RSA trying to curb car modifications

Chris_Heilong

Bottom line, the cars are not really unsafe as if they were there would be higher death rates related to such, and there is just no evidence to say they are more dangerous, in fact my car is lowered, have larger wheels and a nice exhaust that sound good because of my V6 engine and I feel it is one of the safest cars I have ever driven, people that would usually walk on to the road or cars that usually would reverse out of a space without looking take notice si imo it is much safer than my other more ordinary quiet car that people seem to step in front of and cars pull out in front of far too often.

Sofiztikated

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

Bottom line, the cars are not really unsafe as if they were there would be higher death rates related to such, and there is just no evidence to say they are more dangerous, in fact my car is lowered, have larger wheels and a nice exhaust that sound good because of my V6 engine and I feel it is one of the safest cars I have ever driven, people that would usually walk on to the road or cars that usually would reverse out of a space without looking take notice si imo it is much safer than my other more ordinary quiet car that people seem to step in front of and cars pull out in front of far too often.

How many single vehicle incidents are there?
What about young males dying on the road?

Of course they are going to lie blame on modifications, if they can't find anything else to blame. Occams razor, only I feel they have the wrong simple answer on this.

As I have said before, it's all well and good pontificating and crowing about how your car is super safe, and nothing has ever happened to you. Go, attend the forum, armed with facts rather than annecdotal evidence. Prove that modified cars aren't the automatic killer that a lot of people assume they are.

In my own experience, modified car enthusiasts are in the minority. Boy racers are everywhere. The car with €000's spent on it is definitely in the minority. Young lads want to modify their cars, and are taking the cheap way of doing it. I can think of a number of cars, mostly old diesels, that were bought on the cheap, and next day, phat rims, decked, and the like, with no thought to the fact that the car might not be fit for it.

A system in place to regulate it might save a life. Is it worth it? In my opinion, yes.

Chris_Heilong

Sofiztikated wrote: »

How many single vehicle incidents are there?
What about young males dying on the road?

Of course they are going to lie blame on modifications, if they can't find anything else to blame. Occams razor, only I feel they have the wrong simple answer on this.

As I have said before, it's all well and good pontificating and crowing about how your car is super safe, and nothing has ever happened to you. Go, attend the forum, armed with facts rather than annecdotal evidence. Prove that modified cars aren't the automatic killer that a lot of people assume they are.

In my own experience, modified car enthusiasts are in the minority. Boy racers are everywhere. The car with €000's spent on it is definitely in the minority. Young lads want to modify their cars, and are taking the cheap way of doing it. I can think of a number of cars, mostly old diesels, that were bought on the cheap, and next day, phat rims, decked, and the like, with no thought to the fact that the car might not be fit for it.

A system in place to regulate it might save a life. Is it worth it? In my opinion, yes.

These arguments are always weak, its like saying we should ban airplanes because if it just saves one life then it will be worth it, My problem is that I dont think this will turn out to be a fair test, I think it will turn into another money making racket that takes away peoples freedoms, just like what motors tax and VRT have done, now the majority of people are buying crap cars, a car is not just an A to B form of transport and I for one would like the right to choose if my car has leather seats or alloy wheels with out been persecuted,

"In my own experience, modified car enthusiasts are in the minority. Boy racers are everywhere. "

funny you should say this, IMO when I think of a boy racer I think of people in really bad taste mods attached to their cars, see 'Best Skangermobiles online' section of the motoring forum, cause other road users problems and are generally hooligans, anyone who is not like this is an enthusiast who love their cars.

Sofiztikated

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

These arguments are always weak, its like saying we should ban airplanes because if it just saves one life then it will be worth it, My problem is that I dont think this will turn out to be a fair test, I think it will turn into another money making racket that takes away peoples freedoms, just like what motors tax and VRT have done, now the majority of people are buying crap cars, a car is not just an A to B form of transport and I for one would like the right to choose if my car has leather seats or alloy wheels with out been persecuted,

"In my own experience, modified car enthusiasts are in the minority. Boy racers are everywhere. "

funny you should say this, IMO when I think of a boy racer I think of people in really bad taste mods attached to their cars, see 'Best Skangermobiles online' section of the motoring forum, cause other road users problems and are generally hooligans, anyone who is not like this is an enthusiast who love their cars.

No, it's like saying that the airlines and airplanes should be regulated, and fit to meet a test.

To be honest, I don't care any more. I've tried explaining why this should be important to you. But rather than do something, you'll just bitch and moan, and stupid regulations will be passed.

mik_da_man

Lads, This RSA stuff is actually worrying me.
I personally spend a bit of cash on my cars, I'd call myself an enthusiast rather than a boy racer.
From reading the questionnaire, they have a very negative view of modifications.
To me it reads like - "We don't like modifactions, what can we do to ban them, and how can we penalise people who have them"

Now I think a very clear distinction needs to be made between the groups who cut springs, drill holes in exhausts and stick aeroplane wings on cars Vs the groups who actually get proper modifactions done.
I can see a real case for cracking down on the first group, but not the second, my fear is that we all will be tarred with the same brush.

We have the NCT, can we expand on it's scope to check modifactions?
Also the engineers report has it's merits, however, from personal experience, very few companies are willing to do this work.
I'd have no issue paying to get one done and If it was reasonably priced and widely available I'm sure most wouldn't have an issue getting it done.

How many people here are involved in Car Clubs?
Would it be worthwhile organising reps form some of the clubs to make a united submission to the RSA?
I'd be up for it anyway.

JimmyCrackCorn

Sxoc already have a e-mail campaign.
Id suggest that we do the same.


Luckily EU competition law is actually on the side of modified car owners in that they cant ban non oem components as it would be anti-competitive and lock out spurious parts.

The issue is finding a spokes person in modified cars/bikes with credibility. The ability to articulate a point and debate. The loudest people tend to be teenagers who get upset they cant do doughnuts in carparks or on crossroads.

The good news is this is making waves in
-Classic car circles
-Motorbike forums
-Car enthusiast sites.

So if folk would like to begin wording an official letter/e-mail id highly recommend you do same now.

Remember to keep it official, business like and Make valid points.

4wd

cars dont kill people drivers do. wheater it be lack of maintance to just bad driving .
being an engineer im all for the extra work believe me but only a small fraction of cars is see are modified id be lucky if one in a five hundred is a modified car and i can easily see up to 5000 a year. the vast majority of accidents i see are caused by carless driving . i see plenty of fatalities and injuries relating to accidents and have seen no direct link to the modified cars . u can be killed driving anything anywhere ,
if anything ive seen more fatalities due to large commerical vehicles and busses and im strugleing to remember modded fatility in modren times that i have viewed . i think the last one was a 1.8 gsr that spun into a lamppost killing driver and passenger , turned out to be a stolen car so it doenst count. i even think the car was standard so i see no reason for the r.s.a to even suggest this . they would be better of to put a few more telly ads explianing how the inside lane on the m50(countray to popular believe its not the middle one) and more education on roundabouts for drivers as well as pedestrion training in schools for the kids to cross the raod and bycle training for the older kids with free high viz jackets and helmets along with some semenars on the results of road accidents for the late teens to show them the harsh reality of the suition..it would take the unrealistic version of accidents as shown by r.s.a in there telly ads, with plots more complex than a political esbionage film. the dog with the shifty eyes , a game of 3 and in, the old reliable honda civic speeding trought the country with token soon to be paralised girlfriend , thumping tunes and more rolls than o briens. instead show a family left without a loved one a real person not an actor, and let them tell you the pain they feel every minute of the day and let them tell there version. now theres an idea to safe lives rather tahn as always penilise the remaining youth of the country . again i see the result of these accidents and i can safely say your only as safe as the next ejit coming at you. safe driving to u all.

paddy147

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

WTF is this????? Remember that EU ruling a while back that was about preventing people from modifying their cars...well it looks like the RSA are trying to actually bring it in over here. This is really a bad thing for people who want to improve features of their cars.

http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Your-Vehicle/Vehicle-Standards/Information-Notes-Consultations--EU-proposals-/Consultations-/Active-Consultations/Consultation-on-Post-Registration-Vehicle-Modifications-/

And yet Gay Bryrne gets to go around in his car without wearing a seatbelt.

They never opened their mouths about that though...did they???

W^nkers indeed.:mad::rolleyes:

steveone

The Reamer wrote: »

That would work in theory, but in practice what would happen is that engineers will be very cautious about certifying a modified vehicle because if it were ever involved in a crash they would come in for serious questioning.
To counter this risk, the engineer would charge stupendous sums to examine and certify a vehicle, if they would do it at all.
They would also stick to the safer low key stuff like changing lights or tyre sizes. As for major modifications like any chasis work, installing a different engine or suspension work, no engineer in his right mind would take on the risk of some scrote going araound in that.

Think i'm wrong? Look how hard it is to get a structural engineer to issue a fire cert for a building.

On the flip side, it would be a lovely gig for the mech eng's to get in on.


Personally, I would like to see the following mods banned outright:
- window tinting as it is a security risk as a policeman cannot see who is in it or what they are doing and needless to say the drivers vision is impaired.
- lowered suspensions as they could negatively affect the vehicles handling making it dangerous and they also damage the road by scraping in places. The public road is a public road, not a racing track.
- fitting a vehicle with an engine for which it was not orignally designed to have
- fitting aftermarket bumbers and bodykits as they might have different performance in crashes and be unable to absord energy like the original.
- removing the seats from a vehicle and replacing them with a type for which the vehicle was not designed. OFten you are removing pretensioners and other safety devices by doing this.
- for that matter, removal, modification of or otherwise tampering with any safety device or any safety critical component. - typical example is boyracers replacing the airbag steering wheel with a non airbag one. Changing pedals is another one.
- fittment of an exhaust which emits noise at a level in excess of that which was orignially on the car.

As far as I'm concerned, enthusiasts shoudl be free to own and modify a car in any way but should not be allowed drive them on the public road. They shoudl drive them on private premises - ie. car clubs caould be established by enthusiasts and they could get planning for a track where they can drive their cars.

Someone once suggested here that the government shoudl provide car tracks for enthusiasts to drive on! Ludicrous - if you cannot afford a luxury hobby then you shouldn't be doing it.

Oh my god this post gave me heartburn-

how hard is it to get a cert from a structural engineer? ask the people in belmaine??


tinted windows a security risk?, as are sunglasses-ban them, sunshades,night time- thats a major factor in our inability to see....

fitting aftermarket seats? such as those certified by FIA safety standards? and possibly utilising harnesses ELIMINATING the need for an airbag?
yes this should be banned....

Installing an engine into a car not designed to take it? that's why we redesign them to take the new engines.....its just not that easy to throw in an aul' engine..trust me...I know...parts involved come from licenced fabricators....
and what if.....the manufacturers made a car that had a selection of engine options....into the one chassis? not that it goes on or anything...or that the same engine might appear with a different badge, that doesn't happen either.....


lowered suspension negatively affecting handling.. I lowered a subaru and couldn't drive it out of my town, it wouldn't go over the speed bumps that were higher than the kerbs....
yes I agree the current trend for lowering one corner of the car is not good....

fitting an exhaust thats louder than the original? the cyclist in front of me on the way home didn't complain, he had his Ipod on.....

as for damaging the road?? I've gone through four sets of wheels....

this is the reason the feedback needs to get to the rsa..this is what's drafting the legislation..
and the best is they say everyone should be able to modify their cars...

sometimes I fear for the human race, its just as well there was no one around to warn cavemen of the dangers of striking flint and making fires......

MikeD22

The problem of road safety in this country runs much deeper than modified cars. The issue has been touched upon many times on this forum and its driver training.

As for modified cars, there is two sides to the coin. One side is the cheap, do it yourself, look at me lad and the other is the ones who take massive pride in there machines and treat them like they would a family pet. I can speak from experience as i have owned modified cars and indeed modified cars myself. Its a passion. It's a hobby. it's a lifestyle. You have to live it to fully understand.

I agree with the principal which the RSA put forward but it's the way they will go about it is what's worrying me. They are like fishermen. They throw the net out as far and as wide as possible, bring it in and look through to see what money can be made. I think the best way forward is to expand the NCT to include an inspection on modified parts and to deem them safe, but you know what.....it already does that. I've put 4 different modified cars through an NCT and each passed and was deemed safe for the road. I only used quality parts for my cars do you know why, because it's my car and it represents me on the road and i want quality to show through.

The RSA, while they are making a difference in terms of road safety, are focusing on the popular decision rather than the right one. In terms of making the road safer there are a few things which could be changed which would improve the numbers again.

-reduce the licence renewal to 5 years and have a mandatory refreshers course to be attended at a time suitable to the person
-Start driver training in transition/5th year in school as most will be of driving age then
-Stricter driving tests that take in all aspects of driving or even a continuous course over a set period with continuous assessments
-Better road layout and signage

Modified cars are not a problem in themselves but rather they are used to portray a problem. The problem runs much deeper and will take time and money to sort but they are not willing to tackle it because it will affect the masses but with this campaign only a small percentage of road users will be affected, thus maintaining the status quo that they are making the road safer when in fact they are doing very little to find the root of the problem and solve it once and for all.


Feel free to take this post apart and tell me i'm wrong and i know nothing if you want. I've had my say, that's my opinion which in the grand scheme of things will make no difference what so ever....

The Reamer

The Reamer wrote: »

Personally, I would like to see the following mods banned outright:
- window tinting as it is a security risk as a policeman cannot see who is in it or what they are doing and needless to say the drivers vision is impaired.

I used to own a car with about 90% rear tints, never once 'impaired my vision'

- lowered suspensions as they could negatively affect the vehicles handling making it dangerous and they also damage the road by scraping in places. The public road is a public road, not a racing track.

My current car has aftermarket coilovers which lower the height. This has a huge impact on handling in a POSITIVE way. By lowering the center of gravity the car is less likely to roll or bend in a corner causing the driver to loose control.

- fitting a vehicle with an engine for which it was not orignally designed to have

Interesting point, I in some way agree with this point.

- fitting aftermarket bumbers and bodykits as they might have different performance in crashes and be unable to absord energy like the original.

I believe regulating the aftermarket parts industry is a better option, if somebody wants to change the image of their car that's their choice.

- removing the seats from a vehicle and replacing them with a type for which the vehicle was not designed. OFten you are removing pretensioners and other safety devices by doing this.

Yet sometimes you are improving your own safety by having proper back protection, side protection and other forms of protection properly designed seats include. They should however be regulated as I mentioned before and require special testing under NCT

- for that matter, removal, modification of or otherwise tampering with any safety device or any safety critical component. - typical example is boyracers replacing the airbag steering wheel with a non airbag one. Changing pedals is another one.

Standard pedals can actually be a lot more dangerous than aftermarket ones.

- fittment of an exhaust which emits noise at a level in excess of that which was orignially on the car.

Some people including myself like distinct tones made from an engine, a lot of factory sports cars come with exhausts which have a very dull sound, just as some come designed to sound more exciting.
For some it's not about loudness but about tone, noise level should be controlled but if somebody chooses to change the sound of their car that shouldn't be an issue. There are some Exhausts designed for noise more than anything (Buddyclub spec 1) and make a horrible sound which is disgusting and distracting.

As far as I'm concerned, enthusiasts shoudl be free to own and modify a car in any way but should not be allowed drive them on the public road. They shoudl drive them on private premises - ie. car clubs caould be established by enthusiasts and they could get planning for a track where they can drive their cars.

Someone once suggested here that the government shoudl provide car tracks for enthusiasts to drive on! Ludicrous - if you cannot afford a luxury hobby then you shouldn't be doing it.

Your last point is ridiculous. Modifying a car properly will have no impact on the safety of the person driving the car or others around them. This is why with regulation there should be no reason to disallow it. There are laws in place which everybody driving most abide, modified or standard. A track is for racing which not everybody with a modified car wants to do.

For a car enthusiast their car is a statement and something to be proud of, something personal. For you however it sounds like a car is just a mode of transport to get you from A to B, this is why you can't see it from another person's point of view and you will never understand.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

anyone with a loud exhaust should be immediately taken out of the car
and beaten to death with the offending exhaust pipe

end of story

--Kaiser--

steveone wrote: »

sometimes I fear for the human race, its just as well there was no one around to warn cavemen of the dangers of striking flint and making fires......

Are you comparing modifying cars to the invention of fire?

paddy147

DaDumTish wrote: »

anyone with a loud exhaust should be immediately taken out of the car
and beaten to death with the offending exhaust pipe

end of story

98db at 2/3 throttle is the legal noise limit before a cars exhaust becomes illegal due to noise.

Maybe research the facts before posting comments like that here in future.

JimmyCrackCorn

*Mod warning*


Can we get back on topic and stop the bickering or ill have to do something mod like.

Chris_Heilong

Apparently people are planning a protest for this at the RSA office in Mayo http://www.facebook.com/events/306440722792181/ dont really know if this is the right coarse of action and if done wrong could make things worse for us modified car enthusiasts.

Sofiztikated

FFS, has anyone on that FB page actually read what is being proposed?

Protest away, won't do the "cause" any good, because what they are protesting against isn't what's actually being proposed.

steveone

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Are you comparing modifying cars to the invention of fire?

coining an image to describe the type of person whose mission is to save us from ourselves, and hault invention, ingenuity, creativity and fun in the process....such as ...well fire is dangerous, harmful, causes smoke...which is unfriendly...kind of thing that we would be prevented from using.... like alcohol.....

btw fire wasn't invented it was a gift .....

Sofiztikated

steveone wrote: »

coining an image to describe the type of person whose mission is to save us from ourselves, and hault invention, ingenuity, creativity and fun in the process....such as ...well fire is dangerous, harmful, causes smoke...which is unfriendly...kind of thing that we would be prevented from using.... like alcohol.....

btw fire wasn't invented it was a gift .....

And with that, I'm done. G'lak with the protests. :rolleyes:

JohnBoy26

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Which do you honestly think is safer?

The cheap chinese knockoff part, or the one that has gone through extensive testing, and meets all proposed safety guidelines?

Many after market parts are made to oem specifications and are just as safe as genuine parts.

ChapOfDRyans

Wow, just read the thread to date and there has been some good, very good points, by people from what i see know what there talking about . .

Before this thread goes any further people, everybody should be clear the differant sections out there . . .

1: The enthusiast who sinks money,time,blood,sweat and tears into there passion. To them it is an extension of themselves. Just like music, reading or any hobbie is to others.

2: Scum who buy into it for a part of there life, cause as much harm as possible to the scene and **** off, leaving the people on the outside looking in and tarring everybody . . .

3: People who dont have a big knowledge of cars but like a nice looking car , with a nice sound . .

Now i would like if we could all calm a little and have a adult like discussion of how to go about this, If we go about it the right manner maybe boards.ie could help . .

Now people may think im biased, Well i am ive sank so much of my money,time and life lost friends and girlfriends for a car. . Its an exstension of me. I want people to take from my car what i see. The drive for quality, perfection etc . .

My suspension is worth thousands, desent from F1 spec in someway. makes the car like a true race car on TRACK. I obey all the rules of the road and having that suspension makes it handle better. It is not a danger and anyone who says we need to ban lowered car, has a lack of knowledge. Granted there are people who cut springs and that is so dangerous again they stem from group 2 & 3.

Tinted windows to a certain extent is no danger, The rule in place is already working well.

Changing engines is not done by every tom dick and harry. Its not easy and needs professionalism. Ive changed mine and modified it. Its not a danger and if anyone inspected it, you would believe it was from factory. Just like every other person stemming from group 1.

Ive been in the scene for years . . and ive put it down to 2 groups. People who come and go and have no real passion and people who got into at a young age and will be doing it until the day they die(once circumstances allow it). People who come and go some of them give us a bad name and people who have a true passion will ultimatly come off worse.

I will continue to drive my car and nct it, When they bring in these laws to make money, even though my car would pass any nct i will be harassed,fined,brought to court and branded a criminal. .

The best idea would be to allow for such passionate modifications to be examined by a professional ,and not a guy who has went on a course to work in an nct centre. It does make me sick and upset to see people buy into the scene do there upmost best to ruin then leave. Then people like me get the scorn off Joe public of being a scumbag tearing around .

Supergurrier

As long as it doesn't effect OEM or better parts i don't car as long as it gets rid of those stupid sun visors and cut springs and makes it actually viable to insure proper modification

Kilmac1

No wonder theirs cars going round with cut springs etc when the price of taxing them is so high godsake goverment are never happy

homeless student

Kilmac1 wrote: »

No wonder theirs cars going round with cut springs etc when the price of taxing them is so high godsake goverment are never happy

then leave the springs standard if your too poor to tax your car.

Kilmac1

homeless student wrote: »

then leave the springs standard if your too poor to tax your car.

did i ever say i did? I've coil-overs in my car worth £500 and driving an 09 leon at 19 wouldnt be poor would it? And before you said it I paid for everything myself.

homeless student

Kilmac1 wrote: »

did i ever say i did? I've coil-overs in my car worth £500 and driving an 09 leon at 19 wouldnt be poor would it? And before you said it I paid for everything myself.

I wasnt saying you were too poor, but the people you are talking about who are apparently too poor to tax their cars so cut their springs instead of buying proper lowering springs

defitzi

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

I send them an email stating something similar, its at the bottom of the link I posted, they want to gauge the public's interest it bring in this new law

:cool:no they don't...the want to guage how much opposition so they can negate it. The same showers of ba**ards are at it everywhere in EC trying to control all motoring life....the Dutch anti- motoring freedom facists are at the bottom of it ...More and more restrictive leglislation curbing motorists freedom is being brought in by the back door voting on these regs ain't allowed.

Kilmac1

homeless student wrote: »

I wasnt saying you were too poor, but the people you are talking about who are apparently too poor to tax their cars so cut their springs instead of buying proper lowering springs

ok sorry took it the wrong way used to it i suppose. But instead of trying to ban it and hassling people why not try and help them to use proper springs and lower there cars properly. Work with them not against them.

the_syco

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

WTF is this????? Remember that EU ruling a while back that was about preventing people from modifying their cars...well it looks like the RSA are trying to actually bring it in over here. This is really a bad thing for people who want to improve features of their cars.

http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Your-Vehicle/Vehicle-Standards/Information-Notes-Consultations--EU-proposals-/Consultations-/Active-Consultations/Consultation-on-Post-Registration-Vehicle-Modifications-/

Thinking outside the box here, but if you got a car which had no seatbelts installed (yup, real old car), and you installed seatbelts into it, how would that not be a modification?

dgt

the_syco wrote: »

Thinking outside the box here, but if you got a car which had no seatbelts installed (yup, real old car), and you installed seatbelts into it, how would that not be a modification?

Very good point, we have a Land Rover with no seatbelts fitted as standard. It's 1974.

Wern't rear belts not compulsary up till about 1991 ish?