You heard it from the source. GLENN TAYLOR !UPDATE!

[psilosin]

I urge everyone to join the RHDTLC community. It is an umbrella group founded by members of the JDM Alliance forum over at the ih8mud.com forums. It is open to owners of all imports not just landcruisers etc. Members of this group are making good headway in organizing for useful political lobbying against the recent proposed changes to the importation laws. If all various groups potentailly affected from these chages from alpha romeo to JDM to VW importers can come and work together it will not be a lost battle. Collectively we are a large group comprised of taxpayers and companies that are all voters. Each voice and letter etc is important.

[Paradis]

Here is his last response. In regards to the studies, i will try to find them, but i'm sure they're out there, as i know they had to do some research into this issue when travel across the channel became overly affluent.


I'll try to get that email address for this individual he mentions.



No problem Chris. I hope I can be of some assistance as I know you guys have an
uphill battle.

If all the cars were compliant to our rules, it would certainly bode well for
you guys. The trouble is almost everyone I stop has a non-compliant vehicle that
was improperly approved. Most guys just want to argue about how safe they are
instead of trying to make them compliant. Currently if I stop a RHD and find
everything is compliant to our rules, you are on your way. There are no other
issues to discuss.

Like I've said before, the general public (which obviously way out numbers rhd
owners) do not want them on the road, period. If you know of some studies that
are published regarding rhd operation on the right side of the road and their
safety, make it known to everyone and post a link. I think it would greatly help
your cause. Like I've said I am unaware of any such study.

As long as I don't get a hundred emails a day, I have no problem in trying to
help or answer any questions you guys may have. I am here to help as much as I
am here to hurt. D) lol

Mike Woods has also contacted me to let me know you guys can contact him
directly. He is the Vehicle Inspection Manager for the province and is the one
who is "Spearheading" this issue. I can't remember his email (it's easy but
escapes me) but his phone number in Victoria is 250-953-4040.

Cheers,

Glenn

[shawley]

Thats just chump change!

Think of the return on investment!

If I had the LAST 200 skylines to be allowed in Canada until 10 more years have passed. I could mark each one up from $6000 (my cost) to $15,000 each

I would gain over 1.5 million BACK. And then when I got down to my "last 100" the price would go up to $20,000 and then the last 50 would be worth $25,000


.................. Or maybe I will just buy 2!

and people thought they could tripple their money on ps3's haha

[NISMONEWF]

if this means we have to use those stupid looking twin projector headlights i will park my car ... this makes me sick : ( ... it a pain in the ass though. because other than canada i have yet to be in a country that there is strict lhd rules ... almost every country i have been in you see both rhd and lhd cars ... i think for sure if they to insist that everything be dot compliant we should be able to import what we want as long as it meets standards ...
now i dont know all the details on this whole issue but i know for a fact that most skylines and other rhd cars now in canada are in very good shape and there are im sure thousands of pos out there on the roads that are domestic for canada that should never be aloud on the raod but no one even thinks about that part ... i have yet to see a police officer pull over cars with missaligned headlights that blind others because who ever did repairs on the car dont know his ass from his head .. also rusted out crap that im sure if hit by another car it will deff not perform as well in an impact as it was designed to do .. anyways thats just my opinion on it i dont mind finding another way to have dot headlights .. as long as its not those gay twin projector lights .. i have used a dremel on a jig i made to insure stright cuts on the inside of my headlights when i had them apart this summer for the black housing thingy i did .. anyways they turned out pretty damm good and have better cut off than my old integra that i compared them to for alignment..

cheers
clet

[Boyscout]

the projector style headlights have no refractory pattern on the glass in front of the bulb, thus no light being directed the wrong way. the highbeams, however, do have the pattern on the glass in front of the bulbs.......so just dont drive with your high beams on

[Stinky_1]

edited because this was getting Off topic (stinky)

[dah_hunter]

While i would email him myself.. however im not the best with words..

If someone could actualy ask him about the section in the MVA that use the word "may" I would love to know his opinion on that..

Since the word May is used near a lot of items.
Such as.
"May have Day time running lights."
"May have third Brake light"
"May have side markers"

That interests me,.,.

[SmegEad]

I am still going to buy hundreds of them and insure them all now so they can all be grandfathered.

100's (implying at least 200) X $6500 avg = $1.3 Million.

You're my new best friend!

[JapaneseImports]

In regards to this statement please find the actualy link or studies that you can mail to there office for them to review.

"In regards to the studies done, there have been statistical research done by those in Europe to ensure that England's RHD cars were not causing any safety issues in the rest of Europe. Results were very indicative that nothing could be correlated to RHD cars and issues related to them. I'd stand by that."

I want you to know I personally really appriciate your efforts in this matter and think we can make an impact as long as we can provide 100% backed up facts to any statements we make.

[Stinky_1]

All I get out of this is that the inspection system has failed to do their job. Their is NO NEED to change the laws then. They just need to enforce the inspection facilities, make them fail cars with no DOT headlights. SO when we can get them, we can throw them on and the rest of the car would meet the requirments.

So either thats just the "first" thing they care to point out, or there is more half truths and lies going on behind closed doors in an attempt to get the cars off the road.

I am still going to buy hundreds of them and insure them all now so they can all be grandfathered.

[Paradis]

I see that this topic has exploded since this morning, so i'll leave it at this final part of my email convo with Glen, especially since ppl are talking to this man on the phone. Basically he keeps emphasizing the DOT issue which we will hopefully overcome this winter. I still stand by my original assumption that all of this is more that meets the eye. the headlight issue is the easiest to pick on, so we'll see what happens i guess.

I'd really like to personally address some of the individuals in charge that will make "themselves available over the email" as i read.

Anyways the reply i got, followed by my response...

Hi Christopher,

I'll try and keep my responses in order of your questions.

I think the reason for a possible change to a 25 year rule is to give
the lawmakers time to make the right decision, whether its an outright
ban or to allow under certain guidelines.

As far as the headlights not holding up in court, I'm not sure where you
get that from. Headlights in Canada must bear "DOT or SAE" to be legal.
Simple and black and white. In the regs, clearly worded as such. None of
the rhd's I have seen come with DOT or SAE approved lamps. The reason
for that is they are left hand bias lights. What this means is a lhd
vehicles' lamps, when in low beam, point slightly to the right. When
high beam is selected the pattern of light moves over to the left. A rhd
vehicle is backwards to that, shining into oncoming traffic on low beam
then lighting up the ditch in high beam. Pretty straight forward so I am
unsure as to how you think it wouldn't hold up in court or say that
there isn't any sort of significant problem.

When you say that extensive studies and statistical analysis support the
fact that there is no issues regarding the seating position, where are
these studies? I am unaware of any such studies and would love to see
them or be pointed in the right direction.

This also has nothing to do with the fact that these are turbocharged
vehicles nor the fact of "Socially Profiled individuals". Lets not make
this into something it isn't.

It is about vehicles which do not comply and offer reduced visibility
based on the drivers position.



Response...



Hello Glen, and thank you for your prompt and honest reply.

I understand that you've been contacted by other individuals, even by phone. So i'll not make this a tedious and monotonous affair for you.

Simply put, yes, you're right about the DOT approved lights. If we're going to make this work, we should all have standards to abeid by. Hopefully these ones due out in Febuary can nullify this factor.

In regards to the studies done, there have been statistical research done by those in Europe to ensure that England's RHD cars were not causing any safety issues in the rest of Europe. Results were very indicative that nothing could be correlated to RHD cars and issues related to them. I'd stand by that.

I can empathize that your position in all of this is purely inspectional as thats what your area of invovlement is. You're remarks about the calibrated lights are true and need to be addressed. I myself can not beleive that the law could be changed from 15 to 25 years based solely on headlights, and the neccessity for more time to deliberate on this issue. I would boldly venture a guess that there are other reasons that go beyond headlights, whether TC is cloaking them with the DOT issue I don't know, but we'll find out come the release of standardized Skyline headlights within the following months.

I'd like to think in a world where we modify our cars from top to bottom, head to toe, that we can handle such an issue as a headlight and avoid making a rash and unwarranted change in our now current importation industry. I hope that those involved in the decision making realize just how many thousands of people and millions of dollars that are being invested here, and with that should come extreme discretion and consideration when making absolute rulings such as changing current law.

thank you again for your time Glen,

-Chris

[Stinky_1]

and rolling fast!

[Trace]

I think that we, as a community should really step up and show these guys we're willing to work with them in preventing this stupid possible 25 year rule, or if anything, show them that there's a lot of responcible owners and we're willing to do what every it legally takes to keep our cars up to snuff.

well said Trace

Thank you.

I think it's time we stop playing the roles of the victims and start playing the roles of the valors. As small as this is, this is where milestones are cast.

Everything will be alright. We just need to get this ball rolling.

[Stinky_1]

my stomach is dropping by the second!

I am going to buy hundreds of them and ship them all over now. Then I will never have to drive a canadian or american built car ever again! (this includes japanese cars built in Canada) That will show them all

[Murphy]

I think that we, as a community should really step up and show these guys we're willing to work with them in preventing this stupid possible 25 year rule, or if anything, show them that there's a lot of responcible owners and we're willing to do what every it legally takes to keep our cars up to snuff.

well said Trace