'Illegal' Exhaust
28 April 2005 | 08:08 PM
#91
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: Kinross
BTW, I've spoken to the ex-traffic cop again and he's given it more thought. He's basically saying that the 'exhaust altered' offence was originally to make it illegal to knock out baffles etc - and that NC are perhaps pushing their luck somewhat in their interpretation of it 
He's also suggested that Subaru invite the regional head of the transportation division and/or the presiding officers down to Beds to a) show that everything's above-board and b) to show them how sound tests should be done
He's also suggested that Subaru invite the regional head of the transportation division and/or the presiding officers down to Beds to a) show that everything's above-board and b) to show them how sound tests should be done
28 April 2005 | 08:16 PM
#92
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,274
Likes: 0
Obviously Subaru/Prodrive have a vested interest in this case being rejected, but its comforting to see they are taking it seriously, and tackling the problem in an extremely proffesional manner.
Lets hope the result is one for commom sense, and we PPP Impreza owners can carry on driving legally.
Cheers
MTR
Lets hope the result is one for commom sense, and we PPP Impreza owners can carry on driving legally.
Cheers
MTR
28 April 2005 | 11:20 PM
#93
Scooby Regular
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Superb response by Subaru.
Lets hope they can knock some sense into Northern Constabulary - at the very least we can have the law clarified so we all know were we stand.
Well done Iain and your dad for not taking it lying down- keep us posted.
Lets hope they can knock some sense into Northern Constabulary - at the very least we can have the law clarified so we all know were we stand.
Well done Iain and your dad for not taking it lying down- keep us posted.
28 April 2005 | 11:52 PM
#94
Scooby Regular
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 6,316
Likes: 2
From: home
Originally Posted by MTR
Obviously Subaru/Prodrive have a vested interest in this case being rejected, but its comforting to see they are taking it seriously, and tackling the problem in an extremely proffesional manner.
Lets hope the result is one for commom sense, and we PPP Impreza owners can carry on driving legally.
Cheers
MTR
Lets hope the result is one for commom sense, and we PPP Impreza owners can carry on driving legally.
Cheers
MTR
29 April 2005 | 01:01 AM
#96
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Iain McLaren
I've spoken to my dad, who's been reading your replies and is very grateful to you all! 
He's going to reply to the letter Northern Constabulary sent him in reply to his original complaint with the following:
I imagine that they'll politely tell him to p*ss off again. I think he should therefore instruct them to pass the matter to the Procurator Fiscal if they do not agree with his arguments, and that he will be filing a complaint with the police watchdog whatever they do!
Cheers,
Iain
PS I'll see if he's willing to post the correspondence on his website in the interests of the motoring public...
PPS I emailed Top Gear about this a while ago, but so far Jezza's not phoned!!!
He's going to reply to the letter Northern Constabulary sent him in reply to his original complaint with the following:
- A statement that he believes NC to be erroneous in their interpretation of the law - that any modification to an exhaust system refers to knocking out baffles / drilling holes in it etc. They'll deny this, but if a law is as unclear as this one appears to be, how could it possibly stand up in court???
- Request the make, model and Home Office approval of the noise meter used, along with exact instructions of use, its calibration certificate for the day of the 'offence' and the accreditation of the officer to use it correctly
- Assert that the noise test was not carried out in accordance with DVLA procedure
- Point out certain inaccuracies (fabrications) of what the police say was said/done at the time of the incident
- State that their assumption that the exhaust is louder than a standard WRX is due to the exhaust being changed is inaccurate - that the engine has been tuned to increase performance etc. What they would have to do is prove that a WRX fitted with the PPP but a standard back box (or entire exhaust system?) is significantly quieter that a WRX with a compete PPP fitted
- Suggest to them that they don't understand how the decibel system works, preferably with references to literature that explains how it does!
- Inform them that certain police forces use Imprezas with the PPP - why would it be legal for them to run 'loud' and not the public?
I imagine that they'll politely tell him to p*ss off again. I think he should therefore instruct them to pass the matter to the Procurator Fiscal if they do not agree with his arguments, and that he will be filing a complaint with the police watchdog whatever they do!
Cheers,
Iain
PS I'll see if he's willing to post the correspondence on his website in the interests of the motoring public...
PPS I emailed Top Gear about this a while ago, but so far Jezza's not phoned!!!
29 April 2005 | 01:17 AM
#97
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Iain McLaren
Subaru have been in touch with my dad.
They are going to take his car down to Bedfordshire, to an independant testing center, and conduct noise tests based on the following:
Static and drive-by tests with his car (as per current legislation).
Same with a new PPP exhaust system fitted.
Same with a standard WRX exhaust fitted.
They're then going to remove the PPP and run all the tests again. This will give a definative set of results that says which component adds what to the sound output.
They've written to Northern Constabulary asking for their sound-testing procedures (LOL)
While all this is going on they're supplying a replacement car.
Now that's customer service!!!
Will keep you all posted.
Iain
They are going to take his car down to Bedfordshire, to an independant testing center, and conduct noise tests based on the following:
Static and drive-by tests with his car (as per current legislation).
Same with a new PPP exhaust system fitted.
Same with a standard WRX exhaust fitted.
They're then going to remove the PPP and run all the tests again. This will give a definative set of results that says which component adds what to the sound output.
They've written to Northern Constabulary asking for their sound-testing procedures (LOL)
While all this is going on they're supplying a replacement car.
Now that's customer service!!!
Will keep you all posted.
Iain
29 April 2005 | 03:57 PM
#98
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,274
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Pavlo
I think we all have a vested interest.
I agree, but this specific example is too close for comfort for me.
PPP mustn't be classified as illegal, my wife would kill me.
She already thinks my car is bl**dy awful/uncomfortable etc etc
If I had to tell her to keep an eye out for the Police the odd time she unwillingly gets in the car, then that would be the straw that broke the camels back.
She'd have me on a pair of rollerskates.
Cheers
MTR
29 April 2005 | 04:14 PM
#99
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,274
Likes: 0
The resultant outcome of this thread re 'illegal exhaust ' on a PPP specced WRX will be interesting.
If the car was registered with the ABI as a defined specification car like the WR1, then it would not be classified as 'modified' and the whole argument with the Police would be negated.
Subaru/Prodrive are you taking note?
See this thread http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthread.php?t=415477
And
Cheers
MTR
If the car was registered with the ABI as a defined specification car like the WR1, then it would not be classified as 'modified' and the whole argument with the Police would be negated.
Subaru/Prodrive are you taking note?
See this thread http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthread.php?t=415477
And
Cheers
MTR
29 April 2005 | 04:32 PM
#100
Scooby Regular
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 17,582
Likes: 0
From: Sheffield; Rome of the North
Originally Posted by TruckBoy
Err, not quite right actually. 3dB is a doubling of power, 6dB is a doubling of volume. So 79dB to 88.7db (9.7db) is a tripling of volume.
Have a look at :
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/dB.html
Have a look at :
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/dB.html
29 April 2005 | 09:15 PM
#101
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 11,470
Likes: 23
From: MY99UK-MY02STi-MY99Type R-MY06 T20-MY11 340R-MY05 TYPE25
Originally Posted by Iain McLaren
They are going to take his car down to Bedfordshire, to an independant testing center, and conduct noise tests based on the following:
Static and drive-by tests with his car (as per current legislation).
Same with a new PPP exhaust system fitted.
Same with a standard WRX exhaust fitted.
They're then going to remove the PPP and run all the tests again. This will give a definative set of results that says which component adds what to the sound output.
They've written to Northern Constabulary asking for their sound-testing procedures (LOL)
Static and drive-by tests with his car (as per current legislation).
Same with a new PPP exhaust system fitted.
Same with a standard WRX exhaust fitted.
They're then going to remove the PPP and run all the tests again. This will give a definative set of results that says which component adds what to the sound output.
They've written to Northern Constabulary asking for their sound-testing procedures (LOL)
will be nice to see a few peeps squirm over this 
I would imagine this should soon have good outcome
your father ought to, now he's gone this far, see your Local MP who's up for re-election this weekTony
03 May 2005 | 06:02 PM
#103
I have'nt read the entire thread so sorry if this has come up b4
i run a nova 'standard production' 1.2 no engine mods still has cat fitted with a 2" big bore exhaust.
I have a wrx with 5" firestorm
because some things sound louder (the sccob) does not mean it IS louder
Example
Each rally a sound check is performed (nova) .5 metre at 4500rpm OR 3/4 throttle and this comes in at 97 to 98dB constant!
Had the scoob checked the other day (just as a matter of interest) .5m at 4500rpm the level was 96.7dB
funny that???
as for the coppers 'sticking the probe right up the exhaust and reving the car' tut tut not the way to perform a noise test me thinks
i run a nova 'standard production' 1.2 no engine mods still has cat fitted with a 2" big bore exhaust.
I have a wrx with 5" firestorm
because some things sound louder (the sccob) does not mean it IS louder
Example
Each rally a sound check is performed (nova) .5 metre at 4500rpm OR 3/4 throttle and this comes in at 97 to 98dB constant!
Had the scoob checked the other day (just as a matter of interest) .5m at 4500rpm the level was 96.7dB
funny that???
as for the coppers 'sticking the probe right up the exhaust and reving the car' tut tut not the way to perform a noise test me thinks
03 May 2005 | 06:34 PM
#105
Just a bit concerned so i sent an email to TSL re the firestorm
let you know the results
Steve
Just spoke to a m8 (who runs clerk of the course on rallys) AFAHK's you can have an exhaust as loud as you want just so long as its not defective (the plot thickens)
let you know the results
Steve
Just spoke to a m8 (who runs clerk of the course on rallys) AFAHK's you can have an exhaust as loud as you want just so long as its not defective (the plot thickens)
03 May 2005 | 06:56 PM
#106
Scooby Regular
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
From: St Helens, Merseyside
Seems as tho' Subaru?Prodrive are tryin' to sort it!
But there was a similar thread on the SIDCForum and the "defendant" was prepared to go to court, and the police dropped it at the last moment IIRC.
It would appear that they are trying it on!
If you can't trust the Police to be honest and honourable who can you?
But there was a similar thread on the SIDCForum and the "defendant" was prepared to go to court, and the police dropped it at the last moment IIRC.
It would appear that they are trying it on!
If you can't trust the Police to be honest and honourable who can you?
03 May 2005 | 07:48 PM
#107
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: Kinross
Nothing so far, but I will post when I know anything.
AFAIK the car's not been collected yet - presumably the logistics of it all and the booking of the test centre is taking time to arrange...
AFAIK the car's not been collected yet - presumably the logistics of it all and the booking of the test centre is taking time to arrange...
Originally Posted by dmc1980
Anymore news on this? Interested to hear the outcome, heading to Glasgow in a while and dont fancy getting lots of hassle!
03 May 2005 | 09:02 PM
#108
Scooby Regular
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Further info for you on someone whose already beaten them once as per Striders post- http://forums.sidc.co.uk/messageview...51&STARTPAGE=1 - given she's in the Highlands I would put money it's the same copper.
Last edited by stu_5; 03 May 2005 at 09:20 PM.
07 May 2005 | 10:02 PM
#109
Scooby Regular
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
From: St Helens, Merseyside
Originally Posted by stu_5
Further info for you on someone whose already beaten them once as per Striders post- http://forums.sidc.co.uk/messageview...51&STARTPAGE=1 - given she's in the Highlands I would put money it's the same copper.
10 May 2005 | 07:59 PM
#110
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: Kinross
Nothing yet...the car's still not been collected!!! My dad suspects Subaru are waiting for the police to respond to the request for their testing procedure....
I guess arranging the testing must take time too...
Iain
I guess arranging the testing must take time too...
Iain
Originally Posted by Strider
Any more news?????
10 May 2005 | 08:17 PM
#111
Prob due to the fact that the coppers want to dish out some more fines b4 they get blown out
BTW this is the reply i got from TSL (not too helpfull
)
Hi Steve
Thanks for the mail.
Interesting link!
Obviously the law has recently changed to accommodate this new Anti social
behaviour clause, which I am not familiar with in its extent. We have
always based our design ehtos on the db rating of exhausts, and the
firestorm is well under the current 100db nosie pollution.
Other than that I can say that we havn't been approached by the supplier to
discuss any legal changes we may have to make to the exhaust components we
supply.
Regards,
BTW this is the reply i got from TSL (not too helpfull
)Hi Steve
Thanks for the mail.
Interesting link!
Obviously the law has recently changed to accommodate this new Anti social
behaviour clause, which I am not familiar with in its extent. We have
always based our design ehtos on the db rating of exhausts, and the
firestorm is well under the current 100db nosie pollution.
Other than that I can say that we havn't been approached by the supplier to
discuss any legal changes we may have to make to the exhaust components we
supply.
Regards,
20 May 2005 | 04:46 PM
#117
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: Kinross
Right, more news hot-off-the-press...
My dad received a letter from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service this morning giving notice that the incident had been reported to them and that there existed sufficient 'evidence' to justify taking criminal proceedings against him. To quote:
"...you did fail to comply with a Construction and Use requirement namely the exhaust system was altered after the date of manufacture so as to increase the noise made by the escape of exhaust gases."
The letter went on to offer him another 28 days to pay the fixed penalty of £30, or face a maximum penalty of £2500.
Needless to say he faxed it straight to Subaru who phoned him back this afternoon. They've said that their lawyers are working on it, and will be in contact with him directly or via his solicitor.
As for the testing on his car, it should happen next week. They're just finalizing arrangements with the replacement car etc.
I probably shouldn't say too much, but Subaru have said not to worry about any costs incurred during this. Not even the £20 it'll cost to transfer the car insurance temporarily to the loaned vehicle!!!
Will keep you posted...
Iain
My dad received a letter from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service this morning giving notice that the incident had been reported to them and that there existed sufficient 'evidence' to justify taking criminal proceedings against him. To quote:
"...you did fail to comply with a Construction and Use requirement namely the exhaust system was altered after the date of manufacture so as to increase the noise made by the escape of exhaust gases."
The letter went on to offer him another 28 days to pay the fixed penalty of £30, or face a maximum penalty of £2500.
Needless to say he faxed it straight to Subaru who phoned him back this afternoon. They've said that their lawyers are working on it, and will be in contact with him directly or via his solicitor.
As for the testing on his car, it should happen next week. They're just finalizing arrangements with the replacement car etc.
I probably shouldn't say too much, but Subaru have said not to worry about any costs incurred during this. Not even the £20 it'll cost to transfer the car insurance temporarily to the loaned vehicle!!!
Will keep you posted...
Iain
Originally Posted by Blue Dragoon
Still waiting??? Better than a good thriller!
20 May 2005 | 06:30 PM
#120
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (26)
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,423
Likes: 0
From: Stuck in the 70s, man.....
Good luck Iain, unfortunately nothing surprises me re our "friends " in blue.
When I was assaulted in January in my STI because I upset some to**er by overtaking him (on a 60 mph road) did the police come & see me in hospital?
NO.
Did they fingerprint my car?NO
Now they have given up on finding him despite my injuries warranting a GBH or malicious wounding charge.
But drive a Subaru with a non standard exhaust , ooh, they'll pull out all the stops.
Police...Fu**ing wa**ers.(Sorry about the rant)
Cheers,John
When I was assaulted in January in my STI because I upset some to**er by overtaking him (on a 60 mph road) did the police come & see me in hospital?
NO.
Did they fingerprint my car?NO
Now they have given up on finding him despite my injuries warranting a GBH or malicious wounding charge.
But drive a Subaru with a non standard exhaust , ooh, they'll pull out all the stops.
Police...Fu**ing wa**ers.(Sorry about the rant
)Cheers,John