It will make it roll more in corners which will make it more likely to understeer as you are putting more weight on the outside wheel. The car will not handle the way it should which IMO is dangerous and if you were to have an accident I'm sure your insurance company would have a field day with it.

I have driven plenty of cars that never came with ARB setups and yeah they drive fine but there is a big difference between that and removing one from a car that was designed to have it let alone a vrs that can move at least mildly quickly.

It will make it roll more in corners which will make it more likely to understeer as you are putting more weight on the outside wheel.

more weight on the wheel = more tractive effort..... Less likely to slip..

Yes more traction up to the point where it overcomes the tyres ability and you continue in a straight line.

There is a reason why pretty much every car now in production comes with a setup to try to level the loads across the axel while cornering

In order to avoid use of ARB you a setup something like this:

Yes more traction up to the point where it overcomes the tyres ability and you continue in a straight line.

There is a reason why pretty much every car now in production comes with a setup to try to level the loads across the axel while cornering

Jaguar S-Type R sub-frame - could have come off a VAG

I'm building another 7 at the moment ^^ not for me though, I'm too delicate to drive them now..

That setup is a Ferrari/Noble P3/P4

Sorry O/T, but I feel the need to post pornography

If the ARB is removed, then IMO you'd fail on 2.4Gg since it's a standard component. http://www.motuk.co.uk/manual_240.htm and it's a big scroll down.

Hi Guys, just to clarify what we did with this particular car :

Pro Sport Coil Overs were fitted for Lee, he already had the coil overs. Sadly when we came to fasten the drop links on there were no shortened ones present in the box. The standard drop link was way to long so we had 4 options, A/ Lee was going to be stuck with out a car for a couple of days while we get some drop links in, B/ we refitted the original front legs and springs etc C/ we cut the oem links, shortened them and then weld them up (not ideal) D/ we completely remove the front roll bar and links. We chose to do the latter as the roll bar was heavily corroded and worn in the pivot points so it was already rattling around and not doing much. Lee was present throughout and we all agree'd that this was the best route to get Lee on the road asap. We advised Lee this isn't an ideal scenario, however as long as he drove the car sensibly then it wouldn't present a problem short term. The idea being the roll bar is replaced along with the shortened links as soon as Lee could. We have priced this task for him so I'm sure it'll be on his list of things to do, as it stands there is no roll bar or links.

This is definately not a long term fix, this is a short term solution to help Lee out and get him back on the road! I did in all fairness think that the ARB would of been refitted with a new unit by now how ever I suppose Lee's circumstances will decide when that happens.

And we certainly wouldn't entertain compromising a customers safety or risk damaging their vehicle by sending it out with a pair of drop links flapping in the wind, that is just insane to even think a reputable garage would do that. The lack of roll bar and links short term will not have any adverse effect on Lee sensibly driving his vehicle from A to B. Many vehicles out there do not even have a Front ARB, clearly for a VRS Octavia to handle right it is needed no doubt in that, it isn't however going to cause any short term issues with Lee commuting to and from work.

So you've discarded a perfectly good roll bar for no good reason? You say is was heavily corroded and loose in the pivot points. Skoda do two different sized roll bar bushes for exactly this problem (it happens all the time). You smash the collars off the bar, clean the bar, and fit the 17mm bushes (on the now 19mm diameter bar). Problem solved. Bar saved.

And whether or not it is likely to cause any short term issues with Lee's commute is irrelevant. The car has been altered dramatically, is now officially a dangerous vehicle (would not pass an on the spot inspection, or mot), and his insurance is completely invalidated. Having a valid MOT does not get one out of the woods when it comes to vehicle safety.

Alas, it would seem all of these issues have unfortunately come from a lack of research. In part, by Lee on his choice of coilovers, and in part your own. I'm 100% certain you have discarded a bar which would have passed perfectly after the above mod (which I will reiterate as known to Skoda, and an official fix). I've never seen one that had particularly bad pitting under the collars. The collars do become loose rather easily. The bar itself is usually well within specified diameter once the collars are removed.

IMO you should have removed the coilovers and refitted the standard setup and I'm positive your PI policy would agree. If something was to happen you would be liable since it was you who carried out the work.

will be interested to see their response...i wont add as the last 2 posters seem to have done a very good job at summing it up!

Ok guys we can see this is getting out of hand, the ARB was of no use, we would not of scrapped a perfectly good roll bar. The pivot points were weakened and corroded way past what we would deem as being serviceable (and we would of failed on an MOT). I'm not talking about the typical wear you see, this bar had no paint left 3" either side of the ARB and was effectively more dangerous in the weakened state it was as the roll bar was floating side to side. This was obvious and Lee was already aware the roll bar was worn out.

We can argue about this all day, as far as we are concerned we carried out a temporary repair at Lee's request, with his full knowledge. Refitting the original units was the first suggestion and Lee didn't want to go that way. This was recorded on Lee's paper work which we have here. There is certainly not going to be any impact on Lee's insurance, the fact the car now has a coil over suspension kit is likely to more of a concern from your typical insurance inspector as we deal with them on a daily basis.

Lee is actually now here in our Reception waiting while we replace his Cam Belt etc and I have to say he seems rather intimidated by some of the guys on here, he came on asking a question about whether it would fail an MOT, not to start some sort of flaming session. The fact the ARB, its mounts or attachments are no longer fitted and completely removed means it may not fail an MOT as this is deemed a permanent modification. I have 3 MOT testers here for reference and the MOT guidelines as we are after all an MOT test station. It is a grey area MOT wise and we have had several conversations with VOSA as a number of the show cars we see have them removed due to how low they sit (mk4 Golfs, Polo 9ns etc), if the ARB link was missing and the rest present then it will 100% fail. I think we can fail it if deemed to be necessary, how ever this discretion falls down the NT.

This situation came about and our Customer had the final decision on what he would like to do with his vehicle. We didn't just scap his ARB and then say by the way that was no good you need a new one, he was given numerous options and made his own decision.

its not a flaming session, if Lee didn't want a varied response and is intimidated, he perhaps should not have asked the question on here in the first place....a forum is afterall just that, a place for opinion and discussion!

There is a lot of doubt, on here as to whether the prosport coilovers are correct for the vrs, imo they are not, proof is in the pudding so to speak when it comes to fitting. Just because he doesn't like the response, doesn't mean we aren't entitled to comment...

As to whether you should send a customer out without an arb when one should be fitted, i can't comment as to the regs, as you clearly know them better than us having an mot tester onsite, however, having worked for an insurer for a number of years, a modfication is seen as 'any change to a vehicle whether for performance or otherwise', and as thats whats happened here, by removing a suspension element, that it deemed necessary by skoda, then i suspect Lee's insurance would very much have an issue with this should he have an accident.

Fair play to you for coming on here an explaining your actions though, a lot wouldn't bother!

A number of show cars have them removed due to how low they sit...

So just because they're somebody's show piece means they're legal and safe then, does it?

As for the coilover/insurance issue... I would hope that anybody fitting coilovers will have already notified their insurance company of such a modification. Of course there will be insurance issues there. But what would the insurer say about a removed anti-roll bar, deemed as a safety item, which hasn't been replaced, I wonder?

The only reason a missing ARB would be a grey area is by deception in the way of removing the evidence.

I'm not claiming that removal is going to have a massive impact with sensible use, especially running coilovers, but the fact remains that the insurance is invalidated, and the car shouldn't be on the road without sorting that issue out first. NOT that this is your responsibility however. But I do agree with Frisco. It probably should have been returned to standard, and the customer warned of his roll bar issues.

they would more than likely get an engineer to assess and deem the car as modified in an unacceptable fasion...in an effort to avoid paying out in a claim

It doesn't matter what the customer agrees with you carried out the work so it was you left the car in a potentially unroadworthy state. If it came up in court all any customer would say is that they went by the advise of a professional which is you. You saying that you told him and he agreed wouldn't stand up, he isn't a professional.

There was no flaming on here, he was unaware that removing the ARB could be unsafe and it was pointed out to him.

Removing the ARB does not make this vehicle unsafe. It does have an effect on the handling characteristics, it does not have any effect on the vehicles safety that is complete nonsense. If Lee was driving the vehicle beyond its limits given the various conditions yes he would notice the ARB is not there, he would not crash, he would not loose control he would simply experience excessive body roll. For this to result in an accident he would need to drive way beyond the limits he should be adhering to on a public highway.

Many vehicles do not even have a front ARB fitted from standard are they unsafe? No, they just dont handle very well.

I don't agree with running a car with out the ARB and I would strongly advise against it, this is a short term situation for our customer we have in no way suggested this is a permanent fix. I dont agree with some of the cars rolling around with AIR RIDE on neither as I feel these kits have an adverse effect on the vehicles handling aswell, still folk do and that is their choice.

We could go on and on, say for example oversized rear ARB's are they dangerous? They promote lift off oversteer which the manufacturers essential dial out of the vehicles chassis by fitting thinner rear ARB's for SAFETY reasons, yet many of you guys go against this and fit over sized units, so should that fail the MOT? Is it dangerous? We could argue this all day.

Many vehicles do not even have a front ARB fitted from standard are they unsafe? No, they just dont handle very well.

They are designed this way, the octavia is not

We could go on and on, say for example oversized rear ARB's are they dangerous? They promote lift off oversteer which the manufacturers essential dial out of the vehicles chassis by fitting thinner rear ARB's for SAFETY reasons, yet many of you guys go against this and fit over sized units, so should that fail the MOT? Is it dangerous? We could argue this all day.

we all generally advise to uprate the front arb to suit, for this reason, infact, a reason topic hotly debated this issue, as imo, its dangerous to uprate the rear and not do the front too.

We could go on and on, say for example oversized rear ARB's are they dangerous? They promote lift off oversteer which the manufacturers essential dial out of the vehicles chassis by fitting thinner rear ARB's for SAFETY reasons, yet many of you guys go against this and fit over sized units, so should that fail the MOT? Is it dangerous? We could argue this all day.

Yes they are potentially very dangerous. Which is why just about everybody who has fitted one uprates the front arb to suit. Either R32 spec front arb, or occasionally Eibach 23mm front arb. Certainly the vast majority of advice you see on here recommends that exact same thing.

At the end of the day, we are talking about a fairly souped up hatch here. Not just something your grandad might go and do his shopping in once a week, and consideration should be made based on this when doing something such as arb removal. Especially on a car that has already been performance modified before you've even begun to do work on the suspension.

None of this changes the fact that the car is still effectively uninsured.

Well I've learnt a few things from this discussion. Certainly a lot of good and frank discussion.

All I'll say is this:

If Lee sold his car tomorrow, and the new buyer didn't know, is it still acceptable?

I know that may seem an extreme possibility, but actually it's not. I know of a few cars sold mid project due to sudden unforeseen circumstances. The mitigating circumstances here are well laid out, there is agreement it would fail an MOT with various conditions present.

So long as his insurance co know the state of the vehicle, it's covered, or not depending on how they react. IF they don't know it's changed, then it's potentially not covered, but that is a different conversation. No member should feel intimidated, granted this is a safety/legality topic so there is a stronger sense of right and wrong.

Anyway, a good frank discussion and thanks to the company doing the work to try and clarify. I had a rear beam in a mk1 rs way way out, too many kerbs clipped. I was offered three choices, leave, replace 2nd hand, replace new. Leaving it would of cost me tyres and handling, possibly unsafe in right hand corners. I opted on that day to leave, then got them to source a second hand one.

As to whats deemed to be safe and not, thats highly debatable. I mean heck I part owned a 325 sold to us as mot fail due to leaking fuel tank, it passed when I took it to test, never did find the leak, only occurred over 3/4.

ps/

I've been asked to remove this thread by midland-vw, it's under review awaiting feedback.

also, you mention a 'short term fix' and as temporary, and yet in lee's other post he stated the coilovers were fitted at christmas, so not really that short term...near 2 months without an arb? seems that he is not following you advice either..

I agree and that is exactly what we recommend, yet I find this advice falls on deaf ears more often than not. We get lots of proposals from customers for mods we feel are dangerous (and often are very dangerous) but people still go ahead and do it when we say no.