DOT pulled my Japanese import over today. Need some help (1 Viewer)

[light_duty]

Near as I can figure, it works like this: the provincial act and regs refer to the Motor Vehicle Act (a federal law). Part of the MVA are documents called "Standards" - in the case of lighting, Standard 108. Standard 108 is informed by another document called "Technical Standards Document 108." TSD 108 contains a lot of fine detail about how and where certain lamp is to be mounted, how it is to be aimed, etc. It's quite a technical piece - almost 100 pages long. Finally, the TSD refers to certain SAE standards, which are only available for purchase from SAE, unless you happen to live next to a good academic library at a university with a large engineering program.

So basically, there is no way to "prove" that your lights meet the standards. And even if you did get ahold of the standard, you'd need to get a lab to run the same tests on the lenses, etc., that the manufacturers do. I think I much better approach is to convince the various levels of government that the standards used in other jurisdictions are equal or superior to the DOT/SAE standards. As I mentioned in a previous piece, the Feds are moving in this direction in a limited way with TSD 108.1 (http://www.tc.gc.ca/acts-regulations/GENERAL/m/mvsa/regulations/mvsrg/100/mvsr108_1.html),
but there is more to be done, since this only addresses headlamps.

I'm still digging...man, I wish I'd taken that Government Documents class at library school.

Robin

 

[Previa Diesel]

"Quote:
Table 1 you posted applies only to headlights. Nothing about the relevant SAE/DOT standards for tail-lights in there.
It is on page 35 above."

No, those are not the SAE/DOT standards, they are simply the inspection criteria. The main problem here is the requirement that lenses have the DOT/SAE stamp on them, EVEN IF they meet the standards anyway. Many vehicles destined only for Japanese market will meet these standards but nonetheless not have the SAE/DOT markings.

I see, I assumed you were talking about just the issue of the lights being marked SAE/DOT rather than what those standards actually are.

My understanding is that the third brake light is only required if it was originally fitted. How can it be required on a 1990 import when it was not fitted to many NA market 1991 vehicles?

 

[jcolvin]

You are probably right that proving your lenses meet the SAE standards would be quite a job, and might not be feasible. That's why I'd like to have a look at what the SAE standards actually say, to ascertain whether such a course is feasible or not.

I'd agree that the best course is to lobby for something like an exemption for unaltered vehicles older than 15 years, similar to the exemption at the Federal level.

 

[light_duty]

I'd agree that the best course is to lobby for something like an exemption for unaltered vehicles older than 15 years, similar to the exemption at the Federal level.

There is no "exemption" for any vehicle when it comes to the Motor Vehicle Act. A vehicle is exempted from meeting RIV requirements for importation, but that exemption does not speak to vehicle safety. At least that is how I understand it.




Robin

[edit: removed some stuff to keep from the prying eyes of the man]

 

[crushers]

Robin,
correct me if i am wrong but this portion of Motor Vehicle Act pertains to units built or sold in Canada new orunger than 15 years old.
The 15 year rule exempts this from the imports older than 15 years.

The gent in Red Deer who runs this whole mess in Alberta was quite explicit when it came to exemption under the 15 years rule...
cheers

 

[George Cowan]

There is supposed to be an article in the Province newspaper tomorrow on a JDM Nissan S-Cargo. I know the owner who just happened to be driving locally when a reporter flagged him down as this is such a wierd little vehicle.
Maybe this reporter might be interested in the plight we JDM vehicle owners find ourselves in here in BC.

 

[Previa Diesel]

There is supposed to be an article in the Province newspaper tomorrow on a JDM Nissan S-Cargo. I know the owner who just happened to be driving locally when a reporter flagged him down as this is such a wierd little vehicle.
Maybe this reporter might be interested in the plight we JDM vehicle owners find ourselves in here in BC.

Unfortunately this is exactly the kind of vehicle that raises hackles in Ottawa and Victoria: a little box that probably wouldn't survive a collision with much of anything. A poor choice by the reporter or a deliberate choice. I had a look at one on the dock in Vancouver and was not impressed.

I was told by a TC official that "all it would take is one fatal accident" with a vehicle of this kind to shut down imports altogether.

There were over 17,000 imports to Canada last year under the 15 year rule and it is obvious from talking to these people that some or all of them view RHD as a safety issue. Of course probably less than half of that number were RHD imports.

Some accident statistics from Japan where there are proportionately far more LHD vehicles being driven under much more difficult driving conditions would help to show that having controls on the opposite side from the usual is not a safety issue. In fact RHD is safer when driving on the right IMO

 

[light_duty]

I was told by a TC official that "all it would take is one fatal accident" with a vehicle of this kind to shut down imports altogether.

In that case, it's time to pull all the old VW busses off the road! Death traps, those.

Anyway, I suspect you'd see prohibitively high insurance rates long before any legislative crackdown on imports.

Pure speculation, of course.

Robin

 

[crushers]

more steel doesn't nessarily make for stronger, safer cars. the Smart Car is a feat of engineering for safety...

 

[jcolvin]

Robin,
correct me if i am wrong but this portion of Motor Vehicle Act pertains to units built or sold in Canada new orunger than 15 years old.
The 15 year rule exempts this from the imports older than 15 years.

The gent in Red Deer who runs this whole mess in Alberta was quite explicit when it came to exemption under the 15 years rule...
cheers

I think Robin is right and the 15 year rule applies only to importability. At least, I can't find anything in the Motor Vehicle Act itself that exempts vehicles older than 15 years. So technically, yes, this mess applies to Alberta as well (in fact, all of Canada). I'd say the Gent in Red Deer is likely mistaken.

Jonathan Colvin
1990 HDJ-81 with SAE approved tail lights (whew!)
1990 FJ80

 

[crushers]

more steel doesn't nessarily make for stronger, safer cars. the Smart Car is a feat of engineering for safety...

 

[crushers]

tomorrow i will go and get a copy of the MVA and do some research...

 

[jcolvin]

Another question is what standard did the Japanese use domestically when they didn't use the SAE standard (SAE started out as an American standard and was only recently internationalized). For example, looking at the tail-lights on my buddy's S-cargo, each lens has a small glyph/logo that can best be described as a yin-yang with some sort of squiggle inside. I see the same squiggle on the headlights of my HDJ-81.

This squiggle must be the mark from whatever Japanese domestic standard was in use at the time. If this standard was *equivalent* to the SAE standards at the same time, it might help our argument.

Anyone know anything about what automotive standard was in use domestically in Japan around 1990-1991?

Jonathan Colvin Galiano Island

1990 HDJ-81

 

[crushers]

can you take a pic of this yin-yang with some sort of squiggle inside?

 

[expat]

found some good stuff on this site...

http://fmvss108.tripod.com/

 

[jcolvin]

can you take a pic of this yin-yang with some sort of squiggle inside?

It is *really* small. I think a good macro lens would be required, which I don't have.

I will double check tomorrow (when it's daylight) where on my HDJ the squiggle is, so you can go look at it yourself...

W.r.t. the 15 year rule, this is governed by Memorandum D19-12-1

(http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/E/pub/cm/d19-12-1/d19-12-1-01-e.html#P167_22154)

29. Vehicles are exempt from complying with the Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards at the point of entry into Canada if:

(a) the vehicles are 15 years old or older, or are buses manufactured before January 1, 1971; the importer must be able to demonstrate the age of the vehicle;

Note that this exempts vehicles from compliance *only* at the point of entry. Legally, vehicles must be brought into compliance with the MVAR once they have entered.

Jonathan Colvin, Galiano Island

1990 HDJ-81

 

[expat]

Federal Standard 108 here

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=49&PART=571&SECTION=108&YEAR=1999&TYPE=TEXT

 

[Greg_B]

Robin

[edit: removed some stuff to keep from the prying eyes of the man]

I was hoping our friend would play a little longer so we could get some more of the current perspective, working together...however I think this is wise right now.

gb

 

[2rivers]

If anything, I think that the article in the Province today (automotive section) might speed up the process to get authorities working together to make consistent rules and harmonize with Euro standards. I dont see why Canada cannot be like other countries that have R and L hand driving as long as they are safe to drive and safe to others on the road. If bad drivers like Glen referred to opt to get behind the wheel of RHD then they should probably pay more ins premiums.

More than ever the cat is out of the bag with all kinds of models/makes coming in, and efforts to try and stuff them back in might be just starting? The article talks about S-Cargo and Skylines mostly - and what I interpreted as being trendy alternatives

The small kei cars have a niche in cities/affordablility and I can understand why they would be popular. If anything this article has launched the kei cars into mainstream a bit more, if they arent already. Personally, I'll stick to my lumbering diesels. I'll scan the artcile and send it to someone to post becasue I still dont know how to post even a picture..? I just tried and it is way over the max size???? 0.5 MB in pdf?? help!

johnny

 

[jcolvin]

can you take a pic of this yin-yang with some sort of squiggle inside?

Look at the outside bottom corner of your japanese-spec headlights on an HDJ-81. You will see the glyph. It is a circular yin-yang glyph with the letters "J" and "S" (Japanese Standard?) inside.

*ALL* japanese-spec lenses I have seen so far have this glyph. It is a Japanese Standard mark for sure.

If we can show that this standard is equiv. to the SAE standard at the same time, we might have a good argument. But I know nothing about the Japanese Standards bodies....

Jonathan Colvin