Being in the US where there are no "engineering" requirements for engine swaps and other modifications, I'm puzzled. Why -- for a street car -- would a bigger engine "require" better brakes. For example, if a bigger displacement engine is fitted but the vehicle weight doesn't significantly change, that doesn't make the previously "adequate" brakes now become "inadequate". If you keep the car to legal street speeds, why would the stock brakes be considered "not good enough"? Originally the brakes worked at speeds of up to 100kmh, but now they don't?
I'm not saying bigger brakes are not a smart idea ... obviously the 1200 brakes aren't up to today's standards. Is that the intention of the legislators, to get people to bring the safety standards up to a higher level than Nissan originally provided? Do they also require three-point belts, airbags or door side-beams whenever engines are swapped into older vehicles?
I've heard the argument that "if you have more hp, you'll go faster and so need bigger brakes to slow down", but that presumes on the driver's behavior and not the mechanicals. Although I wouldn't be surprised if statistically a link could be established.
I can see if the modifications added significant weight to the car ... then it would make sense to require bigger brakes, so that braking performance wouldn't degrade from original.
Quote:
in new zealand ... they go by the weight of the engine not the displacement size.
OK, that makes sense from an engineering standpoint, although basing it on the weight change to the font and rear of the car would make even more sense. Or am I missing something?