driving with your doors off = cops

[Von Depner]

Hi Stevil I read the ADR from vic roads It will depends on which states and what they mean by can the doors be removed. All doors can be removed if you want to. It might depend on how cops interpert the laws I suppose. a bit of a grey area this one. Any coppers out there that might be able to help?

[carvesdodo]

Originally Posted by davidd

except under the definition of removeable dors, the jk doors are not removeable. chrysler have stated also that when tested for australian compliance plate, the jk was only tested with doors on, and a compliance plate was issued on the basis that doors would be left on. unless the vehicle was tested for compliance without doors and a compliance plate issued on that basis

And just to keep it all tricklng along ....

davidd ... Im guessing here that you have finally found the "presented for testing" criteria in regard to ADRs - available for reading for some time now .... congratulations.

You have also stated previously, quoting ADRs ... that doors are not allowed to be removed.

ADR 02 ... Does not say doors cant be removed ... It specifically deals with the performance of doors, locks and hinges ...
When they are fitted.

ADR 29 ... Does not say doors cant be removed ... It specifically deals with the performance of door side intrusion bars ...
When doors and side intrusion bars are fitted.

ADR 72 ... Does not say doors cant be removed ... It specifically deals with the performance of doors in an impact ...
When doors are fitted.

Doorless Jeeps do not have to comply with the above ADRs as those ADRs dont pertain to vehicles with removeable doors.

Why present a doorless vehicle to be tested for door ADRs ??? The fact that the crappy, removable, jeep doors pass the ADR is a credit to the manufacturer.

ADRs are not about having to have doors on a vehicle - only the effects when they do have doors fitted ...

Strangely enough ... Since ADR 29 was introduced in 1977 ... there are a number of vehicles that have been sold legally since that date i.e. complied sufficiently for sale in Australia without meeting those ADRs ...

Sooooo .... Did the govt stuff up ??? ... did the manufacturer do a sneaky ???


ADR 2 provides the basis for legality of doors off - as shown in previous posts.

Fat Chilis information on impact heights is also flawed. It is in reference to a point on a door as far as I can see ... As TJ / JK doors are removeable by design ... it is irrellevant and was probably provided to him in a desperate attempt by the authorities to find a loophole in the obvious legality of driving doorless ... or maybe just a misinterpretation ... of course.

The failure of ADRs to specify differences in vehicle construction techniques is what makes it quite possible for someone with time and money to spare ... to challenge a "door off" infringement and maybe get definitive amendments made to the rules.

e.g. ADR vehicle class MC ... an offroad passenger vehicle.

That would denote to me ... a 4wd bus. aka Toyota Arkana / OKA tourist conveyance ... except they have a chassis ... so my next thought is that the best example of an MC class vehicle would be an XJ Cherokee ... carries passengers ... has no chassis ... is 4wd ... and the doors are a structural requirement to maintain vehicle integrity.

Therefore I would naturally expect that an XJ Cherokee - meet all the requirements of the above 3 ADRs ... whereas, any rationally thinking person ... would not expect the same of a TJ / JK with a chassis and sales brochures showing the doors removed.

All thats needed ... is for someone to effectively challenge a doors off infringement notice .... But of course - Govt relies on motorists being too scared or non financial enough to challenge their badly written, blanket rule regulations.

Whether "doors off" is defined & legislated as illegal in the future - is totally dependant on the behaviour of the drivers today.

All good stuff isnt ....

[DizzyDi]

Bravo carves, you have excelled yourself once again with that extremely comprehensive & well put together post that is IRREFUTABLE, even by davidd.

Huh? StevilL.... "I read the ADR from vic roads It will depends on which states and what they mean by can the doors be removed" ADR = Victoria ADR's are Federal, not state by state. What ADR from Vic Roads???

davidd: "except under the definition of removeable dors, the jk doors are not removeable"

[davidd]

am trying to chase this up through our local vehicle licensing crowd. so far i have a basic ruling of "if a vehicle is presented for adr crash testing with doors on then it must be driven with doors on", as that is the way it was tested. have another couple of avenues to chase up next week.

[Jimmyb]

Originally Posted by wranglertj

i couldn't have said it better even if was drunk

PURE Gold........ bwah!!

[maddog]

why don't you guys just drive around with your doors off and see what happens?

[carvesdodo]

Originally Posted by davidd

am trying to chase this up through our local vehicle licensing crowd. so far i have a basic ruling of "if a vehicle is presented for adr crash testing with doors on then it must be driven with doors on", as that is the way it was tested. have another couple of avenues to chase up next week.

Yes ... thats the assumption and false interpretation isnt it ....

Just remember in the course of your enquiries ... the question to ask is ...
Does a vehicle with non structural, manufacturer designed, removable doors - need to meet ADRs in regards to door tests.

Complacency / Ignorance by the authorities in regard to vehicle designs has led to the current situation .... As until the TJ & JK were released on the australian market there were no defined/marketed "removable door" vehicles available since the 1982 (?) CJ7 Renegades.


Bear in mind ... If motorvehicles HAVE to have doors to be roadworthy in the future ... then there are going to be a lot of bike riders / tractor drivers / forklift operators / Jeep owners / older vehicle owners ( and not too mention me - when I end up in an old fart, electric mobility device ) .... mighty pissed orff ... with who ever was such a paranoid, do-gooder sociopath - who organised getting doors fitted to EVERYTHING.

That person will want to hope that their side intrusion bars are of extremely good quality ... I would imagine ...


And just a thought on ADR "crash" testing ...

Frontal impact testing is conducted with the bonnet closed ... does that mean that a JK with the bonnet up, parked on the side of the road, with passengers still in it - whilst the driver inspects blown turbo hoses ... is illegally modified ... or doesnt meet ADR requirements to be on that road ...

When an oncoming vehicle veers across the road and hits it ???

Just some more food for thought ....