Legislation, Associations etc. - Standalone/Custom systems?

[munkle]

Hi folks.

I've been working with cars for most of my life and that includes some that had been fitted with LPG. While I have a good grasp of the engineering, I'm not particularly well up on the legislation, which seems a bit confused by the existence of the LPGA.

I would like to be able to offer an LPG service that ties in with my other skills, which centre around performance engine builds and electronics.
Many cars I work with, particularly track cars don't have traditional engine management systems (ie. with OBD) or don't have management systems at all, if they're K-Jet or Carbed.

Now, I don't seem to be able to find any LPG systems that are standalone. They all seem to work as piggybacks for dual-fuel cars.
I don't want this and neither will my customers. We want LPG only cars. We want to make the most of the advantages of LPG from a performance perspective, however we still want to be able to insure our track day cars so we can drive them to and from the track.

If I can't find good standalone LPG injection kits, I'll have to assemble my own setup using an aftermarket ECU and LPG injector components etc. I'm a little puzzled by the legislation behind doing all of this. It seems terribly stuffy.

It looks like the way insurance is going, the only way you can use LPG on the road is if you use a complete LPG system manufacturers kit and have it installed by someone who trained solely with that kit?

Surely that's absolute madness? I can understand having to have the tanks and multivalves conform to BS/EU standards etc, but the front end? Is that how it is?
It seems like a front end kit with any modifications (such as a different ecu) can't be certified?

Have I got the wrong end of the stick?

[rossko]

Now, I don't seem to be able to find any LPG systems that are standalone.

Yup, that's the market out there for current cars.
If you are working with carbs, the LPG equivalent (mixer system) is still available.
Intermediate technologies like K-jet have never been easy to sort onto LPG

piggybacks ... I don't want this

Why not, what are the perceived disadvantages?

however we still want to be able to insure our track day cars

Talk to insurers and see what they really require, they do vary.

It looks like the way insurance is going, the only way you can use LPG on the road is if you use a complete LPG system manufacturers kit

Don't know where you get that. You would be required to use E-marked parts.

and have it installed by someone who trained

No, inspected.

I can understand having to have the tanks and multivalves conform to BS/EU standards etc, but the front end?

Parts of the front end are 25bar pressure vessels. E-marking assures conformance.

It seems like a front end kit with any modifications (such as a different ecu) can't be certified?

Don't know where you get that.

[munkle]

A mixer system isn't an option. It doesn't work with forced induction and nobody wants LPG mixers in their intake.

piggybacks ... I don't want this

Why not, what are the perceived disadvantages?

The 'perceived' disadvantages are that in order to piggyback, you need the piggy. That means if I'm building an engine for LPG I have to run a petrol management system and the piggyback for the LPG. That's very messy, expensive and cumbersome when you could just have one ecu that's configured for the role of LPG.

however we still want to be able to insure our track day cars

Talk to insurers and see what they really require, they do vary.

Well, that's probably my next step if there's no way around the certification issue. It's a bit of a task contacting all insurers then selling LPG services that only (maybe) one or two insurance companies will tolerate.

It looks like the way insurance is going, the only way you can use LPG on the road is if you use a complete LPG system manufacturers kit

Don't know where you get that. You would be required to use E-marked parts.

I read that insurers are slowly insisting the car is registered with LPGA before they will touch it. A lot of people seem to think that they will all end up that way in the near future.
Since the LPGA won't certify a car that is inspected by someone not trained in that brand of LPG kit (which seems a rediculous piece of red-tape), an LPG kit that uses a different ECU isn't going to be supported by that kit manufacturer.

and have it installed by someone who trained

No, inspected.

OK, inspected.

I can understand having to have the tanks and multivalves conform to BS/EU standards etc, but the front end?

Parts of the front end are 25bar pressure vessels. E-marking assures conformance.

Yes, that's fine, but you miss my point. E-marking on fuel carrying parts is fine, it's that I can't mix and match parts that's the problem.
Can I fit a kit, but use a different ECU and/or gas injectors to the kit and still certify it?

It seems like a front end kit with any modifications (such as a different ecu) can't be certified?

Don't know where you get that.

As above. I'm asking if that's true? You can't fit a kit that's made of parts not from that kit manufacturer can you?


You may think I'm being awkward, I'm really not. I'm a big fan of what LPG has to offer, particularly from a performance car point of view. We get through a lot of fuel and higher octane COULD be a big draw for us, despite the flame speed being slower.


It's more than that though....

Motorsport and the track car industry is worth £6 billion a year to the UK alone and I'm getting the impression the LPGA don't want anyone with LPG to be a part of it unless they have a modern dual-fuel car. It seems a massive shame. Am I getting this wrong, despite all my reading on the matter, or do you not reckon the LPGA should perhaps discuss this topic?

[munkle]

I'm probably slightly whittling about the UKLPG (sorry if I've been calling it by LPGA) - It's the insurance companies I'm worried about.

They're listening to UKLPG though and they're missing a big bunch of people (and a big portion of the car industry) out in what seems to be a (kind of) understandable but possibly over zealous attempt to make the industry look safer.

Is it even possible to talk to insurance companies about non-certified cars? Would some maybe insure non-certified cars, is 'some' enough?
Can I sell an LPG service that doesn't seem insurable by a vast majority of insurers?

I suppose I'd only really have to talk to the insurers that cater for enthusiasts cars, though thats probably easier said than done.


Really, can you reasonably run a business converting LPG cars that aren't certified? or is it going to be a short lived affair? Are the insurance companies going to insist on UKLPG approval?

[Tubbs]

You will find many LPG installers in the uk that are not UKLPG registered and have never had a single problem with them not being on the UKLPG register. Its mostly propaganda if I'm honest.
However if you feel that you wish to go down the route then there are a few options to consider. Find a good supply of first gen ECU's. They are all marked and certified. They dont piggy back off the cars injection system at all. To be honest they where a right royal pain in the backside. You had to put on emulators and rev mulipliers and stuff to get all the feeds right and then you had to do the mapping. They where not so much fun. But they would be ideal in your situation. Im sure they could still be sourced from somewhere. All the Italian systems where like this originally. Someone in the uk must have massively overstocked and they are sitting gathering dust in the back of a stock room somewhere ! Bet you could get a mighty fine deal too.
Your other option would be to fit something like a megasquirt and just piggy off that system.
As far as the UKLPGA route thing goes, whats to stop you going and training and getting inspected as an 'approved' installer on standard cars and then fitting to race builds ? as long as all the equipment is marked.

[munkle]

Yeah I was just looking around at a couple of installers here and found one (or two) that seem to get on OK without being UKLPG approved. As you say, it may be the propaganda, but the internet does read as though certification is a must have if you're to get insured. I suppose it will still pay to discuss it with some insurance companies to make sure I've always got a couple of fall back on when recommending to a customer. I have to admit, I've not had to send a certificate in for any of my LPG cars, but then I insure them all with one specialist insurer. It's hard to tell a customer to do that.

Your idea of sourcing old stock, previous generation ECUs is interesting. Like you say, the independant nature of these systems would suit me much more than it would someone installing a dual fuel setup, so there may be something in looking at that route. I don't suppose you'd know where to look? Do you know of any particular vapour injection systems that work this way?

For many setups though, I'd want to use the functionality and adaptability of a fully specced aftermarket ECU. There are a few out there that can be set up to run a gas system quite effectively and they would make for a very nice setup on an LPG only car. That way I could run a very neat system interlinked with cooling system, dashboard, launch control, nitrous control and more.

[rossko]

I read that insurers are slowly insisting the car is registered with LPGA before they will touch it.

This is true, you are right to be thinking about the implications.
I have no idea how much 'penetration' UKLPG lobbying has got into specialist insurers, nor if it might all change next year. This is your area!

Since the LPGA won't certify a car that is inspected by someone not trained in that brand of LPG kit .... it's that I can't mix and match parts that's the problem.

This is not true.

Find a good supply of first gen ECU's.

Bear in mind that stuff hasn't been manufactured for ten years, and it doesn't support current generation low impedance injectors. They will not handle ignition, they're about equivalent to a 1990 petrol system - bank fired etc. There would be no OBD, is that a requirement for newer road cars, I don't know?
It's not a sound new-business proposition.

Your other option would be to fit something like a megasquirt and just piggy off that system.

Use the MS direct as the gas host is tempting, although in my opinion it needs mods to handle vapour fuel e.g. fuel temp correction. But of course MS is not E-marked for gas use (gas ECUs incorporate safety features such as shut-off at stall. I'm sure MS can do that too, but no-one has verified it in an E-marking lab)

As an aside, even if an insurer doesn't require UKLPG registration, its possible they will still turn their noses up at non-E marked equipment in the event of an accident and refuse claims. As a professional, I think you'd be wide open if you fitted non E-marked parts (same as I would).

What I'm saying is we are back where you started; there is no acceptable mass produced standalone LPG system. Another installer on here mentioned he had developed a solution to adapt modern product for standalone, perhaps he will chip in. Bear in mind that still won't handle ignition.

EDIT - best look at MSA requirements too - I understand they too may/will require UKLPG inspection?

[Gilbertd]

No idea where you get the idea you can't mix and match. Anyone with a Stag system will be a mix and match as Stag only make the ECU, none of the hardware. Many systems have Valtek or Keihin injectors but neither of these manufacturers make vaporisers or ECUs. Virtually all systems are a mix and match.

UKLPG is a trade organisation that has produced a code of practice (CoP11) for the installation of LPG system in motor vehicles. They have also started the register for LPG converted cars and convinced some insurers (and DVLA) that unless a car is on their register the installation may not have been done to a safe standard. Anyone can install an LPG system, using parts from as many different manufacturers as he likes, and then get the standard of the installation checked by a UKLPG member and have it added to the register. Other insurers will accept a certificate issued by the installer or a competant person.

Running LPG only is a viable option for a mixer system but how do you anticipate getting the vaporiser up to temperature without running the engine if using a multipoint? They won't run from stone cold like a mixer will.

[Tubbs]

Running LPG only is a viable option for a mixer system but how do you anticipate getting the vaporiser up to temperature without running the engine if using a multipoint? They won't run from stone cold like a mixer will.

They can if you fool the temp sensor with a resistor or something. Not yet tried it but we had this discussion a few months ago as i remember.

[Gilbertd]

I think the general opinion was that while that will make it wake up, actually getting it to start and run even remotely well for those first few minutes was a different matter.

[Tubbs]

Ross has done gas only vans for the council before so it's more than possible. I think woody also said he did a gas only sprinter for someone too.

[munkle]

I got the impression of not being allowed to mix and match by the statements on the UKLPG website - where it says you will only be certified to fit the system under which you were trained.

A number of training centres mention how training under them if you're already certified on another manufacturers system, will now let you certify their systems. Does that not mean that a 'custom' system is not certifiable? I don't really know how else it reads other than you can't build your own system up and certify it as safe.
If you've proven you're competent at fitting LPG, you should be allowed to fit and certify what you see fit. You're supposed to be an expert on the subject.


I don't understand why an ECU would have to be e-marked. The tank and valves, the evaporator, yeah, even the injectors, but you've got more chance of a pipe fault causing a danger than an ecu fault. An ecu isn't really a safety critical part in the system. Even if an ECU completely locks up, the engine will stop and the tank valve will close. Certainly no more likely to cause catastrophe than a pipe, and pipes aren't e-marked.
I probably shouldn't be too worried about that I suppose...with any modified car, you're going to have something that the insurer COULD pull you up on and refuse to pay out in the event of a crash. They don't because they would lose that trade quicker than you can say 'but'.


Megasquirt or VEMS has every inch the capability of running an LPG system safely. While the megasquirt kits aren't something you'd put on someones car, the VEMS stuff is certiainly much more up to the task. I'd certainly consider that as an option when putting a system together.

I think I'm just going to have to try it. LPG definitely has a place in the performance world. It won't suit every situation, especially at a track where LPG is less likely to be available, but for some people, and certain tracks it will be fine. I can see it being a real help to their tuning and a great novelty. Not to mention more enjoyable at the pump, though that's probably going to be further down the list than for most people. I know my work is going to be upto standard and beyond, I think customers will, so long as we can get past the insurance issue I have no concerns.

It's just if this UKLPG gets more power and doesn't listen to such arguments.

[rossko]

where it says you will only be certified to fit the system under which you were trained.

Do not confuse 'install' with 'inspect'.
Installation requirements are about providing a safe and effective job.
Inspection is about safety - something may be barely functional but safe as houses and achieve a "pass", just like an MoT.
UKLPG inspectors may inspect anything. Some may choose not to inspect things they don't recognise, their privilige. Some may choose not to touch any kind of outside job, we're not compelled to.

As a UKLPG installer, you would only be authorised to install certain kit, on the theory that the buying public gets a proppah job.
As a UKLPG inspector, you can look at whatever they bring you because it doesn't reflect on what you are selling.
As a non-UKLPG installer, you can do what the heck you like. You still have an option to take a job to a UKLPG inspector. If it passes muster, it will be registered.

If you've proven you're competent at fitting LPG, you should be allowed to fit and certify what you see fit.

That's an argument to take up with UKLPG. I think they'd point out it's rather like going to Rolls-Royce for an authorised service agency because you have been Lada trained.

I don't understand why an ECU would have to be e-marked.

Because it has a role in system safety. The Euro requirement is to have some means to shutoff gas in the event of accident stalling the engine, the means needs to be E-marked. Thinking on it, you could use whatever ECU you like so long as there is an external "safety relay" that is E-marked.

Even if an ECU completely locks up, the engine will stop and the tank valve will close.

How could we rely on that unless it's been verified (E-marked)

Certainly no more likely to cause catastrophe than a pipe, and pipes aren't e-marked.

Ohh yes they are .....

Megasquirt or VEMS has every inch the capability of running an LPG system safely.

I've no doubt.
I do think fuel temperature (density) compensation is essential for a vapour system, especially if you are looking for race performance, and I didn't think they did that out of the box; but there are ways to do it.

[munkle]

where it says you will only be certified to fit the system under which you were trained.

Do not confuse 'install' with 'inspect'.
Installation requirements are about providing a safe and effective job.
Inspection is about safety - something may be barely functional but safe as houses and achieve a "pass", just like an MoT.
UKLPG inspectors may inspect anything. Some may choose not to inspect things they don't recognise, their privilige. Some may choose not to touch any kind of outside job, we're not compelled to.

As a UKLPG installer, you would only be authorised to install certain kit, on the theory that the buying public gets a proppah job.
As a UKLPG inspector, you can look at whatever they bring you because it doesn't reflect on what you are selling.
As a non-UKLPG installer, you can do what the heck you like. You still have an option to take a job to a UKLPG inspector. If it passes muster, it will be registered.

I see, so an inspector 'should' be happy to pass any kit so long as it's safe and he didn't fit it?

If you've proven you're competent at fitting LPG, you should be allowed to fit and certify what you see fit.

That's an argument to take up with UKLPG. I think they'd point out it's rather like going to Rolls-Royce for an authorised service agency because you have been Lada trained.

It's also a bit like going into a house as Corgi registered and not fitting a boiler because it's not from Wickes.

I don't understand why an ECU would have to be e-marked.

Because it has a role in system safety. The Euro requirement is to have some means to shutoff gas in the event of accident stalling the engine, the means needs to be E-marked. Thinking on it, you could use whatever ECU you like so long as there is an external "safety relay" that is E-marked.

The latter will do nicely. It's the only safety critical element.

Even if an ECU completely locks up, the engine will stop and the tank valve will close.

How could we rely on that unless it's been verified (E-marked)
That's sort of my point, it's up to the installer and his expertise. It's easy for an installer to verify (unlike the safety of a tank, for example)

Certainly no more likely to cause catastrophe than a pipe, and pipes aren't e-marked.

Ohh yes they are .....

Oh. lol. All of them?

Megasquirt or VEMS has every inch the capability of running an LPG system safely.

I've no doubt.
I do think fuel temperature (density) compensation is essential for a vapour system, especially if you are looking for race performance, and I didn't think they did that out of the box; but there are ways to do it.

Yeah, I ran such a system recently and you can quite easily configure a spare input as a trim. That's all it will be, a trim.
I've even seen a system take petrol temperature into account. That would be even less effort, but it's all doable.

Thanks for the replies.

[Gilbertd]

Certainly no more likely to cause catastrophe than a pipe, and pipes aren't e-marked.

Ohh yes they are .....

Oh. lol. All of them?

Take a look here, http://www.tinleytech.co.uk/acatalog/Pipes_and.html from about halfway down the page. All pipes and hose used in an LPG installation must be the proper stuff and marked to show that it is.

Your best bet would be to get hold of a copy of CoP11 from UKLPG. The majority of it is common sense and good engineering practice but there are some little points that aren't immediately obvious.

[rossko]

I see, so an inspector 'should' be happy to pass any kit so long as it's safe and he didn't fit it?

Yup, it's a safety assessment, not performance or suitability. Well, basic emissions too, so it does need to be a runner.
When we're installing to UKLPG standards, then those niceties come into account as well.

It's also a bit like going into a house as Corgi registered and not fitting a boiler because it's not from Wickes.

? Don't follow the reasoning there.
I thought you were saying that if you prove you know how to fit a Wickes model XL5 then you ought to be authorised for any Corgi work.

[re - E-marked ECU] That's sort of my point, it's up to the installer and his expertise. It's easy for an installer to verify (unlike the safety of a tank, for example)

No it isn't. How can I test if some unknown ECU presented for inspection will failsafe in the event of, say, a software crash (you brought that one up!) or abuse?

Look, the game is slightly different with LPG because there are various over-arching EU and BS regulations about storage, handling and use of compressed flammable gases. Much of this still applies to 'Autogas' use, plus you get automotive specific regs on top. Get a copy of the relevant UKLPG code of practice which brings it all nicely together.

[marek]

As far as I can see, the only UK legislation is that relating to lpg is that relating to the tank, which has to comply with E67 European regs.

In reading the E67 regs, it is clear that their purpose and scope of E67R is to give a set of tests for the benefit of 1/ component manufacturers, and 2/ car manufacturers. If either of these two categories of manufacturer submit their parts for testing and they pass the tests, then the parts are deemed to have type approval and need no further testing when fitted to a wheeled vehicle. The tests for the tank or "container" as it is called is quite rigorous and separate from the tests required of other subcomponents in the lpg chain.

It should be manifestly obvious whether most of these "other components" (home built, non-stamped or what have you) will meet the equivalent type approvals, for example a medium/low pressure fuel rail only has to pass a pressure, temperature, leakage, lpg compatability and corrosion resistance test. If it is made of metal, painted (so it doesn't immediately crumble when placed in salt water) and doesn't leak then it'll manifestly pass the tests, stamp or no approval stamp.

For the ECU, these are the E67R regs IN FULL :-

1. The electronic control unit can be any device which controls the LPG demand of the engine and establishes the cut-off of the remotely-controlled service valve(s), cut-off valves and fuel pump of the LPG-system in case of a broken fuel supply pipe or/and in case of stalling of the engine.

2. The switching off delay of the service cut-off valves after stalling of the engine may not be more then 5 seconds.

3. The electronic control unit shall comply with relevant electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) requirements according to Regulation No. 10, 02 series of amendments or equivalent.

4. Electrical failure of the vehicle system may not lead to uncontrolled opening of any valve.

5. The output of the electronic control unit shall be inactive when the electric power is switched off or removed.

So, basically, if it cuts out and shuts the lpg solenoids within five seconds of stalling and the ECU is in a metal box - it almost certainly passes. It's sure to stall if you cut the fuel pipes, because there'll be no fuel pressure at the reducer to keep the engine going. In that respect any ECU which automatically complements the lpg with petrol if the lpg cannot meet high power demand should fail, because there is no obvious way to differentiate broken fuel supply with inadequate fuel supply unless a supplementary high pressure, pressure sensor is fitted into the liquid phase feed line.



Regarding Megasquirt specifically, MS3 is a standalone fully programmable ECU which is capable of accepting two (and more) completely different fuel, ignition, temperature, pressure, warmup maps. Some people insist on complaining that Megasquirt is not E67R compliant - I would like to point out that by that measure, NO petrol powered car ECU is compliant either - it is only the emulator bolted on afterwards that MAY be, but the solenoid cutoff when stalling will still be crank driven to a non E67R stamped petrol ECU.

In short, the tank has to comply to E67R by UK law and the authorities notified of it's presence once operational, but other than passing an MOT, I've yet to see any other specific requirement to be met. The rest of the E67R regs appear to be for the benefit of parts/car manufacturers.

Those of you who are not lawyers, please have a very good read through the regs - several times - before opining.

kind regards
Marek

[rossko]

submit their parts for testing and they pass the tests, then the parts are deemed to have type approval and need no further testing when fitted to a wheeled vehicle.

Agreed. So when would we need to do further testing I wonder ... when thing's aren't marked I suppose.

for example a medium/low pressure fuel rail only has to pass a pressure, temperature, leakage, lpg compatability and corrosion resistance test.

Agreed. So when an unknown part is brought to me in my role as UKLPG (non-legislative, yep) inspector - or looked at by an insurance inspector after an accident - all we have to do is spend a month or two doing LPG materials compatability tests, take it off and bake it, etc. to see if it's okay.

If it is made of metal, painted (so it doesn't immediately crumble when placed in salt water) and doesn't leak then it'll manifestly pass the tests, stamp or no approval stamp.

Not in my book. I'm not a lawyer (are you, out of interest?) but I do carry out professional inspections. I want to see an E-mark normally, but I can well understand home-made parts etc. not having one. How am I to tell if say O-rings are suitable material? "Go away and get a lab report to E standards at your expense, and show me".

So, basically, if it cuts out and shuts the lpg solenoids within five seconds of stalling and the ECU is in a metal box - it almost certainly passes.

As above, show me (or the insurance assessor, or MSA scrutineer). Getting this wrong will bite the OP professionally, he asked for opinions. I'm not disputing the stuff will work as desired, but it needs to be proven.

In that respect any ECU which automatically complements the lpg with petrol if the lpg cannot meet high power demand should fail, because there is no obvious way to differentiate broken fuel supply with inadequate fuel supply

That's not how those systems work, supplementing has nothing to do with pressure sensing and the normal low-pressure and RPM based alarms still function. Of course I wouldn't be able to tell if that was the case in a hombrew setup.
But in any case , that is by the by, early generation systems had no pressure sensing at all and still meet the E standard on RPM sesning alone.

Some people insist on complaining that Megasquirt is not E67R compliant

I are just an enjineer. I can't tell without seeing the mark or certificate.

I would like to point out that by that measure, NO petrol powered car ECU is compliant either

Yes, agreed, they were not designed to control gas so don't have to verified to the particular standards. Gas is an add-on system with independent control, its the independent controls we want to assess. The OP wants to eliminate the usual add-on aspect, hence the difficulties.

Those of you who are not lawyers, please have a very good read through the regs - several times - before opining.

I'm not a lawyer and I will opine where I like (yes I have read the regs a while ago, but did not memorise). I do so in a public place and stand to be corrected - as I freely acknowledge you have already done so with the EMC requirements that I hadn't thought about at all.
My opinion does count here - I do inspect vehicles, will fail them on non-E marked parts, and will defend that decision to the unhappy owner. I'm quite prepared to change opinions but haven't seen any reason to yet.

I do still think E67R are not the only regs to apply here, but yes do dismiss me on that until/unless I can show otherwise.

[marek]

Dear Ross,
I'm sure that a competant inspector, i.e. one with a depth of relevant automotive knowledge, will easily be able to assess whether a vehicle should be awarded a certificate, whether the parts carry a stamp or not. This is because if he's worth his salt, he'll have read and understand what the relevant regulations of E67.01 actually are, not simply to be an automaton who will go through a checklist of whether a part is stamped or not. I say that with a caveat of the lpg tank, because of the specific incorporation of E67.01 into UK law with respect to the pressure vessel. The big irony is that by specifically carving-in this one component, the implication is that none of the other parts have to carry the E67.01 stamp to be UK road legal!

Aside from the tank the other components' tests are generally relatively simple to understand. For example you won't need to stick your neck out to pass a fuel rail neatly TIG welded from 1mm thick steel if it is leak free and is painted or powder coated. It manifestly isn't going to go mushy at -20 to 120 degrees centigrade and it won't collapse within 24 hours of seawater being thrown at it.

No installer should consider themselves truly competent unless they understand why something is safe. It isn't their job to simply look for stamps and tick boxes! Given that some parts of E67.01 are binding legally, whereas none of cop11 is, there's really no excuse for not having a good read of the former prior to applying the common sense contained in the latter.

Every who does read the E67.01 regs will understand that they are there for the benefit of parts manufacturers and car manufacturers - because that's what the regs say! It doesn't say or imply that a car using stamped parts will be safe and certainly doesn't offer any protection to an inspector from inadvisedly verifying a poor installation when writing out an insurance certificate.

In the example you quote regarding O rings, unless there is a reason to suspect you are being lied to, if the items used are those which were supplied with lpg injectors is provided, then it is reasonable to assume they will be E67.01 compliant. Better still, ask for a receipt or service history or any documentation which supports compliance.

You are of course more than correct to ask the person presenting such a vehicle to justify why it is safe, where there is something which requires explanation. This is to be expected and encouraged and in the case of a custom install, one hopes there will be an interrogative process of discovery as part of the insurance certification procedure.

kind regards
Marek

[Gilbertd]

I think you may be missing the point. Who is the manufacturer? Should you decide to build a car from scratch, or using multiple parts from other cars, it will need to be IVA tested. In this case, you are the manufacturer, not the companies that made the component parts that you assembled. So, if the car you have built is running on LPG then absolutely every part of the LPG system must be E marked. Come to that, even the light bulbs and numerous other items must be E marked. No matter how well made the components are, if they aren't E marked it won't pass.

So what is the difference in having an LPG installation checked after it has been installed? Surely the same applies? It doesn't matter how well something is made or installed, if it isn't E marked, it fails, simple. I suspect that you could safely use some form of high tech tubing for vapour hoses but if it isn't E marked, how can an inspector know that it is not a length of washer hose that you have chosen to use instead of the proper stuff?