TMR interview on GCM, GVM upgrades and trailer law - hear it from the top!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 лип 2024
- #GVM #GCM #TMR
Interview with the Principal Engineer from Queensland's Department of Transport & Main Roads. We cover topics relating to the new GVM and GCM laws, as well as some classic towing questions including busting the myth about whether modifications made in a state outside Queensland are legal or vice-versa, whether you can tow a trailer using a car that has a tow capacity less than the ATM of the trailer, and towing shackles.
To calculate your towing weights visit l2sfbc.com/towcalc/
00:00 introduction
00:37 why was the new GVM/GCM code introduced?
02:10 how was the new GVM/GCM code developed?
03:50 how will the J2807 towing test be used in Australia?
04:27 will existing modifications become illegal?
05:28 can 'monocoque' vehicles be GVM-upgraded?
07:45 how does the "110% GVM upgrade path" work?
14:39 how is the Davis Dam from J2807 replicated in Australia?
16:07 can you do an "OEM GVM upgrade" using OEM parts?
17:24 can GCM upgrades be done pre-rego?
20:17 pre/post rego GCM upgrades and interstate operation
21:54 what is a Design and Evidence package?
22:51 can I tow a 3000kg ATM trailer that weighs 1000kg with a towcar rated to 2000kg?
23:15 Case study - upgrading a RAM back to OEM
26:11 do you need rated shackles as tow safety chain shackles?
27:18 final advice from TMR
Post questions as comments!
Follow me on Facebook:
/ robertpepperjourno
Support me on Patreon:
/ l2sfbc
Buy my books:
l2sfbc.com/where-to-buy/ - Авто та транспорт
Well done Robert. This informative discussion should be compulsory viewing for all who wish to alter their vehicle's GVM or GCM.
thank you
Fantastic ... the big questions answered.
Thanks Robert ... as usual, very informative
Very welcome
Well done 👍
Thank you 👍
Hi Robert, I have a 200 series with a Lovells GVM post rego upgrade in WA. GCM is limited to 6850 as per current legislation. If WA adopted the new Queensland laws would I be able to have my GCM re-assessed and upgraded to 7700?
Nobody can say for sure. You would need to have an engineer assess your vehicle, identify the modifications required, then pass J2807, and have the Design and Evidence package accepted. Maybe it would pass, maybe not.
Surely you’d be able to get an upgrade so long as the engineer could determine that your existing vehicle would still pass the tests.
Clear as mud is a good way of putting it. Robert from your interview can you tell me that if I have for example a 200 Series that was upgraded by Lovells to their 4200 GVM & 7700 GCM that was of course approved by the engineers & new compliance plate fitted & checked by Vic Roads & approved (of course a Victorian registered vehicle). Does that new GVM & GCM rating stand in Queensland whilst I am towing through their state?
I asked the question about interstate modifications being legal in Qld and the engineer answered - you can use the chapter list to jump to his answer. I did not ask about Lovells GCM upgrades or any other specific kit as the answer covered them all.
Im confused at your question mate. it has always been legal to tow "through" a state with different GVM/GMC laws. I just finished up a lap of Aus with a ranger that had a GVM/GCM upgrade by lovells. it was done in NSW and the vehicle was registered in NSW while we were on our trip. Every single state has no issue with recognising those revised numbers AS LONG AS IT IS STILL REGISTERED IN THE STATE IT HAS BEEN ENGINEERED FOR.
We finished our trip in QLD where we live now, i had to sell the ranger as i could no longer legally tow our van once i had changed over from NSW to QLD rego.
Indeed...but the question still comes up.
Garry, my understanding from the latter part of the video is, yes, you can. What is engineered compliant in one state with all the plates fitted, you can legally drive it in another jurisdiction. You just cant sell it without it being re-engineered in the gaining state. But this falls into the 'buyer beware' category.
Very little info on the new GCM code. Would have thought it would have been the big talk of the interview. Even just asking what most people would want to know is "I have had a GVM upgrade on my vehicle, under LS16 can this extra from the GVM increase be added to my GCM so I can retain my full tow capacity. As the original GVM upgrade basically takes from the tow capacity and adds to the vehicle capacity."
That's not how GVM upgrades work. The tow capacity and GCM are different and you cannot trade them off like that. Each is a seperate limit. What else were you looking for?
@@L2SFBC I think you dont understand what I was meaning. I know you dont just trade them. What I mean is for example you have from factory 3000kg gvm and 3000kg tow with gcm of 6000kg. You go get a 110% GVM Upgrade which brings it up to 3300kg and still as above tow and GCM. In theory you will not be able to use either 100% of the GVM upgrade or 100% of the tow capacity due to the total being more then the GCM.
SO, what I was getting at is that 110% that was added to your GVM (300kg) be included in your GCM bringing it to 6300kg so you can still use 100% of your tow capacity.
Being that that GVM upgrade has been done is there a simple way to then get that 300kg added to the GCM.
Make sense now?
Hi again - that's exactly what I meant. The three limits are seperate. However, if you're going for a GVM upgrade you could save some time and money by engaging the engineer just once to do more than one limit. There is no 'simple way' just one way to do it.
A question I wished you asked is if a rating is approved through a SSM modification can this be used for the new QLD TMR process. This package has been engineered for SSM of a vehicle. EG a Lovells 4T GVM with 4T BTC and 7.8T GCM upgrade be applied post 1st registration.
I am in a similar boat. I have pre first reg SSM Lovels GVM upgrade and GCM upgrade in Victoria Federally approved so I think I would be right in Qld or any other State or Territory.
@@stevegoodwin5841 If you have a pre rego SSM upgrade you are good in all states. My point is why can't the engineering that's done on the SSM kit be applied post rego.
@@jebw If you have a read through the LS11 GVM codes you can use the SSM approved kits to do the same upgrade on a post registered vehicle. You just have to use the exact components used in the SSM kit and have approval from the persons/company that gained the SSM approval to use it or seek the approval through one of their approved installers. I have personally spoken to Adam Shaw about this prior to LS16 being released. Doing a GCM upgrade on a post registered car using an SSM approved kit though I am unsure about
Davis Dam test, They allow for a towing dyno or a climate control stationary dyno with the load requirements programmed.
Where does the average person access these?
Why not assess certain section of road across the country and come up with our own drive cycle test?
It Always comes across like TMR want to the seem like they are listening to what we want and acting on it, but they always implement it in a way that is overly difficult to access the required test facilities or is in some other way restrictive.
Their goal seems to be make it too difficult for most people to do it.
The average person does not. They engage engineers who rent the equipment required. I agree we could maybe do J2807-Aus and use a different grade, in another video I suggested Harrietville to Hotham.
@@L2SFBC
There would be numerous roads across the country that wold be suitable.
Can you imagine the cost though.
engineer rents equipment and tests, vehicle fails.
go away and make changes, rent equipment again test again.
Or, Test on a section of freely available road.
These things should not be purposefully made prohibitively expensive. Which is what it looks like has happened.
They should be based on sound engineering and tested with reasonably accessible testing methods.
Clear as MUD..!😫🫣
Why?
I really wanted to say "All good". But as others have said, the general conversation seemed to get bogged down and become a bit 'clear as mud'. Much of it came down to "it's up to the engineers".
Seems well and good as long as all the engineers are TMR people and don't hold to kickbacks or other incentives. But, just as has happened with the council requirements in the building industry with the private certifiers being anything but standard in their certifications, one hopes this will never happen in the vehicle registration industry also.
It would be so much easier if the vehicle manufacturers just made vehicles that safely towed the weights we want to pull all over this country. The cost of a new or near-new vehicle is already huge with massive wait times, let alone the cost of the trailer as well. How come we need to modify every vehicle just to tow a van or 5th wheel? There are so many almost standard upgrades getting around. Surely by now, we should be able to buy something suitable 'off the shelf'.
I think that's the key - up to the engineers. I'd say the bigger problem is trailer makers going too heavy.
Up to the engineers is a huge problem because they face all the risk and not really that much of the reward. In Victoria they are super conservative with signing off on modifications, so whilst a vehicle might need the specifications outlined, you just can't get an engineer to approve it.
Vehicle manufacturers play a balancing game.
On one hand they want to sell vehicles, and if their performance statistics are woeful, nobody will buy them. On another hand, they want to build vehicles as cheaply as possibly.
Long gone are the days of just slapping together excessive amounts of metal so that it’ll last. These days there’s incredibly advanced software programs that can simulate an entire warranty period of stress/strain/fatigue upon every single tiny component, and identify when and where things will break. From there they can improve those components until they get the vehicles to a point that believe an acceptable percentage will not see failures within the warranty period.
The problem they have is that Australian Consumer Law gives serious power to individuals such that if even a couple manufacturers start extending warranty periods, and building stronger vehicles that last longer, ACL states that the warranty means nothing, and that a consumer has rights based on “reasonable expectations”, so as some manufacturers start skewing the expectations, it makes others liable for failures they don’t design out by making more durable.
Manufacturers don’t want to be responsible, and they don’t want to give you “the best” vehicle they can. They design something they know will sell because you have no real options, but they hold back massive amounts of performance so they can loosen the reins a little every few years, to make people upgrade for fear of FOMO.
If they actually have customers the best they could, they would actually have to develop proper upgrades to lure buyers into upgrading.
Since manufacturers don’t want to give you the best, and don’t want to be responsible, why would they want to give customers higher GVM’s/GCM’s/BTC? All that would do is make them responsible for failures.
By making you go to SSM to get upgrades, OEM’s can wipe their hands clean of any failures, but suggesting the upgrades caused the failure. Adding 50% more capacity means the drivetrain has to work harder, so that can be absolved. The chassis bears more strain so without reinforcements it’s not the OEM’s responsibility, and with reinforcements it’s not the OEM’s responsibility as they didn’t make the modifications. Same goes to suspension and axles, etc.
It’s less responsibility to offer less, because the risk of failures is less, lest you defy the capacities, thus absolving them.
Stateside it’s big business to offer high capacity models and packages, but we just don’t see the volume here to justify it.
Maybe as some of our models become more global products, these sorts of options might start flowing through, but it’s not a given.
The LC300/LX500d/LX600f aren’t big enough volume. The Prado and Lexus GX aren’t big enough volume. The Tundra/F150/Silverado/1500 offerings are too niche here to make those offerings yet. Maybe the closest in the Ranger, and maybe the Hilux (if it’ll be based on the Tacoma). Even then, there’d have to be “Heavy Duty” packages offered stateside first before we would start seeing them here. Likewise if the full-size “Trucks” get real volume here; locally, they will start offering Heavy Duty packages.
Everyone just needs to keep hitting up SSM’s. Maybe that’ll be the interim solution; campaign for OEM’s to partner with SSM’s, to develop upgrades in line with the vehicle development, so that upon release buyers can get the upgrades from an official partner. It might be a compromise.
@@CM303898 Plus Australia is a tiny market on the world's stage. Australian purchasing decisions don't have that much influence.
@@HardstylePete exactly. We are a risky market (in turns of OEM responsibilities under ACL), and so adding risk by accepting higher loads through higher ratings just doesn’t stack up to them.
It’d be the Wild, Wild West for upgrades if ACL didn’t exist.