KKtrips

It's all good to go, processed it through this avo, but won't go live till Monday, the plate guy had gone home by the time I finished the review.

PS - Matt, you are a fucking crazy mo-fo, the level of detail is borderline psycho and I have half the office around my desk creaming themselves looking through the pics.

Oh hello. What's this we have here...

point 3 - VCC can assist you with producing the evidence that you might need from their archives, but they are not directly involved in the decision making process. point 4 - Yes a vehicle will get a new identity if it is a scratch built, and they are registered as the year that they are completed, typically they year of final inspection, your example would probably be named a : 2021 LVV Replica Bentley Le Mans point 5 - Did you have a body that you based your design on or did you just make it up out of your head for what looked right? Perhaps you have some images of that, the internet would probably be a great source. No problems. Happy to help.

I've summarised your post into the questions and will do my best to answer as accurately as I can. This is entirely unofficial advice as there is no documented answers I can fall back on, so this can only be considered a subjective opinion at best. 1) A scratch built vehicle can be made up of any parts, as long as they are automotive parts that meet the relevant requirements. 2) The process for a car made from a pile of parts is that they are nearly always deemed to be scratch-built. It is unlikely that a car made from a collection of parts could be called a modified production vehicle. (also refer to my point about rebirthing stolen vehicles in my previous post) 3) This is a tricky one - it should replicate an existing vehicle but if they were all effectively a unique appearing vehicle, then I think there may be grounds to consider a replica vehicle built using similar construction methods and materials, however it must replicate in appearance and performance to what you would expect from a vehicle at the time. (ie: you can't make a space ship shaped body running a smallblock Chevy on a 1927 Rolls Royce chassis and say it is a Historical Replica because 1927 Rolls Royces were all unique coach built to order) 4) It's easier to explain this one with some scenarios for vehicles with identity - Replacing the body on a vehicle with like for like is a repair and is considered OE production vehicle, (example - fitting an unfucked Hilux body onto a Hilux chassis that has had the body rolled over and squashed) - Modifying the body on a vehicle is a modification that requires certification, and is considered a modified production vehicle, (example - cutting a Corolla station wagon into a ute body) - Fitting a full custom body on a vehicle makes the vehicle a scratch-built vehicle (example - fitting a fibreglass beach buggy body onto a VW beetle floorpan) Almost all vehicles without identity will fall into a scratch-built category unless they successfully apply Alt Docs and the vehicle gains an identity through that process. 5) Suitable information would be a description of the vehicle that your replica is replicating, it should include information covering the full running gear, chassis, construction methods etc alongside with as many images of the vehicle as is possible, pair the same information for your vehicle and we can make a comparison. It does not have to be a rivet for rivet identical, but if we can compare them, see a comparable silhouette, find substantially similar running gear and construction, then there is a possibility it could be accepted as a Historic Replica. Again - this is not official advice, but the best I can provide having sat in on these meetings before where these determinations have been made.

Gidday Simon, it was me you talked to on the phone yesterday at LVVTA. Reading your recount, I think I did not fully explain a part which might help clear up a couple of the issues you are having. An important part to understand is a critical element missing for your vehicle, which does not allow it to proceed as a Modified Production Vehicle, is a lack of an identity in Landata (a record) and I suspect the vehicles that have been certified previously, were built from vehicles that had an existing identity in Landata. The Alt Docs (CA03) is a way for a vehicle without an identity in Landata (that would have previously had one but has been lost to time) to gain an identity. However if you have built the car out of a bunch of spare parts lying around and/or purchased from swap meets and/or parts made from scratch, then it is not likely to get Alt Docs approved. This is to prevent duplication of identities, for example: say there are 3 vehicle owners with 1932 Fords, all making upgrades to their vehicles and after their upgrades, one will have a spare chassis, the second has a spare engine and the third has a spare cowl and fenders. Someone cannot combine those parts with a bunch of custom made parts and/or parts from a parts catalogue and then simply register it as a 1932 Ford, as this would mean there are now 4 x 1932 Fords, where there were once 3 x 1932 Fords. Unfortunately, without an identity it will be a scratch-built vehicle and needs to meet all the requirements for a 2021 scratchbuilt vehicle, however Historic Replicas do have a few relaxations for some of the requirements. For it to be considered an Historic Replica it must be an authentic replica (not readily distinguishable from the original) of a historically existing vehicle from a period of motoring history before 1960. All other scratch-builts are Reproductions or Custom/Unique. If you feel there is sufficient justification to classify it as a Historic Replica, work with a certifier to provide the information required to Head Office and we will discuss it at our tech working group with NZTA to hopefully achieve a desirable outcome. Not necessarily relevant in your case, but it is worth noting for anyone else reading this post, is that some vehicles don't fit the box of a scratch built OR modified production vehicle, for example: you cannot build a vehicle entirely from a pile of original parts and simply declare it is a scratch-built vehicle. As this process could be abused and end up rebirthing stolen vehicles, to prevent this, there are quite a few hoops to jump through and the process is not an easy ride. Hopefully I have filled in a couple of the gaps, it's always hard to fill in all the information in a single phone call. Cheers KK (Chris)

Sounds like a top bloke.

This reminds me, we need to have a drunken sharn night, been a while since the last one, from memory that might have been Waiarapa 2018, when we shared the cab of a Micro truck?

Another glacial update - motor is nearly done at the reconditioners, should have it back soon for reassembly In the meantime, I got all that really complicated sound deadening done around the drivers footwell. SO many shapes to get around.

/beaten like a $20 hooker.

Information was taken from the 2020 ETRTO Standard (like below but more current). Then a comparison was made to see if there were any common areas on the previous infosheet that we could increase over the ETRTO as we had already accepted them previously. Anywhere there was a logical choice to increase, it was done, but only up to a max of 1/2" more than the ETRTO. Then where there were gaps in the chart, they were filled in by following the patterns of up to down and left to right.

I hope that having a single sheet is much easier to use than the bible that the old one was. That was my idea so you can blame me if not.

Yeah there were a couple of errors on the old one, which we have cleaned up, probably get some flak for it, but we couldn't perservere with the errors that were on the old one.

Yes, and some hotdog flavoured water to wash it down...

Also for everyone waiting, here is the draft new Tyre Size to Rim Compatibility Guide which has gone out for consultation. It may be subject to change, so don't count all your horses in one basket yet.

Tyre tread is the part that rolls on the road, so the horizontal part and probably a portion of the part that rolls around the corner. But vertical (sidewall) tread is not part of the tread in regards to guard coverage. I would expect coverage of the horizontal to the red line.

The intent is aimed at jacked up 4WDs etc requiring mudflaps. I was there during the discussion and as far as I recall it was agreed that if the mudguard tapered off at the tail end then that would be OK, but it would seem that the words that Tony wrote did not allow for that.

The sheet is completed and is in the mailout that is going out this week. Will post here once the updated document has been uploaded.

Had the SCU in work today and I asked him your question, the answer is that they typically won't pull over anyone in an area with no cell phone coverage, because it puts them at too much risk if shit goes bad, so they will typically follow at a distance to somewhere that is safer, or if there is 2 of them, they will pull you over to instruct the driver to a place where it is safer down the road. But he said, not many cops pull over modified cars because they are modified, they simply don't have time for the paperwork, they are nearly always pulled over because they are speeding or being a dickhead on the road and the modified side only becomes an issue where they occupants are failing the attitude test or there is obvious safety or public annoyance issues.

Yup, it'll be a PDF on the LVVTA website.

The new Engine and Drivetrain standard has been relaxed. (note the Driveshaft Loop info-sheet you got above from has been withdrawn) New requirements are 9.22.1 Unless 9.22.2 or 9.22.3 applies, a drive-shaft safety-loop must be fitted at the forward end of each section of drive-shaft transmitting power to the rear wheels on any low volume vehicle which is of a front-engine and either rear-wheel drive or four-wheel drive configuration, and which incorporates an open drive-line, if: (a) the vehicle has had an engine conversion which has resulted in a significant increase in power or torque; or (b) the vehicle has had its factory-fitted engine modified such that a significant increase in power or torque has resulted; or (c) the drive-shaft fitted to the vehicle, either: (i) has been modified by welding; or (ii) is an aftermarket drive-shaft, including one made from steel, carbon-fibre, aluminium, or a composite material. FYI - 9.22.2 and 9.22.3 are other exclusions for not requiring a driveshaft loop and a significant increase is considered to be 50% or greater.

You might not need driveshaft loops. Has the driveshaft been modified at all? Does it make 50% more power or torque than factory?

Well if you are in an area of no cellphone reception, I expect they will probably end up looking over the vehicle, and either calling into control to look up the information or if it is during business hours, ask them to call LVVTA. But to be honest most cops won't pull you over in the middle of nowhere for a modified vehicle check unless they see you being a dickhead and based on the response they get from the occupants of the vehicle, will either look for something to sticker you on, or give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that come WoF time, the WoF inspector will ping it.

Why are you asking people who are not policeman about what a policeman would do in a highly improbable scenario? I'm sure the first time it happens to someone, we will all hear about it and no matter what we guess right now, we will probably be wrong. The answer will either be the cop will do nothing, and you will scoff at the answer because ACAB, or the cop will do something and you will blow a fuse because ACAB.

I just got the final version of the revised Tyre-rim Compatibility Infosheet approved last week. It'll probably be out in the coming week or so. It's been simplified and reduced down to 1 page of comparisons rather than 6 pages.