Fake(?) yellow sticker

[bruce]

Just pay the fine.
You go to Court. Judge asks if the car was under 10cm. Yes says Officer. You argue it was over 10cm with no evidence. Fines stands. Case closed. Extra costs for you.

[NitroDann]

Next time you film everything and measure yourself, on film. Live and learn.

Dann

[wun911]

I thought yellow stickers were only give to Asian people due to the colour of their skin and their tendency to 'slant eye' the car?
Asians often find it difficult to measure 10cm as we have never seen nor possessed anything of such immense girth.
You can be well mannered, polite, well spoken with fluent English and show the utmost respect..... You WILL still get a fine.
You just have to sell more drugs, eat less rice, cop it sweet, and pay up.
You should be thankful your not Mr Gong Ling Tang....

[lizard]

I thought yellow stickers were only give to Asian people due to the colour of their skin and their tendency to 'slant eye' the car?
Asians often find it difficult to measure 10cm as we have never seen nor possessed anything of such immense girth.
You can be well mannered, polite, well spoken with fluent English and show the utmost respect..... You WILL still get a fine.
You just have to sell more drugs, eat less rice, cop it sweet, and pay up.
You should be thankful your not Mr Gong Ling Tang....

Idiot

[droo]

Wun, your Asianness never ceases to amaze me.

Having your car at 100mm clearance is one thing, but the car is meant to have some ballast in it, either passenger or driver, and still clear 100mm.

Early last year i had mine at just on 100mm but not loaded. I was pulled up and my flatmate with the car. I was parked one wheel in the gutter and one onthe road. There was a crest an that had area of the road is where the cop measured me. My car was heaps lower at that point. I pointed out the road wasnt level nor flat, the cop pointed out it shouldnt matter. My mate didnt get out of the car despite my eyeing him to get out.. (100kg of ballast will make a decent difference in road clearance!)

I didnt antagonise the cop, and he went over my exhaust setup, my inlet tweaks, windscreen washer bottle water level, tyre size, tread etc.. He asked why i'd done the exhaust and inlets as they should be fine from the factory... i said to improve fuel economy, that the car's gutless and more for handling then power, so i'd aim to get more mileage. He was noticably less agressive after that. I was polite then i rattled off my facts and figures of my mileage improvements, and he turned his tone down a lot more. Quietly written his defect notice, a few days to correct the issues, said to be safe and left.

Although i cant find it at the moment, vicroads also mention that the car should be showing clearance with loading in the car.
(or words to that effect). However the cops wheel should have been used on flat level ground.

What sucks about the roadster design on an na1.8, the structual bar below the diff is one of the lowest parts of the vehicle, as well as the rear of two beam things that run between the rear and front wheels..

I raised my suspension to show 125mm clearance (after adjustment, and a 5 min drive to re-settle it)
Now the car with my passenger (me out) is 110-115mm clearance loaded.
The rim/arch clearance isnt as pretty as it was but i'm definitely not scraping *anywhere* i've dríven on regional roads.

I took it back to vicroads to get cleared, the lady who measured it passed her wheely thing right under the middle of the doors, in and out twice and said thats all fine.. She then commented "oh thats my red mx5 in the carpark!" and we had a big chat.. : )


Fine paid, sorted. Who cares.. The car is easier to drive without having to be super wary of road irregularities, and with the nature of the traffic cops near home, i'm fortunate not to be harassed ongoing like Kevgoat had been. They usually target the bigger aussie cars with drivers who like to give crap back.

The suspension is more forgiving and my world's a happier place. I had it lower initially as i'd never had a car which i could tweak so much and wanted to give it a go. In reality i would have changed it higher in a few weeks due to the road surfaces I'd regularly drive on..

The thing i learnt about ride height notices is the car must have ballast in it and still be 100mm clear of the ground from it's lowest point. The road surface measured on, must also be flat and level. This latter part is one thing you're not going to get cops to agree on, short of parking the left side of your car upon the curb.

[22Silver]

Ok tomorrow is judgement day. my 100mm block of wood shows a pass or a fail depending on where I park on my bumpy driveway. Mostly pass.
That's with an empty tank + no passengers, tires at 44PSI, no spare tyre, jack, tire iron, boot carpet, or anything added to the car (like 4L water in the boot before.. and a full socket set)

Any tips on things I can take out to save weight (doesn't matter if it effects stuff negatively, assuming it's not integral, as long as it is easy out, easy in, and heavy ;)

And also, how much pressure can a poor little tyre handle before I start risking some form of damage?

[hks_kansei]

Tyre maximum pressure is usually printed on the sidewall, but don't put it to that maximum as when you drive the pressure will go up a couple of pounds (heat etc)
The only real weight left are larger things like seats etc.


Also remember though, the car is supposed to be 100mm when laden (so with petrol, oil, spare wheel, tools, driver)


Didn't you say the car was 110mm though? who's testing it, Vicroads or did they tick the RWC option when you got the ticket?

[Mr Morlock]

Bruce I reckon is spot on.

[D.A.M]

Ive had some shitty fines in my days (just got off my P's) but my worst was getting fined for waving a friend whilst driving past with the roof down, she claimed it was "driving with limb outside of vehicle) and fined me $150.00.

But if you DID want to take it t court i found this the other week, worth a read:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensl ... 2xu5l.html

I and im pretty sure MANY other dont agree to this.. (looking at Nitro Dann)

[Sal.kalandos]

Just pay the fine mate. If you have no evidence that it was legal height at the time, and it's your word against his... it will not go in favour of yourself in court.

I work at civic compliance, i've seen and heard this happen many times before.

[NitroDann]

Ive had some shitty fines in my days (just got off my P's) but my worst was getting fined for waving a friend whilst driving past with the roof down, she claimed it was "driving with limb outside of vehicle) and fined me $150.00.

But if you DID want to take it t court i found this the other week, worth a read:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensl ... 2xu5l.html

I and im pretty sure MANY other dont agree to this.. (looking at Nitro Dann)

WOW !!!

That is MESSED UP!

And people are happy with the excuse that they should do it to save the cops, because one was !! only fined !!, and only 1000 bucks for bashing an elderly homeless man. And the public will let this go through !!

OMG !

Dann

[project.r.racing]

dont just read the bits you wanna read.

Instead, that liability will be transferred to the state. But the legislation does include a clause which allows the government to recoup costs from state employees who "have engaged in conduct other than in good faith, and with gross negligence".

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensl ... z2ldO0uzfM

[NitroDann]

Right, it still takes the responsibility from the officer for the most part, protecting him in general duties from being worried about prosecution from the person he is assaulting this arvo (or this morning, at lunch time, later in the shift etc)

Dann

[project.r.racing]

Right, it still takes the responsibility from the officer for the most part, protecting him in general duties from being worried about prosecution from the person he is assaulting this arvo (or this morning, at lunch time, later in the shift etc)

Dann

you are right, but should you expect every officer to do those things?

the police force is still liable. and as per the little bit of info i quoted, then the police force will still recoup costs if the officer is in the wrong.

i guess now it is bringing us more in line with america style of policing. handcuffs on and do a search.

a officer currently cannot do that in australia as it make the officer liable for be sued for deprivation of liberty issues if they are found to be all good etc in the end.

i'm not gonna get into a fight about whether it is good are bad idea. but it does make their job safer for themselves. just incase they do find a bad egg in the end.

[NitroDann]

you are right, but should you expect every officer to do those things?

If by assault people regularly. Absolutely, of course.

I called in a break in the other day, and the police arrived far too late to do anything, I didn't match the description of the people at all, and was outside in the rain in my pyjamas but they still felt the need to tackle me 2 on 1, detain me and pat me down. Not to mention almost hitting me in their sliding 4wd.

Now, I have no issue with them telling me I must stay put and empty my pockets for their safety, but here I am, half naked, in the pouring rain, sheltered under a tiny 0.5mx1m roof and rather than chase me if I ran, or just yelled stay still and asked who I was, they had to double tackle me topless, into the cement, while I am saying that I was the one who called it in.

Next time, Ill use the pipe on the men I find breaking into next door, flog them silly and let someone else find them and deal with it. I had all of the opportunity to, I found the first one stuck in a hole in the door, and the other one couldn't get out with his mate stuck there.
But no, I had to be an idiot- try and 'do the right thing', and once again reaffirm that the best contact with the police is no contact with the police.

Dann