Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Ok I just got word back from my ‘mole’ inside DoTaRS that there are some MAJOR changes planned for SEVS regarding vehicle emissions, and what’s worse, some of them will be retrospective and will apply to cars already complied!

1) Like the NZ import scheme, SEVS eligibility will soon be limited to cars that meet the Japanese ‘TA’ emissions scheme or later if they’re ex-Japan (that means no cars prior to about 2001 will be eligible for import). For the Skyline range, this will rule out all R32s, all R33s and virtually all R34s (did any R34s meet TA regs or were they all GF?), but V35 and V36 will still be ok. Evos prior to Evo 7 will be out. Supras will all be out. JZX100 Chasers will be canned, but JZX110s will be ok. US-built vehicles are not affected because their emissions regs are stricter than ours anyway.

2) Cars ALREADY imported under SEVS will be tracked down via NEVDIS (the national database for vehicle identification) and owners contacted. The plan is to make owners submit their vehicles for annual emissions inspections to ensure that their vehicles meet the regulations they were complied under. Cars complied under the old scheme prior to SEVS will be exempt, as will cars imported under the pre-’89 rule.

3) The plan is to move SEVS more in the green-car direction, so they will soon allow hybrid models of cars already sold here in Australia to be imported – for example, the Tarago is sold in Japan as the Estima Hybrid, that will be allowed for import.

Well there goes my business, unless I move to Nimbin and use the tree huggers as my new target market... :down:

Edited by Iron Chef
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/359421-changes-to-sevs-in-the-pipeline/
Share on other sites

any ideas on timing for this chef? i.e. can we go import crazy now on pre 2001 cars until this is made official?

better be an april fools f**ker

If its true tho Rhys, will it be worth owning an import that you can modify only basically so it passes emissions once a year?

Well it is actually closer to the truth then an april fools joke, many submissions (LINK) have been put forward for a few years now including as below from the Australian Automobile Association about 3 year old max cars to be imported.

Then you have the current submission LINK of the NSW MTA (image below) that if you are not a dealer you should only be allowed to import one car a year (it was one car every 2 years).

Its coming that is guaranteed, just look at the changes to Pre 1989 model cars and Personal Imports.

post-5805-0-48794900-1301627171_thumb.jpg

post-5805-0-74203000-1301627846_thumb.jpg

For the record, PRIMO passed on a copy-and-paste of my info to my agent in Japan, and from there it went around the auctions like wildfire, till I got a panicked call from another agent I use in Tokyo asking what the hell was going on! Evidently April Fools isn't a big thing in Japan, making them all ripe for the picking haha

For the record, PRIMO passed on a copy-and-paste of my info to my agent in Japan, and from there it went around the auctions like wildfire, till I got a panicked call from another agent I use in Tokyo asking what the hell was going on! Evidently April Fools isn't a big thing in Japan, making them all ripe for the picking haha

sounds like you got a VERY STRONG bite out of it.

mind you ADR 79/02 is going to shake a few people. anything after 2008 ( I *think*) has to pass that one to gain entry.

as for the emmisions gag - like that one. reminded me of the drive by emmissions tests in california.

I think DoTaRS are taking a closer look at it Chris, particularly as Japan has changed its testing procedures for emissions in recent times to be more like what they do here.

The biggest issue is the cost of the test itself for late model cars, I've heard figures of $30-40K bandied about, which makes it bloody hard to recoup those costs without charging a crazy amount for compliance. Ideally, we want DoTaRS to recognise the Japanese testing procedures as being valid here, once that's done, it will be a matter of providing the Japanese emissions paperwork to pass, same as they do with cars from the US now.

Edited by Iron Chef

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...