Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

yeah, as long as cops cant see the light too brightly at night it should be OK!! just turn em off when you get pulled over, then they got no proof, cause you can have them installed just not on when driving!!!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/27498-installing-neons/#findComment-577420
Share on other sites

I have them in my footwells and under the seats, looks awesome when the doors open, but couldnt tell if you were to drive past me on the street, just have a switch close by in the event of being pulled over and your set, no probs.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/27498-installing-neons/#findComment-578888
Share on other sites

when i got pulled over i got let off for the neons in the footwells because they said as long as the neon is below the height of the steering wheel and the neon was not directly visible it will be fine, but i guess that can change from cop to cop...

cheers...ben.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/27498-installing-neons/#findComment-581272
Share on other sites

Just thought I'd pop this up regarding the legality of non-essential lights in Victoria as it has been clarified to my workplace by the Police.

Following is an excerpt of a Road Safety statement as it applies to neon lights and such. Still trying to find an online link to the document but have had no luck as yet... (will keep looking!)

Road Safety

Non-Essential Lights

The boom of non-essential lights, including fluorescent lights under vehicles and the smaller ones on bonnets or wiper blades (generally blue in colour), on motor vehicles is continuing, creating confusion about their legality.

A little history about non-essential lights: the Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1988, required motor vehicles and trailers to comply with the Standards for Registration (Victorian Government Gazette S15, 1 March 1988). Clause 702 of these Standards prohibited the fitment of lamps or reflectors that weren't required or permitted. The Regulations were repealed in 1999, as to were the standards, and replaced by the current Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999, incorporating the Standard for Registration at Schedule 8.

In making the new Regulations and Standards, Victoria adopted the National Light and Heavy Vehicle Standards. The current Standards for Registration, unlike the old, does not prohibit the fitment of lamps that are not prescribed.

What they do require, is for vehicles to be fitted with the lamps specified in the Standards and the Australian Design Rules. In addition, cluase 118(2) of the Standards allows a vehicle to be fitted with any other lamp or reflector, providing it does not show red light to the front, a white light to the rear or a light that flashes.

With regards to dazzling lights, clause 75 of the Standards stipulates a light (except a high-beam headlight), fitted to a vehicle must be built and adjusted to provide the necessary amount of light, without dazzling the driver of another vehicle approaching, or being approached by, the vehicle.

Additionally, if any light fitted to a vehicle (whether it complies or not) is used to dazzle, or in a way likely to dazzle another road user, then the driver may be charged accordingly (Road Rules-Victoria rule 219 applies).

The Macquarie Dictionary defines dazzle as 1. To overpower or dim (the vision) by intense light. 6. Temporary loss of vision, or temporary reduction of visual activity, related to the presence of a bright (possibly moving) source of light.

VicRoads' guideline (Vehicle Standards Information Sheet 8) permits the fitting of additional forward and rearward facing lamps, which comply with or are permitted by the Standards. Mandatory light fitted to a vehicle must continue to comply with the relevant Standards.

If a vehicle is fitted with lights in accordance with the Standards and used in accordance with the Road Rules-Victoria, then police can take no action. If a light fitted to a vehicle does not comply with the Standards, then a defect notice may be issued and the driver charged accordingly. As to the use of flourescent lights under vehicles and the blue lights fitted to vehicle bonnets or wiper blades, providing they do not dazzle other road users, they are quite lawful.

[End Quote]

So essentially in Victoria, as long as no additional light shows no red light to the front (making other drivers think you have your brakes on), white light to the back (making other drivers think you are in reverse), flashes or dazzles, you're clear.

This went through the courts here not long ago, where someone got charged for having windscreen washer LEDs. He won his case in court, and all fines issued to people for having these LEDs installed had to be reversed.

Hope this clarifies things a bit!!!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/27498-installing-neons/#findComment-583781
Share on other sites

Wouldn't say they'd call neons a dazzling light.... Basically they mean any light that "blinds" you (high beams, spot lights, etc.) is a dazzling light. Neons are fine. (In Vic. anyway.)

I have questioned it myself I must admit, IMHO I think that the high-brightness LEDs on windscreen washers are dazzling, I also think the rear red fog lights on Excels are dazzling and they should all be recalled and defected! But they're not...

We have been trying to get info on legislation for the various states, it hasn't been easy. I spent an hour trying to find the document I quoted from on the web, to no avail. Ended up typing it all.

From the layout of the document it came from the vicpolice.vic.gov.au site. We have been looking for a statement like this for a while, and finally received this last month. Haven't seen anything from any other states though.....

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/27498-installing-neons/#findComment-584135
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Dang. I love the little 'oil used' bingo card on the side.   🤣  Well, now they can use a box and an oil-filled goon.
    • Many many moons ago, I was chatting with Andy Wyatt, about his auto ignition tuning. One of the HUGE things he said to me, when tuning for power, right where you hit peak ignition timing for your max torque, dramatically increases NOx emissions. He was finding in testing, particularly on engines you could advance timing beyond peak torque, that backing the ignition timing off a couple of degrees only made for a small drop in torque (compared to if you keep backing it off further the same amount of degrees) but dramatically reduced NOx emissions. I'd say targetting for 14.7, and he's even mentioned in some scenarios going slightly leaner, and pulling a few degrees of IGN timing will help pass for emissions quite a lot. However, who tunes an RB for emissions
    • The main stuff from.Vibrant I see is more their intercooler piping, and everyone raving about their clamps, but when I looked it was about $150 per clamp... I was a bit   I also thought the public price SP had up was high. As Mark said, a normal exhaust shop can fab them. It was many years ago that I had a full exhaust built, but for a full turbo back exhaust, and 2 custom built mufflers, plus a high flow cat, was about $1,100, and that was fully installed, drive in, drive out. I believe SP was about $900 for 2 mufflers, just supplied   These days, I just buy the material and built it myself, because I need to stretch my $$$
    • I'm pretty sure if it's considered a gasoline powered vehicle you have to do certification against a fixed, very expensive certification fuel.  If you add two precats and then replace the main cat with two cats back to back you can get an RB26 to do 0.24 g/mi HC, 1.6 g/mi CO, and 0.3 g/mi NOx on the FTP-75 drive cycle. Found this out courtesy of California's laws at great expense. Divide by 1.61 to get g/km. So even with extra cats + precats you're blowing past the NOx limit by probably 2.3x. Probably the only way to get an RB25 or RB26 to meet euro 4 purely from an emissions per km standpoint and not durability/OBD2 requirements is retrofit at least intake side VVT, clearance the pistons to allow the full 50 degrees of advance so part throttle EGR can be maximized, and change the wastegate control from conventional 7 psi spring for example to one that is always fully open if the wastegate line is at 1 atm or higher and only close it in response to vacuum. See BMW's N54 engine as a reference for how this works. You would need to find space for a vacuum tank to function as an accumulator in this system. That way you can avoid any heat loss to the turbine as much as possible during cold start to heat the catalyst faster. Then find some way to eliminate as much as possible cold start enrichment to light off the catalyst rapidly. Maybe secondary air injection if there's no way to avoid cold start enrichment. Close coupled catalysts in the downpipe are probably necessary. I would also probably swap to EV14s, pick something with the correct spray targeting + dual cone pattern for the intake manifold you're using. EV1 style injectors to pass anything resembling modern emissions requires a very annoying air assisted injector system to break up the droplets at part throttle/idle which still doesn't work that great compared to just having smaller droplets from the injector to begin with. Realistically, you're probably going to be financially ahead if you just pay the fines instead. Or don't drive it into the city center. There's a reason why Nissan never bothered to even attempt certifying an RB for CA/US emissions. The VG30 needed external EGR on top of NVCS to pass in the 90s. Doing all of this work is also distinctly expensive and you're going to struggle to find anyone who is remotely interested in helping. 
    • I remember those, people use to steal them to make bongs.....
×
×
  • Create New...