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

[Dragon Humper]

Interesting stuff guys, I can't believe my little tirade inspired so much thought.

I can't blame the guys enforcing this crap too much, they are just following the rules, because they are paid to. Most will never admit it on a forum like this but I have had quite a few friends in law enforcement over the years and all of them have admitted to me that they hate coming down on someone on a law or regulation that they don't agree with (all of them were car guys, and thought alot of stuff was BS).

When it all comes down to it though you can blame the US for most of this crap, they have been trying to make every IDIOT that thinks they should have a licence and drive a car feel as safe as possible in the most littigous (sp?) country on the planet. This is why cars are getting heavier and heavier with all the safety crap so people can drive faster and faster with even less care and attention than ever before, because they have never been safer than ever before in their little personal cocoons.

The opposite is also why Japan has no problem at all selling LHD, HUGE vehicles in a country that really shouldn't have vehicles that big running around. Everyone is personally responsible for their own stupidity. No-one tries to blame other people or a car company because they purchased a car with the driver seat on the curbside and that MAY have contributed to an accident, they admit that "I couldn't see anything but I made the turn anyway, I am stupid".

Imagine that. Personal responsibility. Same goes for anyone here, if you can't see you don't move, RHD or otherwise (there are lots of times you can't see squat in a LHD car either).



These thoughts are why I don't think RHD will ever be banned, and the 15year rule isn't going anywhere. There are just as many arguments for and against this issue and that makes it too difficult to implement radical change in a democracy (that's the way it's supposed to work anyway.





Jon .

[collector240sx]

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.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it won't happen. It's just not financially beneficial for them at all.

Think of it this way, if you wanted to start a car company and only had 1 standard for every country.
You only have to do crash test and all that good stuff that cost a s***t load of money once. But since
it doesn't work like that you have to add this cost to EVERY market. Making it REALLY hard if you where
to start a new company.

Let just call it a LEGAL way of exercising anti competition behavior.

That and the fact that the North American market still don't see a need for looser rules for city cars, and
they don't understand that all those safety equipment are making car heavier and heavier each years,
steering away from what a nimble, light, fuel efficient, city car should be. Since MOST of the population
live in city, within a reasonable distance from there work, where almost ALL accident are relatively low
speed, and where most severe injuries are to people OUTSIDE of a vehicule (pedestrian, cyclist, ....).

You can easily see this trough the evolution of cars like miata, civic, ....

I'm all for safety equipment, but there's only so much it can do. Right now, I would be willing to bet that
there would be more live safe each year by repairing our road , better educating new driver (harder
road test), but the biggest thing would be stir away from US mentality and incorporate traffic circle. This
would mean NO MORE LEFT TURN.

And to stay on topic, I personally have absolutely no problem complying with rules, when those rule are
ethical. You might ask what is an unethical rules. Well our system is a good example, it ask you to respect
a standard, but does not let you comply to it. For example, the DOT light, DOT mean it pass certain test,
but if you go in to pass an inspection they don't look for if those light pass those test they simply look for
DOT. Hell, have any one seen what a '90 dodge neon, caravan, ... light looks like now, all yellow and s**t.
Those light would certainly not pass the test now, but because they did when new and have a DOT stamp
they'll pass, even tho you can't see 2 m in front of the car. LMAO. But they want what some of us consider
a collection item, our pride and joy, to get butcher for the couple of time most of us actually use it. I don't
see older cars with the 6V system being butchered like our car. And if you don't know how little light those
car actually produce don't even touch this one. I know 6v system date back in the 60's, and that would
mean it predate the creation of the Motor Vehicule Safety Act, wich was 1971.

What really drive me nuts, is the OEM portion, they say you have to have OEM every thing, not to modify.
Are the manufacturer so good that they have achieve perfection, and no one can't improve or is it just to
make us buy THERE PRODUCTS with a substantial mark up. I don't think that there race car use the same
OEM product on there road car, why should we have to settle for it.

Some stuff I really have no problem understand why there really picky, for example the safety belt and
harness, I have seen some really sketchy setup, but why don't they just give us a place with REAL
knowledgeable tech that actually have the power to give a stamp of approval. Hell I wouldn't mind paying
and I'm sure I'm not the only one. This way you get pulled over by a cop that just about knows how to put
gas in the car and where the windshield washer fluid goes, you can tell him, here my license, registration,
and compliance for my harness, roll cage, ... was done on blabla date it's still good for 1-2 years. Would give
good jobs, lots of people would be happy, at least I would be.

I know a lot of people would say it would be a major pain, but think about it. I would rather deal with this
pain in the a**, once every year or 2, then to live in fear of what the next uneducated cop that's going
to pull me over. Because lets face it, society is bombarded with prejudice message, some founded and
backed by statistical analysis but often taken out of context, other well they could have came out of you
know where.

/end

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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".

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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..

:-)

[quadracer111]

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

[GT]

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

1)The engineer in question was lazy.


Jon.

You asume I'm worked up ??

I love internet experts!!!

[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.