KKtrips

Combination of leverage, increased weight and increased HP giving less time for the heat to disipitate between heat cycles. But I understand the extra leverage plays a massive part.

These just popped up on FahBuh right now for $750 - nice and close to you in Havelock too... https://www.facebook.com/groups/1524300857866952/permalink/2421554838141545/?sale_post_id=2421554838141545&ref=messenger_banner

Most Hilux's have to stick with 31" tall tyres and give the brakes a full overhaul. Are you running Safari axles?

FYI - potential solutions are 33x10.5 tyres on a 7"wide rim and you are also allowed to fit 33x12.5"wide tyres on an 8" wide rim. The LVVTA tyre chart says minimum 8.5" but its changed and the tyre-rim chart has not been updated yet. In saying that, the problem you might have with 33" tyres is hauling that bad boy up and passing the brake test. Hiluxes can fail on 33's with a 3 stop brake test, yours being a scratch build requires a 5 stop brake test and I think that you are going to have an issue passing a brake test.

Spent the morning cleaning up the last couple bits to put the subframe together, had the sexy @Steelies and his good lady Ms Steelies call in and say hi, then @LoveChild made a surprise visit soon after. Bloody nice of y'all. Decided I need a bunch of gold passivated bolts to make it all look pretty so compiled the bolts I need to buy and hopefully I can find them all this week. Anyhow after doing all those bits and pieces I got onto the bit I was not looking forward to which was to clean up the shitty looking brake calipers and mounts. Broke them down to the individual components and proceeded to wire brush the living shit out of them. I was going to vapour blast them but I'm happy with the outcome especially at the low low cost of 90 minutes of elbow grease and this before and after doesn't really do the justice of how much nicer they look now. So anyhow after a morning of filth and grime, I went to Ms Steelies coffee shop and rewarded myself with the finest coffee in Wellington (Coolsville in Hataitai for those who care) and currently kicking back in my tracksuit pants and hoodie in front of the heat-pump pretending its an open fire. Enjoying a windless but brisk Wellington winter afternoon listening to podcasts with my pussy giving me the stink eye. Your pal, Dave

LVVTA Wheels and Tyre Standard says... Aluminum wheels must not be repaired unless the repair is carried out in accordance with the requirements specified for wheel repair within the Land Transport Rule: Wheels and Tyres 2001 (Rule 32013), in which case it is not a modification. Land Transport Wheels and Tyre Rule says... 3.2(5) A repair to an alloy wheel must: (a) be compatible with the material specification of the item to be repaired; and (b) restore the damaged or worn wheel so that it is within safe tolerance of its original state when manufactured, as able to be demonstrated by a physical test

Yes, you need to have access in and out of the back seat. But you can get away with only one side having access in and out. So the drivers seat can be fixed back buckets.

Depends, how good are the welds? I would say give it a DT and see how it fairs.

I would check to see if it was actually classed as a 5 seater originally. If it did then it would have had 5 seatbelts from factory as that was the requirement in NZ from 1 November 1979. Officially - if it only ever had 4 seatbelts from factory, I would look at getting it reclassed as a 4 seater and also get your cert plate changed so it is compliant. Unofficially - it is unlikely to cause a problem for you unless someone was going over your car with a fine tooth comb which would not typically happen unless it was going through Low Volume or Entry Certification. The fact it has been through certification already says it passed a close scrutiny check once before so probably would't get picked up.

FYI - returning a vehicle to stock there are 2 processes are called a Full Return to Standard or Partial Return to Standard Both require a certifier inspect the vehicle for any modifications that have been removed, and that they have been removed appropriately and safely and also that there are no subsequent modifications since originally certified. If the answer to both is yes, then the certifier will remove the plate and get in touch with LVVTA to advise a full return to standard. LVVTA will remove the reference to the plate out of Landata or if it is a partial return to standard then LVVTA will print a revised plate and send to the certifier for them to fit. Both require to pay the certifier for their time spent inspecting the vehicle, completing any paperwork and attaching the revised plate (if necessary) A partial return to standard also attracts a plate reprint fee from LVVTA. Keeping in mind that if you are changing a gearbox that was originally changed from Manual to Auto before certification and now going back to Manual and the replacement gearbox is not the same as the original OE manual gearbox, then a full recert is required, because it is not returning to stock, it is a further modification.

I'm not sure its ready for my level of sarcasm.

LoL

As stated above, it's not the lift that kicks a 4WD into requiring cert, it's the additional mods that come with it.

Yes, the issue will come about from the angle of the steering drag link will be steep enough that you will probably need to fit a longer/adjustable drag link. That does require cert.

Grab a copy of the threshold document. It lists all the modifications that don't require certification in one handy location. https://lvvta.org.nz/documents/suplementary_information/LVVTA_LVV_Cert_Threshold.pdf

Are they live front axles?

How do you decide that a vehicle you are inspecting for a WoF requires cert.

It's not a 50mm lift that requires cert. It's how it is lifted that makes that determination.

I haven't checked a WoF for 15 years, so I'm outta touch. Maybe @alltorque can correct me on the way things are done these days.

Also, don't worry, I "argue" with people all day long. It's normally only the ones who take a highly unlikely modification and apply a requirement in a hypothetical situation that doesn't even apply to their own vehicle just to win an "argument". It's those people who wig me out.

Normally a WoF inspector would not need to ask the question provided the vehicle was not extreme in height and the vehicle handled and performed as expected. If their alarm bells were going off then it would be up to the owner to prove their vehicle complied, it is not up to the WoF inspector to prove it doesn't. A WoF inspector has a certain amount of descretion, that's why they have to had been in the trade for 4 years prior to getting their authority.

Yes edit: for clarity, must be catalogued by a reputable suspension manufacturer, not a list of part numbers on some random spreadsheet on an obscure website.

I get calls about this kind of thing several times a week, a vehicle owner will ring up complaining that a WoF inspector has incorrectly interpreted a requirement telling them they need a cert. From the information provided by the vehicle owner we can determine the WoF inspector has correctly interpreted the requirement and I can explain this to the vehicle owner. we can determine the WoF inspector has incorrectly interpreted the requirement and I encourage the vehicle owner to get the inspector to call me and I can explain it to them When the WoF inspector calls I can explain the requirements to them, sometimes it turns out the information provided by the caller was incorrect or an important detail was missed out of the conversation meaning the WoF inspector was actually correct and I encourage the WoF inspector to then get the vehicle owner to call me back so I can explain it to them if needed. We have pretty good bullshit detectors here and can get most of the necessary information out of the vehicle owner pretty quickly unless they are intentionally hiding something knowing it will change the answer, a call from the WoF inspector usually clears that up though.

No I don't sorry. FYI - in this instance, direct replacement means an unmodified catalogued part for the vehicle. eg: if you fit R32 Skyline springs in an R31 Skyline they may fit but they are not a direct replacement.

What's vague? I can clarify. Also only the bits in yellow are changed from previous threshold doc.