Intrigued by LVVTA statement over modified suspension

[Crash bandicoot]

I was reading this tonight.

Was Intrigued by the fact there was no mention of actual ride height after modification in relation to the factory ride height.

It would appear reading further that as a sole modification lifting ya truck is not subjected to the 50mm restriction before Certification is required..

LVVTA has been working closely with the New Zealand Four Wheel Drive Association to try to produce an “Authority Card” system for NZFWDA members which would allow them more freedom with suspension lifts than the general public would have.
However, for various reasons this failed to achieve consensus (see Peter Vahry’s column last issue) and for the time being, at least, the current rules stand.
And these are quite simple. Any suspension modifications must be certified, unless they meet the following exclusions:
Says the LVVTA: “A vehicle is not required to be certified to the Low Volume Vehicle Code where a suspension modification is the sole modification, and the following criteria is met, provided that the safe performance of the vehicle is not compromised.”

(a) Aftermarket shock absorbers including air adjustable units, but not including those with height-adjustable platforms, may be used, provided they are fitted to the vehicle manufacturer’s mounting points; or

(b) Aftermarket road springs, including those that raise or lower the vehicle, may be substituted for the originals, provided that:

(i) the springs are fitted correctly to the original vehicle manufacturer’s mounts; and
(ii) there has been no heating or cutting of the springs subsequent to their original manufacturing process; and
(iii) the springs remain in contact with their seats when the vehicle suspension is fully extended; and
(iv) the original vehicle manufacturer’s method of retaining the springs at full extension is maintained without the addition of any supplementary devices such as wire ties or other non-standard methods of retaining the springs; and
(v) unless specified as an original condition by the original vehicle manufacturer, the road clearance of the unladen vehicle is not less than 100 mm measured at any part of the vehicle other than the
wheel rim, brake backing plate and the outer knuckle of the suspension joint, or body kits such as front spoiler and side skirts of a lightweight construction; and
(vi) the normal relationship between the front and rear suspension height is not unduly affected; and
(vii) there is sufficient travel in the suspension to ensure that contact is not made with the vehicle manufacturer’s unmodified bump stops when the vehicle is fully loaded and operated under normal conditions; or

(c) If blocks are used in leaf springs to adjust their ride height they must be securely fitted, have the same or more seating area than the original fitment, be no more than 50 mm high, be made of metal, and be designed for the purpose; or

(d) Aftermarket suspension bushes may be substituted for the originals, provided they are made from an appropriate material such as polyurethane, and there has been no cutting or machining of the suspension arms to fit them; or

(e) Aftermarket stabiliser bars may be fitted, provided they use the original mounting points.

For more information check out the LVVTA website at http://www.lvvta.org.nz/

[DieselBoy]

Ya, nothing has changed what so ever

Everyone can thank themselves for helping to make sure that authority card crap never got off the ground

[Twodiffs]

Yeah...Peter Vahry also stated in that same editorial that those of us who opposed the LVVTA and the authority card had a quote "lack of vision".

Well as far as Mr Vahry's snide remarks go I think we had plenty of vision and saw the proposal for what it was hence it going back to the drawing board. I guess one of the main parties being misled by the other main party didn't help either.

[tallsam66]

The people to thank for the Authority Card not happening is Combined Clubs.They had talks with LVVTA & when the truth came out they realised it wouldnt work.
NZ 4WD Ass still wants to bring the card in in some form but Combined WILL fight it all the way as its not in the best interest of 4wders to have it.

[Mudde1]

Unfortunately the situation is no where near as simple as the above comments would have you believe. Yes it is true that thanks to complaints, there will be no authority card system. What the people who are patting themselves on the back are forgetting is that this is not the end of changes to suspension standards. Land transport and others are still pushing very hard for major changes to the Suspension standard.(Which is what anyone who modifies suspension systems is required to adhere to in order to be certified). NZFWDA is working closely with LVVTA on the new standard and we will be doing its very best to ensure the best possible out come for everyone. We did our very best to ensure that genuine enthusiasts who wanted large lifts were able to do that, but that was prevented by a reasonably small group with self interests at heart. Our concern now is that the updated standard will prohibit anyone from fitting large lifts with no possible exception for anyone.
NZFWDA will be keeping its members informed as progress is made and members should keep an eye on their inbox on 5th October for a brief update.
Due to our past experience with the amount of abuse we have received and the deliberate misinterpretation of information we supplied on this subject spread on this forum it is unlikely that we will be commenting further here and we recommend to our members that they read the accurate information sent to them by us via trail torque and Zone meetings.
Tony Burgess
President NZFWDA

[Heath]

Unfortunately the situation is no where near as simple as the above comments would have you believe. Yes it is true that thanks to complaints, there will be no authority card system. What the people who are patting themselves on the back are forgetting is that this is not the end of changes to suspension standards. Land transport and others are still pushing very hard for major changes to the Suspension standard.(Which is what anyone who modifies suspension systems is required to adhere to in order to be certified). NZFWDA is working closely with LVVTA on the new standard and we will be doing its very best to ensure the best possible out come for everyone. We did our very best to ensure that genuine enthusiasts who wanted large lifts were able to do that, but that was prevented by a reasonably small group with self interests at heart. Our concern now is that the updated standard will prohibit anyone from fitting large lifts with no possible exception for anyone.
NZFWDA will be keeping its members informed as progress is made and members should keep an eye on their inbox on 5th October for a brief update.
Due to our past experience with the amount of abuse we have received and the deliberate misinterpretation of information we supplied on this subject spread on this forum it is unlikely that we will be commenting further here and we recommend to our members that they read the accurate information sent to them by us via trail torque and Zone meetings.
Tony Burgess
President NZFWDA

With the potential to start another shit storm perhaps your statement " NZFWDA is working closely with LVVTA on the new standard and we will be doing its very best to ensure the best possible out come for everyone." should've included everyone (or at least interested parties) in the first place, perhaps then this mess wouldn't have been so bad and we "ALL" could have been involved in what is in "ALL" of our interests.

United we stand, divided we fall, etc etc etc.

[Crash bandicoot]

Muddle, I couldn't give a toss about the politics, the point of the post was to say , as a stand alone modification

"That does not create obvious stability issues"

, and uses factory mounting points etc etc....I did not relise that A cert is not required.



How ever if you say for example do a suspension lift in a land cruiser then later down the track decided to put a Lexus v8 in it the suspension would then require certification as well.

This i under stand as the bigger motor would place bigger lateral G force on the vehicle forcing the suspension to work more as apposed to factory.

[Twodiffs]

Mudde1...

I was at that meeting in ChCh, There were no complaints...only constructive reasoning and effective input which was 'new information' to the LVVTA representative/s present, plus of course the fact that what was considered as normal acceptable 4wd behaviour and/or issues pertaining to the North Island actually differed from South Island practices in some occupational or recreational/geographical interests.

Also..please refrain from condescending remarks , nobody is quote "patting themselves on the back" and don't consider for one moment that we are silly enough to think or assume that this has been laid to rest because we are a little more intelligent than what you may think. Does some legislation have to be brought in to legalise or place a 'capping' on 4wd suspension lifts? - yes I believe so, and yes...it will happen and quite rightly so imo. It just needs to be discussed, agreed upon and not a brainwash module that has been dictated to the LVVTA.

It's commendable that yourself and the NZ4WDA will liaise closely with the LVVTA and advise accordingly, likewise as a 4wd club member affiliated with Combined 4WD Clubs here in the South Island, I've every confidence that Combined will do the same.

[bang-thud-thump]

From someone yet to buy their first 4x4 (ie an 'outsider')Im seeing the same in-fighting shit I saw while crewing in NZV8s, racing a motard etc...

NZ is WAY to small for in-fighting.
Sadly there is always some cock knocker who is in it to be the big fish in the small pond and tell everyone else how to wipe their ass so he feels better about his issues.
He knows best. Bullshit and 'bollitix' .

I dont know who is who here but FFS people sort it out.
I did work for a certifier for a while as a mechanic. Funnily enough he almost always failed people on WOF stuff, not mods. Most people do sensible mods.

Lifts and safety come down to physics surely?!.
People not liking them is as dumb as the people who say military rifles are 'dangerous'. Screw the safety nazis.
ignorance and perception are NOT reasons to change anything.

Its idiots who are dangerous. With cars, guns, lego......

[badnuz]

just be happy your not in aus! different laws for different states.... and if you push those boundaries the penalties are harsh... glad i dont need a wof thou!

[Pico42]

Awesome, some more NZ4WDA vs Combined Clubs sniping.

I hope for everyone's sake that the Combined Clubs are working with the NZ4WDA on this issue. I get that the NZTA will want to deal with a single entity, but it can't be at the expense of Canterbury 4WDers.

[Ralfie]

Awesome, some more NZ4WDA vs Combined Clubs sniping.

I hope for everyone's sake that the Combined Clubs are working with the NZ4WDA on this issue. I get that the NZTA will want to deal with a single entity, but it can't be at the expense of Canterbury 4WDers.

Surprised no one has commented on the LVVTA article about lifts and raised vehicles in the November issue of NZ4WD. They were very pointed as to what happened over the authority card proposal, who was to blame for its demise and also about the options for the future.

Part 2 next month is about looking at ideas for dealing with raised vehicles.

[Nigel Bannan]

It has never been NZ4WD Association against Combined 4wd Clubs. The point of the whole thing is why should a keen 4wder (whether they are in a club or not) be pushed into a position that he/she has to join the NZ4WD Association due to the modifications that they have done to their 4wd which complies with the current road rules. In matter of fact both have worked together on varies issues in the past few years like the recent CMS for Southland, Canterbury and Otago were 4wd reps from around the South Island meet in Dunedin to nut out a proposal to put forward to Doc. Doc have realised that there is more than one voice in the South Island and they are working with 4wders in there respective areas.

Regards
Nigel Bannan
Chairman
Combined 4WD Clubs Inc

[tallsam66]

Well said Nige !!

It has never been NZ4WD Association against Combined 4wd Clubs. The point of the whole thing is why should a keen 4wder (whether they are in a club or not) be pushed into a position that he/she has to join the NZ4WD Association due to the modifications that they have done to their 4wd which complies with the current road rules. In matter of fact both have worked together on varies issues in the past few years like the recent CMS for Southland, Canterbury and Otago were 4wd reps from around the South Island meet in Dunedin to nut out a proposal to put forward to Doc. Doc have realised that there is more than one voice in the South Island and they are working with 4wders in there respective areas.

Regards
Nigel Bannan
Chairman
Combined 4WD Clubs Inc

[klompy]

I think thru all this the NZFWDA have missed an opportunity to get more four wheelers on side.But by keeping things secret and only for there own members they have done some damage to there image.Surely in cases as important as this to our recreational sport they should of opened up and got as many people involved in an open and transparent way.

[Ralfie]

It has never been NZ4WD Association against Combined 4wd Clubs. The point of the whole thing is why should a keen 4wder (whether they are in a club or not) be pushed into a position that he/she has to join the NZ4WD Association due to the modifications that they have done to their 4wd which complies with the current road rules. In matter of fact both have worked together on varies issues in the past few years like the recent CMS for Southland, Canterbury and Otago were 4wd reps from around the South Island meet in Dunedin to nut out a proposal to put forward to Doc. Doc have realised that there is more than one voice in the South Island and they are working with 4wders in there respective areas.

Regards
Nigel Bannan
Chairman
Combined 4WD Clubs Inc

Below is copied from actual article by LVVTA. Seems to imply it was a NZFWDA against Canterbury thing as the two were not willing to work together, coupled with a few from Canterbury who lobbied direct to NZTA who then withdrew support for the idea.

Now is not the time to feel smug about getting the authority card withdrawn as the alternatives are possibly going to worse and cost more in fees etc. But there is no turning back now.

The whole article is worth reading as it goes into detail and background of what LVVTA is, what it does and the role is does within NZ. Also details why there must be something done about lifted vehicles, what the certifiers concerns are and of course the now defunct Authority Card issue.


The LVV Authority Card proposal
So, how best to assess such vehicles, and determine what is and isn’t safe? The initial thought was, based on a view that the risks associated with raised vehicles are lower while driven by off-road enthusiasts, were to create a three-tier system based on:
● Setting a basic “threshold” that allows a vehicle with a very minor suspension and/or tyre lift to be able to be assessed by a WoF inspector without LVV certification being required.
● A set of LVV technical requirements that say that any vehicle that is raised beyond that “threshold”, but less than a safe and sensible specified maximum amount, may be approved (for any vehicle owner/operator) by the LVV certification process.
● Any vehicle that is raised to such an extent that it exceeds the maximum specified figure may be approved (up to a higher maximum limit) by the LVV certification process, provided that it can be established that the user is a bona fide enthusiast who understands the limitations and risks associated with a significantly raised vehicle.
The way in which we proposed to identify a distinction between an urban commuter type operator and a genuine enthusiast is via an existing system that has worked well for the motor sport and hot rodding movements for 20-plus years, which is based around an “LVV Authority Card” system, which is tied to a certain person who must be a member of a member club of a national association (which must be an LVVTA member association), which will monitor and take responsibility for the behaviour of the card holders via their national club structure so as to prevent the LVV Authority Card system being abused and falling into disrepute. Unfortunately, this concept – which had been agreed in principle between LVVTA, the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA), and NZFWDA – met with disapproval from some Canterbury-based off-roading clubs who were not member clubs of NZFWDA.
The Canterbury-based clubs had a number of different reasons for working against the idea, and a common theme seemed to be disinterest in having membership with NZFWD as well as their own club or association. Some members lobbied their concerns about the LVV Authority Card system to NZTA, and this caused NZTA to withdraw their support for the LVV Authority Card concept. Unfortunately, the affected clubs and associations have been unable to work together for the greater good – as the motor sport and hot rodding fraternities have done successfully for more than 20 years – so the LVV Authority Card option is now dead in the water. A lot of time and effort has been put into the development of the Authority Card system by LVVTA and NZFWDA over recent years, and it had support in principle from NZTA which has now been withdrawn. This LVV Authority
Card system, which will not be revisited, is viewed by many as a lost opportunity.

[Crash bandicoot]

It is very similar to what has happened in the club car racing circut.

IT goes something like this.

You can have your rock hard adjustable suspension roll cages 4 inch exhausts superchargers and semi slicks in a WOF and Registered car for a reason... That reason is you like to do Targa or laps of manfield/taupo.

It's clearly not practical for day to day on road driving And is clearly Lower and stiffer then what a say a set of super low king springs in a family commodore provides...

The LVVTA and the LTSA at the time realised that there are people out there who spend 10 k on racing suspension for there toyota supra's, Historic Group A or C falcon's and commdores nissan GTR's Ford sierra's 911's etc that go above and beyond a standard lowering and areo kits etc purely for looks or a mild suspension enhancement.

Hence the introduction of the log book system(2 events annually) for roll cages and racing suspension to prove to the roading authorities that the car they have in front of them at any given time has not been modified purely from aesthetic point of view.

The Bottom line being it got rid of the stigmata against actual racing enthusiasts as "boy racers".

The upside to this is the guys like me with seriously powerful jap cars in my case a gtr have started to be left alone by the cops if we decide to take our cars out on the public road.

[tallsam66]

NZHRA (Hot Rodders) the only time there members require an Aurthority Card is when they want an exemption to NOT have mudguards on their vehicles.All other aspects of there modifications are all covered by the LVVTA cert system.You do not have to be an NZHRA member to cert your hotrod ( been there done that myself)
The article is a bit misleading as it suggests all hotrodders need a Auth Card & they wouldnt be able to do what they want with out Auth Card.The fact is a small % hotrods dont have guards.
Having no mudguards is outside the rules for LVVTA & also for non modified vehicles thats why they need to have the Auth Card in place.

The LVVTA rules are more than adequate for the modifications we do to our 4wds.They ensure they are done in such a way that they are correctly engineered, & dont cause the vehicle to behave in a way that would make them unsafe on the road.Another layer of bureauracy & expense by having to be a member of NZ4WD Ass & also pay for an Auth Card wont make our vehicles any safer.
Perhaps NZ4WD Ass doesnt have any confidence in LVVTA & thats why they want another layer ???

[Petemcc]

The thing that I keep thinking of is the thresholds.

I have thoughts both for and against the authority cards but most of those have been thrashed out.

When you start talking about suspension lift from factory there are so many variables to really tell how high a vehicle is. What if someone trims the guards 150mm with no lift when the measurement is from the guard to the centre of the hub. Even rubber flares can change this measurement a good inch by how the guy measures it.

What if they don't have the factory measurements?

It really comes down to handling. Just because a truck is high doesn't mean it's more likely to have an accident than another modified vehicle. What if it has suspension that has similar spring rates to factory and although it has gone up 6 inches it has also got 6 inches wider and considerably heavier with unsprung weight (wheels and diffs etc) maybe it has had sway bars installed as well.

What is someone has a mild lift and then puts 400kg on the roof?

suspension geometry and handling characteristics (bump steer etc) are much more important than height.

Maybe they should try and come up with a handling test or a centre of gravity test?

Most guys with 4wds drive to the conditions. If your truck handles average they most people would drive a bit slower.

If it handles really bad they you probably won't drive it from bluff to nelson. it would probably be really uncomfortable and would use heaps of gas if the tyres are too big.

the problem is really young buggers showing off going to fast etc etc. and they are going to do that in any vehicle they get their hands on.

At the end of the day there are still tests they have to pass for cert and then to have a wof they need to keep the brakes and all that stuff in good nick.

Would the authority card really make people safer?

[crazyclark31]

Would the authority card really make people safer?[/quote]

Short answer: Nope

[Ralfie]

The thing that I keep thinking of is the thresholds.

I have thoughts both for and against the authority cards but most of those have been thrashed out.

When you start talking about suspension lift from factory there are so many variables to really tell how high a vehicle is. What if someone trims the guards 150mm with no lift when the measurement is from the guard to the centre of the hub. Even rubber flares can change this measurement a good inch by how the guy measures it.

What if they don't have the factory measurements?

It really comes down to handling. Just because a truck is high doesn't mean it's more likely to have an accident than another modified vehicle. What if it has suspension that has similar spring rates to factory and although it has gone up 6 inches it has also got 6 inches wider and considerably heavier with unsprung weight (wheels and diffs etc) maybe it has had sway bars installed as well.

What is someone has a mild lift and then puts 400kg on the roof?

suspension geometry and handling characteristics (bump steer etc) are much more important than height.

Maybe they should try and come up with a handling test or a centre of gravity test?

Most guys with 4wds drive to the conditions. If your truck handles average they most people would drive a bit slower.

If it handles really bad they you probably won't drive it from bluff to nelson. it would probably be really uncomfortable and would use heaps of gas if the tyres are too big.

the problem is really young buggers showing off going to fast etc etc. and they are going to do that in any vehicle they get their hands on.

At the end of the day there are still tests they have to pass for cert and then to have a wof they need to keep the brakes and all that stuff in good nick.

Would the authority card really make people safer?

I didn't put up the complete article which goes into a lot of the detail you mention as to total package when lifting vehicles; body, suspension, tyres and steering.

Yes, there are proposals to have equipment to test centre of gravity, handling etc. but it is very expensive and the certifiers don't want to pay the thousands to have such equipment for the small number of vehicles they well be used on per year and you can understand why.

When equipment does come instead of the card option it is going to cost significantly more to get a lifted vehicle certified and the current 50mm leeway is likely to go as well.

And yes, they do have manufacturers standard height specifications already.

[Ralfie]

Would the authority card really make people safer?

Short answer: Nope[/quote]

Not about making people safe.
Its about the vehicle been safe and in the hands of people who require such modifications, do use it for the intended off road purpose, knowing how to drive such a vehicle rather than cruise city streets.

[Crash bandicoot]

Not about making people safe.
Its about the vehicle been safe and in the hands of people who require such modifications, do use it for the intended off road purpose, knowing how to drive such a vehicle rather than cruise city streets.

Fark me....... not about making people safe? our dogs don't drive our trucks we do...i.e. people.

So what you are saying is driver training courses for off road in off road vehicles... get real.

And "require modifications" is a moot point..... No one ever "requires" modification.

A 1985 hilux driven by barry crump down a cliff face didn't really require any modification and didn't have any.

That brings me to the point in case about Driver training. and where the LVVTA and LTSA need to listen.

Most of us grew up with vehicles with no power steer, no ABS ESC ASC TCS etc etc. we learnt how to descend a hill with out using brakes . how to keep momentum and pick the right gear where to drive and on what surfaces. we didn't have people teach us these things we learnt for our selves.

It is these so called "Driver Aids" that are dumbing peoples ability to Drive Judge and make acurate desicions. False sense of security and when the shit really hits the fan the result its magnified because we then have SRS ICZ's and vehicles designed with pedestrian saftey in mine instead of the ability to take on a tree on the side of a track.


and the situatuion occuring where these jacked up trucks are rolling over are at low speed and in a controlled environment hell we even had a truck roll over on the Desert defenders trip. the result a bruised Ego.

How many of you know when you aquaplane a car with the cruise control on it will speed up. that's not in the road code...And it certainly isn't in the owners manual either. It is common sense.

[Ralfie]

Not about making people safe.
Its about the vehicle been safe and in the hands of people who require such modifications, do use it for the intended off road purpose, knowing how to drive such a vehicle rather than cruise city streets.

Fark me....... not about making people safe? our dogs don't drive our trucks we do...i.e. people.

So what you are saying is driver training courses for off road in off road vehicles... get real.

And "require modifications" is a moot point..... No one ever "requires" modification.

A 1985 hilux driven by barry crump down a cliff face didn't really require any modification and didn't have any.

That brings me to the point in case about Driver training. and where the LVVTA and LTSA need to listen.

Most of us grew up with vehicles with no power steer, no ABS ESC ASC TCS etc etc. we learnt how to descend a hill with out using brakes . how to keep momentum and pick the right gear where to drive and on what surfaces. we didn't have people teach us these things we learnt for our selves

and the situatuion occuring where these jacked up trucks are rolling over are at low speed and in a controlled environment hell we even had a truck roll over on the Desert defenders trip. the result a bruised Ego.

How many of you know when you aquaplane a car with the cruise control on it will speed up. that's not in the road code...And it certainly isn't in the owners manual either. It is common sense.

Yes you are showing your age ............. it is no longer LTSA. It is NZTA.

You are starting to rant and not think logically. although have to agree re vehicles and all the electronic safety stuff.

However I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility that you will need driver training for off road vehicles in the future. Most company's already do that for the drivers of company 4WD's that go off road.

Its all about how safe the vehicle is on road and to the general public anything over standard height shouldn't be allowed.

[Petemcc]

.

to the general public anything over standard height shouldn't be allowed.

Yea too true. General public have a lot of sway in situations like this.

"Safe" is the way the world is going and sometimes you need to make the best of a bad situation.

These is no argument that my lifted modified 4wd is less safe than it was in standard form. It's a risk I'm willing to take and I take measures to minimise that risk (ie drive slower) but not everyone will agree with a risk that I consider acceptable.

At the end of the day LTNZ or whoever will try to minimise the risks associated with driving on our roads. If they consider lifted 4wds to present and unacceptable risk that they can reduce by making rules then they will do it.

All we can hope to do is to add some logic and reasoning to their decision making process.

I get the impression (though my only research is really what I have read here and even some of that I have skimmed) that those who were opposing the authority card thing feel like they have won rather than stalling the inevitable. What are they doing to help the situation? At least the card idea might have had the right intention?

[tallsam66]

There is NO 50mm leeway ....if you can find it in any official document from either LVVTA or LTSA id love to see it & trust me ive looked lots.

The thing that I keep thinking of is the thresholds.

I have thoughts both for and against the authority cards but most of those have been thrashed out.

When you start talking about suspension lift from factory there are so many variables to really tell how high a vehicle is. What if someone trims the guards 150mm with no lift when the measurement is from the guard to the centre of the hub. Even rubber flares can change this measurement a good inch by how the guy measures it.

What if they don't have the factory measurements?

It really comes down to handling. Just because a truck is high doesn't mean it's more likely to have an accident than another modified vehicle. What if it has suspension that has similar spring rates to factory and although it has gone up 6 inches it has also got 6 inches wider and considerably heavier with unsprung weight (wheels and diffs etc) maybe it has had sway bars installed as well.

What is someone has a mild lift and then puts 400kg on the roof?

suspension geometry and handling characteristics (bump steer etc) are much more important than height.

Maybe they should try and come up with a handling test or a centre of gravity test?

Most guys with 4wds drive to the conditions. If your truck handles average they most people would drive a bit slower.

If it handles really bad they you probably won't drive it from bluff to nelson. it would probably be really uncomfortable and would use heaps of gas if the tyres are too big.

the problem is really young buggers showing off going to fast etc etc. and they are going to do that in any vehicle they get their hands on.

At the end of the day there are still tests they have to pass for cert and then to have a wof they need to keep the brakes and all that stuff in good nick.

Would the authority card really make people safer?

I didn't put up the complete article which goes into a lot of the detail you mention as to total package when lifting vehicles; body, suspension, tyres and steering.

Yes, there are proposals to have equipment to test centre of gravity, handling etc. but it is very expensive and the certifiers don't want to pay the thousands to have such equipment for the small number of vehicles they well be used on per year and you can understand why.

When equipment does come instead of the card option it is going to cost significantly more to get a lifted vehicle certified and the current 50mm leeway is likely to go as well.

And yes, they do have manufacturers standard height specifications already.

[Crash bandicoot]

Ok lets be logical.

Anything over standard height shouldn't be allowed.

As it stands Standard ride hieght is open to interpretation and always will be. why you ask. you 'll need albert einstein's brain to work it out.

IF it was governed, there are too many variables to calculate even standard ride hieght.

need to calculate suspension, Fuel, vehicle track, tyre size and pressure and rim size, addition of accessory's bullbars winches belly plates lugage racks internal storage is the vehicle eqipped with variable ride hieght like the volvo XC90 and range rovers etc.

And then there are factory variations in the same models.
I'll use mine as an example.

not only does the body of a 98 mistral sit higher on the chassis the 98 mistral also rests 50 mm higher then a 95 mistral in suspension, And yet to look on any data base parts supply or registration data base they are all in the same classification

[Crash bandicoot]

tall sam you are correct. The original purpose of this topic was to say that there is no actual law about the actual ride hieght of a vehicle compared to its factory spec ride hieght,

It goes on to say that as a stand alone modification it does not require certification. how every any other modifications that could inherently alter the vehicle handling characteristics such as a more powerful motor that could generate more force compared to the original power plant on the suspension . Then not only the engine but the suspension also needs certification.

[Ralfie]

There is NO 50mm leeway ....if you can find it in any official document from either LVVTA or LTSA id love to see it & trust me ive looked lots.

Says the LVVTA: “A vehicle is not required to be certified to the Low Volume Vehicle Code where a suspension modification is the sole modification, and the following criteria is met, provided that the safe performance of the vehicle is not compromised.”

(a) Aftermarket shock absorbers including air adjustable units, but not including those with height-adjustable platforms, may be used, provided they are fitted to the vehicle manufacturer’s mounting points; or

(b) Aftermarket road springs, including those that raise or lower the vehicle, may be substituted for the originals, provided that:

(i) the springs are fitted correctly to the original vehicle manufacturer’s mounts; and
(ii) there has been no heating or cutting of the springs subsequent to their original manufacturing process; and
(iii) the springs remain in contact with their seats when the vehicle suspension is fully extended; and
(iv) the original vehicle manufacturer’s method of retaining the springs at full extension is maintained without the addition of any supplementary devices such as wire ties or other non-standard methods of retaining the springs; and
(v) unless specified as an original condition by the original vehicle manufacturer, the road clearance of the unladen vehicle is not less than 100 mm measured at any part of the vehicle other than the
wheel rim, brake backing plate and the outer knuckle of the suspension joint, or body kits such as front spoiler and side skirts of a lightweight construction; and
(vi) the normal relationship between the front and rear suspension height is not unduly affected; and
(vii) there is sufficient travel in the suspension to ensure that contact is not made with the vehicle manufacturer’s unmodified bump stops when the vehicle is fully loaded and operated under normal conditions; or

(c) If blocks are used in leaf springs to adjust their ride height they must be securely fitted, have the same or more seating area than the original fitment, be no more than 50 mm high, be made of metal, and be designed for the purpose; or

(d) Aftermarket suspension bushes may be substituted for the originals, provided they are made from an appropriate material such as polyurethane, and there has been no cutting or machining of the suspension arms to fit them; or

(e) Aftermarket stabiliser bars may be fitted, provided they use the original mounting points.

[wjw]

My two trucks ended up needing certs, not for suspension mods, but for increase in tire size....