News about the 15-year importation rule

[ringmaster]

Originally posted by Eleanor
Although the gov't says its primary reasons for changing the rule are safety and fuel efficiency those points are total crap. Are you telling me that a CDM MR-2 is safer than a JDM MR-2? Are you saying that an SR20 is less fuel efficient then a '70 Dodge Challenger? The government is only doing this to protect the domestic car companies who realize that younger people are buying skylines and MR-2s instead of a focus or cobalt.

Originally posted by soloracer

For the record I'm thinking it's most likely the insurance industry that is trying to get something done about these cars because they are the ones who will pay the bills for the claims.

Although I don't agree with most of soloracer's seemingly extreme left wing views, both he and Elanor have made the realization that whatever the motive for this proposed new policy is, it would seem to boil down to money... just like everything else.

[jhmed]

Originally posted by stevo 27
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...p;cardist=2209


is this not an illegal import ^^^^

Not necessarily. Remember, in the US you can import any vehicle LESS than 15 years. The only catch is you much get a letter from the manufacturer stating that the vehicle is FMVSS compliant. If you can't get that letter, then as long as its taken to an RI and made to be FMVSS compliant you can have it. It's very expensive but it CAN be done.

Like I said, the government should be looking into alternatives rather than just arbitrarily (sp?) changing the importation laws. IMHO, it's being lazy on their part.

[JCX]

Originally posted by Eleanor
Although the gov't says its primary reasons for changing the rule are safety and fuel efficiency those points are total crap. Are you telling me that a CDM MR-2 is safer than a JDM MR-2? Are you saying that an SR20 is less fuel efficient then a '70 Dodge Challenger? The government is only doing this to protect the domestic car companies who realize that younger people are buying skylines and MR-2s instead of a focus or cobalt.

Ok.

Why does the Canadian government care about protecting the makers of the Focus and the Cobalt? Both of which are American companies? Furthermore, how many people that buy a Skyline or an MR2 would realistically buy a Cobalt or a Focus instead? Zero? Maybe 1?

Regarding a 1970 Challenger... how many 1970 Challengers do you think were imported into Canada last year under the 15 year old rule? I'd bet virtually zero. Of those 1970 Challengers, how many are complete junkers that are driven irresponsibly by 17 year olds? Zero.

Regarding safety, your example of a JDM CRX and a CDM CRX is relatively accurate. However you are conveniently forgetting that a lot of these cars being imported were never originally brought into the country so there is no safety benchmark.

Let's get back to square 1. This 15 year old rule was meant to offer some lenience to enthusiasts bringin classics in, no? It was not meant to rescue cars from junkyards to be operated as daily driven jalopies here.

The only way I'd support keeping the 15 year old rule is if the cost of importation becomes significantly high enough to keep the garbage out. True collectors will pay for quality autos, this is not arguable.

[jhmed]

Originally posted by JCX
Regarding a 1970 Challenger... how many 1970 Challengers do you think were imported into Canada last year under the 15 year old rule? I'd bet virtually zero.

I'd bet that it's exactly ZERO, not virtually ZERO since it's a 37 year-old car you're talking about.

Originally posted by JCX
Regarding safety, your example of a JDM CRX and a CDM CRX is relatively accurate. However you are conveniently forgetting that a lot of these cars being imported were never originally brought into the country so there is no safety benchmark.

I conveniently forgot nothing, sir. You say that as though I am trying to pull the wool over someone's eyes, which is not the case. I used the CR-X example since that is the situation I am in personally and it is what I know the best... A vehicle with a North American equivalent are easier to modify is what I have been saying... you are not reading my entire posts or are not reading ALL my posts apparently.

Just because a Skyline has no North American equivalent, does necessarily mean it automatically cannot be made CMVSS/FMVSS compliant. Yes, there are some Japanese vehicles - even some Skylines - the US government says cannot be made FMVSS compliant. Those ones have to brought in when the US equivalent of the 15 year old rule comes into effect.

The CVSE in BC has approved prototype LHD Skyline headlights for use LEGALLY on their highways, they have approved side markers, tail lights and tires from Japan (some conditions apply for the those though).

People from the IVOAC are making headway with the ringleader/instigator of this situation, working hand in hand with the government to modify vehicles without North American equivalents to be safer... basically we're helping to do what should have been done in 2001/2002 when this all began.

They are using JIS and SAE and UNCE (I'm pressed for time and that may not be the right acronym, but there's your benchmarks right there...) for standards; comparing and contrasting to see what is equivalent to SAE DOT FMVSS and CMVSS standards and what is to the same standards and what is above our standards. The rest will have to be custom-made and held to the same strict standards as the OE parts would be.

[mx73someday]

Originally posted by soloracer

Here's another one for you. How do you safely pass a semi on an Alberta highway in a RHD car without pulling onto the shoulder or pulling excessively into the passing lane until you can see? Or are you saying that you just won't pass anyone, ever? See what I mean? The car design is what is causing the problem - not the drivers ability.

Have you ever driven RHD on a Canadian highway? The problem you're describing doesn't happen. You can easily see ahead on slight curves where passing is allowed. You can also drop back behind the vehicle you intend to pass, it gives you plenty of time to peek in the opposing lane of traffic without any risk. If you're driving a fast car, then it becomes even easier because when you spot a chance to pass you can accelerate past the vehicle in front of you in no time. It also helps to have a passenger whom you trust in the car.

There are two arguments against imported cars, that RHD is not safe and that imported cars aren't safe because they weren't built for CMVSS. The RHD isn't safe argument is invalid, as I said earlier in this thread RHD's and LHD's get along in Europe and Japan without problem, I've been driving RHD for 4 years in Canada and I never get into these dangerous situations you're describing.

While it is true that these vehicles don't necessarily meet CMVSS, they aren't prescribed to unless the provinces require it. I personally could care less about which country's safety standards my car was built to, I will make my own car safe for me just as some choose to ride a motorcycle instead of a car. If you think that your JDM car is unsafe in Canada, would you still drive a JDM car in Japan? Would you feel safe driving a USDM car in Japan that wasn't converted to JDM specifications?

For those who feel passionate against RHD and imported vehicles, I challenge you to debate your position on the forums at IVOAC.ca. Your position against will be tested more than it would in this thread.

[carter_prelude]

Originally posted by soloracer

That is the safety problem with driving a RHD vehicle on a road system where everyone else follows the rules that apply to a LHD vehicle. I fully it and understand why the gov't is taking the action they are.

Acutaully, i beleive the rules of the road apply to RHD and LHD vehicals

Also you obviously DON'T understand why the government is banning them. They aren't banning RHD. They are banning ANY 15 year old car from coming in. IE. if this rule goes through...you can still import a 25 year old car thats RHD.

[jhmed]

Originally posted by carter_prelude
They aren't banning RHD. They are banning ANY 15 year old car from coming in. IE. if this rule goes through...you can still import a 25 year old car thats RHD.

True.

I use the term "ban" because its easier to type than Proposed change to 15 year rule. LOL

[stevo 27]

Originally posted by JCX


Of those 1970 Challengers, how many are complete junkers that are driven irresponsibly by 17 year olds? Zero.

Regarding safety, your example of a JDM CRX and a CDM CRX is relatively accurate. However you are conveniently forgetting that a lot of these cars being imported were never originally brought into the country so there is no safety benchmark.

Let's get back to square 1. This 15 year old rule was meant to offer some lenience to enthusiasts bringin classics in, no? It was not meant to rescue cars from junkyards to be operated as daily driven jalopies here.

The only way I'd support keeping the 15 year old rule is if the cost of importation becomes significantly high enough to keep the garbage out. True collectors will pay for quality autos, this is not arguable.

why wouldnt you support it
what is awsome about importing higher performance cars from
japan gives younger people a chance to have and afford
a quick car . And the whole 17 year old thing you know how many 25-40 years olds speeding ridiculously doing smoke shows and
fucking around yes more younger people crash but generilizing
on the whole thing is stupid but w\e

i thinki younger people being abble to buy better cars for cheaper is awsome and all the imports my friends have are mint not jalopies

[GT2NV]

The only reason hes against rhd imports =

soloracer
Neutral

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Zimbabwe
What I drive: 89 944 Turbo / 93 RX7 Turbo/94 968 Turbo

that lil rx7 of his because no longer can he sell it for 30,000$ Its people like you and new car dealerships that are against this movement just because your import is overpriced. Me myself i cant wait to get my hands on the 93.5 supra, its my dream car and will probably be my "Old mans mustang" when im older, collectors car hell yes! I dont really agree with daily driver for an RHD car due to the VERY FEW safety hazards but as a collectors car definatly, and there is RARELY a supra forsale in calgary and when there is its usually already modified and priced somewhere around the 30-40k range. I cant wait to be able to purchase one for a fraction of that

[Annoyingrob]

Originally posted by JCX
The only way I'd support keeping the 15 year old rule is if the cost of importation becomes significantly high enough to keep the garbage out. True collectors will pay for quality autos, this is not arguable.

I have an even crazier idea. Maybe they should do some sort of test on these junkers to see if they're safe enough to be driven around. I think that should keep a lot of the junk out.

Why haven't they thought of this before

[jhmed]

Originally posted by Annoyingrob
I have an even crazier idea. Maybe they should do some sort of test on these junkers to see if they're safe enough to be driven around. I think that should keep a lot of the junk out.

Why haven't they thought of this before

They already DO. It's called an OOPI. Problem is, no one seems to be able to test 'em right.

[soloracer]

Originally posted by GT2NV
The only reason hes against rhd imports =

soloracer
Neutral

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Zimbabwe
What I drive: 89 944 Turbo / 93 RX7 Turbo/94 968 Turbo

that lil rx7 of his because no longer can he sell it for 30,000$ Its people like you and new car dealerships that are against this movement just because your import is overpriced. Me myself i cant wait to get my hands on the 93.5 supra, its my dream car and will probably be my "Old mans mustang" when im older, collectors car hell yes! I dont really agree with daily driver for an RHD car due to the VERY FEW safety hazards but as a collectors car definatly, and there is RARELY a supra forsale in calgary and when there is its usually already modified and priced somewhere around the 30-40k range. I cant wait to be able to purchase one for a fraction of that

Ahhh...that would be false. I actually imported the RX7 from Utah - mainly because I couldn't find a black R1 locally and yes the price was decent for the car - something like $16K Canadian. Not $5k mind you but still a reasonable price that I was willing to pay. I'm also in the process of getting an NSX as well from the US - I haven't seen any supercharged ones for sale around here. However, if the government decided that there was something significantly wrong with the cars (like a design defect that made them unacceptable to drive here) and told me that I couldn't bring them into Canada I wouldn't be getting my panties all in a wad and go crying about how unfair it was or that I should have freedom of choice because I know that it's not unfair and the it's not a god given right to own any car for any price. For example, did you know that you can't import most Ferrari's from the US? They aren't on the RIV list of acceptable cars. Neither are kit cars. I'm sure most of them are cheaper in the US - mainly due to the strength of our dollar - but for some amazing reason there is no hand wringing and wailing about it. They even have the steering wheel on the correct side of the car. I would love to buy a Ferrari some day but there is a reason you can't bring one in from the US - probably a safety reason (I'm guessing bumper not meeting minimum Canadian standards). So how come IVOAC isn't all up in arms about that?

P.S. I also don't plan on selling the RX7 any time soon. I'm a collector you see and I'm not buying them just because they are cheap and want to make a buck.

[jhmed]

Originally posted by soloracer

I'm sure most of them are cheaper in the US - mainly due to the strength of our dollar - but for some amazing reason there is no hand wringing and wailing about it. They even have the steering wheel on the correct side of the car. I would love to buy a Ferrari some day but there is a reason you can't bring one in from the US - probably a safety reason (I'm guessing bumper not meeting minimum Canadian standards). So how come IVOAC isn't all up in arms about that?

There are many groups that belong to the SVAA (Specialty Vehicle Association of Alberta) as well and are using the SVAA's sphere of influence (and the NAAACCC's) to assist them. No one with a Ferrari has joined the IVOAC and brought this matter to our attention. We have specialized so far in fighting the battle on behalf of owners who purchased their vehicles from OUTSIDE the USA.

Could you please elaborate as to the specific models of Ferrari that have been disallowed entry into Canada from the US? Or provide a link to where you read that? I'd like to look into it a bit... You've peaked my curiousity. Thanks!

[soloracer]

Originally posted by jhmed


There are many groups that belong to the SVAA (Specialty Vehicle Association of Alberta) as well and are using the SVAA's sphere of influence (and the NAAACCC's) to assist them. No one with a Ferrari has joined the IVOAC and brought this matter to our attention. We have specialized so far in fighting the battle on behalf of owners who purchased their vehicles from OUTSIDE the USA.

Could you please elaborate as to the specific models of Ferrari that have been disallowed entry into Canada from the US? Or provide a link to where you read that? I'd like to look into it a bit... You've peaked my curiousity. Thanks!

The list of cars accepted is here:

http://www.riv.ca/english/US_vehicle_admissibility.pdf

I see they updated the list in the last couple of years to allow the newest Ferrari's in but noticed that pretty much any model from 1992 to 2000 is not allowed. No 355's, no 348's, etc. I'm surprised you've never read the RIV list seeing as how you are apparently involved with the importation of cars into Canada.

[tentacles]

For example, did you know that you can't import most Ferrari's from the US?

Well, I guess by "most", he means all Ferraris except the 360, 575, 612, 599, 430, and Enzo.

God dammit why can't I want to import my 288 GTO and 512 Testarossa !?! *wail*.

[stevo 27]

Originally posted by jhmed


They already DO. It's called an OOPI. Problem is, no one seems to be able to test 'em right.

i think rob knew this and was being sarcastic

love the car rob i call first ride when the new turbos in

[soloracer]

Originally posted by tentacles


Well, I guess by "most", he means all Ferraris except the 360, 575, 612, 599, 430, and Enzo.

God dammit why can't I want to import my 288 GTO and 512 Testarossa !?! *wail*.

Reread what I posted. I said they allowed the cars that were built after 2000 but almost none of the cars that were made between 1992 and 2000. Before this latest update they didn't allow any Ferrari's (back when I imported my RX7)

[jhmed]

Originally posted by soloracer


The list of cars accepted is here:

http://www.riv.ca/english/US_vehicle_admissibility.pdf

I see they updated the list in the last couple of years to allow the newest Ferrari's in but noticed that pretty much any model from 1992 to 2000 is not allowed. No 355's, no 348's, etc. I'm surprised you've never read the RIV list seeing as how you are apparently involved with the importation of cars into Canada.

When you read and see as much as I do on this daily, you can occasionally forget what you've read and when... I've seen that list before but it was back on January 21st (I know because I saved the PDF on my harddrive LOL) and I forgot that I had. Sorry Plus, I've never really gave more than a quick glance at the importation laws for bringing something in from the USA, which is what that list is all about.

EDIT: To clarify your statement that I'm "apparently involved with the importation of cars into Canada"... The way that's worded sounds like you may think I am an importer of some sorts... I'm not an importer nor have I ever imported a vehicle in my life. I *own* one imported vehicle. Custom Auto and World Car Link did the actual *importing* of my car.

[Eleanor]

Originally posted by JCX


Ok.

Why does the Canadian government care about protecting the makers of the Focus and the Cobalt? Both of which are American companies? Furthermore, how many people that buy a Skyline or an MR2 would realistically buy a Cobalt or a Focus instead? Zero? Maybe 1?

True they are both american companies, but how many of their plants are in Ontario? Quite a few. If JDM cars were not an option, I'm sure some people would consider purchasing new cars. you might want to consider an Cobalt SS or an SRT4.

Regarding a 1970 Challenger... how many 1970 Challengers do you think were imported into Canada last year under the 15 year old rule? I'd bet virtually zero. Of those 1970 Challengers, how many are complete junkers that are driven irresponsibly by 17 year olds? Zero.

I never said that they were being imported. I'm just trying to say that fuel efficiency is a bs reason for not bringing in JDM cars. What about Hummers? Tahoes? I see a lot more of those then Skylines.

Regarding safety, your example of a JDM CRX and a CDM CRX is relatively accurate. However you are conveniently forgetting that a lot of these cars being imported were never originally brought into the country so there is no safety benchmark.

True, skylines and other models that were never available here were never tested. However, industry standards for collision safety have increased over the past 15 years and I'm pretty sure that 1980s pontiac sunbirds or ford pintos wouldn't pass testing today either, yet they're still on the road.

Let's get back to square 1. This 15 year old rule was meant to offer some lenience to enthusiasts bringin classics in, no? It was not meant to rescue cars from junkyards to be operated as daily driven jalopies here.

I totally agree with you here. The law was not made so 18 year olds can get their hands on a skyline but if they do decide to ban all imports less than 25 years old, then you're punishing the people who the law was written for for stuff that isn't their fault.

The only way I'd support keeping the 15 year old rule is if the cost of importation becomes significantly high enough to keep the garbage out. True collectors will pay for quality autos, this is not arguable.

I agree again that true collectors will pay for quality autos but there are some people who simply want to own their dream car and can't really afford to pay a premium. Ever since I laid my eyes on (and then drove) an R32 skyline when I was in australia I've wanted to own one. I've come to the point where I can almost afford one and if they implement this rule I'll need to wait another 10 years. The government can't just ban all imports less than 25 years because some kids buy them and do stupid s*** in them. that's like banning matches because some kids lit a house on fire.

[Annoyingrob]

Originally posted by stevo 27


i think rob knew this and was being sarcastic

love the car rob i call first ride when the new turbos in

Yeah, it was pure sarcasm. I'm surprised he didn't pick up on it.


Off topic: I'm pulling the motor this weekend after the track to throw in the turbo.