For Questions Regarding WOFs/CERTs/NUMBER PLATEs

[RUNAMUCK 30,217]

The car I had with flat leaves couldnt get traction. Replaced them, and that improved.

[dspec_tt131 1,408]

I see my van came out with 3 and 4 pack leafs, may grab a 4 pack from a van that's at pickapart currently.

Other question I have is related to this bar that goes between the B pillars behind seats, some vans have it some don't. I would like to remove it. I assume it's purely there for the hinging of the passenger and middle seat combo as the bucket seat models don't have it? 

[zep 430]

When building 4-link bars, how do I determine what bush ends are legit and what are not? Also, are there per-determined widths that they should be? Most seem to come in 2.5" and 3". What about the centre bore/bolt size?

Some are forged and some are welded:

vs

[Nominal 59,186]

17 minutes ago, zep said:

When building 4-link bars, how do I determine what bush ends are legit and what are not? Also, are there per-determined widths that they should be? Most seem to come in 2.5" and 3". What about the centre bore/bolt size?

Some are forged and some are welded:

vs

I made my own, just scaled to the size of the tubing specified in the manuals and welded up.

 

[cletus 40,955]

Have a look in the CCM it specifies what size bolt etc they need to be 

 

Be aware if you are making your own, the welding doesnt agree with a high tensile bolt 

 

Also threaded link bars often come loose with articulation,  a solution is to use a heim joint /rose joint/spherical bearing at one end for movement and a bush at the other to reduce harshness 

[zep 430]

1 hour ago, cletus said:

Have a look in the CCM it specifies what size bolt etc they need to be 

 

Be aware if you are making your own, the welding doesnt agree with a high tensile bolt 

 

Also threaded link bars often come loose with articulation,  a solution is to use a heim joint /rose joint/spherical bearing at one end for movement and a bush at the other to reduce harshness 

Thanks. I've checked the manual and it seems easy enough.

I wanted to use regular bushed joints at each end to fully reduce the harshness. I guess that I could always swap them out for heims if the thread is the same.

[zep 430]

@cletus I saw in another thread you mentioned that Wilwoods with integrated handbrakes have failed the cert test. I wonder if you had heard or seen anything about these:

https://fastlanespares.co.nz/products/wilwood-powerlite-caliper-with-handbrake

 

 

[MRWEST 2,450]

35 minutes ago, zep said:

@cletus I saw in another thread you mentioned that Wilwoods with integrated handbrakes have failed the cert test. I wonder if you had heard or seen anything about these:

https://fastlanespares.co.nz/products/wilwood-powerlite-caliper-with-handbrake

 

 

 +1 interested on the answer to this, as have the same calipers referenced for the rear of the RX3.

 

[tortron 67,099]

On 07/04/2021 at 06:32, RUNAMUCK said:

The car I had with flat leaves couldnt get traction. Replaced them, and that improved.

This is bad enough that it even causes the same on morris minors if you can believe it

[cletus 40,955]

7 hours ago, zep said:

@cletus I saw in another thread you mentioned that Wilwoods with integrated handbrakes have failed the cert test. I wonder if you had heard or seen anything about these:

https://fastlanespares.co.nz/products/wilwood-powerlite-caliper-with-handbrake

 

 

I think the ones I was talking about were a much smaller seperate handbrake caliper that were no good

I have certed something with those 4 pot calipers with the handbrake inside, I have a vague memory of the handbrake lever ratio having to be spot on or there isn't enough force for them to work properly 

[zep 430]

13 hours ago, cletus said:

I think the ones I was talking about were a much smaller seperate handbrake caliper that were no good

I have certed something with those 4 pot calipers with the handbrake inside, I have a vague memory of the handbrake lever ratio having to be spot on or there isn't enough force for them to work properly 

Thanks man.

[Bling 21,886]

Have hopefully a quick on regarding rear seatbelts.

Car in question will be going through cert. When imported it was fitted with static diagonal belts in rear. As per the requirements of the time to have at least static diagonal belts. These were bolted into parcel shelf with rectangular plates. It will have passed compliance I imagine with this as it will have been required on entry due to date of import. 

Have been reading the seatbelt anchorage standard, which seems to have come around post compliance of said vehicle. Will going for a cert trigger a requirement to meet the standard?

I have two vehicles that had the seatbelts retrofitted in the same manner and have no problems come WOF time. Just wondering if I'm going to need to do anything to get through cert or not. Both cars must have gone through compliance fine as factory they come.with lap belts and no allowance for diagonals. This work must be done on entry at the time.

Cheers for any help on this.

[cletus 40,955]

What is the date of first registration on the cars? 

It's on the rego label

[Bling 21,886]

I don't have a ticket handy for the cert car, but carjam says 14-Sep-1990. The car that I can check the actual ticket on says 1/89 and carjam says 25-jan 1989, so i'll assume the carjam dates are correct for now. Can try find an old ticket for the other car if needed though.

[Bling 21,886]

From what I have read (which could be a wrong interpretation, hence asking the pros in here) the following documents and come up with my thoughts.

Due to being retrofit previous to 1 January 1991, the anchorages must comply with 2.3 below, but not with an approved vehicle standard.

So my theory is so long as it meets 2.3 requirements, it should be ok. 

Vehicle falls within table 2.2 https://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/rules/seatbelts-and-seatbelt-anchorages-2002/#table22

 

 https://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/rules/seatbelts-and-seatbelt-anchorages-2002/#416a

Retrofitted seatbelt anchorages that are not required to comply with approved vehicle standards

4.1(6)     A seatbelt anchorage that is retrofitted must comply with 2.3, but does not have to comply with an approved vehicle standard if it is retrofitted in a motor vehicle:

• (a) before 1 January 1991, and the vehicle is one to which Table 2.2 applies; or
• (b) before 1 April 2002, and the vehicle is one to which Table 2.1 applies.

 

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/rules/seatbelts-and-seatbelt-anchorages-2002/#23

2.3     General safety requirements for seatbelt anchorages

2.3(1)     A seatbelt anchorage and its mounting location:

• (a) must be of a strength appropriate to both the motor vehicle and the attached seatbelt; and
• (b) must be structurally sound and free of corrosion; and
• (c) must not be damaged or distorted.

2.3(2)     When a seatbelt or part of a seatbelt is integral to a seat, the seat and the seat anchorages must be compatible in strength with the seatbelt or with that part of the seatbelt attached to the seat, as appropriate.

2.3(3)     In assessing whether 2.3(1) is complied with, a person in section 5 may take into account evidence that the seatbelt anchorage is within the motor vehicle manufacturer’s operating limits.

2.3(4)     In assessing whether 2.3(2) is complied with, a person in section 5 may take into account evidence that a seat or seat anchorage is within the motor vehicle manufacturer’s or component manufacturer’s operating limits, including the type of seatbelt for which it was originally designed.

 

 

[cletus 40,955]

1 hour ago, Bling said:

I don't have a ticket handy for the cert car, but carjam says 14-Sep-1990. The car that I can check the actual ticket on says 1/89 and carjam says 25-jan 1989, so i'll assume the carjam dates are correct for now. Can try find an old ticket for the other car if needed though.

Will be fine as its pre 92.

Date of first registration proves the belts are fitted prior to 92,  as it would have been a requirement to have lap and diagonal belts fitted when it was first registered in 89

 

[Bling 21,886]

Great thanks for clarifying that, one less thing to sort. I'll get some proper anchorage plates to replace what is in there currently though as I'm not 100% happy with current setup. Just good to know it's not something that will need to be to current specs. 

Cheers.

[cletus 40,955]

Just keep in mind if you change it, then it's a modification post 92 and it would have to be certed as per the rules of now  

[Bling 21,886]

Thanks for the info. Will stick with the current setup up in that case. If the underside of the parcel tray was flush i'd put in the required plates, but it's not close to being flush so easier option is to just leave as is. If I get time I may template it and see what the seatbelt shop have in stock. 

[CUL8R 922]

@ Clint, lap belts from a proper 5 point harness in a factory lap belt car - legal or no go?

Lever latch style like this;