Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bootstrap.php(430) : eval()'d code on line 118

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958
LVVTA Certification
New Zealand Hot Rod Magazine Subscribe Today and Save
    HOME
    FORUM 
    EVENTS 
    HISTORY 
    TECH 
    VIDEO 
    MEDIA 
Page 1 of 7 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 69
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    5,446

    Default LVVTA Certification

    LVVTA have had their hands full in the past couple of years with safety alerts and recalls on steering columns and axles, both of which have been well handled. Other issues have diverted their resources but there seems to be a growing snowball of discontent re the certification process, interpretations of existing rules changing and tightening of some standards.
    THIS THREAD IS FOR YOU TO SHARE YOUR EXPERIENCES IN A BALANCED , CLEAR AND LOGICAL MANNER.
    Please no character assassinations or poor choice of words.
    State your experience with a positive suggestion for preventing recurrence and smoothing the way for others.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    1,641

    Default

    Was talking with a mate this week who built a T bucket with his son. Car is getting certed but has an issue with the front end.

    Specifically, they have hairpins and a tube axle, which by the book is a no go deal. So he can either fit 4 bars (same as his wifes bucket) or keep the hairpins and get a forged I beam. I have a spare Henry axle, and he can make the necessary batwings, so thats not an issue.

    Strange thing is that another bucket in town has a tube, hairpins and a cert plate. Car has been legal on the road for about 8 years now. And nothing has broken in the front end area.

    Anyway, a relly of the guy with the certed bucket was building one off the same plan, and went to cert with the hairpins/tube axle set up and got bounced by the certifier (as per the HCM). So he goes "Oy, my relly has one like this with a cert on it so I should be able to do it too".

    So relly got a letter to say you are off the road till either you get 4 bars for the tube axle or a beam axle for the hairpins.

    I accept that its best practise to have 4 bars with a tube axle, but I note that folk in the USA have been using hairpins and tube axles for 50 years now (Ted Brown/CCR) and they dont seem to have any issues with it.

    Are we over complicating things here in NZ?
    Last edited by Hot Rod Todd; 01-23-2015 at 09:25 AM.
    I like shiney stuff.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Hotrod Hell!
    Posts
    993

    Default

    Could have something to do with suspension travel? If you have a very small travel the hair pins are less likely to put twist into the tube axle. I had a declared car with a I-beam and a rack and pinion mounted crossways behind it, centre pivot rack/tie rod ends style (Camira/Lancia/Late Honda donors) steered perfectly even up to 230kmh, it had minimal suspension travel so no adverse effects(bumpsteer), and is listed as a no-no in HCTM.

    Also the car getting round with the tube axle and hairpins may have been declaration(ed) then retro-certed - which sometimes is a bit of a slip thru the system.

    Also once a car is certed someone may change it and it is not picked up at WOF time cos a WOF guy has no idea that hairpins don't mix well with tube axles and all that is listed on cert plate is "beam axle".
    Success is self inflicted.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,461

    Default

    WTF! after reading that, I pose this question. A stock 37 Ford with a stock tube axle would have the same geometry as a hairpin/tube. What exactly are they expecting to fail here?
    Sid.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    South Otago
    Posts
    3,084

    Default

    Sid, the 37 had proper radius rods, you don't get binding with that set-up. (As long as the radius rods haven't been split)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rainmouth.
    Posts
    1,214

    Default

    I've read for years on American forums that hairpins with tube axels were a bad idea.
    Guess its a Hamb thing. They all seem to know it.
    Me, i love an i beam or tube, anythings better than the Jap independant currently in the Hudson
    Gold Chainers CC
    President
    New Zealand Chapter

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    1,641

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoopDevil View Post
    Also the car getting round with the tube axle and hairpins may have been declaration(ed) then retro-certed - which sometimes is a bit of a slip thru the system.
    It was a new build 8 years ago. It just slipped past the certifier, which shouldnt happen, so no declaration and no retro cert either.

    I fully accept that we have the HCM and we have to build to its standards. The question is whether the standard is reasonable, and how would one go about questioning it?

    That said, Im a big supporter of LVVTA
    I like shiney stuff.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,461

    Default

    So down there a split wishbone is still ok with an I beam.
    Are there acceptable & non acceptable tube axles in general? There's been some junk on the market over the years & some home built hand grenades.
    Sid.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    1,440

    Default

    Boy, I can see that this thread is going to burn up some time!

    In case you donít know, Iím Justin from LVVTA in Wellington.

    To start with, I think that I should clarify Ďthat letterí. I actually wrote the letter Todd has mentioned, and I can tell you that at no time was the car put, or ordered Ďoff the roadí Ė I simply wrote the letter to bring some issues to his attention that LVVTA had been made aware of. Also, I have never been aware of the car having hairpins fitted on its tube axle, so this hasnít come from me Ė yet another problem for LVVTA to deal with?



    Perhaps at this point I could ask that we make sure that weíve got our facts straight before posting in this thread Ė otherwise I might find myself missing out on my lunch break for the foreseeable future.

    Iíll always try and help or clarify any issues that any of you have, but as was alluded to in the first post, Iím incredibly busy already with my day-to-day work, and so itís not reasonable for me to sit here waiting to answer questions. If anybody has legitimate problems, grizzles or gripes, Iíd be disappointed if they didnít contact me here at the office first, so that we could try to work out a solution. You can get me on 04 238 4343.

    So, back to that car, how did it get certified if it allegedly had multiple issues such as welded forgings, under-spec steering arms and brake pedal (and apparently, also hair-pins on a tube axle)? Weíre all just human arenít we, and sometimes an LVV Certifier can make a wrong decision. But if we (LVVTA) are made aware of a potential issue, what do you guys think we should do? Should we ignore it and hope the worst thinkable outcome never happens, or should we put on our big-boy trousers and notify the owner in a non-confrontational, not threatening way, as we did in this case? That way itís over to the owner to do the responsible thing and hopefully sort any problems out.

    I should add that the LVV Certifier who passed this vehicle back in 2007 had a long history of making poor decisions, and had his authority as an LVV Certifier revoked by the Transport Agency (who are responsible for the appointment, suspension, and revocation of all LVV Certifiers) back in 2012. That doesnít help the owner of this car, who would otherwise have been able to go back to the certifier to seek some assistance in coming up with a solution.

    That brings me back to the discussion that has developed on here about hairpin radius rods fitted in combination with a tube axle. This arrangement hasnít been allowed since the first Code of Construction Manual was released back in 1992 Ė why? Because of known failures! Once a Ford radius rod is split away or hairpin radius rods are fitted, the axle needs to be malleable, to enable it to deal with the twisting action through its length. An old Henry I-beam can cope with the twisting easily Ė theyíre forged steel and incredibly strong. A ductile iron cast axle is also able to flex, and allow a sufficient amount of compliance, but a tube axle unfortunately, will not. It becomes a giant anti-sway bar, and the likelihood is that eventually, some day, either the bat-wing brackets, welds between the tube and the kingpin boss, or the tube itself, will crack, break, or otherwise fail. So, should we just ignore that little point, allow them to be used again (or turn a blind eye when cars like this crop up) and hope that they donít break and cause a fatality?

    You might say ĎHow about the 8 years this car has been on the road? Donít all of those hard road miles count for something?í I canít say for sure, but I can say that a quick look at the mileages recorded at all of the carís WoF inspections shows that itís traveled a whopping 4,000 km's in its entire life. So, itís not even due for an oil change yet! We really can't get sucked into this silly notion that just because something hasnít broken yet, that it wonít break tomorrow, or next week. Because it just mightÖ.
    Live life hard, come home hungry. (And thirsty!)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,461

    Default

    Thanks for the explanation on tube axles Justin. This LVV stuff is all new to me as I left NZ some 35 years ago.
    Sid.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •