Need some info on CM inspection

[Shark Bait]

Cool, Thanks a ton. RedChili (my papa) is of the opinion that even he wouldn't pass me in Tech Inspec. If for any reason he is right I don't want to chance it, but that seemed a little far fetched.

Well, the guidelines say "dangerous" cracks. Dad's pretty experienced. If he thinks is marginal, maybe you should have it replaced?

 

[Red_Chili]

Justin, The requirement for tech inspection is the truck has to be street legal. You should be fine. Now, if your muffler bearings haven't been replaced in a while, you might be in trouble.

Justin and I are discussing the 'street legal' part. So would the standard be, if you would get a ticket you won't pass inspection?

I would assume so, but that is an assumption. I suggested Justin ask a cop, saying he is tight on $$$ but wants to do the right thing, is it ticketable. That kind of question. The crack does go all the way across the portion of the windshield that the wipers wipe.

Am I steering him right?

I'd feel awkward passing my son with a big crack, then what would I say to someone else... I'd have to have someone else pass him. Favoritism, that kind of perception thing.

I've been known to be a bit, um... tight, is that the word?
What say ye?

 

[Shark Bait]

See my second post above. Sounds like it should be replaced.

 

[Three Wheel Ben]

Let me lay some trickery on you. Colorado I'm not entirely sure what the law says. Utah, (where I grew up) the vehicle had to pass an annual safety inspection, any crack in the drivers view 8 1/2 X 11 directly in front of the drivers face - fail. Anywhere else - fine. Which street legal do we need to be? Colo or Utah since that is where the event is held Utah also has/had some very strict lift laws when I lived there.

As safety chair, I would say as long as the crack is not in you direct vision, like pass side or below windshield wipers it's probably ok. If it's in front of you or not done cracking and heading towards in front of you I'd probably get it fixed.

And Justin, if it is ok by these standards and someone at tech gives you grief, come find me.

ben

And if your dad thinks it should be replaced - then you probably better.

Justin and I are discussing the 'street legal' part. So would the standard be, if you would get a ticket you won't pass inspection?

I would assume so, but that is an assumption. I suggested Justin ask a cop, saying he is tight on $$$ but wants to do the right thing, is it ticketable. That kind of question. The crack does go all the way across the portion of the windshield that the wipers wipe.

Am I steering him right?

I'd feel awkward passing my son with a big crack, then what would I say to someone else... I'd have to have someone else pass him. Favoritism, that kind of perception thing.

I've been known to be a bit, um... tight, is that the word?
What say ye?

 

[Hulk]

I noticed on that list it said no open exhaust, does that mean that a muffler is required? Mine fell off last weekend, so I just have a pipe coming straight out of my cat right now. It is not excessively loud and it does not smoke.

It's probably pretty loud if you're in the vehicle immediately behind you. 'Twould be best to put a muffler on there.

 

[ScaldedDog]

Justin, The requirement for tech inspection is the truck has to be street legal.

If we're picking nits about street legal, we're all screwed:

42-4-233. Alteration of suspension system.
Statute text
(1) No person shall operate a motor vehicle of a type required to be registered under the laws of this state upon a public highway with either the rear or front suspension system altered or changed from the manufacturer's original design except in accordance with specifications permitting such alteration established by the department. Nothing contained in this section shall prevent the installation of manufactured heavy duty equipment to include shock absorbers and overload springs, nor shall anything contained in this section prevent a person from operating a motor vehicle on a public highway with normal wear of the suspension system if normal wear shall not affect the control of the vehicle.

(2) This section shall not apply to motor vehicles designed or modified primarily for off-highway racing purposes, and such motor vehicles may be lawfully towed on the highways of this state.

(3) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class 2 misdemeanor traffic offense.

History
Source: L. 94: Entire title amended with relocations, p. 2267, § 1, effective January 1, 1995.

Annotations
Editor's note: This section was formerly numbered as 42-4-232 and the former section 42-4-233 was relocated to section 42-4-234.

Annotations
Cross references: For the penalty for class 2 misdemeanor traffic offenses, see § 42-4-1701 (3)(a)(II).

Annotations
ANNOTATION

Annotations
Annotator's note. Since § 42-4-233 is similar to § 42-4-232 as it existed prior to the 1994 amending of title 42 as enacted by SB 94-1 a relevant case construing that provision has been included in the annotations to this section.

Section unconstitutional. This section's flat prohibition against any motor vehicle suspension system alteration, except the installation of heavy duty shock absorbers or springs, is unconstitutionally overbroad. People v. Von Tersch, 180 Colo. 295, 505 P.2d 5 (1973) (decided prior to 1975 amendment).

As I understand it, the "except in accordance..." section was added in 1975 to try to make it constitutional again, and there are no appellate cases on record since then. As far as I know, "the department" has never established the specifications mentioned above. I have been pulled over for this, though not ticketed.

So, all y'all with them fancy modified suspensions need to stay home. Those of us with stockers can still attend.

Mark

 

[Shark Bait]

If we're picking nits about street legal, we're all screwed:


Section unconstitutional. This section's flat prohibition against any motor vehicle suspension system alteration, except the installation of heavy duty shock absorbers or springs, is unconstitutionally overbroad. People v. Von Tersch, 180 Colo. 295, 505 P.2d 5 (1973) (decided prior to 1975 amendment).[/I]

As I understand it, the "except in accordance..." section was added in 1975 to try to make it constitutional again, and there are no appellate cases on record since then. As far as I know, "the department" has never established the specifications mentioned above. I have been pulled over for this, though not ticketed.

So, all y'all with them fancy modified suspensions need to stay home. Those of us with stockers can still attend.

Mark

The vehicle must be legally registered and insured. If it's not, technically it's not allowed.

Non-DOT approved bead locks are "illegal". Some of the Proffitt's guys were ticketed last year for running bead locks. What happens during EJS? I don't know.

 

[Red_Chili]

...
Section unconstitutional. This section's flat prohibition against any motor vehicle suspension system alteration, except the installation of heavy duty shock absorbers or springs, is unconstitutionally overbroad. People v. Von Tersch, 180 Colo. 295, 505 P.2d 5 (1973) (decided prior to 1975 amendment).

As I understand it, the "except in accordance..." section was added in 1975 to try to make it constitutional again, and there are no appellate cases on record since then. As far as I know, "the department" has never established the specifications mentioned above. I have been pulled over for this, though not ticketed.

So, all y'all with them fancy modified suspensions need to stay home. Those of us with stockers can still attend.

Mark

Nope. Unenforceable. No one has ever been ticketed on it. The department never established the specifications.
I'm sure we could sell raffle tickets for your legal defense if you wanna go first and establish case law though!

FWIW, Mark, you can almost bet on being ticketed for the tires extending way beyond the body. Like beadlocks though, I will shrug. Your poker hand.

My concern is safety issues like broken glass. I passed someone last time with NO windshield though (rolled a couple days before). He had goggles. Technically legal! Beadlocks? I'm willing to be inconsistent and look the other way, there is a limit to the black and white interpretation and IMHO the non-DOT beadlock thing is beyond that limit for lots of reasons. YMMV.

I'd be concerned about leaks too, due to environmental impact. If someone dripped while being inspected I'd be inclined to decline him!

 

[ScaldedDog]

Actually, I was kidding, though to make a point. The "registered and insured" standard is a much easier one to interpret than "street legal".

Mark

 

[Red_Chili]

Yeah, well, you just watch it there fella. I'm gonna crawl under your (awesome ) truck and look for drips.










Mostly because I just fixed mine...

 

[90 Weight]

How strict are you guys gonna be on tire tread? I have a pair of 35 MTR's on right now...but they are pretty damn warn....I am strapped for cash and hoping that I wont have to buy a new set this soon!

Also...for the street legal aspect...If I have rear turn signals, but no front ones hooked up, is that going to be a problem...? Also how about the reverse light? I wont be participating in any night runs.......

Thanks for any info.

PS I got my ebrake ordered and put in all quick like just for you guys

 

[nakman]

Arm signals are perfectly legal.. and I'm sure the "slicks" will do great on the slickrock. You got a spare, right?

 

[ScaldedDog]

Yeah, well, you just watch it there fella. I'm gonna crawl under your (awesome ) truck and look for drips.










Mostly because I just fixed mine...

LOL! I think I'm drip free...

BTW, while we're on the subject, what's the Wednesday inspection schedule? I was hoping to get inspected around 1PM, then get in a warm-up run. Doable? Is there much of an inspection line expected?

Mark

 

[90 Weight]

Arm signals are perfectly legal.. and I'm sure the "slicks" will do great on the slickrock. You got a spare, right?

yea I have a spare

 

[Hulk]

what's the Wednesday inspection schedule? I was hoping to get inspected around 1PM, then get in a warm-up run. Doable? Is there much of an inspection line expected?

Mark

That will work fine.

 

[Uncle Ben]

Arm signals are perfectly legal.. and I'm sure the "slicks" will do great on the slickrock. You got a spare, right?

Traction is not the problem! I would worry about punctures and please don't take this personal but when I read that your tires are worn and no front signals it sends up caution flags in my mind as to overall maintenance. Marginally maintained vehicles WILL break in Moab!

 

[Three Wheel Ben]

X2, You should be fine. Again make sure you have a spare and everything else will pass inspection.

Traction is not the problem! I would worry about punctures and please don't take this personal but when I read that your tires are worn and no front signals it sends up caution flags in my mind as to overall maintenance. Badly maintained vehicles WILL break in Moab!

 

[90 Weight]

Traction is not the problem! I would worry about punctures and please don't take this personal but when I read that your tires are worn and no front signals it sends up caution flags in my mind as to overall maintenance. Marginally maintained vehicles WILL break in Moab!

Haha yea. Maybe I just need to clarify... I am just finishing a full off body reso mod, everything has either been replaced or rebuilt...so there are no issues with maintenance..the whole thing only has about 40 miles on it! Its just that I had to dissasemble things for my painter and wont have time to get the turn signals set back up before I leave...In regards to the tires- they are just what I have been using throughout the build to get it around...and I just havent had the time to replace them...also since I have only put like 40 miles on it...tires havent been my main priority form preparing for CM.