oh arrrh jizz i just blew my load every thing about this scraems sex!!!!torqued wrote:
BOSO THREAD
-
MR1200
- Datsun Nutter
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:00 pm
- Location: guns at the ready lets go fool
Re: BOSO THREAD
PAINT THE ROADS BLACK !!!!!
-
dirtyleppa
- Datsun God
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:35 pm
- aka: leppa
- Location: BLENHEIM
- Contact:
Re: BOSO THREAD
you should see the rest of it 
Re: BOSO THREAD
its nice to see Alfonzos cellica getting so much loving after watching him build it up on the net for a couple of years now.
also
Shark noses are no go in NZ
i was hoping there would be a way that they could be snuck in a back door in the law but the offical word is here from my inquiries with the LVVTA:
"Unfortunately we don't have any good news on this one. We've looked pretty closely at both the LVV external projections requirements, the 'Land Transport Rules', and have also discussed this with a few different certifiers, and a senior engineer from NZTA. All of the advice and information we have received has pointed to this modification being outside of the legal requirements, and as such, could not be approved under the LVV system. This could possibly be approved however, if the extension could be made from a material that would deflect upon impact, for example the relatively soft foam-type material that some rear boot spoilers are made from.
In a nut-shell, the likelihood is that this modification (with a relatively sharp, protruding edge forward of the bumper) would cause more serious injuries to a pedestrian in the event of an impact than if it wasn't fitted. The lighting equipment would also need to be modified, however in the context of this outcome, that's a less significant issue.
These are the relevant section from the Land Transport Rules;
From external projections rule:
2.2 General safety requirements
2.2(1) An ornamental object or fitting must not protrude from a motor vehicle if the object or fitting is likely to injure a person.
2.2(4) Components of a motor vehicle, including damaged or corroded body panels, must be such that the risk of their hooking a vehicle, or hooking or grazing a person, is minimised.
2.2(5) In assessing whether 2.2(1) to 2.2(4) are complied with, a person specified in section 4 may take into account evidence that the external projections are within the motor vehicle manufacturer's operating limits.
Here is the relevant section from the LVV Standard;
Non-functional items
2.3(2) Protruding external objects or fittings that do not have a functional purpose may not be fitted to low volume vehicles if they are likely to increase the risk of injury to any person, including the following three requirements for non-functional items:
(a) ornamental hood emblems must be designed and attached in
such a way that they will fold back or break off in the event of
contact, without leaving any sharp edges;"
so yea, gay.
also
Shark noses are no go in NZ
i was hoping there would be a way that they could be snuck in a back door in the law but the offical word is here from my inquiries with the LVVTA:
"Unfortunately we don't have any good news on this one. We've looked pretty closely at both the LVV external projections requirements, the 'Land Transport Rules', and have also discussed this with a few different certifiers, and a senior engineer from NZTA. All of the advice and information we have received has pointed to this modification being outside of the legal requirements, and as such, could not be approved under the LVV system. This could possibly be approved however, if the extension could be made from a material that would deflect upon impact, for example the relatively soft foam-type material that some rear boot spoilers are made from.
In a nut-shell, the likelihood is that this modification (with a relatively sharp, protruding edge forward of the bumper) would cause more serious injuries to a pedestrian in the event of an impact than if it wasn't fitted. The lighting equipment would also need to be modified, however in the context of this outcome, that's a less significant issue.
These are the relevant section from the Land Transport Rules;
From external projections rule:
2.2 General safety requirements
2.2(1) An ornamental object or fitting must not protrude from a motor vehicle if the object or fitting is likely to injure a person.
2.2(4) Components of a motor vehicle, including damaged or corroded body panels, must be such that the risk of their hooking a vehicle, or hooking or grazing a person, is minimised.
2.2(5) In assessing whether 2.2(1) to 2.2(4) are complied with, a person specified in section 4 may take into account evidence that the external projections are within the motor vehicle manufacturer's operating limits.
Here is the relevant section from the LVV Standard;
Non-functional items
2.3(2) Protruding external objects or fittings that do not have a functional purpose may not be fitted to low volume vehicles if they are likely to increase the risk of injury to any person, including the following three requirements for non-functional items:
(a) ornamental hood emblems must be designed and attached in
such a way that they will fold back or break off in the event of
contact, without leaving any sharp edges;"
so yea, gay.
-
dirtyleppa
- Datsun God
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:35 pm
- aka: leppa
- Location: BLENHEIM
- Contact:
Re: BOSO THREAD
damn, that sux. im so so gutted 
Re: BOSO THREAD
yea a, not going to stop me though, i gotta have a sharknose, i'll just have to have two sets of guards/bonnets.
just sucks i can't be legal.
just sucks i can't be legal.
-
dirtyleppa
- Datsun God
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:35 pm
- aka: leppa
- Location: BLENHEIM
- Contact:
Re: BOSO THREAD
im sorry if this offends, but if i buy a honda, this is what it will look like
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
gingofthesouth
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1932
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 4:06 pm
- aka: Ging
- Location: Lower Hutt
- Contact:
Re: BOSO THREAD
Epic and Honda never go in the same sentence unless accompanied by FAILMR1200 wrote:wow thats epic for a honda
My orangatang 510 here.
-
Seibu Keisatsu
- Datsun Dreamer
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 10:42 am
- Location: C
- Contact:
Re: BOSO THREAD
may i ask where your prejudice against honda motor cars came from?
regards
regards
http://gx61.wordpress.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
gingofthesouth
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1932
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 4:06 pm
- aka: Ging
- Location: Lower Hutt
- Contact:
Re: BOSO THREAD
Yes, the cheap rust buckets my friends and one family member have owned that constantly shat themselves or died in a rusty heap. Meanwhile my mums Toyota corolla was like the energizer battery and kept going and going, and my nissans my mates owned (old pulsars and bluebirds) never suffered issues besides your standard maintenance. Sooo, based on my experiences and those around me Honda = fail! (and fail often lol)Seibu Keisatsu wrote:may i ask where your prejudice against honda motor cars came from?
regards
My orangatang 510 here.