Can we please relax the automotive regulations?

In reply to Apexcarver:

While I'm not arguing with you, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, don't link that stupid "Chinese truck crash" video that's been going around the internet for years. That's actually a VW T3 massively overloaded to test the new wall the Germans had built. Which just for the record crashes quite well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO_AfCFQR2M

Point taken, will not utilize that video in that manner anymore.

Also not a big fan of the old chevy vs. new chevy video, the car had an X shaped frame, no E36 M3 its gonna fold up in an offset frontal. Wouldn't have been nearly as impressive as a full frontal, or with a 59 olds which had the same X frame, with perimeter rails added, probably still lethal in any event, but still, its setup specifically to paint things in the worst light.

I miss so much fun when I’m out of town! Someone said that myself or Eric could get some of the info people are talking about. A) I’m not sure I could. B) Even if I could I would never publish it as I’d be instantly dismissed and possibly prosecuted for doing so, quite rightly so.

For those of you who think that it’s stupid that we can’t buy 60’s era trucks like they can in Russia you can. Just move to Russia with all the wonderful benefits that has in store for you. Worried about making money? No problem, set up a website advertising young to Russian men the chance to meet your beautiful American mail order brides who are desperate to get out of the US to a free and fair country like Russia as everything is better over there.

Keith mentioned the gray distinction between AWD and 4WD, it’s an utterly pointless separation 99.999% of the time and just for dick swinging. I was totally unaware that there even was a distinction until I moved to the USA. Overseas vehicles that have the ability to send power to all four wheels are known as 4x4’s no matter if it’s permanent, on demand, by locking hubs, with or without low range. The primary reason for low range is torque multiplication and low speed control. With today’s powertrains there is much more torque available and better control. I bet you don’t need low range for 90% of the situations you did 20-30 years ago. Yes, for true off road rock crawling, hill decent etc. it will help, but what fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a % of users / situations does that apply too? And for those there are a) options available off the shelf at you new car dealer or used on Craig’s list or b)available aftermarket. As for low range being added needing re-emissions testing compared to not having low range I’m 99.9% certain that’s not true either although Eric will have to confirm. Low range is by definition for off road use and would not come into play for any of the emission testing cycles that apply. As for the small amount of weight centrally located I don’t believe that would affect crash or emissions. And if it did affect crash, there are so many versions of a vehicle crash tested that one could be done with the low range option. No, it’s not offered on more vehicles because it’s not wanted, not used and not needed by US buyers. Those that do want it have the option of buying a new vehicle with it. This is getting like SCCA solo classification where everybody wants a ‘me too’ class so they can win a trophy.

The Elise sage. Guess what. When lotus designed and introduced the Elise they didn’t see a market for it in the US. Period. How do I know? The Elise was introduced in 1996 and passenger air bags weren’t mandatory until 1998. They could have launched the car here and had two years sales prior to needing a passenger airbag as long as they had a drivers one. Or they could have designed the car from the outset to meet the US regulations in effect at the time. They didn’t do that. On the engine. Again, they obviously didn’t see the market or they wouldn’t have chosen the Rover Engine. The K series was never intended for Federal use and was never used here. They could just have easily chosen and engine that was in use here. Suzuki, Toyota etc. all had small, light 1,300 – 1,600 cc 16V engines available at the time. They chose and engine that didn’t work for the US as they never intended to sell it here. Heck at the 2000 Series 2 re-design they partnered with GM to make the Speedster with the Ecotech engine and still didn’t bring the car over here. They chose not to develop a Federal market as they didn’t see the potential sales, and guess what, in the long run they were right. Look at the sales figures in the US through the years. This is for Elise and Exige combined:
Year Total built
2005 3,321
2006 1,417
2007 735
2008 425
2009 146
2010 95
2011 186
Total 6,325

That certainly looks like a market that got saturated very very quickly. Yes it’s the darling of the used car market with prices holding steady and or beginning to climb. But car companies don’t make money on used cars, they make them on new cars

And guess what. If you want to buy some throw back to the 60’s and you can. If there was a market your Russian crap mobile manufacturer could sell them here tomorrow. Look at Superformance. They make GT40 and Cobra replicas in South Africa and sell them new here every day. They build them new and ship them over without and engine or transmission. You buy one and buy your new completely smog exempt engine and trans from Roush and pay a garage to mate the two. You they register it as a kit car which as far as I know is legal in every state. Yes those cars are expensive, but they are hand built super cars. If the Russian manufacturer wanted they could roll the current vehicle off the end of the line sans engine and trans and do the same thing. Then they could sell it here for $4,999 or whatever and you or the importer could source your own engine from whoever and fit it. Why don’t they? There isn’t the market. I mean seriously who would buy one? Would you really?

As to what is wrong with old cars and why should they still be legal if they are unsafe argument. Really? You actually don’t understand? Technology, standards, expectations all improve over time. It’s possible to do things today that weren’t possible or affordable even a few years ago. There is a duty by both the manufacturers and the government to improve safety. Even if there wasn’t legal standards you can see Joe Q public suing Auto manufacturer Bobscarsco when their new FoxMaroAmry T bones and kills some kids in a car as the FoxMaroAmry didn’t have ABS in wet conditions and couldn’t stop. Safety devices aren’t just about saving you from yourself. They are about saving others from your actions and you from other peoples actions or circumstances as well. Ditto emissions. Do you really want to go back to LA Circa 1970 or Beijing circa 2012 where you are chocking on smog and have beautiful sunsets every day due to the particulates and pollution in the air? Imagine how bad LA would be now since the population has doubled. You’d suffocate getting from your house to your car!

As to why is an old car safe and a new one not. Come on. It’s not absolutes, it’s about improving standards over time so everyone benefits. It’s not that a 1980 320i isn’t safe (or clean) as a 2014 330i, it’s that isn’t AS safe or clean. As cars age they get replaced so we all benefit over time. I think the average age of cars on the road in the US is about 11 years. Even that’s misleading. For every 1992 M.Y. car that does 50,000 miles a year I’ll bet there are 1,000 2014 M.Y. cars doing those same 50K miles per year. Older cars get used a lot less then new ones. Yes I’m sure you can show me Billy Joe Bob who does 100,000 miles a year in his 1960 Ford F100 or Mary Jane Withington Spoon doing a 100 mile per day school run in her 1976 BMW 2002, but you know they are the massive exceptions. I’ll be the vast Majority (Majority, not all) of GRM readers have a DD that is less than 5-10 years old but a toy that is far older and does way way few miles, but both are still part of that same 11 year average age.

And for all the bitching about emissions, as far as I can see increased emissions regulations have done nothing but help the enthusiast. Heck in 1966 the pinnacle of racing technology the Cosworth DFV was making 100hp per liter. Today there are dozens of naturally aspirated production engines that surpass that and can last over 100,000 miles. While some of that is materials and machining, the majority of those improvements have come from engine management the driving force behind which was originaly emissions development.

Would it be better if America and Europe could agree on a common set of emissions and safety standards? Probably, but who is to say who is correct? Over the years each continent has taken the lead in both safety and emissions at different times with the other eventually catching up and surpassing the other. Also the driving conditions, road use, demographics, mileage, congestion etc. etc. etc. are vastly different between the continents leading to the need for different type of regulations. Good luck sorting that one out.

Oh, and one more thing. We really do have it easy here. In the UK you can build kit cars etc., but the bar is pretty high these days. They have the IVA test which your car has to pass once built. This isn’t just for kit cars, but also modified road cars. Want to build a mid-engine VW Sirocco? Over here no problem. Just build it. Over there you need to pass the IVA as well. The cost of the test is something like $700-800 on top of your build. Want to build a traditional style hot rod over there? OK, but it must have the tires covered and the engine covered (if in front of the driver). I’d say it’s way way easier to get a car on the road over here than there. Don’t forget over there you’re not even allowed to wire in your own electrical outlets or connect gas to your furnace because of health and berkeleying safety rules. Trust me, this is the land of the free both in life and cars.

Is it perfect? No. Is it reasonable? I say yes.

I for one think that both TPMS and back up beepers if not cameras are a really really good idea, especially the backup cameras. In Europe people back into a space and drive out forwards. To me that’s the safe way to do it. You can see into a space before parking and a space is less likely to suddenly have someone in it than the road. Over here people drive into a space and back out into traffic / lanes in a parking lot etc. which are far more likely to have a car, child, shopping cart etc. suddenly appear. Back up beepers are a really good idea. Even the most observant person is going to be hard pressed to see a 3 year old toddler who just slipped daddy’s hand at the market and is in your blind spots.

E36 M3, I rambled on a bit there didn't I!

In reply to Adrian_Thompson:

All good points, though I still feel we heavily hit diminishing returns on crash safety and emissions about 20 years ago, and much of the further development is a waste of money all around to perpetuate bureaucracy and make treehuggers and paranoid people feel better.

Really pops out of the data when you realize the average car on the road is nearly 12 years old, and probably a bit older than that on the west coast. <img src="" />

My point, which I will make once again, is that for small manufacturers it isn't generally feasible to bring in small production runs because of the cost of making them meet Federal standards. The original Elise would not pass European crash standards, that's why they partnered with GM in 2000 to help bankroll its further development. In return, GM sold Vauxhall and Opel variants (not sold here) to help defray the development costs. There's those pesky regulatory costs again... only overseas.

Superformance sells INCOMPLETE KIT CARS, not complete vehicles. Like any KIT CAR, it is the RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER to get it registered if they plan to drive it on the street. http://www.superformance.com/Faqs.aspx They do NOT guarantee it will pass. Apples vs. oranges. FWIW, my bud says his Megabusa will be hell to get street registered.

The EPA most certainly does have a say in off road emissions for non street legal vehicles. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/basicinfo.htm That's where all those super four stroke dirt bikes came from. CARB in California issues green and red stickers for off road vehicles, there denote where and even what time of year they can be operated. So oh yes they most certainly can require testing of on road vehicles in their off road use configurations.

Look, I am NOT in favor of going back to the days of stinky air and VW Bus crumple zones. But I also do not delude myself, I fully realize that some of the cars sold overseas don't make it here because of the cost of meeting those emissions and safety regulations.