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

[quadracer111]

Nothing has changed in at least the last 15 years there.

Ahh, that was the rhd sticker thing... My bad.

That says the thing about electric/mechanical signal lights, but nothing about they have to be approved iirc.

I think the whole thing is just stupid. Sure, I understand lhd lights, but I have not had an issue with either my GC8 or r32 with factory lights, I have never been flashed once. I had a friend drive my car towards me on the highway in my car, I was in his, it did not blind me at all, I have more of an issue with any truck or big car. Slapping in some honda accord lights is a lot more dangerous because the aim is all messed up, can't see anything. The headlights are not made for the car at all, no matter how you mount them they will always be shitty.

And don't get me started on tail lights, if it reflects light, and lights up, is that not good enough? A magical DOT stamp isn't going to change anything. The Japanese are way more strict than us with vehicles (general population seems to be smarter too, not a bunch of knuckle dragging mouth breathers), I think they know how to make a tail light light up and reflect. Look at the vehicles on our roads compared to theirs, all I see are rusted out pieces of **** with exhausts dragging on the ground, missing a headlight with blown struts swaying all over the road. RHD's should be the least of your worry, at least they are good shape. I think it's time to give them some credit lol.

Side markers are a joke too... But whatever.

EDIT: And don't forget about all the shitty drivers! Get rid of those if you want to do something productive

[Dragon Humper]

1)Where do I start. JDM headlights do not conform to our requirements and has been proven by an engineer. The lights might have a great cutoff for use on the left hand side of the road, but we don't do that here.

2)I'm not going to bebate what 172(2) states, because it says what it says and the signals are supposed to be approved by who they say they should be approved by.

3)You keep talking about what rdh's are like to drive on our roads and that left hand drive cars are fine when operated on the left hand side of the road. who are you haveing this debate with cause I never mentioned that. Now that you bring it up I would ask why a right vs left hand seating position is picked over the other at the time of manufacture.

4)Lastly ( again I can't believe we are still talking about this) you are correct that vehicles over 15 years of age are exempt from the Federal requirements. You must comply simply with the provincial regulations. In BC we have adopted the federal regulations for lights ( and other things) into our legislation. I don't get how that is hard to understand.

Oh Relax, it has been a long time since this topic has been discused and I needed to vent a little, mostly because of the rediculous BS that is going on in Manitoba (and to some extent continuing in BC).


1)The engineer in question was lazy, the lights that I have seen (a freaking lot of them, how many did this "engineer" test) and the ones that I have are perfectly acceptible in a LHD world. There is no issue, never has been. There is NO KICKUP TO THE CURB like DOT lights have so there is no issue using them in a LHD world.

2)What debate, you brought it up and it's as lame now as it was 10 years ago, if you have electric or mechanical turn signals you can operate a RHD vehicle WITHOUT using hand signals (because you can't use hand signals in a RHD). Your little toothpick didn't stir a shotglass let alone a pot.

3)I really don't know what you are trying to say there. If you are wondering why certain contries pick RHD or LHD you can blame the Brits on that one, those Limeys were pushing their goofy pre-ocupation to hang on to the old world of horse-riding with your sword in your hand to all it's territorries (Japan traded with them more than the US back in the first 1/4 of the 20th century). The only reason the Brits were pushing that was because the US went the other way, probably because the Brits were insisting on theirs.....LOL.

4)The only reason I mention that is because, the regs. are a complete waste of time. They are not going to make anything safer, if anything they make things less safe because of the goofy things that need to be modified to make it work. Fenders will rust out faster because holes are being cut where there was never ment to be a hole so there is not sufficent drainage in case of a leak, headlights are being botched in to satisfy some obsurd request to fix an issue that doesn't exist, the list goes on and on. Some people do good work and make this stuff look like it was ment to be there, some really do not. The sad part is the really crappy work is technically acceptable for inspection, it just completely fukced up a mint 30k km cream puff.


I know full well what is needed to pass inspection in BC, I've done it twice now and the inspection facility had no idea what I did or didn't do because it was that seamless (except for the headlights because you really can't pollish a turd in most cases with those lights). I just think it is pointless when there are thousands of POS muffler draggers polluting our air and putting our lives at risk (ironically all of which are DOT compliant).




Jon.

[Dragon Humper]

. Slapping in some honda accord lights is a lot more dangerous because the aim is all messed up, can't see anything. The headlights are not made for the car at all, no matter how you mount them they will always be shitty.

EDIT: And don't forget about all the shitty drivers! Get rid of those if you want to do something productive

That's the thing that really gets into my craw about this whole thing, I have lost count of how many perfectly compliant DOT approved headlights absolutely suck the balls off a dead bear. They blind the absolute piss out of you when oncoming and spray their light pattern all over the freaking place and give you a dull weakass beam that you can't see a damn thing with. Accord lights are some of the worst, I drove a GTS-t with some in and thought that the alignment was all screwed up, untill I drove an Accord. Those lights absolutely blow. My Caprice lights are better and I think that they suck compared to my N1s.

Ironically I was riding shotgun in an Impalla SS that had the Euro spec. glass lensed (NA cars are plastic) headlights in it and I noticed the beam was WAY better (I guess DOT stands for POS in Europe). They looked just like JDM lights, really sharp cutoff, no kickup on the curb side, all around much better than the NA headlights. They cost a fortune though, about $800 iirc and from what I have heard the supply has run dry as the cars are now 14+ years old.

Edit: bingo on your edit, everyone should be retested every 5 years and anyone over the age of 60 should be tested every 2. I think it should be without your knowlage too, people drive much better when they know they are being watched (like that will ever happen, civil libertarians would have a field day with that).

Bla.....enough venting for a while, let the MVA stew in it's own pointlessness.




Jon.

[GT]

Oh Relax............................................. ..................

1)The engineer in question was lazy.


Jon.

You asume I'm worked up ??

I love internet experts!!!

[quadracer111]

Funny thing is, shops don't even check headlight aim, they just check for a dot stamp.

[dah_hunter]

This thread is getting interesting..

I personly Choose to use a logical mind and thinking about things, i dont care what governing body has made a rule.. if it doesnt make sence.. the i dont really see the reason to follow it..

Running a Stop light.. Thats dangerous.. Rule Accepted

Installing DOT lights... cause... umm... they say soo... Hmm Rule Not accepted..

anyways.. GT you keep up your mindset. people like you help people like me have entertaining threads to read..

:-)

[GT]

This thread is getting interesting..

I personly Choose to use a logical mind and thinking about things, i dont care what governing body has made a rule.. if it doesnt make sence.. the i dont really see the reason to follow it..

Running a Stop light.. Thats dangerous.. Rule Accepted

Installing DOT lights... cause... umm... they say soo... Hmm Rule Not accepted..

anyways.. GT you keep up your mindset. people like you help people like me have entertaining threads to read..

:-)

It's my "mindset" to do the job I am paid to do and that involves enforcing the rules we have in BC. "We' are enforcing the rules that apply to every other vehicle on the road. I don't understand how people want to import something that wasn't made for here then cry about having to make them the same as everything else on the road. If people don't look into what they are going to have to do to make it compliant then cry about afterward, about all I can do is hand them a towel.

It is fair to complain about other junk that is on the road, there is lots of it. I am frustrated by what I see as well, but it is not my job to deal with unless they have been through the inspection program.

[quadracer111]

I don't really see how these vehicles were not made for here? Slapping DOT stamps on a vehicle don't make it suddenly safe for our roads :/ A car is a car.... Seating position doesn't matter, I thought the government had that through their head already ?

oh yeah, /rant lol.

[dah_hunter]

It's my "mindset" to do the job I am paid to do and that involves enforcing the rules we have in BC. "We' are enforcing the rules that apply to every other vehicle on the road. I don't understand how people want to import something that wasn't made for here then cry about having to make them the same as everything else on the road. If people don't look into what they are going to have to do to make it compliant then cry about afterward, about all I can do is hand them a towel.

It is fair to complain about other junk that is on the road, there is lots of it. I am frustrated by what I see as well, but it is not my job to deal with unless they have been through the inspection program.

I made that reply without thinking about who you were..

LoL.. My bad.. no offense intended.. its the system i don't like.

[GT]

I don't really see how these vehicles were not made for here? Slapping DOT stamps on a vehicle don't make it suddenly safe for our roads :/ A car is a car.... Seating position doesn't matter, I thought the government had that through their head already ?

oh yeah, /rant lol.

They are made with the seating position for the best view when driving on the left hand side of the road. Seating position absolutely matters or you would have a choice here when you go to teh Dealership.That and their requirements are different. We have had a requirement for side markers and reflectors since about 1967. I think it is a requirement now in Japan but that has just come in the last few years.

There is also some question about impact testing. What is the maximum speed limit in Japan??

And no worries Ben, no offence taken. Hopefully you'll drag your tall butt up here for Hot Nights in the City this year so we can do this in person.

[quadracer111]

Everyone that drives a rhd says different, it is not harder to drive a rhd car than a lhd car. Were not piloting airplanes here, just cars.


But okay, a bunch of people that have never driven one obviously knows best

And what about the fact that in Japan you can buy a lhd vehicle new from the factory? Oh wait, they actually think things through and use logic instead of instantly disregarding things that are "different".

[johnnyjohnny]

Slapping in some honda accord lights is a lot more dangerous because the aim is all messed up, can't see anything. The headlights are not made for the car at all, no matter how you mount them they will always be shitty.

And don't get me started on tail lights, if it reflects light, and lights up, is that not good enough? A magical DOT stamp isn't going to change anything.

You kind of just proved the point about having standards in place to ensure a base level of performance. Without it, I could put the weakest tail light bulb in that no one can see unless they are standing 1 foot behind the lense, and according to your logic above, this should be fine. Some people may not agree that the standard is sufficient, but you have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

If you are wondering why certain contries pick RHD or LHD you can blame the Brits on that one, those Limeys were pushing their goofy pre-ocupation to hang on to the old world of horse-riding with your sword in your hand to all it's territorries (Japan traded with them more than the US back in the first 1/4 of the 20th century). The only reason the Brits were pushing that was because the US went the other way, probably because the Brits were insisting on theirs.....LOL.

Actually it was most of the world, not just the Brits, that were travelling on the left, which made sense on horseback for right-handed people. It wasn't until the last century or two that things shifted to the right, mostly due to the Americans.

I personly Choose to use a logical mind and thinking about things, i dont care what governing body has made a rule.. if it doesnt make sence.. the i dont really see the reason to follow it..

I think it makes sense to do things that result in me keeping my car. Taking your attitude leads to a mild form of anarchy, where each person can decide which laws apply to them, and which ones don't.

Seating position doesn't matter

This is BS - of course it's different. Visibility of on-coming traffic is made more difficult in a LHD car when passing and making left turns (when someone is making an oncoming left turn directly opposite of you in an intersection). A difference of 3-4ft in sitting position changes the site angles in those situations - it's basic geometry. When I'm trying to make a left turn, and there's someone doing the same in the opposite direction, and I can't see through their car, then I just have to sit and wait until they make their turn. Otherwise, I'd have to stick my left-front corner way out into the intersection (and oncoming traffic) just to see if anyone's coming along in the other lane. Similar situation for passing to the left.

[Tony-R32]

I think it makes sense to do things that result in me keeping my car. Taking your attitude leads to a mild form of anarchy, where each person can decide which laws apply to them, and which ones don't.

He's not trying to relay that message at all. What he's saying is when a rule doesn't make sense or is unjust, rather than just close your eyes and blindly follow it because "someone says so", you should stand up and ask why.

Your manipulating his words here the point of his rant is that, just because the government has made it, doesn't mean it's right. Because the rule doesn't make sense, he doesn't see the need to follow it, and there for is going to question and scrutinize it until he gets a legit answer.

If you boss told you he was cutting your salary by $15,000 because it was the "new rule", you wouldn't just bend over and take it. You would see no reason behind having to take a pay cut and you would start asking questions.

[quadracer111]

You kind of just proved the point about having standards in place to ensure a base level of performance. Without it, I could put the weakest tail light bulb in that no one can see unless they are standing 1 foot behind the lense, and according to your logic above, this should be fine. Some people may not agree that the standard is sufficient, but you have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

This is BS - of course it's different. Visibility of on-coming traffic is made more difficult in a LHD car when passing and making left turns (when someone is making an oncoming left turn directly opposite of you in an intersection). A difference of 3-4ft in sitting position changes the site angles in those situations - it's basic geometry. When I'm trying to make a left turn, and there's someone doing the same in the opposite direction, and I can't see through their car, then I just have to sit and wait until they make their turn. Otherwise, I'd have to stick my left-front corner way out into the intersection (and oncoming traffic) just to see if anyone's coming along in the other lane. Similar situation for passing to the left.

So just because your tail lights are dot stamped that is going to make you not put in a weak bulb? That makes no sense what you said.

I've never had an issue seeing in different traffic conditions. Maybe its the light SK traffic though. Point is, it's not hard to safely drive these cars, if it was we wouldn't want to own them.

[johnnyjohnny]

Tony & Quad - I would bend over knowing that if I fought against it, I would lose my job. Depends on how much you like your job, where you work, and how much you depend on your salary even if it's reduced. And if knowing that putting the weaker bulb in would potentially result in me losing the car, even for a few days to put a replacement, DOT-approved bulb in and get it re-inspected, then hell ya, I'm going to use the right bulb.

You're right, of course - bad laws don't make sense. But it also leaves the definition of what is "good" and "bad" up to every single person in the country. So you think it's bad, but I think it's good. How do we resolve this?

Take the DOT lense/reflector example. Canada has a standard. Japan has a different standard. Other countries may have different standards still. Which one is the right standard to use? Hypothetically, if the Canadian standard is the lowest common denominator based on quantitative testing, and the rule was written to ensure these units are compliant with DOT "or any better performing" standard, that would mean for every component where a standard exists, the government body would need to test against all standards. And not just at any point in time, but keep track and continue to test new components, and when other standards change (and they do, frequently). Add to this mix when a car was built and what standard was in place at that time, which means you potentially would need to test all components, regardless of when they were manufactured, to all previous standards. Oh yeah, and for all cars. And toasters. And mobile phones.....

Honestly, it's much simpler to define a single standard for the country and require everyone to meet it. Let the manufacturers sort it out.