DOT pulled my Japanese import over today. Need some help (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter nickw
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
M John Galt said:
Valid points. I accept that you respectively disagree. I meant no disrespect in my thoughts.
I just did not agree with the above mentioned theories. But again that is IMOP...
Fromage said:
Jest don't want to be handing ammo to the Man, you know what I'm saying?
Fromage said:
I agree. Any provincial acts and regs that I've looked at require that vehicles conform to the MVSA, regardless of age. That is why parts of the MVSA and its TSDs are relevant to us even though our trucks are 15 years or older. So, practically speaking, there is no exemption. We still need to meet those requirements, and the provincial leg and regs are pretty specific about which sections of the MVSE are relevant. I haven't looked into whether things like crash safety, penetration, etc., are among these.
Fromage said:
Let me get this straight: you don't need DOT markings, but if you don't have them, better change your lights out? I don't get it. It is true, though, that you don't need DOT markings, but you do need SAE markings, or, in the case of headlamps, a valid E-code and proof the lights were patterned for travel on the RH side of the road (TSD 108.1).
Since we've pretty much established that everyone's lights meet some kind of standard, the trick is to get ahold of the standard and the tests used to establish that standard and demonstrate to the Feds that those test are as stringent and complete (if not more so) as the SAE standards they currently use. It seems that most of these are available online, except that the ECE website is an absolute bastard to use, making them hard to find.
This is not a pitch, these are my honest observations based on my own experience and common sense. Before I drove RHD I had no idea if I could/would like it. I asked everyone I saw driving RHD what their experience had been. They all said there was nothing to it; now I can see why.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2005
- Threads
- 110
- Messages
- 638
- Location
- Vancouver, Canada
- Website
- www.jjadventuretours.com
Fromage said:
Can you quote the part of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act that specifies this? I have not been able to find it. AFAIK (see earlier post of mine), the 15 year exemption applies ONLY at the point of entry.
Previa Diesel said:This is not a pitch, these are my honest observations based on my own experience and common sense. Before I drove RHD I had no idea if I could/would like it. I asked everyone I saw driving RHD what their experience had been. They all said there was nothing to it; now I can see why.
Hey you changed my comments to blue???
Thanks for the counterpoint.
My misclarification on the first comment was regarding you are sitting further over to the right in the vehicle(the rh seat) and thus have less vision to the left around cars at an intersection.
Time for tea...Thanks BB
brownbear said:
Yeh, red's not my colour.
If I understand correctly you are referring to a scenario where you are waiting to turn left behind another vehicle and might be better able in a LHD to see the oncoming traffic around the left side of the vehicle(s) in front?
Left-turners are 100% liable in the event of an accident. Thus it seems smarter to wait until you are the lead vehicle in the left turn lane then decide when it is safe to turn. Personally I'm #^$%@# tired of people turning left on red lights or against oncoming traffic. RHD should help discourage that kind of behaviour. (a bit of enforcement would be nice too)
The inspector I spoke to referred to passing being more difficult in a RHD. As I pointed out passing is inherently risky and if you are so close behind the vehicle ahead that you cannot see if it is safe to pass you'd better stay where you are. So RHD probably makes people more cautious. That can only be a good thing.
crushers
post ho
yep, if you tailgate in either LHD or RHD you are at risk.
driving RHD is the same as LHD, there is a learning curve. if you are uncomfortable in either you shouldn't be driving it.
cheers
<3 years and counting for my wife and I in a RHD in a LHD country>
without documented proof that RHD are more dangerous it is all uneductated, unproven hear-say...
driving RHD is the same as LHD, there is a learning curve. if you are uncomfortable in either you shouldn't be driving it.
cheers
<3 years and counting for my wife and I in a RHD in a LHD country>
without documented proof that RHD are more dangerous it is all uneductated, unproven hear-say...
crushers said:
I just wounder if the postal workers who drive our citys and towns all day long may have some ducumantation on RHD saftey?
GB
crushers
post ho
i will get my wife to do a search at work and see if she can dig anything up...
cheers
cheers
crushers said:
It's not even hearsay - there is NO evidence, period. In fact the evidence is quite the opposite IMO: RHD is safer.
I don't know, but some of them could sure use a good import. I was driving in Ladner a few weeks ago and one of them was driving up the right side of the road in the wrong direction so he could reach the mailboxes without getting out of his LHD car.
Last edited:
crushers
post ho
of he gets caught doing such a stunt the fine at the post office is steep and could lose his job for doing that...
Well, one of you importers ought to find out who these guys are and introduce them to the joys of RHD imports. Like most people they probably don't know the option exists.
Last edited:
Previa Diesel said:
See my comment above.....
You mean on a two or three lane road with a left turn lane in both directions? True, you can't see quite as much past the RH side of the facing (also turning) vehicle, (assuming you're not in a 4x4) which just means you have to wait until you can! If you're trying to turn left when there is a vehicle blocking some of your view of the oncoming through lanes you are asking for trouble whether you are RHD or LHD. So from what you are saying, RHD would make people less inclined to gamble when turning left on a multi-lane road. Good; anything (within reason) which makes people more cautious is to be welcomed by sensible drivers, the insurance industry and regulatory authorities.
Last edited:
Heheh, you realise that major OEMs have been trying to do that for 30 years, right? ECE lights generally don't pass DOT. They aren't inferior, just different. Actually Canada accepts some ECE lights - see CMVSS 108.1 alternative headlights. However, there are some catches - LH traffic being one of them.
Why mess with the man? Get DOT lights. Province guy happy. End of story.
cruiser_guy
Out of Africa / North Africa
Fromage said:
Most of Europe, with the exception of Great Britain, which it could be argued, is not part of Europe, is all left hand drive.
We've been trying to say that for a long time, we have more in common with North America than we have ever had with the rest of Europe.
I think it is right though it isn't really worth trying to buck the system, better just to fit DOT approved lights and be done with it.
Problem is (certainly over here) that while most sane people don't have an argument with the safety of imported cars, it is the manufacturers that really have a vested interest in not having grey imports on their turf. They spend a lot of money making region specific vehicles (and I'm not sure that this is all because the regulations need it - I'm sure the vehicle manufacturers have enough clout to get anything they want passed - apart from emissions) and the manufacturers want to protect their local dealers which doesn't sit well with having grey imports allowed.
A lot of Toyota dealers in the UK won't recognise grey imports, supply parts for them, honour recalls etc. They don't want them over here, they want to sell the local ones - remember the local dealers and also the manufacturer don't make any money on the sale of grey imports and at the price they go for they figure they could sell a local vehicle (maybe not the quality of the LC). For the money you can pay for a 10 year old import LC in the UK you could pretty much buy a small local Toyota from new which is obviously what Toyota want.
You won't beat the governments no matter how hard you try untill there are sufficient grey imports in the country to overcome the manufacturers reluctance to allow them and also become a significant minority.
In the UK we just take it on the chin, do what's asked and get on with it. Every now and then they try to make it a little more difficult (we now have two levels of SVA depending on age of vehicle) however overall it's amazing that you often have to remove items for the SVA which are allowed as accessories on no grey import vehicles such as
Bull Bars
Rear mounted spare wheels
Vent Visors
Side steps
anything that could be remotely classed as sharp (vent visors are classed as this).
It's a fight you aren't going to win - Sorry but that is the way the world works.
In the end it just ups the price of the imports which is another way of discouraging them. However that tack won't win either as long as JDM vehicles exist in better or different specifications to local market versions and as long as countries who don't normally have many diesels refuse to meet the needs of the consumer.
Rant over!!!
I think it is right though it isn't really worth trying to buck the system, better just to fit DOT approved lights and be done with it.
Problem is (certainly over here) that while most sane people don't have an argument with the safety of imported cars, it is the manufacturers that really have a vested interest in not having grey imports on their turf. They spend a lot of money making region specific vehicles (and I'm not sure that this is all because the regulations need it - I'm sure the vehicle manufacturers have enough clout to get anything they want passed - apart from emissions) and the manufacturers want to protect their local dealers which doesn't sit well with having grey imports allowed.
A lot of Toyota dealers in the UK won't recognise grey imports, supply parts for them, honour recalls etc. They don't want them over here, they want to sell the local ones - remember the local dealers and also the manufacturer don't make any money on the sale of grey imports and at the price they go for they figure they could sell a local vehicle (maybe not the quality of the LC). For the money you can pay for a 10 year old import LC in the UK you could pretty much buy a small local Toyota from new which is obviously what Toyota want.
You won't beat the governments no matter how hard you try untill there are sufficient grey imports in the country to overcome the manufacturers reluctance to allow them and also become a significant minority.
In the UK we just take it on the chin, do what's asked and get on with it. Every now and then they try to make it a little more difficult (we now have two levels of SVA depending on age of vehicle) however overall it's amazing that you often have to remove items for the SVA which are allowed as accessories on no grey import vehicles such as
Bull Bars
Rear mounted spare wheels
Vent Visors
Side steps
anything that could be remotely classed as sharp (vent visors are classed as this).
It's a fight you aren't going to win - Sorry but that is the way the world works.
In the end it just ups the price of the imports which is another way of discouraging them. However that tack won't win either as long as JDM vehicles exist in better or different specifications to local market versions and as long as countries who don't normally have many diesels refuse to meet the needs of the consumer.
Rant over!!!
jcolvin said:
It's actually under the Regs.
Section 4(2) of the MVSR:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/acts-regulations/GENERAL/m/mvsa/regulations/mvsrg/001/mvsr3-5.html
"(2) The prescribed classes referred to in subsections (1) and (1.1) do not include a vehicle that was manufactured 15 years or more before the date of its importation into Canada, except for a bus. "
Safety of a RHD
I've been driving RHD's since August 2001.... quite early in the whole RHD craze. I got the second vehicle that Lost Guide brought into Canada. I would have bought the first, but was late by 30 minutes. So, I think I have some experience on RHD use....
There are two things that RHD's really are bad at...
1. Passing on a 2 lane highway. If it's straight and flat, and you're behind a big square boxy truck, you just can't see. You either sit behind slow poke, wait for a bend in the road which enables you to see past the slow vehicle, or, if you have a passenger who's judgement you REALLY trust, they can advise you on the passability of the oncoming traffic. The only remaining option is to pull WAY out into the oncoming traffic lane to see around him.
2. Left hand turns on a solid green, when there's someone also in the opposing LH turn lane. You can't see around the guy across from you to see if there's traffic coming. You sit there. People in LHD's that can see around you honk like you're an idiot. You feel like an idiot.
There are some things that RHD's definately do better.
1. Visibility. The convex lenses of the RHD vehicles are incredibly superior to the N.A. flat mirror counterparts. I can see around me and in all blind spots WAY better than anything else. I've subsequently changed out all my mirrors on my NA spec vehicles to have convex mirrors.
2. Parallel Parking. Indeed, WAY better than in a LHD.
3. Curb appeal... Indeed, it's also way nicer to enter and exit from the curb side. No sitting and watching the mirror to know when you can open the door to get out. No watching the traffic before you dart out to run in the driving lane to get to your door. Very much nicer. With the life insurance money, passengers can be replaced... often with younger and better looking models.
I must also say that I do agree with the comment about LH turns in LH vehciles. I have a new 2003 Dodge pick-up, and the slopey front windshield and beefy A pillar make for a very effective screen to any visibility on LH turns. I have to move my head entirely around the pillar (and subsequently loose visibility in all the mirrors and sometimes directly ahead of me) to make a LH turn, and have, in fact, had to test the ABS in the rig on a few occassions where I couldn't see a biped until I was pointing right at them. Hence, I've become more cautious in this 'safer' LHD vehicle.
I would also suggest that the night time-oncoming traffic-watch the white line really is better in the RHD, although only a bit. There's still a moment of blindess as two vehciles pass in the night, but it's a bit less intesne in the RHD vehicles I've driven.
But all that is anecdotal heresay. Let's get the facts and the stats.
Peter Straub
I've been driving RHD's since August 2001.... quite early in the whole RHD craze. I got the second vehicle that Lost Guide brought into Canada. I would have bought the first, but was late by 30 minutes. So, I think I have some experience on RHD use....
There are two things that RHD's really are bad at...
1. Passing on a 2 lane highway. If it's straight and flat, and you're behind a big square boxy truck, you just can't see. You either sit behind slow poke, wait for a bend in the road which enables you to see past the slow vehicle, or, if you have a passenger who's judgement you REALLY trust, they can advise you on the passability of the oncoming traffic. The only remaining option is to pull WAY out into the oncoming traffic lane to see around him.
2. Left hand turns on a solid green, when there's someone also in the opposing LH turn lane. You can't see around the guy across from you to see if there's traffic coming. You sit there. People in LHD's that can see around you honk like you're an idiot. You feel like an idiot.
There are some things that RHD's definately do better.
1. Visibility. The convex lenses of the RHD vehicles are incredibly superior to the N.A. flat mirror counterparts. I can see around me and in all blind spots WAY better than anything else. I've subsequently changed out all my mirrors on my NA spec vehicles to have convex mirrors.
2. Parallel Parking. Indeed, WAY better than in a LHD.
3. Curb appeal... Indeed, it's also way nicer to enter and exit from the curb side. No sitting and watching the mirror to know when you can open the door to get out. No watching the traffic before you dart out to run in the driving lane to get to your door. Very much nicer. With the life insurance money, passengers can be replaced... often with younger and better looking models.
I must also say that I do agree with the comment about LH turns in LH vehciles. I have a new 2003 Dodge pick-up, and the slopey front windshield and beefy A pillar make for a very effective screen to any visibility on LH turns. I have to move my head entirely around the pillar (and subsequently loose visibility in all the mirrors and sometimes directly ahead of me) to make a LH turn, and have, in fact, had to test the ABS in the rig on a few occassions where I couldn't see a biped until I was pointing right at them. Hence, I've become more cautious in this 'safer' LHD vehicle.
I would also suggest that the night time-oncoming traffic-watch the white line really is better in the RHD, although only a bit. There's still a moment of blindess as two vehciles pass in the night, but it's a bit less intesne in the RHD vehicles I've driven.
But all that is anecdotal heresay. Let's get the facts and the stats.
Peter Straub
