Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

It's been a fair while since I've been on the forums....or anywhere near an import to be honest (just spent 4 weeks in Japan...saw 2 Supras and 3 Skylines.... these things are just nowhere to be seen anymore).

I see that there have been some changes to importing legislation made recently, and I am wondering if anyone on the forums has any knowledge of what these new rules mean;

1. 25 year rule - well, I guess this one is pretty simple. I presume it is simply month/year of production and - like the old 15 year rule - these cars will need to be complied at the 'state level' (ie not SEVS  RAWS - but you get them engineered to the relevant state requirements)

2. Changes to the SEVS / RAWS - I believe that cars like the Nissan R35 GTR (2007-2008) will soon be permissible, but it doesn't sound like there will be that many more 'jaw droppers' than we can currently get under SEVS / RAWS. I guess this means that cars will require a process similar to the current compliance process (similar but not the same....from the customers perspective you still pay a couple or a few thousand and wait for several weeks, to be told that your car now complies to Australian rules)

3. Can anyone shed light on the new 'variant' rule? My understanding is that it only applies where a 'variant' was made to less than 100 units per year, which includes both LHD and RHD. Given most sports cars are usually made in higher volume for LHD....that would generally mean no more than 10-20 RHD units made per year of manufacture. I cannot think of many cars (aside from ultra expensive collector cars) that fit this criteria. If a car is produced from (say) June 2012 to June 2013 - is that regarded as 2 years (200 units), or 1 year (100 units)?

Any thoughts on the advantages of the new rules with regards to turbo or similar performance vehicles?

Cheers,

 

Foibles

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/477423-new-importing-rules/
Share on other sites

The limited production run cars will probably allow for Toyota Century's to be brought in. As well as bespoke manufacturers or tuners who sell the cars whole. Eg disability vehicles, parade vehicles, mitsuoka motors.

 

Also rule changes include EV cars.

 

Regardless of what cars get brought in, it doesn't change the local laws for P player approved vehicles... If that's why you're asking about turbos.

 

No - not at all interested in P plate regulations. 

Let's take your example of a Century for instance (although I am surprised that this would be eligible under limited production...but I have just googled and indeed some makes or even variants may meet the criteria).

Assuming you want one of these century's - will the new system be like the old one, where;

  1. first someone must apply to get it on a register of approved vehicles (SEVS)
  2. engineers must submit 'evidence packages' (or whatever they are called)
  3. compliance agents (RAWS) then comply the car according to the approved package

Or is it likely to be more like the current 30-year rule - where you can import an eligible limited production vehicle (and by the way - who makes this decision and where is it published?) and simply get it registered to state laws?

The only person I have spoken to so far says 'nobody has any clue of how this is going to work' - but on the other hand - I believe importers are already offering to buy and store these cars. So...how can (or why would) you buy a car if you do not know how to get it 'complied and registered'? What if the bill is $10,000 and not $1500?

Edited by foibles

Legit questions. I suggest reaching out to J-spec imports and tell him what you're interested in and your questions.
He is known to be a lot more straight forward and less political with responses than Iron Chef.

  • 2 weeks later...

feedback from relevant federal department received today.....

The Department is seeking to have legislation introduced into Parliament that, if passed by Parliament, will postpone the commencement of the RVSA. However, until that legislation is passed by both houses of Parliament, we are still working to be ready for a commencement date of 10 December

 

and hence the saying 'caveat emptor'. there's a good chance that anyone who has bought such a car and is currently storing it overseas might just find their storage fees will continue on in perpetuity...if the department stalls the legislation into the never never... maybe we'll never access these cars.

gotta love agenda and the subjugation of democracy to profit the few...in this case new vehicle retailers

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...