Hey guys, went for WOF check today at the same testing station i have last two times, and i was failed on ride height. last time it happened i made another tester check and he said its fine, and passed me. this time they measured from the front north/south cross member (90mm from ground) as opposed to the lowest suspension arm (110mm from ground) . now the law is this : A minimum of 100mm ground clearance, unladen and without driver, exists below any part of the vehicle structure, or any steering, braking or suspension component. note does not include exhaust pipes .or exterior body panels that do not contribute to the structural strength of the vehicle . now i know the .cross member does contribute to strength. but I'm annoyed they passed me twice before, then deny me now.

Park around the corner from where you get it checked, jack it up for an hour or two, carefully let it down and get it measured before the suspension settles down again.

that is not a bad idea!! the thing is, i was about to leave and the guy that had failed it last time and had the decision overturned, rushed out, measured it abd said, na no go. sure he was just getting his back lol. i will test your theory out timi, ill do it at home, drive up the road and back and see if she stays up ha. im all for safety, but its such a small amount . the car was lowered professionally. a workmate has said he raised his tyre pressure right up and cleared once.

Perhaps get it raised just a tad? I've never seen the neccessity of having a ride so low that you can't get a clenched fist under it. Do you have trouble getting over speed humps? :P

Maybe get it raised by 2cms? I know it's the opposite of the look you're going for, but it might make the difference between a fine and no fine, or the difference between going over a speed hump with speed and clearing it or not.

clear all speed humps, and it is not that low, see my ride thread. all parts of the car are 110mm off the ground, its just the crossmember that is closer (90mm). and raising a tad would involve replacing the soprings, i cannot afford this. also i never get any attention from the police, and i am mainly annoyed that the springs have been through multiple wof checks no issues. i have monitored the height since i got the car and it has not sagged at all, shocks are in great condition.

Borrow bigger wheels >_>

Hey guys, went for WOF check today at the same testing station i have last two times, and i was failed on ride height. last time it happened i made another tester check and he said its fine, and passed me. this time they measured from the front north/south cross member (90mm from ground) as opposed to the lowest suspension arm (110mm from ground) . now the law is this : A minimum of 100mm ground clearance, unladen and without driver, exists below any part of the vehicle structure, or any steering, braking or suspension component. note does not include exhaust pipes .or exterior body panels that do not contribute to the structural strength of the vehicle . now i know the .cross member does contribute to strength. but I'm annoyed they passed me twice before, then deny me now.

Ummm, this just in, this DOES contribute to the structural set up of this car, do you really think that Mits would have put that there because they had some scrap steel left over?????

This member has 2 uses, 1st to hold the front trans mount, secondly it adds in many ways to the strength of the front end of the car to help stabalise the k frame, impact protection from the front end etc etc. The second gen had a front member for the mounts and then 2 of these braces on them, the third gen used the brace to mount the trans as well as assist in front end strength

I DID say i knew it was a structural part of the vehicle that contributes to its overall integrity, never claimed it wasnt. my problem is the fact that they passed it before and now choose to be picky. love how you come in blazing mal, as always. anyway, took it to another testing atation (rechecks can be done at any testing station) and passed. good times.