SAE/DOT light question

[84crewcab]

I have begun to start looking at taillights and headlights over the past couple of months on various other cars other than JDM vehicles and have noticed that there are quite a few different makes that don't seem to have the required DOT/SAE markings (ie Smartcars, Volvos, VW, other Mercedes etc etc). I brought this up before in another thread and sombody shot this down by saying that those vehicles have been approved for import because the manufacture proved that they met the required codes. My question is who did the manufacture prove this to? I bet you it was Transport Canada that gave the approval for those cars to be imported not the provincial MOT.
Why is it OK for these cars to not have to carry SAE or DOT on their lights but we must comply? I have a signed stamped form for my truck from Transport Canada that say its OK for import, Why is this not the same as the approval that they gave for the import of the Smartcars? Or did every single Canadian province have to individually approve them to be operated on their roads without DOT/SAE lighting?
Don't get me wrong I can accept replacing the headlights for safety reasons but the other lenses are exactly the same and should be left as is.
When this goes to Court, and it WILL go to court this needs to be brought up!

Grant

 

[Stone]

Hhmm...I don't necessarily think that it's apples to apples on your Transport Canada vs MOT argument. Regarding the new vehicles (ie. Smart Car), the manufacturer has documentation that proves to TC that the new vehicle being imported complies to all of the safety requirements for our roads. Our RHD Cruisers on the other hand are coming in under an exception...so the MOT is requiring that we bring our vehicles up to snuff to be run on our roads. At least that's how I see it.

 

[Psilosin]

I think the point is that in BC the CVSE are going by the "letter of the law" in regards to the BC MVA and even worse "the letter of the inspection manual" when it comes to OOP inspections and are using that as their be-all-end-all argument.

So simply put, no visible DOT/SAE stamp on your lights/lenses then you fail. No exceptions. That is the letter of the law/inspection manual.

They also stick to the point that provincial jurisdiction beats federal jurisdiction.

Soooo even though SmartCars etc without visible SAE/DOT stamped lighting HAVE a letter of compliance that satisfies Transport Canada standards they technicaly still do not meets the "letter of the law" standards of the BC MVA (which trump federal remember) and should not be allowed on the roads any more than 15year old JDM imports without visible SAE/DOT stamps on all lights/lenses.

Yes thats stupid but thats the same "letter of the law" thats being shoved in the face of each JDM import owner in BC.

It is an impossible senario to imagine enforcement of this in BC to all such vehicles (SmartCars etc) as political backlash would be huge. So if push comes to shove and one of us JDM import owners ends up in court, victoy should not be too difficult once this double standard is brought to light.

 

[crushers]

as long as the "smart" car has a sticker of compliance on the door then they are clear to go.
we do not have a sticker and so far have not been able to get one...
i have been informed by both the alberta and BC inspectors that if i get a letter of compliance from an engineer then the tail lights will pass.
here is the catch, you need a letter for each model and each year. in other words if i get a letter for a HZJ77, they will not allow me to use it for a 90 LJ78 even though they share the same tail light assembly.
to muddy the waters worse, there is an inspector that will not accept a swapped in DOT tail light since it is no longer OE for that vehicle.

cheers

 

[1990 LJ78]

Wayne with what you have said with regards to the last sentance in your post
#4. Dose that mean that if we change or modify any lenses to DOT they will fail your vehicle?? So as I see it if we mod anything on these trucks they are going to fail. OR am I reading too much between the lines..
How about If we add a third high brake light ?? that would be a mod and the vehicle would fail..??
SO how on earth are we going to comply ??? Just about makes it impossible.

Starting to stink of lobbying officials and such to me..

Regards

 

[nickw]

Wayne, the sounds great.
How much does it cost for an engineer to do the tests?

Maybe a group of us could fork out the money.
Then could we charge people for the sticker of compliance (not much $10-20?)
Not to make money, just to help cover the costs of testing.

Cheers,
Nick

 

[1990 LJ78]

Well now dose the engineer need to be Canadian..??
Or from this country?

How about a good one from Japan.??
What kind of $$ would they charge I wonder..

Rich

 

[nickw]

What are the odds that if we did do a registry we would find a JMD owner WHO IS an engineer?

 

[1990 LJ78]

Here is a link.

http://bimmer.roadfly.com/m3/messages/archive/msgsy2000w13/75121.html

On the european head lights. I found it while trying to find some sort of euro- spec, DOT, Sae comparision page or forum..

I have not had time to read it yet..

Rich

 

[1990 LJ78]

Here I think is a link to SAE http://www.sae.org/standardsdev/groundvehicle/newgvstd.htm
A place to start..??

Rich

 

[1990 LJ78]

Just came from here
http://www.mazda3forums.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=26731ee653d95271b1eb53ba2cf72ca3&topic=35966.new

These guys are switching to Euro - spec lights ( which is elegal).. and we get hastled for having them..
Rich

 

[crushers]

Wayne with what you have said with regards to the last sentance in your post
#4. Dose that mean that if we change or modify any lenses to DOT they will fail your vehicle?? So as I see it if we mod anything on these trucks they are going to fail. OR am I reading too much between the lines..
How about If we add a third high brake light ?? that would be a mod and the vehicle would fail..??
SO how on earth are we going to comply ??? Just about makes it impossible.

Starting to stink of lobbying officials and such to me..

Regards

this is just one inspector who, in my opinion, doesn't know his stuff. The reason i posted it was to make anyone who reads this aware that WE need to know the rules and have a copy handy to present to the roadside official should a problem occure.
there is, to my understanding, any law that states you can not modify from OE to comply.
we need to comply, simple as that.

 

[crushers]

Just came from here
http://www.mazda3forums.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=26731ee653d95271b1eb53ba2cf72ca3&topic=35966.new

These guys are switching to Euro - spec lights ( which is elegal).. and we get hastled for having them..
Rich

there are lots of aftermarket kits for various vehicles on the road but most are illegal to run. it is a chance you take to look cool and different from everyone else.
we are not talking common sense here, we are talking the letter of the law.

 

[crushers]

Here is a link.

http://bimmer.roadfly.com/m3/messages/archive/msgsy2000w13/75121.html

On the european head lights. I found it while trying to find some sort of euro- spec, DOT, Sae comparision page or forum..

I have not had time to read it yet..

Rich

there is little fact here and this deffinately hurts our case...

 

[light_duty]

this is just one inspector who, in my opinion, doesn't know his stuff. The reason i posted it was to make anyone who reads this aware that WE need to know the rules and have a copy handy to present to the roadside official should a problem occure.
there is, to my understanding, any law that states you can not modify from OE to comply.
we need to comply, simple as that.

I think this comes from a line in the BC Inspection manual and/or the BC Regs that states that lamps must be "equivalent to OEM." Of course, the word "Equivalent" is subject to interpretation. Does it mean equivalence in terms of size? Luminosity? Shade of red or amber? Who knows?

Sounds like the Inspector in question has decided to interpret "equivalent" as "identical." I doubt such an interpretation would stand up to a challenge, should it come to that, which it probably will at some point.

In my reading of the federal MVA and regs, and that of BC and Alberta, I have never seen anything that states that a vehicle cannot be modified from OEM, at least in terms of lighting. If that were the case, a lot of home-built traybacks and DIY RVs would be off the road.

Robin

 

[1990 LJ78]

Thanks guys makes me feel a bite better now I've heard your takes.
I am going ahead with my High Third brake light addition.
I'm hoping to have the brake light that will stick onto the rear large door window Saturday after I trip up to Barrie in the Prado to visit Princess auto...
I'm also trying to get The dealer I bought the truck from to come up with the import papers or at least copies to put in the truck.. OR anything. I wish I could get this stuff myself..
Funny thing about the safety certificate that they gave me when I picked the truck up ... It was signed of course But on the back it states
"the Highyway Traffic Safety Act requires the inspection of the following"
Item 10 is Lights and reflectors -it passed
Item 11 Read Lamp aim -it passed

How is any one else dealing with this issue..or is it just us few??? Trying to do anything.. There must be sports car JDM's out there.
I wonder what they are doing.??


Rich

 

[nickw]

Please note: You DON'T have to do the 3rd high-mount stop lamp.
This not required on SUV's until September of 1993.

Go look at any pre 93 4 runner and you will not see one.

I dug through the legislation and found their mistake.
I politely showed this to my local CVSE contact.
He presented it to his boss in Victoria and they are going to amend the inspection manual in it's next revision.

Cheers,
Nick

 

[1990 LJ78]

Nick thanks for the info.
I know I do Not have to make this mod... But feel it is just one of those things I need to do..
I do not think it can hurt our cause to add the third brake light.
Had a cop follow me to work yesterday checking out my crusier and plate on his computer, I was watching him as much as he was watching me.
I guess he found no warrents outstanding as he turned off about 5 minutes from work location. waaahooo

Rich

 

[1990 LJ78]

Just got some import documents from the dealer I purchased my truck from.
They also informed me they have 3 more trucks on the way to them..

Rich

 

[jhmed]

I have heard a rumor that the Skyline Shop in Vancouver is making prototype headlights for their Skylines and having them tested by engineers to the SAE standard for use over here...

I'm sure some of us could do the same if we got a group together to split up the costs....

I like the idea of having the tests done on existing or European equipment in order to bypass some of the regs... I confirmed with Terry McDonald of the Alberta Infrastructure & Transportation office last month: If a certified engineer can attest to the equivalency of the LHD Euro lights to the SAE/DOT standard (RHD would never pass, as also mentioned in the APATHY thread here) then there would be an exception made to the SAE/DOT markings being required...