Trials Australia Forums

Any more news on the randonne and it's compliance for rego ?

Not yet, still working on it.

Just received this from Sherco, re the X-Ride:

"Apologies for the delayed response. This model is available (on order basis only) and will be sold without ADR approval."

So what's the news on randonne for rego been a long time since testing stated ?

As an interested outsider from the UK,can someone explain how the Aussie compliance thing works please.

I find it incredible that I can Road Register my old 1960 Greeves Scottish, with no problems.
Just a frame and engine number. Bulb horn, no indicators, and a head light, trail and brake light run off a 7.2v Makita cordless drill battery in the tool box, when needed.
Yet. a 1977 Honda CJ250T, with all the 'modern gear', need to be engineer certified, and a compliance plate added, because it was two months over the cut off date.
It changed mid 77 sometime.
The Honda was stock standard. No frame chop, no motor upsize.
The 'Inspection' was done via information and photos, I sent them.

whitehillbilly

Jon V8 wrote:As an interested outsider from the UK,can someone explain how the Aussie compliance thing works please.

I don't think anyone can, the closest would be "jobs for the boys". People who seem to think they know more about bikes or cars then eg BMW, Mercedes, Honda etc.

Jon V8 wrote:As an interested outsider from the UK,can someone explain how the Aussie compliance thing works please.

Our authorities responsible for registering vehicles here in Australia think they know more about what is required in the way of road safety and engine emission control than the rest of all the other first world countries put together.... subsequently they make up their own rules for us to comply with.

Then all the vehicles that are produced for import to Australia must be specifically built to meet our compliance laws, at a cost of millions to the manufacturing companies (that cost then gets passed on to us, the consumer).

We can also bring in second hand vehicles from overseas, we call them "grey imports", they then have to be "complianced" by authorised mechanical workshops.
Basically it involves replacing all fluids in the vehicle, and tyres, with over the counter products available here in Australia, the rest of the emission differences seem to be ignored for compliancing "grey imports".

Now I'm sure someone will come along and tear my view of it to pieces with real facts on what actually gets done for both new and second hand vehicles to meet Australian Compliance standards, but having owned both imports and grey imports, that is my view of what I've encountered.

It seems much of the bureaucratic process is designed to create jobs for bureaucrats, and fill government coffers.... particularly given that much of the rest of the world have higher safety and emission standards than we do.

at the time of the introduction of the ADRs, there were no international standards for car and motorbike safety features and many new vehicles (but not mercedes, volvo etc) were woeful in that regard, so we got ADRs for things like seat belts, windscreens, crumple zones and side anti-intrusion bars.
Emissions standards for Aussie cars also came under the ADRs so we got sealed fuel systems, exhaust gas recirculation and even air compressors on some cars, starting in 1976. By 1986 we joined most of the developed world and new cars in Australia were made for unleaded petrol and ran catalytic converters. Some new cars even then still had terrible crash performance.
The ADRs came to cause havoc for new, road registered motorbikes when they were introduced in 1976. The main change for us was that new bikes had to be a lot quieter, which brought about a lot of dirt bikes needing new sprockets and exhaust mods before they went well (XR600 springs to mind here). Many even had orifice plates fitted between carby and inlet or at the exhaust port outlet to achieve the noise targets. Some enduro bikes from Europe that were developed to meet strict European noise standards went great and met the ADRs even with everything standard (Montesas and Bultacos), but the existing designs of Japanese two stroke enduro bikes were a mile off being quiet enough. This was when the Japanese started making us think that 4 strokes were a good idea (TT250 1979, TT500 XT500 1975, XRs 1979). It was good for them because it was easier to meet the ADRs with a 4 stroke. It took quite a while for the Japanese to bring out bikes that went well and also met the ADRs off the showroom floor (an early exception was the (1977) TY175JC). Some Japanese models never really did achieve this in their model life (KDX, IT, PE). I remember my new (1977 model) IT175D was like a screaming banshee. It had no battery or indicators and the ADR plate was posted out to me months after buying the bike.
Jeez I'm rabbiting on. Yes we stopped needing ADRs on motorbikes decades ago now and should adopt some relevant international standards instead (just not the Californian standards)

Thanks for the replies,sounds like any typical govt department... Keeping it all going around in circles to justify their own existence.My brother had a very frustrating time recently trying to register a boat trailer in WA that came from South Australia, and I thought the UK / Europe were leaders in red tape !