YOU not the cof inspector had all the information about the vehicle by means of the receipts . YOU had that information before you purchased the vehicle. I would put money that if the inspector was told about the engine change before that first COF post engine change you wouldn’t be posting this. To reiterate -it is all but impossible to tell a 13c from a 14c visually so no reason to doubt it was original engine. The PAPERWORK was the evidence and reason to investigate b
tgray,
Jun 7, 7:14am
I have to be honest and say I have a lot of sympathy for the poster here. I see his point.
franc123,
Jun 7, 7:15am
Not making excuses for anybody here but its a sad fact of life sometimes that these issues can often only be picked up down the track when someone comes along and spots something odd due to them having a "more intimate knowledge" of a make or model. They could have personally owned one or even worked at an agency representing Toyota or Daihatsu in a previous life. Whats worse is that chances are this conversion was indeed bolt in and didnt involve any other mods on the other side of the certification threshold, there is next to no difference in the performance between the two, and if the transition was the other way from 14 to 13B it would not have been a problem. 😡
redhead18,
Jun 7, 7:37am
Yes re #29 and my earlier post we ALL make mistakes. However where border inspection misses clear criteria and V T N Z are found accountable well Perhaps all look at the Bible.
when compared with the OE engine, the replacement engine: is of the same or less cubic capacity, and has equal or less weight, and uses the same fuel (petrol, diesel, LPG, CNG), and uses the same unmodified attachment points and system (i.e. bolts-in), and uses the same family of block and cylinder head from the same vehicle manufacturer, and the block has the same number of cylinders arranged in the same configuration, and the head has the same number of valves and camshafts, and meets the requirements of minor modifications detailed below, and when the minor modifications have been taken into consideration the total power or torque increase is no more than 20% over the OE engine specification.
franc123,
Jun 7, 7:41am
The increased cubic capacity of the 14B is the sticking point. The inspector was correct in failing it, it meets the criteria for requiring cert theres no doubt about that. .
2. Any repair or modification not listed in the left-hand column unless the vehicle inspector considers that certification is required because the modification or repair has affected the vehicle’s safety performance (a second opinion from an expert may be needed, eg the manufacturer’s representative, or a reputable workshop).
traykuku,
Jun 7, 7:56am
Oh I’m not expecting any resolution to this. I’m just venting & possibly preventing someone else from having the same bad luck.
VTNZ let a potentially unsafe vehicle on the road for years because they either didn’t know or were too lazy to enforce the law. Yet I should have picked it up ? Really. Who would have been responsible if the vehicle had been involved in an accident?
franc123,
Jun 7, 8:01am
Lol thats a bloody minefield isn't it! Its a further reminder of why I wouldnt get involved in CoF. Reading again the above criteria for WoF reminds me of an R32 coupe that came in the shop one day for WoF, it was a beautiful car in every way and wasnt obviously modified. I did the test and was about to put the bonnet down and go issue the sticker and log the pass and something made me look at the chassis plate. RB20E listed as the factory engine. Dang. engine I'm looking at was a twin cam RB, went hunting for the engine number and sure enough. RB25DE. I looked over it again and could not spot anything obviously out of place with respect to the installation and certainly no cert plate. Turns out the current owner bought it like that too, at least according to him, I got no satisfaction from having to fail it and send him on his way.
traykuku,
Jun 7, 8:02am
haha might just do that.
traykuku,
Jun 7, 8:05am
Yes that’s correct, I’ve learnt a lot in the past few weeks about these motors. Isn’t checking that the engine numbers line up part of the inspection process?
franc123,
Jun 7, 8:10am
I would only do it if I suspected it may have been swapped, see my above story about the R32 Skyline about how easy it is to be caught out. Otherwise no, the only number that has to be inspected is the VIN or chassis tag and the number recorded, and that it lines up with the registration number when the inspection gets logged.
traykuku,
Jun 7, 8:12am
So the law is only sometimes enforced. Silly me for leaving the receipts in the glovebox eh but hell ,how was I to know the law when even those enforcing it don’t. What a screwed up world we live in.
redhead18,
Jun 7, 8:16am
LOL Counting 2 camshafts is well. JISD4604. VTNZ God's Bible. and WTF ya tellin Me I Have to pass it. Sex And Travel You Pass it it will Have YOUR Name and number on it Not Mine. Ah dear so ya need ELR VW now mmmkay
So in my first post i see VTNZ held accountable.
Station Manager passed 3 times there didn't it.
redhead18,
Jun 7, 8:18am
Yes.
Silly me for leaving the receipts in the glovebox eh
Unless they were dated pre declaration days.
franc123,
Jun 7, 8:18am
Effectively, yes. Unfortunately even as a WoF inspector myself it is hard to disagree with that statement. Not trying to rub salt into the wound here but some used imported vehicles may not have an engine number or even a type designation entered into NZTA's database when they are certified for entry at all, some cylinder block numbers can be hideously diffficult to read due to other components obscuring them, so it doesnt get entered! The cc rating will be, but thats all.
heads1st,
Jun 7, 8:37am
When did a glove box (or the contents of it) become part of a cof?
kazbanz,
Jun 8, 1:56am
One more time. YOU were made aware that the engine had been changed for a non factory engine BEFORE you made the purchase .YOU were presented with the receipts for the transplant. YOU own the vehicle and importantly made the decision to make the purchase fully aware of the transplant. The COF inspector/inspectors that did the post transplant COF/COF's did NOT have the luxury of having that information. The two engines are all but identical to look at whilst in place with the only difference being the head sits about 7mm higher in the 14 So YES you are responsible. BUT to answer your points. Is it a physically dangerous situation. NO. Why ? the increase in HP is 8hp when new. by now the 14b will have lost a pony or three. The engine mounts to the same mounts and weight is all but identical On that basis a LVV cert/plate will be a doddle to get. P-ain in the backside? Yep but at least easily fixed
traykuku,
Jun 8, 4:36am
So a law that is too hard to enforce so is only enforced sometimes.
I understood your POV the first time, there was no need for YOU to repeat it “one more time”
clangie,
Jun 8, 5:39am
shouldnt need a cert if it uses factory mounts and is not more than 10% power increase
kazbanz,
Jun 8, 6:07am
so accept responsibility for your stuff up and sort it out . Go get a LVV cert
kazbanz,
Jun 8, 6:10am
it’s not factory in that vehicle. It really is that simple.
kenw1,
Jun 8, 6:13am
Out of interest, if the original engine required a rebore, what is the maximum capacity that the original block could be bored out to?
gabbysnana,
Jun 8, 6:44am
your not a professional, you are not required to look beyond the cof, its reasonable to expect the cof inspector to be correct all 4 times. Its on them. The tell them to go have sex with themselves is correct. You can start with making a complaint to ltsa against the cof inspector,/s that will get the squirm going.
kenw1,
Jun 8, 6:50am
A 60 thou rebore would increase the engine to about 3720cc.
traykuku,
Jun 8, 7:27am
See post # 33
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.