Ban on "boy racer" cars

egan007

There is a huge difference between a Farting fiesta racket and a sweet Murcielago hum. This is why the class differentiation is needed.

kdevitt

egan007 wrote:

There is a huge difference between a Farting fiesta racket and a sweet Murcielago hum. This is why the class differentiation is needed.

You have to be taking the piss... but I'll take the bait anyway, I'm bored...

So now the quality of the noise should be measured as well?? Noise is noise - if the Fiesta is too loud, it should fail, just as the Murcielago should - doesn't matter one bit that you prefer the sound of one or the other.

There should be no differentiation at all... should the speed limit for the lambo be higher than the Fiesta too because it looks so cool at high speed??

DoctorEdgeWild

I have to agree with KDevitt - It should be one law for all. If they set a high noise limit then all cars should be subject to it.

As for tinted windows, I see no problem personally with someone tinting their windows as dark as they like with the obvious exception of their windscreen.

The less about safety the NCT becomes, the more it falls by the wayside. It is already being ignored by a huge number of Irish drivers.

Seth Brundle

Interceptor wrote:

The government should feck off. And kbannon should be forced to change that sig

'c

Hrumph :mad:
OK then

elexes

kbannon wrote:

Hrumph :mad:
OK then

i find this more disturbing

mike65

Ivor Callely was on The Last Word earlier and he's clearly making it up as he goes along, I suspect someone in his clinic had a moan about tarted up loud junk and Ivor without thinking decided to lump the issue in with his NCT review (which Unkel, will be addressing number plates woes!).

A few things can be NCT-ed, like window tints but mainly it a law enforcment issue.

"Boy racers" should be dealt with, Modifiers should be left in peace.

Mike.

t5pwr

DoctorEdgeWild wrote:

I have to agree with KDevitt - It should be one law for all. If they set a high noise limit then all cars should be subject to it.

As for tinted windows, I see no problem personally with someone tinting their windows as dark as they like with the obvious exception of their windscreen...

I agree with KDevitt also...

DoctorEdgeWild your saying that if your front side windows are completly dark you will be able to pull out from a junction safely

How will you see what is coming?

I'm not against tinting but I just think some people go too far and it makes it especially dangerous at night...

mike65

Tints should be outlawed if you can't see someone's eyes! They're a pain at junctions, did he see me, can he see me?

Mike.

DoctorEdgeWild

t5pwr wrote:

I agree with KDevitt also...

DoctorEdgeWild your saying that if your front side windows are completly dark you will be able to pull out from a junction safely

How will you see what is coming?

I'm not against tinting but I just think some people go too far and it makes it especially dangerous at night...

Sorry, should have made myself clearer, tinted to within regular levels. Such as almost impossible to see through from the outside in but they are actually pretty clear from the inside out. I haven't travelled in many limos :v: but that's the maximum tint going around and they are clear to see out of even in the dark and the rain.

Basically, I believe that the driver should be targeted more so than the car. Every year, someone targets modified car owners and drunks get away with a couple of month long bans. I personally have never heard of a case where a chrome mirror killed a man but personally knew several people who were killed by drunk drivers /waits for someone to dig up article involving chrome mirror death/.

seamus

egan007 wrote:

Presumably you never drove behing a van -

Since clearly I'm the only person who can see my post on page 1 dealing with this, I'll say it again

The poor visibility from behind busses, trucks and vans is a hazard. A hazard which all road users (and the driver of the vehicle) need to be aware of. It's a completely unavoidable hazard - we can't ban these vehicles.

Fitting ridiculously tinted windows to your car though creates an artifical and unnecessary hazard for other road users. Obviously any alteration to a vehicle which affects other roads users' ability to drive, or creates an extra, unnecessary hazard on the road should not be permitted.

Perhaps it's because I spend most of my road time on the bike, and as such I need to, and can take in a lot more information about what's going on. For example, this evening coming home (about halfway through dusk - so I could see well enough, but everyone had their lights on), I'm driving behind an SUV with a tinted rear window. All I could see through his window was the brake lights of vehicles in front of him (when they braked). This causes me to have to give extra stopping distance, and change my road position to improve the view.

HashSlinging

Archeron wrote:

Just heard about this on the radio this morning. Apparently Ivor Callelly is introducing a law that cars with tinted windows, loud exhausts or double exhausts will all fail the NCT. Does anyone know where we can see more details about this? It sounds like a major pain in the ass for anyone who likes their cars. Ivor Callellys website says nothing about this. Sounds like another bit of baiting on certain members of society to suit those who disapprove of young people in nice cars.

Music to my ears, please bring this law in, anyone who likes their cars cant be that mad about them if they butcher perfectly good motors into looking like UFO's with glowy blue lights under them.. IMO these people are idiots, with small penises & ugly birds.

Interceptor

HashSlinging wrote:

Music to my ears, please bring this law in, anyone who likes their cars cant be that mad about them if they butcher perfectly good motors into looking like UFO's with glowy blue lights under them.. IMO these people are idiots, with small penises & ugly birds.

Back to Troll-land with you Slasher. Lots of new Audis, Porsches and others have tinted windows and double exhausts as standard and as for looking like UFO's, have you seen a BMW Z4 recently...

maidhc

Interceptor wrote:

Back to Troll-land with you Slasher. Lots of new Audis, Porsches and others have tinted windows and double exhausts as standard and as for looking like UFO's, have you seen a BMW Z4 recently...

The reality is this:

They are not going to ban any OEMs from doing anything they cant do already. A manufactuers spec Z4/M5/RS4 will pass the NCT. It is only nonsense talk and pure conjecture to suggest otherwise.

Only thing that would concern me would be a "ban" on the use of spurious parts. Not because I'm a modder, but because I dont think I should buy everything from a dealer.

Something should be done about idiots like drdre (He has boasted about his "amazing" speeds in a thread before), but the response shouldnt interfere with either "normal" people or the genuine modders (like the guys who think about swapping out the rear drums before ringing superchips...).

johnnyrotten

Oh, Please ban those ridiculious Exhausts that look like the Dublin Port Tunnel entrance. They should be banned on a noise pollution level.
What about the illegial Number plates with fr example the text in Script.
I fing it amusing to see the car with the number plate and in small text it says "PUNTO"

528i

...... on a bmw ?


I think we should legislate against vulgar attire on these delinquents as well.

Lord Nikon

TBH, I think everyone is taking this with a lot more than a grain of salt.

Remember, this is the government who made 69 offenses which would result in penalty point, only 4 are in effect today, and that's after 3 years.

With regards to tinting, you cannot tar everyone with the same brush. Does it mean that all limosines, garda security vans, and government vehicals must also abide by new rules? Yeah, sure, that's going to happen.

With regards to twin exhausts, does that mean I can't buy a porsche, an Audi 1.8T, Mondeo ST220? get real government.

With regards to loud exhausts, what I can see is that people have a problem with noise polution when it comes to this. With regards to noise polution trucks seem to be the biggest culprit, they are also pumping out a lot of hazardous fumes which is something completely different.

What I am trying to say is that the statements made today, may well infact be focused on so-called "boy-racers", but the truth is, is that the statement is far to generalised when it comes to the actual changes to be made to the NCT, with regards to certain modifications. Modifications of which come as standard(or optional extras) to a lot of todays new cars.

iregk

I was talking about this last night, where do limos fit into the tinted window ban? I'm assuming as they are a road going machine they cannot be completely exempt from these laws? Also will the govt cars have to adeer to these rules?

Personally I think it does break down into two categories, the boy racer who does up his micra with huge spoilers air scoops on the bonnet etc... and the genuine enthusiast who enjoys more subtle transformations. The latter I have no problem with, like football its a hobbie and I'd prefer to see them put money into their car rather than their veins or up their nose.

The boy racer though should be banned, stripped and burned at the stake. A micra in tallaght about a year ago, viper wrote on teh side, two "racing" strips going up the middle, air vent on the bonnet and an air scoop on the roof!!!! Please ban that car and ban him for life!!!!

freewing

I have nearly always had my rear windscreen tinted on any car I owned . I find that in the winter evenings the inside of my car is lit up by some drivers who refuse to turn their lights down or if they replace their stock bulbs with the mulit directional ones which usually give me a headache .I dont really mind car mods that improve the abilty of the car but their are a lot of cars that look like a halfords shop threw up on them ( just cos you spent a lot of money doesnt mean youre a better driver) .

ambro25

freewing wrote:

I have nearly always had my rear windscreen tinted on any car I owned . I find that in the winter evenings the inside of my car is lit up by some drivers who refuse to turn their lights down or if they replace their stock bulbs with the mulit directional ones which usually give me a headache .

You do know that most rear-view mirrors have two positions (night/day), right?

That's what that little latch in the middle of the underside of you mirror is for...

Ann Elk

Oh the sweet smell of vindication ... begone with you boy racers!

kdevitt

Ann Elk wrote:

Oh the sweet smell of vindication ... begone with you boy racers!

I think you're missing the wider issue - no one cares about the little scrote boy racers. Its the genuine enthusiasts who'll be affected more by this.

The other issue is that the little knackers who drive the likes of the aforementioned Micra who cause trouble with black windows and deafening exhaust will just not bother NCT'ing their car anymore - its not like its actually required for anything (such as insurance/tax) And before you say that your insurance may be invalid, a: you know the insurance companies have to honour third party claims and b:they don't care.

Just to add - it could just as easily be a scumbag in a bog standard car being a public nuisance...

DoctorEdgeWild

iregk wrote:

The boy racer though should be banned, stripped and burned at the stake. A micra in tallaght about a year ago, viper wrote on teh side, two "racing" strips going up the middle, air vent on the bonnet and an air scoop on the roof!!!! Please ban that car and ban him for life!!!!

What exactly has this guy done to you? Yes, his car is disgusting and makes me want to cry but if this makes him happy, then so be it. These ridiculous stickers and vents aren't causing him to speed, drink, drive dangerously. Modified car or not, the drivers who drive badly should be targeted, not their taste in cars. So many people jump on the bandwagon whenever the issue of modded cars comes up. Ban this, ban that etc. Rubbish! Target the drivers who drive dangerously or drunk if you really want to make Irish roads safer. Not some kid who has horrible taste.

Ann Elk wrote:

Oh the sweet smell of vindication ... begone with you boy racers!

How is this vindication for you exactly? Have you campaigned for unfair bandwagon jumping and targeting of innocents with bad taste? Maybe you are just a huge fan of stereotypes?

prospect

kbannon wrote:

maybe so, but any solicitor or barrister could easily prove your opinion wrong.

your probably right there.
But removing it, is ALTERING its location and function!

prospect

mike65 wrote:

"Boy racers" should be dealt with, Modifiers should be left in peace.

Well said.

egan007

kdevitt wrote:

You have to be taking the piss... but I'll take the bait anyway, I'm bored...

So now the quality of the noise should be measured as well?? Noise is noise - if the Fiesta is too loud, it should fail, just as the Murcielago should - doesn't matter one bit that you prefer the sound of one or the other.

There should be no differentiation at all... should the speed limit for the lambo be higher than the Fiesta too because it looks so cool at high speed??

See this is a great arguement -" should the speed limit for the lambo be higher than the Fiesta too because it looks so cool at high speed??"

SUVs have higher emission standards to class differentaion is already in effect

Soupi

egan007 wrote:

See this is a great arguement -" should the speed limit for the lambo be higher than the Fiesta too because it looks so cool at high speed??"

okay i think you're getting a little off the point now.

kdevitt

egan007 wrote:

See this is a great arguement -" should the speed limit for the lambo be higher than the Fiesta too because it looks so cool at high speed??"

Nah - its a daft argument, but every single bit as idiotic as your quality of sound suggestion.

_Kaiser_

ambro25 wrote:

You do know that most rear-view mirrors have two positions (night/day), right?

That's what that little latch in the middle of the underside of you mirror is for...

I know what he means... it's when the whole interior of your car is lit up by the idiots with stupidly bright headlights behind you and/or who don't bother to lower them in traffic.

That's a bigger problem I think (right up there with people who don't bother indicating :mad: but that's another thread) rather than complaining about people modding their cars.

My new car came with film on the rear and back windows but I found that it was restricting my visibility (as it was this mesh fabric rather than "proper" tinting) so the first thing I did when I got the car home from the dealer was strip it off.

I would agree as well with the comment that the Guards themselves don't seem to clear on the rules. When I asked one lately if it was correct that I should have to NCT my car again next year (despite having it done only this week) he told me that he probably would've said nothing and just gotten it done in May!!! ... incidentially, why is it that the validity of the test isn't FROM the date it was tested, rather than the date it was due (which in this case was 2004 when it wasn't even in the country!). IS it just a money-making scam??

shagman

IS it just a money-making scam??

---

Yes, it is.

The question for me is will it be enforced by the cops or by the NCT?

If it's the the NCT I predict a huge resurgance in modded mantas, capris and Mk 1 escorts.No NCT to worry about!!!
Wonder what a cortina with a UV kit will look like?

I was gonna include an octane favourite the integrale there but I think Lancia fitted it with every possible mod under the sun before it left the factory.

Soupi

Kaiser2000 wrote:

IS it just a money-making scam??

i know that the whole point of the NCT is to get clapped out bangers off the road but my bro brought his car in to be tested and they failed it.they gave him a list of what it failed on and he brought it home and fixed the things that were wrong and made another appointment.they then failed him again and gave him another list with trivial things on it,he again brought it home and fixed the things that were on the list,he also got his friend to test it in a garage he works in and he said it was fine.

the last time my bro brought it back they failed it on something that wasn't on the list at all and told him that he'd have to get it fully tested the next time and pay the full price.he came home in such a foul mood and i don't blame him.i told him to go back down and explain to them that they failed it on something trivial that wasn't even on the list and that it had been his third time down there,they then passed it and apologised to him.rip offs!!:mad: