections, so once a 'dodgy car' has been 'accepted, then it goes under the radar for good. There are a lot of unroadworthy cars (drag cars & others) in Victoria masquerading as 'historic' & the insurance companies are seeing a surge in comprehensive claims as a result. All this does is make it more difficult & more expensive for the genuine guys who just want to enjoy their old car every 2nd weekend, or whatever.

Dr Terry.

Its a shame modified cars get left out as most are just as passionate as the restorers.

As for the Vic side of it, we are lucky as the RACV have battled long and hard to keep from having yearly inspections as they have statistics that prove unroadworthy cars are a very minor contribution to accident numbers.

As for "dodgy cars" on plates yes there are a few and most owners know there days are numbered as Vicroads are aware and stated so in the new revised scheme. They aren't going to call in cars but if pulled over and deemed unsafe you will need to fix and possibly engineer the mods. I know of a few already one of which actually passed the engineers with no changes required. Might be a bit of an exaggeration about the insurance as I'm pretty sure the amount of club plated cars in accidents is and has been very low. Especially seeing how our media love to jump all over so called acts of hooning.

I'm not sure if you're aware of all the changes that happened as of January this year. There is now a set of standards for club rego agreed to by the vast majority of clubs. Anyone interested can Google vsi33 to see what has been approved. Sure it's not perfect but the changes that have been brought about this year to me go a long way to making it a very good scheme for any car enthusiast to use and enjoy.

As for the Vic side of it, we are lucky as the RACV have battled long and hard to keep from having yearly inspections as they have statistics that prove unroadworthy cars are a very minor contribution to accident numbers.



I gotta say I'm staggered the RACV uses that as an argument for justifying non yearly checks.

They're admitting that there are unroadworthy cars out there, but it's ok because they may not contribute greatly to accident numbers ?

It sounds good to me. None of us would drive more than say 5000 km per year, most would be under 1000km per year in our old cars. I travelled around Australia in my old land cruiser and camper for 5 years. I maintained it the same no matter what the state regs were. I had to transfer it to different state Rego's because I couldn't get back to nsw for the Pink slip. I felt no more danger on Qld or WA or SA or Vic roads. New cars in nsw don't need pink slips for the first 5 years. Rego checks are $35.00 each so the mechanic certainly doesn't spend much time checking Them over. I see no great benefit in yearly inspection, it is just what we are used to that makes other states seem too lenient.

yes it's ok for the people that maintain there cars but there are plenty that it means beauty drive the car till it stops, i know of one in QLD a few years back now and keep this in mind they would drive around with there kids in the car ............. you could not open the rear doors because of rust in the car basically they were helping keep the car togeather

Cal wrote:I gotta say I'm staggered the RACV uses that as an argument for justifying non yearly checks.

They're admitting that there are unroadworthy cars out there, but it's ok because they may not contribute greatly to accident numbers ?

It's just part of their argument Cal. Not all, they have said even bringing in yearly checks is no guarantee you will have 100% of the cars on the road in a roadworthy state. Which I'm sure you all know someone who gets a dodgy yearly examination and others who use it as a tool to generate extra income, but we digress from the original topic.

iso007 wrote: New cars in nsw don't need pink slips for the first 5 years. Rego checks are $35.00 each so the mechanic certainly doesn't spend much time checking Them over. I see no great benefit in yearly inspection, it is just what we are used to that makes other states seem too lenient.

I realise that we are now off topic, but we might as well continue, because it's all related.

Speaking as the owner of a workshop & an RMS inspector, i think that the 5-year inspection thing was a retrograde step. Up to a few years ago it was a 3-year minimum & a decade ago it was every year for every car.

It seems that there are 3 main types of drivers. There are those who don't drive many kms, there are those who drive high kms & get their car serviced regularly & there are those who just drive their car into the ground, with no real service schedule in mind. Sadly the majority of drivers in Sydney (in my area anyway) that belong to the last group.

Typically they'll buy a new Hyundai/Kia (or whatever has a nice long warranty) @ $20,000 drivaway (or less) then drive it until something happens. When they hear a grinding noise they get their brakes fixed, when they can't see at night they might get their headlights looked at, but other than that they just keep driving. Luckily modern cars are pretty reliable so most get away with it, but many come to grief when they try a warranty claim for example, on an crook engine that has travelled 80,000 km in 3 or 4 years without oil changes.

I get to see many of these cars at the 3 or 4 year mark, with 4 bald tyres (thru to the steel belts) & a multitude of globes out & no functioning wiper blades remaining. I firmly believe that the annual rego inspection is a good reminder to at least have the bonnet opened & maybe get the car serviced.

The yearly rego check in NSW is basically a safety check, not a full RWC, as many people seem to think.

Dr Terry

I agree with Dr Terry on this one - an annual safety check is a good idea for those who drive their cars into the ground, and easy to pass for those who maintain their gear.

What craps me is when the safety check becomes over the top, and an invitation to gain new work for a workshop. Had one RWC indicate that absolutely no oil leaks at all were permissible from the FB... but they could fix it for me.

Cheers,
Harv

Dr terry. It would be better for you if these uncaring car owners were driving volkswagons. They use up to 500ml of oil per 1000ks. So if they didn't check under the bonnet at least once a month you would get an engine rebuild out of it. It is unbelievable that in 2015, any car manufacturer could get away with this.

PM sent Dr Terry

iso007 wrote:Dr terry. It would be better for you if these uncaring car owners were driving volkswagons. They use up to 500ml of oil per 1000ks. So if they didn't check under the bonnet at least once a month you would get an engine rebuild out of it. It is unbelievable that in 2015, any car manufacturer could get away with this.

You look in the service book of any new VW, Audi, Toyota, and many other makes and they'll tell you that using up to 1lt of oil per 1000km is acceptable .

Anyway, I agree with others. Yearly rego checks should be compulsory. The Vic system is too open for abuse

Yes the oil use is acceptable to them so they don't have to field Warranty claims from disillusioned customers.
If we were in Vic, I am sure you wouldn't go to a Mechanic and get him to do a yearly safety check on your car.

You nsw folk are brain washed into paying for these checks once a year and you like it! [SMILING FACE WITH OPEN MOUTH AND COLD SWEAT]

I agree 100 percent Trev. If we changed it to Vic system, there wouldn't be too many complaints , me thinks

iso007 wrote:Yes the oil use is acceptable to them so they don't have to field Warranty claims from disillusioned customers.
If we were in Vic, I am sure you wouldn't go to a Mechanic and get him to do a yearly safety check on your car.

But the fact I'm forced to take it for a yearly rego check means I'd have to replace those bald tyres, or fix that dodgy headlight, or whatever. That's the point of it