NSW MOTORISTS will need to seek engineering approval for any height-altering suspension modifications from August 1 onwards, under tough new rules designed to stamp out dangerous car modifications.
New South Wales Minister for Roads Michael Daley announced today that under the new legislation vehicle ride height can only be changed by up to five centimetres, on the proviso that the modifications be approved by a licensed automotive engineer.
Under current NSW law a vehicle’s suspension can be raised or lowered by up to five centimetres without an engineer’s approval, and by up to 15cm with an engineering certificate.
“I don’t want to see young hoons putting their lives or the lives of others at risk, just because they think their car looks better 15 centimetres closer to the ground,” said Mr Daley.
“These hoons may think their car looks cool, but as far as I’m concerned anything more than a five centimetre change in a car’s suspension is dangerous and doesn’t belong on our roads.”
Under the new laws, vehicles will still need to have no part of their body less than 10cm above the ground, meaning cars that come from the factory with a low ride height may not be able to be lowered as much as other cars.
“It can affect handling, braking and safety features such as electronic stability control,” said Mr Daley.
“It can also change the position of vital impact-absorbing sections of a car, designed to reduce the severity of a crash.
“Raising a vehicle’s suspension can also reduce the driver’s ability to see pedestrians and cyclists, and higher headlights can startle other road users.”
Off-road enthusiasts who require a lift of greater than five centimetres for competition reasons may be able to get special dispensation, however the days of the catseye-scraping modified car are well-and-truly numbered in NSW.
Loading ...
Comments
Click here to jump to Add Comment box
How do you get a picture next to your name?
Get a Gravatar. Click here to find out more.
“….but as far as I’m concerned anything more than a 5 centimetre change in a car’s suspension is dangerous and doesn’t belong on our roads.”
Exactly - as far as HE’S concerned. Just him. His opinion and that’s that, the law changes.
What next - ‘As far as I’m concerned, any car above 2.0L is dangerous and doesn’t belong on our roads’?
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not particularly fond of ‘filly sik’ lowered cars but it’s not like these guys are putting blades and machine guns on their cars! The law as it stood seemed pretty reasonable to me. Another example of the nanny state! (lucky I don’t live in NSW!).
Agreed with Skywalker on this. Doesn’t the government have more important things to worry about right now? Such as the fact they have no money and can’t manage a state correctly.
Get a grip NSW govt, you’re a pack of wankers and idiots..
Its not the height of the suspension they have to worry about, its the rampant combination of driving with drug & Alcohol use they need to extensively target - and how about giving your police a much needed pay rise to go deal with that, instead of just equipping them with a tape measure to check someones pride & joy’s ride height.
This sort of $hit just makes me shake my head - repeatedly - until it falls off.
Yes the NSW govt should be more concerned about the growing violence on our streets, drug and alcohol abuse, drug dealers running rife in their lambos while living in fibro house in Greenacre, bikies out of control, chop shops, bad businesses ripping off consumers etc etc. But wait I forgot that means they actually have to come up with policy and implement, too much of hard work. So lets pick easy targets, people who lower their cars. What a joke. Other than P platters, gone are the days of people lowering by cutting springs. Most pay good money for quality aftermarket shocks and springs installed by professionals which actualy improve a vehicles dynamics.
I agree with Jess, gone are the days of cutting springs! almost everyone i know (including P platers) save up for good quality aftermarket springs and shocks which have some sort of adjustablity. NOONE wants a ride that is extremely unconfortable to ride in.
So lowering a car 5mm is dangerous? Pull your head out of your rear ends - it’s probably safer. Better response in handling, more controlled weight shift while braking, yeah dangerous stuff. I propose a new political party - HADAP - Hoons Against Dumb A** Politicians
Why is everyone now smeared with the hoon brush? If you have so much as an exhaust tip the NSW rta wants to lock you up. They are also slowly removing all race tracks in this state and every possible way that car enthusiasts have of enjoying something they love.
Oh now nice that now we have Comrade Conroy’s censorship regime and Daley’s uninformed opinions which lead to ridiculous rules for what you can and cant do with your own vehicle.
I’m starting to get really fed up with the padded room mentality and over controlling of this idiotic government and its minions.
All you can do these days is be a drone in a holden cruze or kia carnival. Try to be something else and you are a criminal. Hooray for change.
Hoons will be spewing now doubt but what about the 4WD heads, they’ll be absolutely spitting chips. I dont think there’s a 4WD out there with a lift kit.
I wonder how they going to police this? They don’t police speeding properly or fairly, as such I’ll expect to get a fine in the mail from the new Suspension Cameras which automatically take your photo if you car is too high or low….
This is a joke, there are some many things NSW policy makers could be focusing on (concerning and not concerning car modifications) that would have much greater impact on safety.
Forgetting the cars themselves, how about a routine license revision course? Many people seem to forget the rules soon after they pass the test and just make up their own… I’m talking young and old alike here.
Sure that’s just one example but of all the things to police in the hopes of protecting us “from our selves” this is moronic beyond comprehension.
Not impressed.
lol at the pics, WA plates on the 200, QLD plates on the 4wd.
Here’s a copy of the email I sent yesterday to the minister (office@daley.minister.nsw.gov.au):
Dear Mr Daley,
I note with considerable disgust your comments to the press regarding the change to rules governing car suspension height. Firstly, your comments are misguided - raising or lowering the suspension is not automatically dangerous or life threatening, in fact quite the opposite can be true. In many cases a modest reduction of 50-75mm in vehicle height accompanied by a re-alignment of suspension settings will make the car corner and stop more effectively. This is comprehensively proven by the thousands of cars used for recreational motor sport each weekend. If such modifications did not improve the vehicle’s dynamics then most people would not bother spending the time and money to do so. Secondly, the implication that this type of modification is the exclusive preserve of “hoons” is quite offensive to a middle aged motorist who has spent several thousand dollars improving his car’s handling and braking ability. Finally, you seem to labour under the misapprehension that there were no laws in place currently to deal with cars that are unsafe on our roads. NSW current law provides for a minimum ground clearance of 100mm, and I have observed law enforcement officers checking this at roadside stops and issuing infringement notices where vehicles have breached the rules. What purpose is served by further regulating the poor motorist in this way? I assume I will now be required to spend even more money for the privilege of driving a safer car! I should point out that I drive approximately 30,000km per year on NSW roads, and have noticed a continual decline in our state’s road system over the past 15 years, with ever increasing traffic, deteriorating and disintegrating road surfaces, and the burgeoning ‘police state’ of over regulation, lowered and inconsistent speed limits and ineffective policing of driver behaviour. It is high time that you stopped listening to the seat fillers from the RTA and started to use some common sense in regard to NSW motorists and roads - talk to the intelligent road users out there and to engineers with real world experience before you make new rules. By the way, I trust you understand that the springs in an average Australian car will sag anything up to 100mm over 5 to 10 years of driving - thus making almost every car over 5 years old in breach of your new rules… you will no doubt reap the benefits of this over time.
Yours sincerely,
etc…
bigdog, well said mate, totally agree!
height restrictions!
when will they lobby to restrict kw in new cars
that will be interesting.
Bigdog…
the springs in an average Australian car will sag anything up to 100mm over 5 to 10 years of driving …..
BULLSH*T!
I Applaud Bigdog in everyway ……
Has the Minister thought this through totally ?. Has he realised that by introducing these new laws that he will be throwing people out into the Doll Offices due to “his own opinion” ?
I am one of many people that work within a very large 4wd industry, we all serve alot of people that want to head out to see “Our Great Land ” and spend their money on our shores !
Some people build their vehicles up for plesure but there are also many others who do it for purpose. A standard Toyota Hilux or Nissan Navara will never get to those “need to see” places running O/E equipped suspension laden with all the neccessary supplies for not only pleasure but also survival !!!
Loading up a vehicle with inadequate suspension is not only a recipe for disaster on an “off the beat” track due to being stranded by breakage but also a dangerous move in a vehicles stability and handling, which in my books (or in Mr Daleys words “as far as i’m concerned”), is totally UNSAFE !!
I work for an AUSTRALIAN OWNED company that PRODUCES it products here, in Australia !! Our company has over 120 Stores and Stockists throughout Australia, and we even export all over the World !!.
We also fit out “Australian Company” vehicles to carry about their loads, keeping this country running, in a safer fashion, are they illegal once they unload due to the unladen height increase ?
Or is a vehicle also illegal if u load it up temporarily and it falls below the “NEW LAW” height limit !!
With the Current World Economic Crisis, we are already penny pinching wherever we can, it is hard enough to get anyone to part with their hard earned money as it is, let alone wack a customer with another $1000 bill for a Certificate due to the Minister’s “Brainwave”.
Many of us are struggling to make ends meet already, but putting us out of a job and then reducing Australia’s own exports, which we need so much…. Really WTF !!!!
But i guess that Mr Daley will sleep well not knowing what HIS laws will affect and WHO they will affect….. it will always be a “Buck Pass”.
Mr Daley… Go out and look around you, and hopefully you will realise the bigger picture….. but then again, please cross the street in front of me with your “horse blinkers” on, so my “imported (not Australian) 4WD” can hit you with a QUALITY AUSTRALIAN Bullbar !
I agree, to a certain extent, with the minister. Excessive raising or lowering of cars is dangerous. Those people who say that carte blanche lowering of cars is automatically good for performance are ignorant of how good handling is actually achieved.
The new rule also requires an engineer (i.e. a qualified professional) to certify the work, and how can any reasonable person think that this is a bad thing? There are a lot of idiots who think they’re ace mechanics out there, as if the idiocy bleated in the comments here wasn’t evidence enough. He’s not banning it outright, just making sure there’s some kind of expert oversight when it comes to modifications.
Changing the ride height on a car changes its suspension’s geometry. On cars with IRS this also immediately affects the camber, which also affects traction. Even without, the available travel is reduced. Yes you can adjust your alignment settings to compensate, but the range of the stock adjustability may not be enough. Then you need more replacement parts, which some people may not be willing to buy since they’re just after the look and “don’t care about performance”. The point is, whether they want to or not they should have to if they want to lower the car. An engineering signatory will enforce that.
A 5cm drop is huge on most cars. On any modern passenger car you’d have the tyre into the wheel well at that kind of drop. Depending on how its done, the car will be more likely to bottom out the chassis on bumps (and god knows we have enough of them on NSW roads) or run out of suspension travel. They don’t just slap in a set of cheap lowering springs around stock shocks and think that they’ve now got a F1 car.
As an aside, ask Ayrton Senna what a too-low car on a bumpy road does for handling.
Heavily lowering the centre of gravity is a good thing, but wildly changing your roll centre, suspension travel and suspension compliance is not. Especially if you haven’t considered what your lowering has done to these things. Increasing suspension stiffness improves response, but actually reduces grip and narrows the limit at the edge of traction. Too stiff, and you lose progressiveness and predictability in the handling.
The roll centre is just as important, if not moreso, than centre of gravity when it comes to handling. Yes a lot of race cars lower their cars, but they also re-engineer the entire suspension componentry to make the most of it. Even then, they lift the cars up for bumpy circuits.
For special purpose cars, like proper off roaders, dispensations are available to raise the height. It’s to ensure its done right. There are enough dangerous clunkers on the road, and I for one am happy to see that our government is doing something reasonable about it.
As for lowering, real car enthusiasts who are willing to pay to do the job right are practically unaffected. The only difference is requiring someone verify the work to ensure its set up properly and safe. That’s something any serious driver would want done for their own peace of mind anyway.
MotoWebbi - I was drawing an extreme example at 100mm, but several Aussie built cars that I have owned suffered from badly sagged springs - over 50mm in one case. What I was trying to point out is that suspension components wear and change - so insisting that the vehicle ride height remains static is simply not realistic. The impact on Aussie business, particularly in the 4WD industry will be huge. This is a very poorly thought out piece of legislation and deserves to be condemned.
@ Bigdog,
I understand suspension components sag with time and use, but the point you made above and what you said further above are quite different.
I’m no champion of the body politic, but our much maligned pollies are required to argue with the facts (or with what they are lead to believe are the facts) lest they be found out, as they usually are (by the astute observer and our generally scrupulous media).
Our side of the argument, on the other hand, is under far less minute scrutiny, being able to make sensational, baseless claims with impunity: I would not be surprised if you receive no reply from the Minister.
Further, that the ride height should remain static is not what is being proposed. A five centimetre reduction in ride height may be allowable as may a greater than 5 centimetre lift in ride height under special dispensation.
I went to get a pink slip today bought car in jan this year checked all mods first guy wont do my pink slip cause my car is at 90mm in rear, I told him law is from 1st august not acording to him.
@ Tasha
From the article above:-
Under the new laws, vehicles will still need to have no part of their body less than 10cm above the ground, meaning cars that come from the factory with a low ride height may not be able to be lowered as much as other cars.
Charlie
maybe before you make referance to the death of a racing legend
you may want to read up on the spacifics of his death as it had nothing to do with the ride hight of his car nor did it have anything to do with the surface he was driving on
it was found that the accident was caused by a broken weld in the steering system causing the column to brake as he turned the wheel to make the corner and the car continued straight
There are some really good points being mentioned here, in amongst some not so good. The main thing is to do as BigDog has done, and write to the Minister. I took a letter to my local member today on this topic. Local Members will vote in Parliament on this, and every issue, and they need YOUR opinion to make the outcome one which reflects the community. It doesn’t need to be long, just a few sentances. (preferably spell checked).
Well done BigDog !
Dear Minister,
My son is a 21 year old fitter machinist apprentice who has spent the last 2 years and $12,000 (hard earned) modifying a 4WD. This has been a great engineering project for him, which has taught him how to research, design, think, setup and build. It has been based on the specs as they are currently. It will take another year or so to complete, and I dare say that it will never see the road due to the NSW Governments persistent creation of regulations and legislation without regard to the wider community.
I hope the Government sees that other people will be sucked into this net along with the “wogs riding on bump stops”, and act appropriately.
” NSW Labor - Blindly Creating Legislation “
Good luck policing this.
“As an aside, ask Ayrton Senna what a too-low car on a bumpy road does for handling”
that is an extremely low blow, why speak ill of the dead when making a point about suspension laws!!
Any vehicle out there that has modifications considered as dangerous would almost certainly already be outside the bounds of existing laws, therefore changing the law is a pointless exercise. This announcement is a publicity stunt by a wowser minister intent on showing the dissaffected masses he’s on the job and not just polishing a seat for a massive salary. Enforce the current laws and you get the same result. I don’t object to the fact that an engineer signatory would be required to perform certain modifications, but the existing laws cover it already. The most annoying thing with the current law and this proposal is the limitations placed on engineering signatories as to what they are allowed to deem “safe”. Why is it that the engineers over at Holden or Toyota are automatically thought to be so much smarter than the professional automotive engineers approved by the RTA as signatories? The charter of manufacturers’ engineers is to design an all-round vehicle that meets a budget and won’t send the manufacturers broke with warranty claims, not specifically to come up with “the safest design”. Accountants have the greatest influence in a manufacturer’s vehicle design! The charter of RTA-approved automotive engineering signatories is to consider the fitness for purpose of an individual vehicle and approve modifications which by nature need to encompass the safest design - their charter is not to ensure a design complies with budget constraints.
It is one thing to say, “make a modification beyond limit X and you need an engineering signatory to approve the modification”, but it is a completely different thing to then restrict the outer limits of what an engineer is allowed to approve by announcing sweeping generalised limits regardless of vehicle specifics. It is this limitation of the latitude which an engineer should be entitled to have which is key to annoying every person involved in the vehicle modification/aftermarket industry. Let’s face it: Irrationality annoys people. The engineers are the professionals, not the politicians or the RTA. Let them be professional, do their jobs, and guide the way. You wouldn’t let a politician make legislation inflicting limitations on what modifications a heart surgeon can make. Politicians know as much about vehicle dynamics as they do about heart surgery, so as many of the others on this blog have said, politicians should get back to providing the meaningful community benefits they get paid for instead of running NSW into the ground and then demonising a 99.9% responsible subculture to create a diversion.