<p> Mechanics Name Address RTA Inspector xxxx </p><p>7/06/2010</p><p>Dear Sir or Madam,</p><p>As a qualified and licensed Motor Mechanic and RTA Authorised Vehicle Inspector I have recently inspected the 1978 HZ Holden Utility (reg xxx-xxx) belonging to Kurt Murray. I inspected the vehicle for registration purposes and found it to have the same type of 4.2 litre (253cu in) V8 engine as was originally fitted from new. The engine had not been modified for the purposes of improving its performance, nor had the other driveline components of the car been modified. I drove the vehicle (to perform a brake test) and I am satisfied that the cars performance was not greater than it would have been when new. Mr Murray has advised me that since my inspection was carried out the engine has been replaced with a six cylinder engine.</p><p>I have also been asked to provide some data comparing the performance of this vehicle to some common, non-V8 powered vehicles, and this is listed in the table below. Note that none of these vehicles are classified as sporty or high-performance cars; rather they are base-model family and fleet vehicles. I have included the details of Mr Murray’s Holden utility on the bottom row of the table, and despite being the only vehicle listed which is P plate prohibited its performance is relatively poor. The data below was taken from contemporary road tests that were published by various Australian motoring magazines. I believe these tests to be reasonably representative of the respective vehicle’s true performance.</p><p>Make/Model Engine Size Engine Output Acceleration, 0-100 P-Plate kph Prohibited Mazda 3, 2010 2 litre, 4 cyl 104kW 9.6 seconds No Toyota Corolla, 07 1.8 litre, 4 cyl 100kW 9.7 seconds No Ford Falcon, 08 4 .0 litre, 6 cyl 195kW 7.4 seconds No Holden 3.6 litre, V6 180kW 9.5 seconds No Commodore ,08 Holden HZ , 1978 4.2 litre V8 120kW 12.9 seconds Yes</p><p>Yours faithfully,</p><p>Xxxx</p>