i had a engineer inspection 2day
#26
Posted 06 June 2009 - 04:23 PM
Your tank has a sharper departure angle and would be much closer to legal if not legal already (which it must be as your engineer said it is).
It gets back to engineers and their interpretation of the rules.....
Mick.
#27 _HRV74_
Posted 06 June 2009 - 04:38 PM
ass308, did the inspection include the sound limit test?
#28 _ass308_
Posted 06 June 2009 - 04:42 PM
i cant answer u all individualy.but have listened to all your replies
my problem is this
he passed everything else 10inch rims included.which is a whole other arguement.i went through 4 engineers to,find one to let me have 10inch rims on a 9inch diff.i cant change
from this fella easily.its decibel passed,brakes passed,9inch passed,wheels and tyers passed.
im not giveing up!.it over till the fat lady sings,but the engineer has won round 1 and 2
it means a bloody lot to me personaly to have the WHOLE car engineered
i am considering my options atm.
in a few day ill post em,and by the end of next week i should hopefully have an answer.
just to add fuel to the fire.i told the tilt tray driver of my woes.he cranked the tilt tray right up.this the clearence.bloody heaps of room !!!!!!!
#29
Posted 06 June 2009 - 09:18 PM
The certification for the Brown Davis tanks is more to do with the build quality of the 'product' itself, not so much the fitment to a particular car. It's like anything modified you buy I guess.
I have the same tank fitted to my LX... it passed RWC and engineers no problems at all in Vic.... but he refused to accept wide rims... so it just shows the frustrating difference between them.
Good luck moving ahead from here. It's great to see your committed to getting everything passed. By the way - the car looks absolutely fantastic mate!
#30
Posted 06 June 2009 - 09:20 PM
#31 _LHoon_
Posted 06 June 2009 - 10:10 PM
However that being said, I can also understand the engineer's point of view and the reasons for the regulations. I also had one of these 120L drop tanks in my LH. On many occasions the drop tank scraped on the ground going up and down driveways or other difficult situations. This happened so much so that there were very deep scratches in the aluminium, and I was becoming afraid that one day it would eventually puncture through and leak fuel everywhere. This worst-case scenario would also be the engineer's concern.
#32
Posted 06 June 2009 - 10:30 PM
#33
Posted 07 June 2009 - 12:36 AM
The certification for the Brown Davis tanks is more to do with the build quality of the 'product' itself, not so much the fitment to a particular car.
Although i agree with this statement, i beg to differ.
If Brown Davis are making & selling the tanks to be fitted to road going vehicles they should comply to the ADR.
If the tanks are actually made for track use they should have a disclaimer in BOLD print stating that they dont comply.
If they want to sell to the general public for road use they should do 2 tank styles, one for road use with a modified angle.
Lastly, if i was to spend $1400.00 on a drop tank i would have an extremely high expectation that it would pass an inspection for road use.
Thats a lot of money for something that you legally cant/shouldnt use.
Edited by LX2DR, 07 June 2009 - 12:39 AM.
#34
Posted 07 June 2009 - 01:02 AM
I like your determination
#35
Posted 07 June 2009 - 01:06 AM
You just have to clean out the fuel, rinse out the fuel residue also when you weld it, you dont want to wear a drop tank on your head.
Alot of work you probably dont want to do but that the breaks sometimes.
Awsome hatch by the way
#36
Posted 07 June 2009 - 03:15 AM
You can not get the Brown Davis tank within the departure angle by raising it as it already touches the boot floor.
I was ready for the top to be welded onto my tank which is similar to the Brown Davis design. My tank is an integral part of the LS2 EFI fuel system and therefore will be subject to engineering. I do not see any other option than to redesign the back half to fit within the departure angle.
I suspect that once the drop tank is modified to fit within the departure angle it will look odd compared to the Brown Davis design. You could make a cover in the Brown Davis shape that fits over the legal drop tank design. As the cover is not a fuel tank it would not be subject to departure angle rules.
Edited by ls2lxhatch, 07 June 2009 - 03:27 AM.
#37
Posted 07 June 2009 - 08:33 AM
#38 _ass308_
Posted 07 June 2009 - 08:54 AM
brown davis may have a engineer who will certify it yet
ls2lxhatch,theres not really much to come off the tank.if u cut along the bottom of the tube,u would loose 50mm along the bottom,maybee10-15mm off the front verticle edge.to form the new angle.
do u think it would look that bad ?
mick,id say my engineer would say harveys tank is legal.
#39
Posted 07 June 2009 - 09:06 AM
he does not like the depature angle.everything below the tube shouldnt be there
He is correct in saying that, sorry.
Departure angle goes from bottom dead centre of the tyre to the bottom of the rear most part of the body.
#40
Posted 07 June 2009 - 09:29 AM
He is correct in saying that, sorry.
Departure angle goes from bottom dead centre of the tyre to the bottom of the rear most part of the body.
Again....it all comes down to 'interpretation'.
If that ruling was staunch, then nobody in the country would have a droptank certified.
Think of the ramifications......BD; or every other tank manufacturer; wouldn't be able to sell their products for road use, insurance companies would be denying claims due to illegal modifications, defect notices would be handed out to existing droptank users, no torana would ever cross the nullabour under their own steam unless they had a trailer full of fuel, engineers who signed off on droptank fitment could be prosecuted.....ect ect.
My 120L droptank was built by the consulting engineer.
It doesn't look any different than any other droptank. Departure angles are the same.
So what does my engineer know that yours doesnt?
#41 _ass308_
Posted 07 June 2009 - 09:37 AM
a lot of people,engineers included,think some toranas came of the factory production line with drop tanks.
and i agree with everything u said.but ALX76 is technicaly right im afraid.
i just so depressed about this atm.
LHoon,when your tank scraped,did u have as much clearence,as i do.could your car go up a tilt tray like that ?
#42 _ass308_
Posted 07 June 2009 - 09:42 AM
theres no way my car could go up the tilt tray like that with front spoiler on.
because the front spolier sticks outside the front departure angle.surely i would take my front spolier out before the droptank,whilst going up inclines.
this has to limit what i can do with the car more than the tank ?
#43
Posted 07 June 2009 - 09:44 AM
If so....perhaps [ok, this is dodgey] cut & shut a VK rear lower spoiler, fix with double sided tape, tada!...instant lower bever by 5".
Go home, peel off, happy days!
#44 _ass308_
Posted 07 June 2009 - 09:47 AM
so sorry i dont think that will work.
i think the rule is original permanet bodywork :(
#45 _mowie_
Posted 07 June 2009 - 09:52 AM
What ever anyone is thinking it is not the engineers fault here. The rules are clear and are there for a good reason. As LHoon said, his tank scraped and nearly punctured, and i dare say this was with cautious driving. Ultimately the engineer is liable if he passes it and anything goes wrong.
For instance, if it was to get a heavy hit and was to rupture, pouring fuel over the exhaust, catches fire and burns your hatch to the ground. He is the one that gets sued, not brown davis. Therefore i wouldn't pass it either.
Tom
#46
Posted 07 June 2009 - 10:02 AM
At the end of the day the engineer has made the correct call!
Edited by Redslur, 07 June 2009 - 10:03 AM.
#47 _LHoon_
Posted 07 June 2009 - 10:14 AM
LHoon,when your tank scraped,did u have as much clearence,as i do.could your car go up a tilt tray like that ?
I don't think I had as much clearance as you, because my car had 14" wheels and was probably sitting lower. I think I had my car on a tilt tray like that once, and it cleared by a few milimeters but didn't scrape. The scraping occured in random day-to-day situations, like going up a steep driveway or over large speed humps.
#48 _cruiza_
Posted 07 June 2009 - 10:32 AM
All I will say about this thread is that I would rather have my vehicle certified by a diligent engineer than a lenient one. Just because you want something the way you like it, doesn't make it right! I know this may sound petty but why do people always want to get around the law?
At the end of the day the engineer has made the correct call!
I would disagree with that, I would like to have any work done certified by a compent engineer who used common sense in following the letter of the law.
It is my belief that ass308 is wanting to build what he thinks is the ultimate Hatch the best gear, setup and attention to detail, with everything compling and certified, no short cuts and no compromises.
To that end what he needs is a solution to the drop tank issue, no factory Torana ever had one and the standard tank meets requirements, so options are
Get Davis Brown to come to the party
Get another engineer to certifiy the tank seperatley, not the best option
Find some loophole that makes it alright, again not really ideal
Modify the Tank, ugly expensive and shouldnt really have to do it
#49
Posted 07 June 2009 - 10:59 AM
You have to wonder, because surely a late model Commodore (as it comes from the factory) wouldn't pass such a test without the low hanging plastic bumper...?I am curious....is a body kit classified as 'permanent' body fixture?
If so....perhaps [ok, this is dodgey] cut & shut a VK rear lower spoiler, fix with double sided tape, tada!...instant lower bever by 5".
Go home, peel off, happy days!
What about a cover for the tank, would that count as permanent body work?
#50 _cruiza_
Posted 07 June 2009 - 11:03 AM
You have to wonder, because surely a late model Commodore (as it comes from the factory) wouldn't pass such a test without the low hanging plastic bumper...?
What about a cover for the tank, would that count as permanent body work?
Or fit a towbar
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users