oldtimer
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 11:06 AM |
|
|
One rule for Caterham and another for the rest of us.....
I don't know if this has come up before......but whilst searching for SVA suitable collapsible steering bosses I came accross a SVA
memorandum:
IM 14 - SVA CATERHAM CARS - ISSUED 23/09/98
Please ensure this note is seen by all SVA Examiners.
A recent test on a Caterham 7 resulted in a fail due to the lack of evidence that the steering wheel/column gave equivalent protection to
the driver to that of an approved component.
The steering wheel was padded over the "Boss" but did not incorporate a collapsible feature in the wheel or upper column.
Caterham Cars have a "Low Volume" approval for there Seven and Super Seven models where use is made of either Moto-lita, Mountney or
Momo steering wheels that do not incorporate a collapsible feature. In respect of these vehicles only, due to the existence of the approval this
situation will be considered acceptable.
In any other case, where a non approved steering wheel is fitted, it should be considered highly unlikely that the wheel/ column would
provide
equivalent protection to that of an approved component unless the wheel or upper column incorporate a collapsible feature
So that's all right then!..............
|
|
|
|
|
Staple balls
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 11:11 AM |
|
|
Well, that's easy enough.
*buys Caterham badge* 
|
|
|
oldtimer
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 11:16 AM |
|
|
I just wonder how many SVA safety features you can avoid if you have 'Low volume' approval, and, why?
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 11:26 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by oldtimer
I just wonder how many SVA safety features you can avoid if you have 'Low volume' approval, and, why?
None, but where SVA has to be very black-and-white to keep cost low and avoid destructive testing, Low Volume approval will involve a combination of
engineering assessment, calculation/simulation and destructive testing which are not practical for SVA.
|
|
|
DarrenW
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 12:15 PM |
|
|
Good reply andys101.
I have seen type approved vehicles about too that sport particular features that would fail SVA. At the end of the day they are seperate tests and the
criteria for each is well publicised. If Caterham have done additional testwork that proves their arrangement is acceptable then hats off to them for
taking the time out to do so.
|
|
|
oldtimer
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 12:20 PM |
|
|
All right, all right - just asking!
|
|
|
chrisg
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 12:50 PM |
|
|
That's all very well but it does mean that two cars which use identical components are tested differently.
Cheers
Chris
Note to all: I really don't know when to leave well alone. I tried to get clever with the mods, then when they gave me a lifeline to see the
error of my ways, I tried to incite more trouble via u2u. So now I'm banned, never to return again. They should have done it years ago!
|
|
|
mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 12:52 PM |
|
|
One only has to look at the Ariel Atoms mud guards to see one rule broken
|
|
|
oldtimer
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 01:01 PM |
|
|
I suppose my comment and question sounded anti-Caterham. Really the question maybe should have been how come this wasn't known by some SVA
inspectors? SVA has been around a long time. My own car has a Caterham quick rack onto a Caterham column onto a Caterham supplied Mountnay wheel.
|
|
|
chrisg
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 01:27 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by oldtimer
I suppose my comment and question sounded anti-Caterham. Really the question maybe should have been how come this wasn't known by some SVA
inspectors? SVA has been around a long time. My own car has a Caterham quick rack onto a Caterham column onto a Caterham supplied Mountnay wheel.
Then your car acts as the perfect example.
All the components on your car are identical to those on a Caterham.
But it isn't a Caterham.
So you wouldn't get this exemption.
I suppose you could argue that the Caterham has had the chassis crash tested but the note is specifically about the steering system with no mention of
the chassis.
Cheers
Chris 
Note to all: I really don't know when to leave well alone. I tried to get clever with the mods, then when they gave me a lifeline to see the
error of my ways, I tried to incite more trouble via u2u. So now I'm banned, never to return again. They should have done it years ago!
|
|
|
ReMan
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 04:03 PM |
|
|
Bear in mind the mention of a collapsible column. Nearly all our cars have these and very easy to see I would have thoiught?
|
|
|
Mix
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 04:28 PM |
|
|
Bonzer ........... I have a Motolite wheel with a Caterham horn push badge ......... I'm exempt
Mick
|
|
|
Mix
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 05:19 PM |
|
|
Hi Andy
It's really refreshing to see well informed advice on here rather than well intentioned re-iteration of other's, (mine included),
inturpretation / experience.
Please keep advising us ........... we will all benefit greatly.
Regards Mick
|
|
|
Vindi_andy
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 05:37 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mix
Hi Andy
It's really refreshing to see well informed advice on here rather than well intentioned re-iteration of other's, (mine included),
inturpretation / experience.
Please keep advising us ........... we will all benefit greatly.
Regards Mick
Fully agree with your comments Mick I suspect andys has something to do with the legislation side of the fence and his input is fully appreciated.
The SVA is there to save us, our passengers and god forbid anyone we run into from serious harm or worse and shouldn't be avoided or
"worked around" but complied with to the best of our abilities and understanding.
|
|
|
oldtimer
|
| posted on 25/3/09 at 05:39 PM |
|
|
Agreed, good advice is always appreciated.
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 26/3/09 at 08:21 PM |
|
|
probably missed some bits on my quick scan of the thread but does the caterham column not contain suitable angles of deflection to negate the need for
a collapsible section anyway??
( I don't know the answer by the way, never measured on our racer, but I would be surprised if it needed a collapsible section to comply with
current SVA, but then equally one would think caterham would know that! )
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
oldtimer
|
| posted on 30/3/09 at 04:49 PM |
|
|
The Caterham column does have 2 UJs, the angle change is very shallow on mine so I may have to tweek the mounts some. I'm not trying to avoid
safety items - I was actually thinking of doubling up.
|
|
|
