Style Bars/WOF

Ken Blockley · Post by **Ken Blockley** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 11:24 am

I have a M shape style bar which attaches to the seat belt bolts. I
think it looks very smart and with perspex between the hoops reduces the
back draught and improves the comfort level when the top is down.
About a year ago I was asked by the Lichfield Sreet Testing Station
(Christchurch) to remove it because it was a modification and should be
certified. This was their interpretation of recent legislation. I
removed the bar but to date haven't done anything about getting it
certified. I still find however numerous MX5's with style bars similar
to mine.
Can anyone enlighten me on the the interpretation of the law or share
similar experiences.
Cheers,
Ken

Chris Tankard · Post by **Chris Tankard** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 11:42 am

On a similar topic - can anyone advise / suggest who could help me with a
roll cage that could be certified for racing?

Many Thanks

Chris

lou Girardin · Post by **lou Girardin** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 11:55 am

Contact LTSA for a definitive answer, make sure you get a name, they tend to
be more thorough then.
Lou

Chic & Morven · Post by **Chic & Morven** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 12:10 pm

Ken,
I've never had any problems at any of the testing stations that I've been to and I don't see how adding a style bar is any different from adding a spoiler. They are talking nonsense. I bet you won't have any problems if you go somewhere else.

Chic
[...]

Mathew · Post by **Mathew** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 12:19 pm

There was an article in the latest "Performance Car" mag about this very thing, though after reading it I am still not quite sure where I stand (I have a similar set-up to yours which hasn't been queried...yet). There was a clause in the legislation that said Convertibles and any other vehicles with insufficient strength in their roof (like hotrods etc) were able to legally use roll over bars on the road. I think It also mentioned that roll bars behind seats (in a two seater) also didn't need to be certified but that any bars that came close to an occupants head needed to have the proper foam padding on it. I think the main idea of the legislation is to stop people fitting roll cages to their road cars as without a helmet on they would actually be much more of a danger to a driver.
In my car I have different seats with much more shoulder and head support so my style bars are actually totally behind the seats and I can't see anyway that my head could whack them in an accident. The article never mentioned (that I recall) whether the non-certifiable rollbars actually needed to be of a certain standard, as I'm sure almost at least 90% of the rollbars in mx5s wouldn't pass certification for any form of motorsport. I have never had a problem with my car passing its warrant... yet, but it must only be a matter of time before some testing station Hitler crosses my path. I've had past experiences with modified suspension that was failed at a W.O.F station and I had to run around and find all the relevant LTSA clauses which proved my set-up was perfectly legal.
Perhaps Sean from NZPC (a regular contributor to this list-you out there Sean?) could run our situation past the chap who wrote the article as I'm pretty sure Sean has a very similar style bar in his own mx5.

M@
http://miata.cardomain.com/id/imbecl

lou Girardin · Post by **lou Girardin** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:15 pm

The problem is, once you're rejected for a WOF, it is entered into the LTSA
database. No-one else can then issue a WOF until the reason for failure is
rectified.
Lou

Keith Cook · Post by **Keith Cook** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 10:02 am

Unfortunately Chic I think he will. The info that a WOF has been refused and the reason will now be on the computer if the "Hitler" did his job right.
It has long been my feeling, supported by reports I have had from people who know, that the LTSA is over staffed with graduates with little to do and who are educated far beyond their intelligence! Some life experience would be a great thing for them. (and I don't mean team-building at Outward Bound!)

Mike Pearson - WYSIWYG... · Post by **Mike Pearson - WYSIWYG...** » Tue Mar 11, 2003 8:54 pm

Ken wrote:
About a year ago I was asked by the Lichfield Sreet Testing Station
(Christchurch) to remove it because it was a modification and should be
certified. This was their interpretation of recent legislation.

Rules are online at http://www.status.co.nz/LTSA.html

Information on how rules are created is here:
http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/legislation/rules.html

Does anyone have a specific regulation reference? I suspect it is probably
the Land Transport Rule: Vehicle Standards Compliance 2002, which sets out
the way that motor vehicles must comply with safety standards when they are
new or imported into New Zealand and how they must continue to comply with
those safety standards during their on road life. Includes requirements for
warrant of fitness and certificate of fitness checks.

Like all Govt agencies, LTSA will put rule/regulation amendments out for
public submission, before enacting them. Presumably no one made a
submission at the time. We could do an Official Information Act Request
and ask what information they used to create the rule - once we find the
specific rule.

I will approach LTSA if you like and ask the question (rather than everyone
doing it).

Regards,

Ken Blockley · Post by **Ken Blockley** » Wed Mar 12, 2003 8:20 am

Hi Mike,
I appreciate the varied and helpful comments this concern has generated.
It would be great if you in your capacity could get a ruling on behalf
of MX5 club members and owners.
Kind regards,
Ken

Who is online