red13 Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 http://www.importavehicle.info/2014/06/california-vehicle-industry-news-2014-14.html Quote Link to comment
Mattndew76 Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 No RHD cars allowed unless US mail carrier cars.. Is there anything you can do in Cali? Quote Link to comment
datzenmike Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 I'm not seeing anything newsworthy here. Couldn't find the part about RHD. Quote Link to comment
smoke Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 So get a US mail sticker. 1 Quote Link to comment
MikeRL411 Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 I'm not seeing anything newsworthy here. Couldn't find the part about RHD. Right on that. Not a twit about RHD. Initial post is blowing air on that! 1 Quote Link to comment
Draker Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 No RHD cars allowed unless US mail carrier cars.. Is there anything you can do in Cali? You can sell shit at double its actual value. 3 Quote Link to comment
wayno Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 I did not put the smiley faces in that text, I don't know how or why they are there. :( Right Hand Drive (RHD) Vehicle Importation to the USA The NHTSA regulates Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards(FMVSS) in the US. Most vehicles originally produced for the United States are left hand drive, however there are no regulations stating the driving position of the driver. As long as the driver has standardized controls and displays, and the vehicle meets eligibility standards, it is legal in the NHTSA's eyes. For instance the Nissan Skyline GT-R was legalized as a right hand drive car and is noted as such in the eligibility list under VCP-32. This notice as of December 2010 says the NHTSA will no longer accept petitions that a LHD and RHD car are substantially similar just based on arguments alone, rather the vehicles must be crash tested. IMPORT ELIGIBILITY PETITIONS FOR RIGHT-HAND DRIVE (RHD) VEHICLES An RI can petition NHTSA under 49 CFR 593.6(a) to decide that a nonconforming vehicle is eligible for importation if the vehicle is substantially similar to a vehicle of the same model and model year that was certified by its manufacturer as complying with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS). If there is no substantially similar U.S.-certified vehicle, the RI must petition the agency under 49 CFR 593.6( B) and support its petition with dynamic crash test data to demonstrate that the vehicle is capable of being modified to the FMVSS for which such testing is prescribed. This is to notify you that NHTSA will no longer accept petitions filed under 49 CFR 593.6(a) for RHD versions of vehicles for which no U.S.-certified RHD model was produced. The agency does not consider these vehicles to be substantially similar to U.S. certified left-hand drive (LHD) versions. Import eligibility petitions for these vehicles must therefore be filed under 49 CFR 593.6( B) and include dynamic crash test and crash avoidance data to demonstrate compliance. The reasons for this decision are set forth below. In our administration of the vehicle import and certification program, we have gained the understanding that only manufacturers who chose to certify an RHD version of a vehicle to all applicable FMVSS will possess the necessary incentive to conduct due care evaluations to establish the conformity of the RHD version to those standards. Very few RHD vehicle models have been certified by their manufacturer for sale in the United States during the past 25 years. When NHTSA has asked manufacturers whether crash test results for the left-hand drive (LHD) version of a specific vehicle could be extrapolated to apply to a non-U.S. certified RHD version of the same vehicle, the manufacturers have consistently informed us that they have no data to support this position because the RHD version was not intended for sale in the United States. NHTSA has also been informed by at least one manufacturer that designing a vehicle platform for both LHD and RHD markets requires crash testing of each version separately in order to meet differing occupant protection standards. This is attributable in part to the fact that the orientation of the engine/drive train and auxiliary components in relation to the driver’s seating position in an RHD vehicle is not a mirror image of that in the same model produced in an LHD configuration. The unique requirements of U.S. and other market occupant crash protection systems, including air bags, seat belt tensioners, occupant protection system control systems (including control logic), interior materials, chassis structural components, and assembly methods all effect crashworthiness and militate against the development of a single platform for both LHD and RHD markets. We are also aware that RHD vehicles intended for markets other than the United States and manufactured on the same production line as similar LHD vehicles do not necessarily have the same features required to meet all applicable FMVSS, since those standards would not apply, or would differ from those that do apply, in the market for which the RHD model is produced. For example, unbelted occupant, side impact, and upper interior occupant protection requirements do not exist in many foreign markets or cannot be compared to US requirements. In addition, vehicle assembly tooling, component attachment points, methods of assembly and mechanical fastening may be different between LHD and RHD vehicles even when those vehicles are produced on the same assembly line. Quote Link to comment
laotsu Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 You can sell shit at double its actual value. Market sets the price through demand. Quote Link to comment
Draker Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Market sets the price through demand. Clearly we both watched the same ihop commercial. 1 Quote Link to comment
q-tip Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Mmmmm....pancakes.... 2 Quote Link to comment
ggzilla Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Good thing that vehicles over 25 years old are exempt from crash safety regulations. 1 Quote Link to comment
q-tip Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Mmmmm.....crash safety regulations .... 4 Quote Link to comment
Mattndew76 Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Right on that. Not a twit about RHD. Initial post is blowing air on that! Yeah it says nothing of RHD. Since this is a law in regards to overseas automobiles being imported. RHD is usually the Euro Asian mainstay. But yeah its hot air. 1 Quote Link to comment
RatVonDude Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Market sets the price through demand. Quote Link to comment
yellowdatsun Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Why do Californians keep allowing their government to continue doing shit like this? Who keeps voting these car haters into office? Eventually you won't be able to do anything in Cali. I can't ever move there because my cars would be illegal (engine swaps), and my guns would be illegal. When it comes to stripping the freedoms of the general public, California and New York have to be tied for the worst. They are part of the reason why the U.S. is ranked like 14th when it comes to actual freedom. 3 Quote Link to comment
datzenmike Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Yeah it says nothing of RHD. Since this is a law in regards to overseas automobiles being imported. RHD is usually the Euro Asian mainstay. But yeah its hot air. Usually the case. Just like the Datsun name coming back. That 'law'having the '74 and newer smog law being moved forward every year, like closing public land to 4x4s, like the 'new' 510'. Like... National Enquirer Quote Link to comment
housew Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 4x4 land being closed off is happening though. Not looking good on that front in the north east. Quote Link to comment
bananahamuck Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 . They are part of the reason why the U.S. is ranked like 14th when it comes to actual freedom. And Arizona is ranked like what in the voting of freedom by Hispanics?? Oh the voting is only conducted by and for whites.. carry on. 1 Quote Link to comment
DaBlist Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 The future is dark Quote Link to comment
bananahamuck Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Aaaaaand 50+ MPG i would totally rock that. 1 Quote Link to comment
DaBlist Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Aaaaaand 50+ MPG i would totally rock that. Wife won't hear you when you come home late 1 Quote Link to comment
Tristin Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 Yeah, because all EVs look like Prius' And with all Tesla patents being usable by anyone, I bet there will be a smathering of nicer looking ones coming out. Eventually Big Oil will be overtaken by Big Electric. 1 Quote Link to comment
Z-train Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 And Arizona is ranked like what in the voting of freedom by Hispanics?? Oh the voting is only conducted by and for whites.. carry on.Who gives a fuck what criminal aliens say about voting "problems"?Yes,PROBLEMS,because they have NO rights. And if anyone needs to register there car and their state is fucking with them,they can register it at my place and then transfer to what ever state. 6 Quote Link to comment
Mattndew76 Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 And Arizona is ranked like what in the voting of freedom by Hispanics?? Oh the voting is only conducted by and for whites.. carry on. How did this tie into anything? Quote Link to comment
bananahamuck Posted July 3, 2014 Report Share Posted July 3, 2014 How did this tie into anything? Weeell on the 4th of July 1776 ,, that is weird it's kinda like that firecracker holiday,,, anyways ,, on that date the founding fathers submitted a Declaration of independence and in that document was this. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. As the 7th reason we needed to be free of Englands reign . Kinda weird A guy from one of the states most aggressively passing laws to harass immigrants is complaining of a government taking away rights seems kinda hypocritical to me. Z-Trains over the top response was exactly the one i was expecting so i'm good. :lol: :lol: I was commenting on the quote i posted nothing else (edited 7th) 1 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.