it just came to me. user name is AATLAS1X
Calif.DMV, BAD news
- Thread starter Diesel42
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
cruiser_guy
Out of Africa / North Africa
tlcruiserman said:
I'd be this has ALOT to do with it. Back when emissions testing started in B.C. I had a car that was the last model year that would run leaded gas. I was cosntantly hassled at the emissions inspection and I started taking my orginal owners manual to show that my vehicle was NOT equipped with a cat and did NOT have a small fuel opening. The manual had pictures of both and clearly said "USA only" under the cat picture and "Canada" under the non-cat picture.
It seems like California is not smart enough to take that sort of evidence.
- Thread starter
- #43
Well, i believe California is just trying to make it harder for these rigs. But there are to many already registered for them to start with me. I'll continue to be a thorn in there side until it's registered. I just have to find the right person. Because the people so far have been apathetic, short, rude, and obtuss. " Well i guess you'll just have to get it out of the United States!" I said," You can't make me remove it from the United Dtates, who do you think you are?" He said," Well out of California, anyway!" I told him no. He was from CARB. So i'll be back on the phone tomorrow.
Diesel42 said:
good luck, diesel. just so you know, they WILL seize that vehicle and cut it in half if you arent careful. i have seen it done to a nice HJ61. huge bummer. all they need is a sherriff and a tow truck.
time to call AATLAS1X and have him make some stickers!
OK Keith, as far as I can tell there is nothing in my importing docs that resembles an emissions sticker. I've got a sticker for the doorjamb that lists tire pressure, weight, etc. and states that "This vehicle conforms to all applicable U.S. federal motor vehicle safety and theft prevention standards in effect on the date of manufacture." Says nothing about emissions.
The only doc I have dealing with emissions is of course EPA Form 3520-1, which states that it is exempt from Federal EPA emissions requirements because it's more than 21 years old.
I will not be near my BJ until Sun. or Mon. and will check it then, but I don't remember putting anything on.... What does the current doorjamb emissions sticker (if there is one) say? I can't remember on mine.
Again, I think Michael is on to something--like you said Keith, they didn't mark the box for engine/fuel type originally, so they may still be thinking somewhere that it is a gas model. Or maybe they think it has been modified or they think you're running away from a smog test? Who knows.
It may just be that the technical compliance section has noticed a lot of these coming across their desks and are cracking down with calls to CARB etc.
Another thing, that guy at CARB who said we are all gross poluters and he was going to get us had better keep a more even keel, objective approach to the citizens he serves. He might be someone else you mention when you talk to your state representative.
B
The only doc I have dealing with emissions is of course EPA Form 3520-1, which states that it is exempt from Federal EPA emissions requirements because it's more than 21 years old.
I will not be near my BJ until Sun. or Mon. and will check it then, but I don't remember putting anything on.... What does the current doorjamb emissions sticker (if there is one) say? I can't remember on mine.
Again, I think Michael is on to something--like you said Keith, they didn't mark the box for engine/fuel type originally, so they may still be thinking somewhere that it is a gas model. Or maybe they think it has been modified or they think you're running away from a smog test? Who knows.
It may just be that the technical compliance section has noticed a lot of these coming across their desks and are cracking down with calls to CARB etc.
Another thing, that guy at CARB who said we are all gross poluters and he was going to get us had better keep a more even keel, objective approach to the citizens he serves. He might be someone else you mention when you talk to your state representative.
B
Last edited:
The letter can be obtained FWIW, I just PM'd you a zerox I acquired once upon a time. Also check the importing thread, lots of good info that I'm sure you've read before. Also, biocruiser (I believe) has a good Registered Importer he uses that gets them in all the time, he has some very good technique. You might try giving him a shout, see what he says instead of dealing with the burocracy..
sorry not biocruiser, Zander above... Sorry Zander hope you don't mind me revealing that.. Andre
Here you go, edited to protect the person who recieved it, but good news FWIW...
Why? It sounds like it was legally imported, just has not been permanently licensed/registered for use on public roads.stumpy said:
- Thread starter
- #52
Dieselcruiserhead-that is really interesting. Here's a letter from Toyota dated March31,2006. Exact letter head and person whom authored it. I'm not sure how to scan this and post it so i'll just write it out verbatum(remember, this letter looks identical to yours except the language):
Dear XXXXX,
We are writing in response to your request for a letter to advise you if your 1983 Toyota Land Cruiser manufactured to meet Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety and Emission Standards, satisfies all U.S.Department of Transportation(D.O.T) fedralVehicle Safety,Bumper,Theft Protection Standard(U.S.FMVSS) and U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(E.P.A) Exhaust Emissions Standards.
Your vehicle,chassis number XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, was engineered and manufactured to meet Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and is not completely identical to similar versions imported by Toyota Motor Sales,U.S.A.,Inc.
Unfortunately, in order to satisfy specialized marker damands and/or government regulations in differing countries,Toyota, as well as other manufacturers, does not design or build vehicles with the intent to cross international borders. We highly recommend you sell your vehicle in Canada and purchase a U.S. specification vehicle once you arrive in the United States.
Thank ou for allowing Toyota Motor Sales,U.S.A., to asist you in the matter.
Sincerely,
Cassandra Jemison
National Customer Realations
Well there it is. PROOF that these assholes at Toyota know far less about the Toyota landcruiser line than we do on this forum. They absolutily refused me to speak to Cassandra Jemison. They couldn't explain this letter. SO because this letter was so vague and contradictary, the U.S.Customs couldn't accept it for importation. So a reg's importer was used.
Dear XXXXX,
We are writing in response to your request for a letter to advise you if your 1983 Toyota Land Cruiser manufactured to meet Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety and Emission Standards, satisfies all U.S.Department of Transportation(D.O.T) fedralVehicle Safety,Bumper,Theft Protection Standard(U.S.FMVSS) and U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(E.P.A) Exhaust Emissions Standards.
Your vehicle,chassis number XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, was engineered and manufactured to meet Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and is not completely identical to similar versions imported by Toyota Motor Sales,U.S.A.,Inc.
Unfortunately, in order to satisfy specialized marker damands and/or government regulations in differing countries,Toyota, as well as other manufacturers, does not design or build vehicles with the intent to cross international borders. We highly recommend you sell your vehicle in Canada and purchase a U.S. specification vehicle once you arrive in the United States.
Thank ou for allowing Toyota Motor Sales,U.S.A., to asist you in the matter.
Sincerely,
Cassandra Jemison
National Customer Realations
Well there it is. PROOF that these assholes at Toyota know far less about the Toyota landcruiser line than we do on this forum. They absolutily refused me to speak to Cassandra Jemison. They couldn't explain this letter. SO because this letter was so vague and contradictary, the U.S.Customs couldn't accept it for importation. So a reg's importer was used.
firetruck41 said:
CA doesnt care if it was imported legally into the US. if it is used on CA roads and is not properly tagged, they can seize it. of course if it is used off-road only, it doesnt matter if it is tagged. but if it were to say, sit on the street... just letting him know there is good reason to be careful.
-dre- how does that letter help him out? it looks like all it does is say it cant comply with EPA emissions standards. being exempt from US EPA standards doesnt make him exempt from CARB standards, does it?
Diesel42 said:
seems like nothing but a confirmation of what we all know- BJ/HJ models dont conform to US DOT regulations because they dont have the right stickers. mechancially, sure, they are nearly identical. but the BJ wasnt marked appropriately for US DOT acceptance. there are similar issues that come about if you change over your headlights to H4s. technically, they dont meet US DOT standards. in reality, they are better than US DOT approved headlights for the 7" round. but because US DOT hasnt approved the H4 conversion lamps, TECHNICALLY, they dont meet the sandard and have to be "for off road use only."
how was the letter contradictory? seemed to make sense to me. they are just covering their asses, just as every other major auto manufacturer would do in such a case.
The situation described by Diesel42 in post 28 applies to vehicles imported to CA from another state, as well. I recently bought an 80 from Washington state, and went to register. Same process as D42 posted, plus I had to have a smog test document assoc. with the VIN.
California is not diesel friendly for ONE REASON - with current high sulphur deisel fuels, the effluent mixes with water in the air, and forms dilute sulphuric acid - acid rain to you and me. This has been a devastating problem in the Sierra Nevada.
I would love to own a diesel, but Nevada is the place to register. But you cannot legally register in another state and drive in CA if you work or maintain your principal dwelling in CA.
California - my native state - wasn't always so f*cked up. It took hundreds of thousands of people moving here from OTHER STATES to **** it up. Welcome to the future.
M
California is not diesel friendly for ONE REASON - with current high sulphur deisel fuels, the effluent mixes with water in the air, and forms dilute sulphuric acid - acid rain to you and me. This has been a devastating problem in the Sierra Nevada.
I would love to own a diesel, but Nevada is the place to register. But you cannot legally register in another state and drive in CA if you work or maintain your principal dwelling in CA.
California - my native state - wasn't always so f*cked up. It took hundreds of thousands of people moving here from OTHER STATES to **** it up. Welcome to the future.
M
I was indicating that toyota does write the letter, despite what he was told.. Which he seemed to already know. This is the letter you need to get the truck across the boarder legally, even with the descrepancies usually they will take it because it says "it does satisfy US EPA." So, FWIW..
Also the law is that all vehicles in Canada satisfy all DOT standards if before 1990, so it already passes all DOT rules. They are already prevaived, they say" Before 1990, you are OK." The only discrepancy is airbags for a few years starting in 1990 (required in US, not in Canada) then they are in the clear again. Then Canada has some funky rules (daytime running lights for example) that are also funky and slightly more stringent in some areas when importing into Canada... But for example the last cruiser to go into Canada was the FJ62, they never saw 80 series there... But people import them there all the time...
So the big thing is emissions and if you can get the manufacturer to write a letter saying it meets both then you are in the clear, otherwise you have to pay to have the vehicle tested which is a major PITA not to mention the money... I had heard and had trouble getting the letter from Toyota myself when I imported my HJ60 and with a RI was able to get it across somehow seperate from Toyota luckily. But there was a fee for that even with me doing most of the work..
But his california dillema is definetely a PITA.. Andre
So the big thing is emissions and if you can get the manufacturer to write a letter saying it meets both then you are in the clear, otherwise you have to pay to have the vehicle tested which is a major PITA not to mention the money... I had heard and had trouble getting the letter from Toyota myself when I imported my HJ60 and with a RI was able to get it across somehow seperate from Toyota luckily. But there was a fee for that even with me doing most of the work..
But his california dillema is definetely a PITA.. Andre
- Thread starter
- #59
My purpose for citing the letter from Toyota was to show how two seperate people asking the same question about two like vehicles got seperate responses from the same exact person at Toyota. The first letter would have possibly been accepted by Customs as there requirement is that the letter say that it's SIMILAR with minor labaling issues. The EPA exemption already applies and there aware of it. But my letter was vague and specifically stated that they were not completely identical to similar U.S. versions( when asked to explain the differences, they couldn't), therefore the letter was rejected by customs thus a RI was hired for the legal importation. So it cost me money and the RI admitted Toyota screwed up. As far as California's concerned they don't require any diesel smog verification at this time. A vehicle that mets just federal EPA standards 49-state(even if it doesn't met California-50 state emissions) can be registered as long as it's not classified as new(less than 7500 miles). Which mine does have. But, there's no sticker! Regardless of the certified EPA form 3520-1 that states the 1983 vehicle IS EPA EXEMPT. THey just sit there with there fingers in there nose and say,"But, it needs the sticker!" or we need a letter from the manufacturer(because they can't think for themselves) If it were a Canadian gasser w/o sticker, get a smog certificate, met w/ state referee, a grants a waiver, presto- your registered. Even the state referee says they are being contradictory. Plus as Diesiple says, these rigs are all over and they can't refuse some of us and not others. Nor can they make up the rules as they go(ex post facto). I'll get this thing through.
Last edited:
crushers
post ho
actually they can and do change the rules as they feel fit...Diesel42 said:
