reasoning behind the 15 year rule? [Archive] - Beyond.ca - Car Forums

TypeS

06-12-2005, 06:37 PM

cars built for another market were safety tested by that markets rules and standards, and since places like japan and europe have different standards, the canadian government wont allow them to be driven out here. Its bullshit, because lots of cars from japan are identical to their north american counterparts, but since it was built in japan for the JDM market...it doesnt pass.

The only exception to this rule is if the car has become 15 years old or older. Partly to keep imports out of the country so that north americans will buy more noth american cars:thumbsdow

its BS, but from rumours ive heard it is being reworked, and may be lowered year by year until its only 5 years or something. I sure hope so....the quicker i can get an S15 the better:clap:

A790

06-12-2005, 06:51 PM

Hey, if they drop that rule I'll be the happiest man alive!

braden883314

06-12-2005, 07:09 PM

It would ruin the domestic car market, the cars over there are better in every aspect in my opinion, lower km's, better body shape, more power, better styling, better options, and you can get them for decent prices. I blame it mostly on the USA and thier dumb rules.

1. Legalities
1.1 Importing to Canada
To import a vehicle legally to Canada from a country other than the United States, the vehicle must be 15 years old to the month. This is the only exception that is accepted by both the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA) and Transport Canada (TC) for importing used cars. There are other exceptions legislated by the CCRA, but because they aren't also legislated by Transport Canada, they aren't feasible.

Import Concern - Legalities (http://www.importconcern.ca/articles/import.htm)

Import Concern - Illegally Imported Vehicals (http://www.importconcern.ca/articles/illegals.htm)

~Braden

Idratherbsidewayz

06-12-2005, 08:00 PM

Technically could you import to the states and then just bring it over?

XylathaneGTR

06-12-2005, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
Technically could you import to the states and then just bring it over?
I don't think that matters.
It's still a non northamerican car that is under 15 years old.
It would probably be refused entry at customs.

88CRX

06-12-2005, 08:20 PM

the states have even harsher importing rules then canada.

chris

06-12-2005, 08:32 PM

Originally posted by 88CRX
the states have even harsher importing rules then canada.
yes and no. In the U.S you have to modify a car to meet US regulations, but you can bring a car in from any year. Here you have to wait fifteen years, no exceptions

TypeS

06-12-2005, 08:59 PM

it doesnt matter if you import it into the states and then to canada, it was still manufactured for the JDM market and therefore is illegal in canada unless 15 years old......

dumb ass government agencies.....

mx73someday

06-12-2005, 09:12 PM

It's definitely a political/economic rule to help our poor "friends" to the south. If you can ride a bike, you should be able to choose which cars are safe and which are not yourself. It's just another personal freedom taken away by the Americans.

Think if one day they said that your PS2 wasn't safe for you to use, and you could only use an Xbox, that's pretty much what they're doing with cars. It being a safety issue is no longer a valid point in these modern times. If it were a safety issue, someone should tell the Japanese and Europeans about the deathtraps they're driving, I'm surprised they're not all dead already.

braden883314

06-12-2005, 09:14 PM

The US government has a 25year rule like our 15, no u cannot import to the states then to here, still has to be 15years old. The states u can modify any car to US regualtions, cost you an arm and a leg tho, definatly NOT worth it, i hate the rules that the US government imposed, its why we have these rules

~Braden

tapout

06-12-2005, 09:14 PM

Originally posted by braden883314
It would ruin the domestic car market, the cars over there are better in every aspect in my opinion, lower km's, better body shape, more power, better styling, better options, and you can get them for decent prices. I blame it mostly on the USA and thier dumb rules.

Import Concern - Legalities (http://www.importconcern.ca/articles/import.htm)

Import Concern - Illegally Imported Vehicals (http://www.importconcern.ca/articles/illegals.htm)

~Braden :werd:

braden883314

06-12-2005, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by mx73someday
It's definitely a political/economic rule to help our poor "friends" to the south. If you can ride a bike, you should be able to choose which cars are safe and which are not yourself. It's just another personal freedom taken away by the Americans.

Think if one day they said that your PS2 wasn't safe for you to use, and you could only use an Xbox, that's pretty much what they're doing with cars. It being a safety issue is no longer a valid point in these modern times. If it were a safety issue, someone should tell the Japanese and Europeans about the deathtraps they're driving, I'm surprised they're not all dead already.

:werd: lol and anouther rant begins, j/k

~Braden

JCX

06-12-2005, 09:33 PM

Originally posted by braden883314
[B]It would ruin the domestic car market, the cars over there are better in every aspect in my opinion, lower km's, better body shape, more power, better styling, better options, and you can get them for decent prices. I blame it mostly on the USA and thier dumb rules.

Quite possibly the dumbest statement ever.

Few people would import brand new cars even if allowed. It would mainly be JDM fanatics importing stuff like Skylines and Supras.

Blame it on the god damn car companies who refuse to sell the fucking cars here and quit crying.

Z_Fan

06-12-2005, 09:59 PM

^ It's not just selling them here - it's that they'd have to MAKE them here (Can/Us/Mexico)

Just like many goods, countries erected trade tariffs to protect their internal economies from outside producers who may be able to produce at much lower costs due to lower wages, etc. The same thing happened with motor vehicles - the 15 year limit is simply a representation of restrictive tariffs.

Until we have complete free trade, you can expect the protective stance taken by the governments to remain. Considering that the automobile manufacturing business is very simply one of the largest forms of business in the nations of Canada/US/Mexico - you can continue to expect the automakers to have considerable influence over government policies. Fortunately we have NAFTA, and that's why your Nissan SE-R Spec-V was made in Mexico! (Example only but very possible.) LOL.

Bottom line is the policies protect north american production and ensure that the industry remains profitable and boosts our economies as opposed to that of overseas nations.

braden883314

06-12-2005, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by JCX

Quite possibly the dumbest statement ever.

Few people would import brand new cars even if allowed. It would mainly be JDM fanatics importing stuff like Skylines and Supras.

Blame it on the god damn car companies who refuse to sell the fucking cars here and quit crying.

They would love to have been able to sell the cars that they intended to make over here instead of the dumb down versions we got, it because of the American regulations.

Originally from Sport Compact Car mag. May 2000 from the last paragraph of article: tested Nissan Silvia Spec-R (S15)
Consider this: in last month issue we announced the winners of this year's "Eight great rides" awards. In our analysis of the winners; we ran all eight of these cars---cars that we consider to be the best eight performance cars for under $35,000---through the same test be subjected the silvia to. The silvia beat every last in every test of acceleration and braking and tied the very best on the skip pad (the miata). And it did so for a price that hovers in middle of our eight car pack. Even more impressive, the silvia still beat all of the modified versions of the "eight great rides" we tested in that issue in everything but skidpad. Even with o.e. tires, the silvia's stock skid pad performance was only topped by two of last month's tuner cars. So why are nissan dealers still peddling only on trucks and sedans? We can't imagine

I feel strongly that had the S15 been distributed here with the 250hp SR20DET, it would have knocked all the cars in that price range and style completely off the scale.

We got the shitty versions for a lot of cars (just a few examples):

No SiR EF
No CA or SR S13/S14/S15
No Skyline
No Soarer
ect. ect. The list goes on.

No to mention all the options that we could not get here, including Glass Top CRX’s, climate control in some makes and models, a hole slew to body features and engine/body combinations!

If these cars would have been brought in as there true forms in the early years, when the Japanese manufactures made TRUE sports cars and wanted to sell them. IMO it would have killed all the American car company competition. The Japanese cars in the late 80's yearly 90's were years above American manufactures.
The car companies didn’t refuse to sell them in North America; they were govern by the U.S. government and were not allowed to sell their car as they were meant to be here; instead we are stuck with underpowered vehicles that the American manufactures could compete with.

And I wasn’t crying, I was making a statement, Mr. Pair of Neons, a perfect example of the cars that we would most likely had seen a lot less of, had the Japanese been allowed to sell their cars, their way.

As supported in Z_Fan’s statement, they had to make sure that the US companies would not fail, so they imposed polices that made the Japanese sell inferior products that what they can make

~Braden

JCX

06-12-2005, 10:24 PM

Originally posted by Z_Fan

Bottom line is the policies protect north american production and ensure that the industry remains profitable and boosts our economies as opposed to that of overseas nations.

The bottom line is Japanese, Aussie, German, French, etc., etc., etc. have the option to make their cars legal for sale in any particular country. Just like Chevy certifies the Vette, Ford cetifies the Mustang and Dodge certifies the Caravan for sale in Canada. Toyota could certify the Supra, Nissan could certify the Skyline and Honda could certify a Type R Civic. They choose not to. Blame the auto companies, not the government.

It's not like foreign countries will just openly allow American cars is it? I thought not.

JCX

06-12-2005, 10:29 PM

Originally posted by braden883314

They would love to have been able to sell the cars that they intended to make over here instead of the dumb down versions we got, it because of the American regulations.

How do American regulations make them have to give us the dumbed down version. American car companies play by the same rules. They can build cars to meet American / Canadian standards. Why can't Japan? They can. They choose to give us the dumbed down version.

Nissan could easily give us a turbo spec V. Instead they choose to give us an overrated base model Altima powered version. Honda could give us the Type R, but they give us the 160 HP special. Do you really think there are laws to prevent them from it?

braden883314

06-12-2005, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by JCX

The bottom line is Japanese, Aussie, German, French, etc., etc., etc. have the option to make their cars legal for sale in any particular country. Just like Chevy certifies the Vette, Ford cetifies the Mustang and Dodge certifies the Caravan for sale in Canada. Toyota could certify the Supra, Nissan could certify the Skyline and Honda could certify a Type R Civic. They choose not to. Blame the auto companies, not the government.

It's not like foreign countries will just openly allow American cars is it? I thought not.

There is american cars in Japan, they just dont sell becuase why the hell would they want one? like seriously, they had WAY more superior products already from their own country. I cant even imagine making this wicked product and tryin to sell it in anouther country but they have polices there that make it a not as good as it could be, i think they gave up, and were like why bother!! And the american's had a big impact of the polices that the canadian government placed.

~Braden

braden883314

06-12-2005, 10:36 PM

It comes down to this:

Originally posted by mx73someday
It's definitely a political/economic rule to help our poor "friends" to the south. If you can ride a bike, you should be able to choose which cars are safe and which are not yourself. It's just another personal freedom taken away by the Americans.

Think if one day they said that your PS2 wasn't safe for you to use, and you could only use an Xbox, that's pretty much what they're doing with cars. It being a safety issue is no longer a valid point in these modern times. If it were a safety issue, someone should tell the Japanese and Europeans about the deathtraps they're driving, I'm surprised they're not all dead already.

~Braden

JCX

06-12-2005, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by braden883314

There is american cars in Japan, they just dont sell becuase why the hell would they want one? like seriously, they had WAY more superior products already from their own country. I cant even imagine making this wicked product and tryin to sell it in anouther country but they have polices there that make it a not as good as it could be, i think they gave up, and were like why bother!! And the american's had a big impact of the polices that the canadian government placed.

~Braden

I have this feeling I'm trying to explain something to a jr high schooler. If the Japanese car companies wanted to certify the cars and powertrains for North American consumption they could. They choose not to, whether you like it or not.

braden883314

06-12-2005, 11:01 PM

I feel like i'm trying to explain something to a American!

If they did get them to be cerified in america, they would be selling shitty products like americans, and my guess is they arent willin to do that. (unlike american manufactures) you cant have everything, thats what wrong with north american, we want it all, and it just cant be done! they want fast cars that are good for the envrioment, but they want them to be so safe at the same time, well they would be alot faster and or better for the enviroment if they did have all the extra useless saftey shit, i hate how heavy north american 2 doors are!!Just slows u down, I cant imagine a big ugly 5.0L V8 being any better for the evrionment than a 2JZ or a RB26DETT or a B16B. They probley choose not to sell them here cuase they didnt want people like you to drive their cars.

~Braden

Lo)2enz0

06-12-2005, 11:02 PM

Originally posted by JCX

I have this feeling I'm trying to explain something to a jr high schooler. If the Japanese car companies wanted to certify the cars and powertrains for North American consumption they could. They choose not to, whether you like it or not.

I don't see why your picking on what braden883314 is saying cause he is saying truth here.

But it does have to do with the import companies. The reason why we didn't get most of these cars deals with what north america wants from a car. Back in the early 90's alot of the cars were based in having higher displacements. This is why car's like the lexus sc400 and the nissan 240sx didn't get the forced induction engines that we love now. This was a big factor because the companies were competing with cars like the ford mustang 5.0 and camero's and so on. So the import companies decided that this is what the market was looking for at the time. In my opinion some of the companies didn't want to loose there reputation on some of the cars like the nissan skyline by changing the engines in there car to meet these standerds.

Now people are wondering why this is happening and have problems with it because they wish that these vehicles were brought to canada, which now we have to wait the 15 years. But the rule was inforced mainly for collectors and the company does have a little say in it. Its all about the demand of what the public wants in a car. Now we have cars coming out that are based on forced induction because thats what the big craze is about from a sports car.

But you have to remember that alot of the cars from japan are based on forced induction and a lower displacements in the early 90's and so on and this was not what people wanted in north america, hence why the companies changed the names of alot of cars and gave them a different powerplant.

b_t

06-13-2005, 08:29 AM

uhh yeah okay

They didn't import these cars because it cost a few hundred thousand dollars (maybe a million or two) to develop domestic-specific bumpers, LHD interior, new airbags, whatever the car needs, a few hundred thousand dollars to re-tune the engine to run on lower octane gas, a few hundred thousand dollars to crash test them, a few million dollars to market them, low pricing to try and quickly grab a market share and so on. oh, and then several million dollars to put together a factory for them, or else the car will cost so much nobody wants to buy it (ie... Toyota Supra).

it is a money losing venture. you spend millions and millions of dollars redeveloping a car, and then you are forced to sell them at narrow profit margins. sports cars are a very small market, compared to regular cars. plus, until lately, it wasn't really viable to market a Japanese sports car, especially after the fallout with them in the mid-90s that saw the 300ZX, RX-7, Supra, and 3000GT/Stealth all cancelled.

it wasn't that Japanese people didn't want Americans driving their cars (that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard), it was just that it wouldn't make them any money. believe it or not, Nissan brass are not car guys. they just want to make money. that is why there is no GT-R anymore... because it doesn't. make. money.

and as far as cars coming out with forced induction, Honda still doesn't make one, Acura doesn't make one, Nissan doesn't make one, Toyota doesn't make one, Chevrolet only makes one, Saturn only makes one, Pontiac doesn't have any (unless they still sell the Bonneville), Chrysler only has a couple.... and Mazda doesn't make one, even though they have the only rotary in production right now.

even cars that are the new big wave of Japanese sports cars, which have traditionally depended on forced induction (350Z and RX-8) are not turbocharged. the trend is for all-motor power, because it costs much less to build, maintain, and gets better mileage.

rage2

06-13-2005, 08:39 AM

Originally posted by Z_Fan
^ It's not just selling them here - it's that they'd have to MAKE them here (Can/Us/Mexico)

Just like many goods, countries erected trade tariffs to protect their internal economies from outside producers who may be able to produce at much lower costs due to lower wages, etc. The same thing happened with motor vehicles - the 15 year limit is simply a representation of restrictive tariffs.
The US government imposes how many different models foreign auto manufacturers can sell here, regardless if they're built here or not. Add the CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) requirements and you'll understand why a lot of performance cars doesn't make it over here.

To answer the original question, as someone else already mentioned, the 15 year old rule was meant to protect domestic auto manufacturers.

JCX

06-13-2005, 08:41 AM

Originally posted by braden883314
I feel like i'm trying to explain something to a American!

If they did get them to be cerified in america, they would be selling shitty products like americans, and my guess is they arent willin to do that. (unlike american manufactures) you cant have everything, thats what wrong with north american, we want it all, and it just cant be done! they want fast cars that are good for the envrioment, but they want them to be so safe at the same time, well they would be alot faster and or better for the enviroment if they did have all the extra useless saftey shit, i hate how heavy north american 2 doors are!!Just slows u down, I cant imagine a big ugly 5.0L V8 being any better for the evrionment than a 2JZ or a RB26DETT or a B16B. They probley choose not to sell them here cuase they didnt want people like you to drive their cars.

~Braden

Hey Einstein, Toyota did certify the 2JZ in North America. They pulled it out because it wasn't selling. Nissan could have certified the RB26, but they chose not to.

All car companies comply with the same crash and emissions tests, all of them. It's not fair if the Euro / American companies spend tons of money to certify their cars and then a year later you import something that doesn't meet crash tests.

How many times to I have to say it? If the car companies wanted to sell the RB26DETT, the 2JZGTE, the SR20DET, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, they HAVE THE OPTION TO DO IT. However the CHOSE NOT TO spend the moeny to do so. So you JDM nutswingers need to focus your sadness at the JAPANESE AUTO MAKERS rather than auto laws. If they want to sell you the car, they should have to certify it LIKE EVERY OTHER CAR COMPANY THAT SELLS CARS HERE. If not, you wait 15 yrs.

P.S. I'm not an American, nor am I anti-Japanese car, nor am I a 17 year old rice tard. I call it like it is, and 15 year rule is very reasonable.

rage2

06-13-2005, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by JCX
How many times to I have to say it? If the car companies wanted to sell the RB26DETT, the 2JZGTE, the SR20DET, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, they HAVE THE OPTION TO DO IT. However the CHOSE NOT TO spend the moeny to do so. So you JDM nutswingers need to focus your sadness at the JAPANESE AUTO MAKERS rather than auto laws. If they want to sell you the car, they should have to certify it LIKE EVERY OTHER CAR COMPANY THAT SELLS CARS HERE. If not, you wait 15 yrs.
There's other reasons that manufacturers choose NOT to import them. If a manufacturer can make money on it, of course they'll do it, it's a no brainer. I covered it in my last post.

The Skyline GT-R with the RB26 is a textbook example of economics, and why it was never certified for the north american market. First off, it was an expensive and low margin car built originally for homogolation purposes, later to be built as an "image" car. It was never a huge money maker. Stuffed with overengineered parts (forged everything), the RB26 was very expensive to build compared to any other motor. Of course they could've lowered costs, but then they would've made it not as friendly to big mods, and defeat the purpose of the "image" car.

Because of the low margins, and a restriction of how many models Nissan was allowed to sell here, it did not make sense to sell it here when another car that makes more money can be sold instead. Not to mention it would lower Nissan's required minimum CAFE average, which means they would have had to spend money on making all their other cars more fuel efficient.

If there's anyone to blame, blame the Domestic manufacturers and the US government... they're the reason why import manufacturers have these restrictions.

heavyD

06-13-2005, 09:15 AM

finboy

06-13-2005, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by heavyD

Quite possibly the most retarded post I have ever read in these forums and that is saying alot.:thumbsdow

:werd: :rofl:

atomic

06-13-2005, 09:22 AM

read this: http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/E/pub/cp/rc4140/rc4140-e.html

and here are some other sniplets .

Any car brought in from abroad must be 15 years or older, using the date the car was built. If it is younger then 15 years, it falls subject to Transport Canada regulations, which may prohibit entry to any vehicle that does not meet Transport Canada's Safety Regulations. In other words, go for a car older then 15 years.

As a general rule, used cars that are at least 15 years old can be imported from the U.S.A. and are not subject to safety and emission equipment requirements. Age is not determined by model year; the month of importation must be at least 15 years after the month of manufacture of the vehicle.

If your vehicle is less than 15 years old and was manufactured for sale in the U.S., you must first determine whether it qualifies for importation. Transport Canada's Registrar of Imported Vehicles (RIV) program ensures that qualifying vehicles are modified, inspected and certified to meet Canadian safety standards.

JCX

06-13-2005, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by rage2

There's other reasons that manufacturers choose NOT to import them. If a manufacturer can make money on it, of course they'll do it, it's a no brainer. I covered it in my last post.

The Skyline GT-R with the RB26 is a textbook example of economics, and why it was never certified for the north american market. First off, it was an expensive and low margin car built originally for homogolation purposes, later to be built as an "image" car. It was never a huge money maker. Stuffed with overengineered parts (forged everything), the RB26 was very expensive to build compared to any other motor. Of course they could've lowered costs, but then they would've made it not as friendly to big mods, and defeat the purpose of the "image" car.

Because of the low margins, and a restriction of how many models Nissan was allowed to sell here, it did not make sense to sell it here when another car that makes more money can be sold instead. Not to mention it would lower Nissan's required minimum CAFE average, which means they would have had to spend money on making all their other cars more fuel efficient.

If there's anyone to blame, blame the Domestic manufacturers and the US government... they're the reason why import manufacturers have these restrictions.

Rage, I agree with you on many levels. Anyone with a sniff of business sense can see it's clear that from a monetary standpoint it does not make sense for Nissan to license the Skyline for sale here. Absolutely. The same goes for things like the Evo. Why spend money to sell 1000 units in Canada. However, any way you slice CAFE average, margins, etc. the car companies play by the same rules. GM can pass CAFE with the Vette and GTO. DCX passes with the Viper, the HEMI, the Mercedes Biturbo V-12s and Supercharged v-8s. Let's also keep in mind we are mixing American and Canadian laws / regs here. Different animals. The point is many non Canadian companies spend the money to certify performance cars in Canada.

If the 15 year rule didn't exist, you could import any car that did not meet specs. This is simply unfair to the manufacturers (domestice and foreign) who spent the time, money and effort to make their auto legal for sale in our country. I think it's also borderline paranoid to say strictly the 15 year rule in Canada is in place to protect American companies.

I'd like a warrantied brand new turbo Sivlia like anyone else. But I blame Nissan and not the governent of Canada. The 15 year rule is a reasonable compromise for all parties. Just because Nissan can't make money on the car bringing it here certified does not mean you and I are entitled to have one immediately by going around the laws.

JCX

06-13-2005, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by heavyD

Quite possibly the most retarded post I have ever read in these forums and that is saying alot.:thumbsdow

Heavy, I owe you a beer. You can drive though, I've never been in a DSM. :nut:

heavyD

06-13-2005, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by rage2
If there's anyone to blame, blame the Domestic manufacturers and the US government... they're the reason why import manufacturers have these restrictions.

The restrictions are there for various reasons some environmental and some to protect their own but lets remember that Honda has never brought a civic type R over here because they chose not to. Nissan braintrust decided to bring 240's to the US with a truck engine not the US government. Hell even the best Ford Focus models are in Europe and not the US. Some cars are just not profitable in North America.

Why don't we also blame the US for Canada not having the EVOVIII while everyone's at it.

rage2

06-13-2005, 01:18 PM

Originally posted by JCX
GM can pass CAFE with the Vette and GTO. DCX passes with the Viper, the HEMI, the Mercedes Biturbo V-12s and Supercharged v-8s. Let's also keep in mind we are mixing American and Canadian laws / regs here. Different animals. The point is many non Canadian companies spend the money to certify performance cars in Canada.
Good point. But remember, there's restrictions on the number of models non-domestic manufacturers can sell here. And they would have to give up a specific model to bring in a low production model, which could swing the average more than you'd think.

Originally posted by JCX
If the 15 year rule didn't exist, you could import any car that did not meet specs. This is simply unfair to the manufacturers (domestice and foreign) who spent the time, money and effort to make their auto legal for sale in our country. I think it's also borderline paranoid to say strictly the 15 year rule in Canada is in place to protect American companies.
A non compliance tax would fix that. Lifting the restrictions on non-domestic manufacturers would also make the 15 year old rule obsolete, as manufactures can then bring in as many different models as they want. Not like the restrictions are working, GM's having tons of troubles, and Toyota is making stupid amounts of money even with such heavy restrictions. The only losers are the consumers, losing out on cool cars.

Originally posted by JCX
I'd like a warrantied brand new turbo Sivlia like anyone else. But I blame Nissan and not the governent of Canada. The 15 year rule is a reasonable compromise for all parties. Just because Nissan can't make money on the car bringing it here certified does not mean you and I are entitled to have one immediately by going around the laws.
Like I said, if the non-domestic restrictions are lifted, it'd be a lot cheaper and definately profitable for say, Nissan to bring ANY car here, as long as there's a demand for it. In the grand scheme of things, cost of federalization is cheap, especially in today's single platform cars. Removing profitable models to bring a certain vehicle here hurts their bottom line a lot more than federalization and certification of that vehicle.

Originally posted by heavyD
Why don't we also blame the US for Canada not having the EVOVIII while everyone's at it.
The EVO was an odd one. It's like someone at Mitsubishi forgot about Canada's different safety laws ;).

JCX

06-13-2005, 03:12 PM

Originally posted by rage2

A non compliance tax would fix that. Lifting the restrictions on non-domestic manufacturers would also make the 15 year old rule obsolete, as manufactures can then bring in as many different models as they want. Not like the restrictions are working, GM's having tons of troubles, and Toyota is making stupid amounts of money even with such heavy restrictions. The only losers are the consumers, losing out on cool cars.

Like I said, if the non-domestic restrictions are lifted, it'd be a lot cheaper and definately profitable for say, Nissan to bring ANY car here, as long as there's a demand for it. In the grand scheme of things, cost of federalization is cheap, especially in today's single platform cars. Removing profitable models to bring a certain vehicle here hurts their bottom line a lot more than federalization and certification of that vehicle.

Not a bad idea indeed, but there would still have to be some type of timeframe (be it 5 years, 10 years, whatever). Having a non compliance tax levied on say a 1 year old car would, IMO, undermine Canadian regulations too severly. For example, cheaply built unsafe cars could become prevalent under such a situation. Perhaps an extreme example, but not unimaginable. Then we get into arguments on valuation to levy such a tax, do we go % of book, price you paid, arbitrary govermnet valuation, flat fee? On many levels it's just easier (read : cheaper) to say 15 years and away we go.

I agree consumers are the net losers, but we have to look at the scope of loss. It is by and large a narrow group that would even look to import non federalized cars. A non compliance levy would also weed out a few more prospective buyers, money talks.

It's interesting you mention Toyota, as they have probably the least performance oriented line up of any carmakers. They've derived their success from plebian autos and reliable trucks. No disprespect, they've done well. There are many protectionist elements of Domestic (moreso I say American) import laws that don't work, I concede that. But with the specific example at play of importation of non federilzed autos there's gotta be a time frame. In Canada we also have it significantly better than our brethren south of the border. Some of our friends in this thread have forgotten that. the 15 year rule may seen inconvenient, but on the flip side we have easy access to a lot of cool JDM stuff (albeit a tad older).

I do admit I like the non compliance tax in combination with a timeframe. Now to find the proper balance and convince the powers that be. Do you think we can get some funding and form a commitee. :devil:

mx73someday

06-13-2005, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by JCX

If the 15 year rule didn't exist, you could import any car that did not meet specs. This is simply unfair to the manufacturers (domestice and foreign) who spent the time, money and effort to make their auto legal for sale in our country. I think it's also borderline paranoid to say strictly the 15 year rule in Canada is in place to protect American companies.

I would still blame the Canadian and American governments for using "safety standards" just strict enough that foreign manufacturers have to spend more money on research and designing of existing models.

I don't see how it's any business of a government to say which car is safe for me when I can choose to ride a motorcycle. Safety standards are not even a concern when I'm buying a car, I would even say that I prefer cars without airbags and other safety gimmicks, its just extra weight to me. Safety is about always driving with awareness.

I don't see how it's paranoid to say that the 15 year rule in Canada is to protect American companies, it being a safety thing can be thrown right out when other modern countries can have less standards than us and still function like a normal society. Can you maybe suggest what else might be the function of the 15 year rule?