You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Read the thread. A lot of stock cars are being VI'ed randomly. Nothing funny about it.
These "crackdowns" are because of the vendetta and pettiness of a group of people who shouldn't be in the force and not because of a VPD initiative. Nothing funny about it.
A lot of the cars on here have thousands and thousands of dollars blown on them, on items that just make them less legal. Someone saying they're suffering financially because of the cost of a VI is going to sound laughably silly to the general public.
Are people really so bad at math that they're taking the massive depreciation hit of selling their modded vehicle and then the tax hit of buying another vehicle just to avoid the cost of a VI? Again, if that's the kinda stuff people bring to the media you're likely to get a lot of laughter and little support from the public.
I am more worried about the high school kid who bought a modified Civic with all his money and now has to deal with a VI.
__________________ Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
I am more worried about the high school kid who bought a modified Civic with all his money and now has to deal with a VI.
Agreed. One of my friends who owns a small business, daily drives a slammed stanced jetta. He just bought it cause it was cheap. He has no intention to be part of the car life. A VI would be mean he would have to close shop for a day, and deal with the VI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nlkko
Read the thread. A lot of stock cars are being VI'ed randomly. Nothing funny about it.
Most members in this thread, aside from Badhobz, is modified. Skunkworks included. We all drive modified cars, beyond the scope of the MVA, and thus breaking the law.
Read the thread. A lot of stock cars are being VI'ed randomly. Nothing funny about it.
These "crackdowns" are because of the vendetta and pettiness of a group of people who shouldn't be in the force and not because of a VPD initiative. Nothing funny about it.
Pretty sure underscore has read this thread. He is offering some optics and the general public views in such cases based on what I posted, hence him quoting items I said. Kind of an unwarranted fail given the message he was trying to convey.
People that have received a VI due to a side mounted front plate or similar false infraction need to make their situation known to the police. What we don't want is a bunch of stance kids clearly driving illegally modified vehicles making waves crying injustice. That would do more harm then good.
Agreed. One of my friends who owns a small business, daily drives a slammed stanced jetta. He just bought it cause it was cheap. He has no intention to be part of the car life. A VI would be mean he would have to close shop for a day, and deal with the VI.
Most members in this thread, aside from Badhobz, is modified. Skunkworks included. We all drive modified cars, beyond the scope of the MVA, and thus breaking the law.
We don't really have a say.
One of my friends have an old car without mufflers or cat as well. Yep, he bought the car like that. He planned on put on a cheap cat and muffler, but money is tight.
Anyway, I have a question: is there anything in MVA regarding catalytic converter? And for people who have gone through a VI, will an aftermarket unit pass or will it have to be stock? Also, do they measure the noise level with a device?
I think the biggest thing is they specify who you have to go to for the inspection, and in this case the dealer. That's the same as saying you must eat at McDonald's or you can't eat.
Anyway, I have a question: is there anything in MVA regarding catalytic converter? And for people who have gone through a VI, will an aftermarket unit pass or will it have to be stock? Also, do they measure the noise level with a device?
According to the MVA, all cars must be fitted with the stock (or stock equivalent) catalytic converter. The emissions and exhaust system may not be modified.
According to the VI inspector's handbook, they measure the noise level with a device. And they reject if the noise level is beyond the limit, for the appropriate class.
Read the thread. A lot of stock cars are being VI'ed randomly.
I've read the whole thing, and posted several comments. Maybe you should read it again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nlkko
Nothing funny about it.
I never said I found it funny. But if someone tries to bring this to the media, when non-car people (who think all modified cars are the straightpiped idiot doing pulls past residential areas at 2am) see it they're just going to laugh. Especially if it's the people whiterocket mentioned bringing it up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manic!
I am more worried about the high school kid who bought a modified Civic with all his money and now has to deal with a VI.
I'd feel a bit bad for the kid too, though really if you're broke af stick to stock shit. But anyone outside of the modified car scene won't give two fucks about them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by white rocket
Pretty sure underscore has read this thread. He is offering some optics and the general public views in such cases based on what I posted, hence him quoting items I said. Kind of an unwarranted fail given the message he was trying to convey.
I'm glad somebody gets the points I'm trying to make. If someone wants to bring this beyond the car community they better be thinking about how they're going to be perceived by non-car people, and I don't think many are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by white rocket
People that have received a VI due to a side mounted front plate or similar false infraction need to make their situation known to the police. What we don't want is a bunch of stance kids clearly driving illegally modified vehicles making waves crying injustice. That would do more harm then good.
Even out of the cars that were VI'd but are MVA compliant, I think there are very few scenarios where the general public or small claims would side with you. Because of how the VI system works anything visibly modified the officer can just say they suspected you had other illegal modifications (valid reason for a VI), and anything more than a few years old they can just say they suspected may have had hidden mechanical faults (valid reason for a VI) and then you're stuck in a he-said-she-said (especially if you've only gotten one) which you're not likely to win. Regardless of whether you both know that's not the reason you got a VI, unless you can somehow prove it I don't think you'll get very far since they can just say one of those two things and it's GG.
__________________ 1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC // 2007 Toyota Rav4 V6 // 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S ["sold"] \\ 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD [sold] \\ 2000 Jeep Cherokee [sold] \\ 1997 Honda Prelude [sold] \\ 1992 Jeep YJ [sold/crashed] \\ 1987 Mazda RX-7 [sold] \\ 1987 Toyota Celica GT-S [crushed]
Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
I'm glad somebody gets the points I'm trying to make. If someone wants to bring this beyond the car community they better be thinking about how they're going to be perceived by non-car people, and I don't think many are.
Bingo! Perception and optics are everything. We're the ones in the bubble looking out and we have all lived within a huge gray area for decades. Why the law has their hackles up now and how to lower those hackles is the real issue at hand. If it takes a bunch of legitimate complaints from misrepresented infractions on stock vehicles then so be it. Maybe that will force the higher ups to re-evaluate their protocol so they don't continue to take heat from the public. But they have to be solid iron clad examples, not borderline illegal modified cars.
It is a massive uphill battle and really one that needs some time to pass. Forcing the laws hand is very difficult and must be done in a responsible mature way with hard facts so it is received well. Otherwise it will continue to shed a negative light on the modified car scene in general.
the 2 things i'm worried about, can someone clarify the rule, what's the allowed decibel rating for a regular passenger vehicle, 83? and i guess for clearance it's
Clearance height
7.091 A motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 4 500 kg must have a minimum clearance for all parts of it, other than the wheels in contact with the level roadway, that is no lower than the lowest point on the rim of any wheel in contact with the roadway.
For ride height, if your car is sitting on the rims with no tires, no part of the car can touch the ground.
On top of that, there can't be any rubbing of your tire on your fender/wheel well.
The last part of the ride height equation that many tend to forget is that the headlights have to be within a certain height limit from the ground. I can't remember the actual range for that though.
the 2 things i'm worried about, can someone clarify the rule, what's the allowed decibel rating for a regular passenger vehicle, 83? and i guess for clearance it's
Clearance height
7.091 A motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 4 500 kg must have a minimum clearance for all parts of it, other than the wheels in contact with the level roadway, that is no lower than the lowest point on the rim of any wheel in contact with the roadway.
I was caught in a speed trap years ago (2009 maybe) in Richmond and they waved me down due to modifications. As the cop looked my car over he cited me for hood pins(could hurt people I run into), front tow hook(could take out a kneecap from a pedestrian) and exhaust (tip too big and melting bumper). He brought up the item I bolded above and said that is how they determine a ticket for being too low as my car was lowered as well. Not even a mention of that being an issue and I was far lower than anyone getting flagged in today's climate. There were trainees at the check stop and the head cop saw my unpadded Autopower and said that it was a great safety option and there is no infraction for it when a trainee asked, but we all know that non-padded roll bars on the street are scary as a collision could have your head make contact with the main hoop if rear-ended. Just goes to show how higgity-piggity the system is when it really depends on who is enforcing it.
the 2 things i'm worried about, can someone clarify the rule, what's the allowed decibel rating for a regular passenger vehicle, 83?
For a light duty under 4500 lbs it must be 83 DB or 91 DB for motorcycles, according to Division 7, Section 27, Table 3.
Also in the amended VI handbook (linked in thread somewhere), it stated that the inspector must confirm noise level with decibel meter for any non-oem, modified, altered exhaust system.
They will reject it if it is excessive or is equipped with any noise enhancing device.
Quote:
The opinion of the inspector as to whether the engine and exhaust noise is greater than that made by other vehicles in good condition of comparable size, HP, piston displacement or compression ratio shall determine whether noise level is excessive. Must be comparable to OEM and confirmed with decibel meter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wing_woo
The last part of the ride height equation that many tend to forget is that the headlights have to be within a certain height limit from the ground. I can't remember the actual range for that though.
56cm. But most think its outdated as a Huracan is less than 56 cm LOL.
"Plates have to be one in front of the other, you can't have them on the sides"
"It's a fine"
The cop actually went on to lecture him on how he (my buddy) read it wrong on the internet
I recognize the officer as well, Nathan Wallace, not Cain or Christensen.
Essentially it boils down to either 1 of 2 scenarios. The officer is:
-A: Completely incompetent in their understanding of the MVA
or
-B: Lying to save face
In either case, officers like these are doing a disservice to the people of Vancouver and to the reputation of the VPD. The correct and mature response would've been to recognize that perhaps they didn't catch the plate at first due to lighting or whatever, and asked the driver to carry on. It's a white license plate on a white car on a sunny day, it's possible you missed it, we're all human. But to backpedal and straight up lie about the MVA rather than own up to an honest mistake just shows really poor judgment on the officer's part and makes me question their mental fitness to be in such a high-stress occupation.
IMO this kind of behaviour could escalate if a driver (knowing full well they are innocent) were to be more defensive and argued with the officer. One thing leads to another and next thing you know, the officer is calling for backup due to an uncooperative and aggressive driver during a "routine traffic stop".
For ride height, if your car is sitting on the rims with no tires, no part of the car can touch the ground.
On top of that, there can't be any rubbing of your tire on your fender/wheel well.
The last part of the ride height equation that many tend to forget is that the headlights have to be within a certain height limit from the ground. I can't remember the actual range for that though.
Do auto leveling head lights help with that issue?
Do auto leveling head lights help with that issue?
No, it refers to the distance between the lowest point of the headlight housing and the ground, must be at least 56cm. Thus, the headlight must be mounted at least that high.
According to the MVA, all cars must be fitted with the stock (or stock equivalent) catalytic converter. The emissions and exhaust system may not be modified.
According to the VI inspector's handbook, they measure the noise level with a device. And they reject if the noise level is beyond the limit, for the appropriate class.
Thanks a lot for the answer. Guess I will have to be careful then.
So where should I avoid in general if I come and visit?
No, it refers to the distance between the lowest point of the headlight housing and the ground, must be at least 56cm. Thus, the headlight must be mounted at least that high.
Center of headlight, my old car was stock 58cm to the center without lowering. 56cm would mean it was illegal from the factory
This is the biggest bullshit waste of time ever. So you’re saying if a dealership bolts a demonstration plate to a car, being there will be no front plate, that’s okay in your eyes, but if a regular person fails to display a front plate, or even has it off center, my god they are criminals and i need to talk to them in a condescending way. Great.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
