REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum

chris_89T · 09-08-2009, 11:42 AM

So i got pulled over today. I appreciate that the officer was polite and kind to me, id only been up for 20 minutes, i was coming back from dropping my little sister off at work.

Anyways, i was pulled over, my front plate was not on the car, i decided to make my own bracket rather then wait for 10 years for the one i ordered to come in. Anyways my fault i know, I bought the car like that.

The officer came back and said he could also give me a Box 2 VI for my wheels. He said the wheels stick out way to far and he personally doesnt mind, but other officers might.

Now searching through the MVA i found that the tread of the tire must not stick out past the body of the car. Well im running a 275 on a 10" rim. The tread does NOT stick out past the body, but the lip of the rim does. Now as far as i was concerned i was okay in that sector. The lip of the rim sticks out maybe 1-2cm, barely anything, but because of the time attack ring and how my bumper kinda narrows in near the bottom, they look like they stick out more then they really do.

Im just curious to what you guys think about that? Im interested in what the officers on this board have to say, i was not driving fast, aside from stock like mufflers and rims the car is bone stock tinted rear windows only.

The tires are within their specified range on the wheel, i know they are stretched, but if stretching is illegal them every Z/G35 owner should be getting pulled over because they come with a factory stretch on the front (225 on a 8")

Sorry should also note, thats factory alignment specs on the E39 M5. They run quite a bit of negative camber from the factory, and for some odd reason allowed significant amount of toe variance between the 2 front wheels. I do need to get the front aligned still.

Sorry id post the pictures here but i cant get it to work.

http://img80.imageshack.us/gal.php?g=dsc02318rs.jpg

skidmark · 09-08-2009, 11:54 AM

From your description and the photo, it doesn't look like a problem to me...

zulutango · 09-08-2009, 12:09 PM

When I think of the jacked up pickups I stopped with the tyres several inches outside the body...some over 18 inches outside, according to the pictures taken at the angles you show here, should not be a problem. The good book says they must be enclosed by the body.

chris_89T · 09-08-2009, 12:49 PM

Thanks very much guys! It just makes me frustrated sometimes i know people who have lifted 4x4's with 35" tires that stick like 4-5" out of the body and they claim to have never had a problem. Kinda bugs me, i do have a tendancy to be on the wrong side of luck though.

Anyways the Officer said that the car attracts attention, i can kinda see that in some respects, but thats why i got rid of the Chrome wheels as fast as i could and went with something a little stealthier. The officer was a nice guy, and i totally appreciate his patience and for being polite/courteous with me. I also returned the favour, so i guess all in all, treat others how you'd like to be treated!

yvrnycracer · 09-09-2009, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris_89T

Thanks very much guys! It just makes me frustrated sometimes i know people who have lifted 4x4's with 35" tires that stick like 4-5" out of the body and they claim to have never had a problem. Kinda bugs me, i do have a tendancy to be on the wrong side of luck though.

Anyways the Officer said that the car attracts attention, i can kinda see that in some respects, but thats why i got rid of the Chrome wheels as fast as i could and went with something a little stealthier. The officer was a nice guy, and i totally appreciate his patience and for being polite/courteous with me. I also returned the favour, so i guess all in all, treat others how you'd like to be treated!

Correction... it attracts those who believe in stereotypes...

The front plate opens up a whole bag of worms... IF he were to issue you a VI he would be issuing it for no real reason (unless you have other real problems with the car) hence the problem with our current system.

As one officer put it so eloquently... "It's not our job to know the rules, thats why we issue VI's"

And the 4x4's that never have problems... I see so many 4x4's with tinted windows, lifted with no flaps, poke etc etc... its not at eye level when they pull up beside a car so out of sight out of mind i guess...

chris_89T · 09-09-2009, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yvrnycracer

Correction... it attracts those who believe in stereotypes...

The front plate opens up a whole bag of worms... IF he were to issue you a VI he would be issuing it for no real reason (unless you have other real problems with the car) hence the problem with our current system.

As one officer put it so eloquently... "It's not our job to know the rules, thats why we issue VI's"

And the 4x4's that never have problems... I see so many 4x4's with tinted windows, lifted with no flaps, poke etc etc... its not at eye level when they pull up beside a car so out of sight out of mind i guess...

Yeah. As soon as i got home i made my own brackets and put the front plate on, ive been waiting for weeks for my order to come in and it still hasnt so screw it. Anyways the car looks terrible with the front plate on, but oh well its the law.

Anyways, im not trying to get on any officers nerves, but i really think there should be some reasoning for giving out VI's. I think its rediculous that we should have to pay $200 for the VI if our car passes. The cop told me its a $200 inspection and if i dont do it within 30 days its a 590$ fine.

Personally aside from my R/F fender liner which had a hole rubbed in it from the old wheels the car will pass. The check engine light is on for SAI code, but the car is bone stock otherwise and runs good. It just seems rediculous that even if the vehicle passes in its current form i still have to pay. I can understand the officers point of view with people changing things then passing and trying to get back at the cops.

youd be amazed at the amount of cars i see with front windows tinted so dark you cannot even see if someones inside, N drivers driving around with the car packed, trucks with wheels sticking 4+ inches out of the fenders with no mud flaps and spraying water everywhere, exhausts that are way above the legal limit in terms of db's. The list goes on. It just seems like i got the short end of the stick again..

jlenko · 09-09-2009, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris_89T

youd be amazed at the amount of cars i see with front windows tinted so dark you cannot even see if someones inside, N drivers driving around with the car packed, trucks with wheels sticking 4+ inches out of the fenders with no mud flaps and spraying water everywhere, exhausts that are way above the legal limit in terms of db's. The list goes on. It just seems like i got the short end of the stick again..

I'm surprised there are no avenues for the regular Joe to report stuff like this easier than calling 911..

zulutango · 09-10-2009, 05:31 AM

If they charge you $200, then you got ripped. Many places charge for the time spent. If your car is 100% compliant then it should take very little time to do. There is no set price for the inspection so get a list of the inspection stations and make some calls and ask how much $$. The fine for failing to comply with a Peace Officer's conditional condemned vehicle order is $598...plus a tow and a #1 order and off the road, when you get caught.

yvrnycracer · 09-10-2009, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zulutango

If they charge you $200, then you got ripped. Many places charge for the time spent. If your car is 100% compliant then it should take very little time to do. There is no set price for the inspection so get a list of the inspection stations and make some calls and ask how much $$. The fine for failing to comply with a Peace Officer's conditional condemned vehicle order is $598...plus a tow and a #1 order and off the road, when you get caught.

I will say it again... the system is GARBAGE... Police officers are human... they do not know everything in the MVA, most don't really have true car knoledge... giving the power of Judge, Jury and Executioner is wrong. Why should a regular everyday citizen have to pay for the lack of knoledge/arrogance/whatever you want to call it of a police officer?

projectcivic · 09-10-2009, 02:23 PM

Most shops here in Victoria charge around $90-120 plus tax for a VI depending on the shop.

zulutango · 09-10-2009, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yvrnycracer

I will say it again... the system is GARBAGE... Police officers are human... they do not know everything in the MVA, most don't really have true car knoledge... giving the power of Judge, Jury and Executioner is wrong. Why should a regular everyday citizen have to pay for the lack of knoledge/arrogance/whatever you want to call it of a police officer?

Where is your attitude coming from? Police are human and they don't know everything...some of do know how to spell knowledge though. The act was not designed to permit a Police officer to do a front end alignment check at roadside...or check the slop in your ball joints...that happens at an inside inspection station where a certified mechanic covers everything in the vehicle to check to see if it meets the minimum standards. Lets review the OP...he had no front plate, wheels not enclosed by body and needed a front end alignment. I would have ordered the VI for the alignment alone. It's a safety concern.

The regs were designed to permit Police to give a cursory roadside examination to check for easily visible things...and to require a full mechanical inspection to be completed later, if required.. It does give Police the authority to immediately remove dangerously defective vehicles from the road right now...and I don't need my mechanic's ticket ( I was a mechanic) to identify wire belts sticking out of a bald tyre, or front end wear so great you can crank the steering wheel on a jacked up 4X4 and the tyres don't move...or non functioning brake lights or mis-aligned illegal headlights.
The mere fact that the vehicle is inspected by an independant 3rd party, a mechanic, means your whole rant about judge & jury is not logical. Most Police I know wish the mandatory annual safety inspections were back in place. It would remove 100% of the defective vehicles at least once a year and make our jobs easier so we don't end up taking loads of heat from people who deliberately mod their vehicles, knowing they are illegal...or not bothering to check before they do...and then scream when they get caught and made to comply with the laws. If you want to see what real tough vehicle laws are, take a look at the California Vehicle code. If they even suspect you have modded your engine you get towed. I have CHIP friends and they read this board and laugh. I tend to read it and cry, at times.