Steering lock ADR

[boxhead]

Dont know why I did not twig to this earlier.
But the new 150 series Prado's (most likely the same as a lot of newer cars) has a keyless system, in that you have a key fob that needs to be close to the car and, depress the clutch and press a button on the dash to start the car.
I tested this morning, it does have a steering lock, I would suggest it is electric but has no direct connection to an ignition switch.
So maybe look at one of these type systems or colomns to use?

I am sure being a Toyota product it would be pretty well thought out as far as failsafes going.

[sideshow]

just use an rpm activated switch or tachometric relay
or run it off fuel pump power
connect one of these triggers to a relay which then triggers a solenoid
to unlock the steering wheel
but i recon there has to be a secondary safety
what if u stall car or something and suddenly u loose steering
id pressume the prado shold have something incase u loose power
u dont want steering lock to come on
so might have some mechanical system as backup

[boxhead]

If I get a chance I will sneak down to local Toyota dealer and see if I can get a look at diagrams.

[Zedn]

Sideshow that is what i have been saying. Its easy to do, but it is scary if it fails. I cant help but think of when i had central locking go funny and the doors would lock and unlock randomly. This particular fault was in the switch that is triggered by locking a door which wouldnt exist in this ciruit, but just the thought it scary enough.

Boxhead, im not sure i trust Toyota after the prius accel problem.

[jcraigau]

Yea, those Prius' get up to nearly 40kph!!!

[Jethrow]

This is a tricky one I think. In some ways, a self arming immobiliser meets most of the requirements. Sure it does not lock the steering, transmission or gear shift, but it does have to be put out of action before the car can be started. And the self arming bit says that when key is removed (or engine stop), then the device has been set to act.

Going back to main ADR requirement which says "This Regulation applies to protective devices designed to prevent the unauthorized use of power driven vehicles", could that be argued as an alternative means of compliance?

One thing the steering lock does do is make it hard for someone to push away your vehicle, but note that you are allowed to lock the gear shift in neutral as part of the compliancing, so perhaps the requirement for anti push away is not the main driver of this ADR?

Thoughts?

[Zedn]

I think its pretty clear that it requires both an imobiliser and a lock.

[sideshow]

Immobiliser is easy
Clutch switch thru starter relay
U need clutch pressed for motor to crank
Steering lock is harder if I remember I'll ring my
Service adviser friend at Toyota see bow they do it

[boxhead]

The 150 Prado does require foot depressed on clutch to start, but alot of cars do now.

I would ask the local Toyota Sealer, but I honestly dont trust any of the techs there to understand my question, or there ability to check.

[Jethrow]

ADR25 does not actually call for an immobiliser. It calls for an anti-theft lock. I was just wondering if an immobiliser might be construed as an alternative to the anti-theft lock. Especially given that now (in WA anyhow) immobilisers are required on all cars as an anti-theft device. Perhaps because the other anti-theft device was not actually working!

[Zedn]

5.1. The protective device shall be so designed that it is necessary to put it out of action in order to enable:

5.1.1. the engine to be started by means of the normal control; and

5.1.2. the vehicle to be steered, driven or moved forward under its own power.

5.2. The requirements of paragraph 5.1. shall be met by the single application of one key.

5.3. Except in the case provided for in paragraph 6.1.5. a system operated with a key inserted in a lock shall not permit removal of the key before the protective device referred to in paragraph 5.1. has come into action or has been set to act.

Most common practice for manufacturers to comply is an immobiliser for 5.1.1 and a steering lock for 5.1.2 both controlled by the one key.

[Jethrow]

OK, this is not meant to be a pissing match, but an immobiliser is not the compliance means for 5.1.1. In fact, you are reading the rules out of context. That section actually means that you must not be able to start the car, AND must not be able to steer or move the car forwards, until the protective device, whatever it is, has been put out of action.

So, for most cars, once the steering lock (protective device) is put out of action via turning the key to that first click, then, and only then, are you able to start the car, AND then move it or steer it.

The one protective device has to prevent both 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 from occurring.

And again, typically, it is a steering lock that does that.

The immobiliser is a separate thing. And, again, largely, it is something that might also meet the intent of this regulation. Tho I agree it does not specifically meet requirements because it does not act in the manner called out in the reg. Probably because this is technology that came about after the reg was written.

Anyway, this is a tricky issue for me because the kit I am building does not have a steering lock. So I am a bit stumped on this too.

[400TT]

ADR 25 is for Steering Lock/Transmission Lock/Shifter Lock

ADR 82 is for Immobilsor.

Both are required.

ADR 25 stipulates you can have a steering lock, transmission lock, shifter lock etc. It details the exact requirements.

Lots of production vehicles have an electronic steering lock, but the steering lock design meets ADR 25 and has numerous safety measures incorporated. One of the significant ones is that the steering lock mechanism needs to have a mechanical lock/latch system when in the disengaged state. This protects against steering lock accidentilly engaging if you suffer from a power failure etc while driving.

[Zedn]

Originally Posted by 400TT

ADR 25 is for Steering Lock/Transmission Lock/Shifter Lock

ADR 82 is for Immobilsor.

Both are required.

ADR 25 stipulates you can have a steering lock, transmission lock, shifter lock etc. It details the exact requirements.

Lots of production vehicles have an electronic steering lock, but the steering lock design meets ADR 25 and has numerous safety measures incorporated. One of the significant ones is that the steering lock mechanism needs to have a mechanical lock/latch system when in the disengaged state. This protects against steering lock accidentilly engaging if you suffer from a power failure etc while driving.

Thanks for clearing that up Craig.

[gjkrv8]

BTW: One of my mates has his Electronic Steering Lock/Immobiliser fail yesterday and his BMW 3 series had to be put on skates and man-handled out of an undercover carpark to then get it towed. Only a 3yr old car. bugger.

I havent heard of any mechanical ones failing.

Rgds Gregg

[ando1]

Hi guys, new to the forum but thought I'd add my two cents...

I used to own a manual 1976 Saab 99...its ignition was in the centre console, underneath the handbrake lever, and you couldn't remove the key unless the gearstick was in reverse...I'm pretty sure there was no steering lock. Also, there was a latch on the gearstick below the gear knob that you had to pull upwards in order to engage/disengage reverse - I assume that was connected to a simple gate mechanism.

That car pre-dated ADR 25, but I think that those two features combined would still make the car compliant with the requirements today (if an immobiliser was added of course).

It shouldn't be too difficult to adapt that same type of mechanism to a dash mounted ignition...wire the ignition to one solenoid that would lock the reverse gate, and have another solenoid (or other mechanism) that would prevent the key being turned off past ACC unless the gearstick is in reverse. Since neither of those solenoids is connected to anything related to forward motion, a failure also wouldn't cause any safety risk whilst driving.

Wouldn't that setup meet the ADR requirements and eliminate the need for a steering lock? I'm a newbie to this, so may be over simplifying...any thoughts?

[boxhead]

Very good thought Ando.
My 1971 Valiant is a colomn shift manual, and the ignition key (colomn mounted) can not be removed unless in reverse, and gearstick can not be moved until ignition key is off lock.
But I suspect the Valiant would be a mechanical linkage from ignition barel to colomn shift, I would think the SAAB may be mechanical aswell (reason why key is in centre console close to gearstick), But I do not know for a fact.

[sideshow]

u are all forgetting one simple thing
99% of cobras are manual
so not sure how u lock it in neutral
anyway european cars are the biggest pains in the butt
when u crank the key and motor doesnt start to restart car u need to turn key all way to off then back to start dumb idea hehehehe
i guess thats y id never own a european car hassle to work on and expensive to fix heheheheheeh

when they say transmission lock and shifter lock im sure that relates to an auto trans
so does that mean if its manual u need a steering lock since u cant do the others
or can u have a switch on the clutch so u cant start car without pressing on the clutch

in my ve comm diags it has a clutch switch
also the start signal goes to ecu
ecu then turns on starter relay if immobiliser says ok and if clutch switch is depresed
then u get to the later 08 09 ve comms where they have a full variable resistor for clutch pedal which complicates things more hehehe

where have all the smart engineers gone
oh sorry they all retired last year hehee
has anyone gotten a straight answer from an engineer

id never trust an electronic steering lock if it was an aftermarket fitment
imagine if that bmw have had the lock stuff up while it was driving
surely they should have a backup incase u lost complete power which is very common these days never buy a battery from nrma they used to use good batts now they get em made in u know where for 5 bucks and have heard many complaints of the new ones failing too
they must use those same batteries in qantas planes these days to save money
since the ceo put on a big sob story saying he cant afford to give himself a 10 million dollar bonus this year one plane will come a croppa the way they r cutting costs and using not so qualified staff


one other thing is if anyone has driven a car with the keyless entry where is recognises the key in the proximity like boxhead mentioned regarding the late prado and i think also late lancers have it

this is purely for immobilisation isnt it
im still pretty sure u need to put key in ignition
or do these remotes have a start button on them which allows u to start the car without key in igntion or owner in the car
i havnt seen a factory car with this setup as yet
and even the latest comms u need to put key in ign and turn key for cranking
but once u crank for a second the ecu takes over and keeps cranking motor till it starts u dont have to keep holding key to crank

[sideshow]

if someone knows a car with no key in ignition start feature let me know
ill try get the workshop manual for it and see what setup it has

[hsv300]

BMW, Mercedes both have some models with no key ignition if this helps.