500rwhp N/A LS1 Build Discussion
#41
TECH Apprentice
I believe QLD has a different system to the other states, which I'm not familiar with, but I'm surprised that an engineer can get their licence revoked in that situation. Does the engineering report not specify the exact mods made? Would it not be quite clear if they have submitted an engineering report for, say an LSX 440 with no turbo, that if the car suddenly has a turbo, that was clearly added afterwards?
In NSW, there certainly has been cases of people engineering a turbo 5.3, then stroking or replacing this motor with a much larger LS and bigger turbos etc and using the existing approval.
In NSW, there certainly has been cases of people engineering a turbo 5.3, then stroking or replacing this motor with a much larger LS and bigger turbos etc and using the existing approval.
#42
I believe QLD has a different system to the other states, which I'm not familiar with, but I'm surprised that an engineer can get their licence revoked in that situation. Does the engineering report not specify the exact mods made? Would it not be quite clear if they have submitted an engineering report for, say an LSX 440 with no turbo, that if the car suddenly has a turbo, that was clearly added afterwards? In NSW, there certainly has been cases of people engineering a turbo 5.3, then stroking or replacing this motor with a much larger LS and bigger turbos etc and using the existing approval.
Then every state stuck their own amendment into it and wasted millions of tax dollars and no state is the same with modified cars still.
Our great government hard at work yet again.
#43
TECH Apprentice
I don't follow how you would be able to put that against the engineer, just because the owner says the turbo or supercharger was there when approved doesn't mean a thing. What's approved in the report is what's approved. End of story. It's then the owners responsibility if the car is different. I'm also very surprised that any engineer would take on an approval job with an owner putting those sorts of caveats on it. Can't take photos? The engineers down here would tell the vehicle owner to f**K off. It happens plenty, dreamers approaching engineers thinking they can dictate what will be approved and get a nasty shock when they're shown the door empty handed.
#44
I don't follow how you would be able to put that against the engineer, just because the owner says the turbo or supercharger was there when approved doesn't mean a thing. What's approved in the report is what's approved. End of story. It's then the owners responsibility if the car is different. I'm also very surprised that any engineer would take on an approval job with an owner putting those sorts of caveats on it. Can't take photos? The engineers down here would tell the vehicle owner to f**K off. It happens plenty, dreamers approaching engineers thinking they can dictate what will be approved and get a nasty shock when they're shown the door empty handed.
The engineers of old were relaxed and didn't follow things to a T.
But now that they have been done over by a few morons they are cracking the whip big time.
But enough of this we are hijacking someones thread.