Is running shockless legal?

[1972]

Ok i know in some countries it is illegal to run without shocks is this the same in SA?

[eben]

Cast your eyes on point 69e:

69.
Shock absorbers
All vehicles
An “excessive fluid leak” in this context means that hydraulic fluid, rather than vapour, is escaping. This is a valid reason to reject the vehicle, because it affects the function of the shock absorber.
Reject if -
a) a shock absorber is loose;
b) an anchorage or a linkage is fractured or is excessively worn;
c) an excessive fluid or air leak is present;
d) a shock absorber is damaged to the extent that the unit is not functioning correctly;
e) where it can be seen that the vehicle is designed for the fitment of shock absorbers and these are missing, or
f) in the case of motorcycles/tricycles/quadrucycles, the front mudguard or frame touches the tyre, when the handlebar is pressed down, or the handlebar “hits back solid” when it is allowed to rebound.

http://www.transport.gov.za/siteimgs/schedule5.pdf

[Bad Ass Bob]

i think that SHOCKED him !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[1972]

e) where it can be seen that the vehicle is designed for the fitment of shock absorbers and these are missing

Ok my beam is going to be overhauled and it will not be visible that a shock was ever needed there?

[eben]

I reckon if you are going to go to them on the pretext that you redesigned the car or part of the car, they might even ask you for your SABS certification.

[1972]

SABS certification.

?????

[bugspray]

The guys at the test station will know the car is supposed to have shocks... they will see the rear ones and ask about the front, then you gonna fail no doubt. even if theres no sign of shock towers, they gona be suspicious, and will ask you, hey wheres the shocks, then you gonna say oh naah i redesigned the suspension so i dont need shocks. then they gonna go. aaah ek sien... so wheres the sab mark of approval for the redesign? what you gona say mate??? a car is deemed unroadworthy if it doesnt meet standards set by the South African Beaura of Standards. sabs. and your new beam is waaaaay out. maybe when you go to the test station, swop owt with a std beam for the day.....

[Ron&Gill]

I wouldn't run without shocks, pal... You'll end up on your roof in no time. Even on a beach buggy, which is so light in front you can't even do the old push-down and re-bound test to check your shocks, you'd be very surprised to know what a difference worn shocks vs new shocks makes with respect to ride quality, let alone no shocks.

[Barry]

Is running shockless legal? doesn't matter - it's just plain silly

I wouldn't run without shocks, pal... ....what a difference worn shocks vs new shocks makes with respect to ride quality, let alone no shocks.

Ride quality, braking, handling, etc etc. A far bigger safety issue than worn tyres in my opinion.
They are there to keep your tyres in contact with the road, and I think you'll find that that is fairly important....

A friend had the shock mounts on his just-completed-the-night-before car shear off (poor design, not gusseted) on a trip up to JHB. The last 500 km was ...uummmm...interesting to say the least. He nearly lost it a number of times.

What's the reason for not wanting shocks? If it is appearance (can't think what else??? but then if you're looking for a clean looking front ditch the beam and make up some double a-arms) then please reconsider, or investigate other options like fricton shocks, or a lever action setup with the shocks mounted inboard - probably pretty difficult to figure out on a beam.
Whatever you come up with make sure it is engineered properly, if you plan on sharing the road with others....

Barry

[jmvv]

The function of the shock absorber is to control the rebound of the wheel caused be road irregularities.

With standard suspension and no shock absorbers, the wheel will spend more time in the air than on the road. No tyre contact with the road means no control, no braking and no steering not to mention the screwed up wear patern on the tyres.

If you want to make the suspension solid (stupid, but some people do it, think - Hardtail Harleys), the only flex would be from the tyres and unless you run under inflated high flotation type tyres, the ride would be unbearable at anything above walking pace.

Might be fun to watch a well endowed seatcover in a car like that though

[fig]

Listen to Barry.

Yes, shocks are a legal requirement and, no, the authorities weren't just being difficult when they penned that one.

Running a vehicle without shocks is just plain stupid and irresponsible. You will not be able to control braking and handling in an emergency, or even under normal road conditions, and you will wreck your tyres very quickly. You will put your life at risk, as well as the lives of other road users.

Feel free to go out and kill yourself any way you like, but don't do it where you might harm me or my loved ones or anyone else innocently going about their business.

[1972]

Thanks For the help, have had the shock towers templates sent to me already so now will have to find someone with a laser cutter, to cut them out....

[davetapson]

Does the person who recommended the shockless setup have a website? Be interesting to see the how's and why's of a shockless setup. Like everyone else, I think it's a daft idea, but then I haven't seen the alternative yet...