How To Modify A Skyline Right To Avoid Defects!

[saliya]

I didnt realise that knowing exactly how the Police and EPA operate, having been through it many times, was not experience.

Better contact Oxford Dictionaries about that ASAP!

You just keep digging, pal.

"Knowing exactly" != this personal, practical experience that you were going on about a few posts ago. Which, apparently, you don't actually have (by your own say-so).

I have been told by officers of the law what they have access to when they bring up your rego. It is very very limited detail and from what they tell me does not go into that level of detail.

I'm inclinded to believe their word for it. I have no reason to believe otherwise afterall.

Sorry i can't be like you and question everything, i do have a faith in people's word.

On the one hand, you accuse the Police of acting contrary to the law and to the guidelines published by VicRoads. This would make them dishonest.

On the other hand, you take them at their word (presumably, because they're honest). Which are they?

You know what... I remember who performed a VASS cert from 2002.

I also remember the number on the defect notice. The exact time on the defect notice. The officers name, number and rank on the defect notice.

I even remember the judge's name and how old he/she was and the colour of socks that was worn that day, hell i even remember what colour my own socks were

If you expect someone to remember the intricate details of something that occured about 6 years ago... no problems, but i do not have them. Simple really. Either accept, or don't.

I couldn't care less.

I know what occured, it was against the VASS as it was over ADR rulings, to which i was not in breach of.

So not only do you not have any evidence to back your say-so, you can't actually remember exactly what happened.

Congratulations, the quinella.

So don't talk about experience, you have none.

I was not talking about my personal, practical experience with VicRoads and emissions testing (I freely admit, I have none).

I was talking about your lack thereof with respect to this issue (you freely admitted, you have none, yet you write as though you do).

This makes me as qualified as you to discuss the topic.

Correction. VicRoads saying one thing, the Police doing another. Any Victorian will tell you that is rather a common occurence.

I honestly don't care if you don't believe me though dude. Not my problem.

No, I don't believe you. But you can easily convert me - provide evidence in support of your claims.

For this specific example, show me a defect notice listing an "as-VASSed" item which would normally be defectable, and is covered by a VASS issued prior to the defect notice

For example, a VASS listing a "pod filter", no modifications were made to the pod filter after VASS issue, and a defect notice for "pod filter" is subsequently issued.

If you cannot provide evidence then you need to accept that your position may be called into question (as it has been here).

Cheers,

Saliya

[R31Nismoid]

You just keep digging, pal.

"Knowing exactly" != this personal, practical experience that you were going on about a few posts ago. Which, apparently, you don't actually have (by your own say-so).

You've totally misunderstood what the comments were in reference to, thats ok though. Your arguments jump around as much as your misinterpretation.

On the one hand, you accuse the Police of acting contrary to the law and to the guidelines published by VicRoads. This would make them dishonest.

On the other hand, you take them at their word (presumably, because they're honest). Which are they?

They are simply using the laws in the methods they are allowed to. Hardly dishonest.

So not only do you not have any evidence to back your say-so, you can't actually remember exactly what happened.

Congratulations, the quinella.

I remember what happened. Your harping on because i cannot recall intricate details is laughable at best.

I remember enough to prove the point, not enough for you, don't care!

I was not talking about my personal, practical experience with VicRoads and emissions testing (I freely admit, I have none).

Or the Victorian Police, or the EPA... and so on and so on.

No, I don't believe you. But you can easily convert me - provide evidence in support of your claims.

No worries then. I believe me, everyone i speak to believes me, people that know me understand i would not lie.

If you don't believe me, so be it. No skin off my nose at all. To expect someone to keep 6yr old court documents for the day someone on the internet thinks you are a liar... is... odd.

[saliya]

Well, you're definitely not bored now

You've totally misunderstood what the comments were in reference to, thats ok though. Your arguments jump around as much as your misinterpretation.

I address your comments individually, where I believe they are incorrect or incorrect logic is used.

My problems with your responses are threefold:

* You make blanket statements that simply aren't true where you think they support your 'case'

* Where challenged on those statements, you ignore or simply repeat

* Where proven wrong, you seem incapable of accepting or acknowledging that

I remember what happened. Your harping on because i cannot recall intricate details is laughable at best.

I remember enough to prove the point, not enough for you, don't care!

It's a convenient sort of answer, though, isn't it.

"I'm right, because I remember something that happened to me several years ago which I have no evidence of and I can recall no specifics of, but that proves I'm right".

And even if accepted at face value (i.e. you did get EPA'd and go to court over it), it still does not prove the point because you cannot recall the specifics.

For example, let's say you have VASS approval for different brakes. You get EPA'd for emissions. One has nothing to do with the other...

No worries then. I believe me, everyone i speak to believes me, people that know me understand i would not lie.

If you don't believe me, so be it. No skin off my nose at all. To expect someone to keep 6yr old court documents for the day someone on the internet thinks you are a liar... is... odd.

I believe that you believe what you are saying. I don't think that you are deliberately lying.

But let's look at other statements you have made in this thread alone that are demonstrably wrong:

* You state that the OP never asked for the legal way to achieve the result (see OP)

* You say that 'the cost involved in (ADR emissions approval) makes it worthless' (To be legal, approval must be obtained. Therefore, the cost of approval must be borne)

* You state that VASS approval is valid for 28 days and after that you are a target (the 30-day window is for you to provide data to VicRoads, not a temporary stay-of-execution)

When you confidently make unfounded statements like this, it leads me to wonder about your other statements.

Cheers,

Saliya

[R31Nismoid]

I address your comments individually, where I believe they are incorrect or incorrect logic is used.

My problems with your responses are threefold:

* You make blanket statements that simply aren't true where you think they support your 'case'

* Where challenged on those statements, you ignore or simply repeat

* Where proven wrong, you seem incapable of accepting or acknowledging that

1. Wrong.

2. No, you do not accept because you seem to have some inability to read and accept the words before you.

3. Wrong on paper, right in the real world. What counts? Reality everytime.

It's a convenient sort of answer, though, isn't it.

"I'm right, because I remember something that happened to me several years ago which I have no evidence of and I can recall no specifics of, but that proves I'm right".

Never said those words.

And even if accepted at face value (i.e. you did get EPA'd and go to court over it), it still does not prove the point because you cannot recall the specifics.

Nope again, you do not accept it. again, big difference. Your choice, pointless to bring it up every post though. You can't even accept that is how it is.

For example, let's say you have VASS approval for different brakes. You get EPA'd for emissions. One has nothing to do with the other...

Really...?

(note severe sarcasm just so you don't interpret that horridly wrong either)

* You state that the OP never asked for the legal way to achieve the result (see OP)

* You say that 'the cost involved in (ADR emissions approval) makes it worthless' (To be legal, approval must be obtained. Therefore, the cost of approval must be borne)

* You state that VASS approval is valid for 28 days and after that you are a target (the 30-day window is for you to provide data to VicRoads, not a temporary stay-of-execution)

1. I stated - the first question.

2. It is pointless for reasons already provided in several posts now.

3. True. You have never been through it by your own admission.

When you confidently make unfounded statements like this, it leads me to wonder about your other statements.

The one making unfounded statements is you, by your own admission, you've never seen anything in practice.

Something you acknowledge but seem unable to fully comprehend for one or another reasons.

[saliya]

The one making unfounded statements is you, by your own admission, you've never seen anything in practice.

Something you acknowledge but seem unable to fully comprehend for one or another reasons.

No, I have made no unfounded statements. All statements have been backed with evidence and/or references. Please point me to any unfounded statements and I will clarify/rectify for your benefit.

Unfortunately, this means the what we have here is yet another blanket, unfounded statement from R31Nismoid. See the problem?

You have (by your own admission) not seen the Vic EPA ADR compliance process in action (you did not bother with it).

So your practical experience with the Vic EPA ADR compliance process is therefore zero (i.e. equivalent to my own).

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Perhaps if you had performed the ADR emissions compliance process you would not have been EPA'd

Anyways, the documented, referenced, approved method to modify a Skyline legally has been described, the original question answered.

Whether it is, in your humble opinion, a worthwhile process is of no moment - it is the only legal process at present.

If the process is so bad then someone that is dissatisfied with it and knows where the problems are needs to change it.

Cheers,

Saliya

[R31Nismoid]

Are you posting from Copenhagen by any chance?

Just wondering as there are 40,000 or so people just like you there at the moment.

They are arguing the THEORY of global warming vs what the REALITY says.

The 40,000 'theorists' saying the globe in theory... is warming.

Yet in reality, you know, where it is actually happening is the globe... is cooling.

Theory - You

Reality - Me

[Sarumatix]

Jeez i'm getting sick of eating all this popcorn lawl.

Just to put a small point in here. It is certainly 'common' knowledge that what nismoid is referring to re: the pointlessness of trying to do it legally. I have several _real_ friends who have attempted the engineer option and have then been defected for those very items. It definitely does happen in Victoria (I don't know about NSW) and has been happening for longer than 6 years. The police are, to the best of my knowledge, very aware of this. One particular member of the force being well known by almost all imported car owners in Victoria, for his brag (and it's accurate) that he can defect any car he wants to. I have also heard from a variety of sources (professional and amateur) exactly what nismoid is refering to re: ADR, that the process is nigh on impossible to complete in Victoria regardless of what the documents say.

I also want to agree that the enthusiasts who remain interested in 'imported' cars in the LONG TERM have simply taken the approach of making modifications to the car in a manor which is low key. Victorian police have been known to say things such as 'oh good you have made an effort to do things properly'. Practical personal experience. I have never been defected even though I drive a car with several 'illegal' modifications and have been pulled over numerous times. That isn't to say i'm not prepared in the future to clear a defect if one does get issued... essentially this is the way we play in Victoria for right or wrong. You can try and fight it, and many people have.. and I personally wish you support and the best of luck. Everyone I know who took that path went on to other things soon after .

This isn't to say I agree with Nismoid's arguments in their entirety but that I completely agree with the spirit of message he is trying to provide to someone asking a fairly simple and blunt question about _avoiding_ future defects.

[Sarumatix]

Case in point I completely disagree with Ash on that one rofl.

http://reg.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/chan.../timeseries.cgi

Pretty hard to say with certainty looking at that.. that the globe is currently cooling. Although you might have a tiny bit of evidence to suggest it may not be warming as quickly.

[saliya]

Are you posting from Copenhagen by any chance?

Congratulations, and thanks for playing the "internet argument" game

You lose because:

* you have made an ad hominem attack

Next time, try actually addressing the material at hand. That's right, the part about legal modification of Skylines in Victoria.

"An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition." - Monty Python

Regards,

Saliya

(FYI, the real ruckus is with the CRU in Britain regarding hiding/destruction of data)

[saliya]

Jeez i'm getting sick of eating all this popcorn lawl.

Just to put a small point in here. It is certainly 'common' knowledge that what nismoid is referring to re: the pointlessness of trying to do it legally. I have several _real_ friends who have attempted the engineer option and have then been defected for those very items.

Hi Sarumatix,

thanks for weighing in. Are any of these people on SAU? Can you point them to this thread?

It definitely does happen in Victoria (I don't know about NSW) and has been happening for longer than 6 years. The police are, to the best of my knowledge, very aware of this. One particular member of the force being well known by almost all imported car owners in Victoria, for his brag (and it's accurate) that he can defect any car he wants to.

It is my understanding that the police can defect any car they like whether or not it is actually illegal (they say "something's wrong here" and it's up to the owner to prove there's not). This applies in NSW as well as in Victoria.

In this situation they have all the power; but they also have accountability. For example, the officer in question issues a defect on what should be a non-defectable item.

After proving that the item is not defective, the owner might take this up with the officer, starting with an informal one-on-one chat and escalating if necessary.

A simple "good afternoon, I am the owner of this car that was defected by you, but which is legal according to <foo>. Can you let me know why you issued this defect notice please?" might be a good start.

If there are no consequences for issuing incorrect defect notices, there is no reason for officers doing this to change their behaviour.

I have also heard from a variety of sources (professional and amateur) exactly what nismoid is refering to re: ADR, that the process is nigh on impossible to complete in Victoria regardless of what the documents say.

I can believe that the process is difficult. However, I too heard this information from a variety of sources regarding NSW (that is: don't bother with engineering, engineering is too hard, you will never get it passed, there's no point engineering because you'll get stickered anyway). 3 years later, no stickers; and there has been at least one officer that went over all the fine details (a hard worker?). Sure, I might still have been OK without the paperwork; but who knows?

I also want to agree that the enthusiasts who remain interested in 'imported' cars in the LONG TERM have simply taken the approach of making modifications to the car in a manor which is low key. Victorian police have been known to say things such as 'oh good you have made an effort to do things properly'. Practical personal experience. I have never been defected even though I drive a car with several 'illegal' modifications and have been pulled over numerous times. That isn't to say i'm not

prepared in the future to clear a defect if one does get issued... essentially this is the way we play in Victoria for right or wrong. You can try and fight it, and many people have.. and I personally wish you support and the best of luck. Everyone I know who took that path went on to other things soon after .

This isn't to say I agree with Nismoid's arguments in their entirety but that I completely agree with the spirit of message he is trying to provide to someone asking a fairly simple and blunt question about _avoiding_ future defects.

I agree that practical experience in living with Victorian rules, police, EPA with a modified vehicle is valuable. If the original question were different - for example, "what legal or illegal mods can I typically get away with" or "what mods can people that want minimal defects make" or "how can I minimize my chances of being defected" then the answers would naturally be different.

The problem is that the original question - how do I legally modify my Skyline (in Victoria) - only has one answer (follow the process). It sounds like that process is very difficult; but it's the only thing that exists at present.

Cheers,

Saliya

[R31Nismoid]

he problem is that the original question - how do I legally modify my Skyline (in Victoria)

That was not the original question, it was secondary. Read the title of the thread, it has a question mark.

Lol @ this all just being about who wins and who does not.

Your theory wins – there you go.

However that theory, when put into practice, is useless.

So anyone using the theory advice is inevitably going to feel wronged if they take your points.

Sarumatix has also backed this up, as will any other Victorian who has seen approved cars still getting defected, which at the end of the day, is what matters.

You can get approvals to be legal (theory), however you can still be defected (practice).

Therefore making the attaining of approvals, utterly pointless.

The end.

[saliya]

That was not the original question, it was secondary. Read the title of the thread, it has a question mark.

If we're going to argue semantics, then semantically, the first post is a block.

In the first post, the OP asked how they go about legally modifying their skyline.

Lol @ this all just being about who wins and who does not.

Your theory wins – there you go.

Never thought I'd see the day. Well done.

However that theory, when put into practice, is useless.

So anyone using the theory advice is inevitably going to feel wronged if they take your points.

Sarumatix has also backed this up, as will any other Victorian who has seen approved cars still getting defected, which at the end of the day, is what matters.

I take it back, I guess you couldn't resist.

Am I paraphrasing your answer correctly with "you cannot legally modify a Skyline and avoid defects in Victoria, because the process for doing so is too hard and/or does not work" ?

Cheers,

Saliya

[adznight]

Not sure if it's been mentioned or not but the best way's I found to gain performance without being deflectable were -

Stock airbox with highflow panel

Stock BOV

By screwing the 'Nissan' ECU cover plate on the 'Power FC' ECU. It's a really tight fit, some of the screws take some work but it can be done and works a treat

Then there is of course the old bleed valve which you cable tie under the airbox so they can't actually see it or pull on it. Also high flow turbo's, not as desirable as a nice HKS unit but you wont be able to defect it.

Last thing I did was guy a 3" CAT and have some 3" pipe welded through for less turbulence.

Cops couldn't touch me in the end. Was ace.

[grippy]

Modify the living sh*t out of your car, as much as you can possibly afford, then leave it in the garage and drive it to and from the track. Use your car for what it was designed for. The smile on your face will be bigger than anything you can achieve on the roads.

Problem solved...