Jump to content
SAU Community

15 year old rule to be scrapped???

Gerardrh34
 Share

Recommended Posts

Gerardrh34 Enthusiast

Gerardrh34

Posted
Posted

Hey Guys

Just heard from the old man that the government is going to scrap the 15 year old rule. Apparently they are going to ban cars that are 15 years or older from entering Australia.

This is suppose to happen in 2 months....

This is what my old man heard as he knows a few people in the business so whether it's 100% right or he's misunderstood im not too sure so don't fully take my word for it..

If someone has heard a similar story let me know.. thanks

No hate mail if im wrong :D time will tell i guess

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/63331-15-year-old-rule-to-be-scrapped/
Share on other sites
funkymonkey Grand Master

funkymonkey

Posted
Posted

i'll believe it when I see a proper legislation go thru parliament about it. In order to stop the 15 year import scheme or even amend it, you have to amend the Motor Vehicle Standards Act. When I see a bill passed in parliament regarding such amendments I'll listen to what people have to say.

Workin in the industry I've already seen people go into their shells on the last week of December because the 1st of Jan was supposed to be D-Day for 15 year old cars... then there was some stupid rumour about sometime in the second week of Jan. I've personally spoken to mates who are lawyers in big businesses (and a barrister amongst them), and they say unless a definite amendment is passed via parliament then it'll be importing as usual. And even if they do amend it, it can be contested in a court and by example where in previous years they've allowed people who have already purchased cars when the rules have been changed, they will have to allow people who have already bought cars to bring em in under the old scheme when they change the laws again.

In short... don't believe the hype, and don't spread it unless you have it on a piece of paper with a governmental stamp on it.

SteveL Mentor

SteveL

Posted
Posted
i'll believe it when I see a proper legislation go thru parliament about it. In order to stop the 15 year import scheme or even amend it, you have to amend the Motor Vehicle Standards Act. When I see a bill passed in parliament regarding such amendments I'll listen to what people have to say.

You may be right, but I think you'll find that the current 15yo scheme is a set of regulations which probably only require ministerial approval to change. That is, the department draws up the 'new' regulations in accordance with the legislative framework (Motor Vehicle Act), but they only require the ministers signature on the doc, not full parliamentary approval.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

All I tell people is buy a car you can bring in now, I wont tell people you will be right as they will need a good lawyer or we think you will be right as we assume what the rule will be.

I have a lot of vested interest in the rule changes with a lot riding on the out come so I just say what they tell us not rumours or a story so people spend their money.

lwells Grand Master

lwells

Posted
Posted
Spoke to DOTR's today and the rule was suppose to be out last week, it is still with the Minister waiting to be signed, hope fully next week.

We only asked when not what it will be as we know they wont say.

Parliment begins sitting next week (ie. Ministers will be back in Canberra and actually working as of next week). If it literally is just waiting on a Minister's signature, then look out from next week ;)

LW.

MarkR33 Community Regular

MarkR33

Posted
Posted

as previously said by steve the rule only needs ministerial signage, not parliament.

but do you realise how many acts parliament puts through now adays without even reading them? described , as "a sausage mill" by modern political commentators as the amount of things that go through un noticed

e.g the terror laws in australia that removes peoples right for a lawyer, and to talk about what has happend was put through by both houses, with out so much as a debate, now it is causing all sorts of headaches

I dont hold much hope for this act to attract much attention, the reality is that government listens to industry groups especially liberal governments, and those industry groups , ford , holden, etc.. all would much rather you buy a second hand australian built car so they can sell more of there piece of shit cars

its not the fact that the 15yo rule may dissapeare, the reality is it will dissapear its just when

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Those that have already paid for 1990 model cars should also be OK.

This is one of the bigger issues we are waiting on also, assuming you will be right is a bit risky.

What if they go yes you can bring them in but you have to go through a RAW, is a point that has been raised, they have let it come in but limit the amount by it going through a RAW.

Their is lots of rumours and assumptions but till it comes out officially we wont know.

SteveL Mentor

SteveL

Posted
Posted
This is one of the bigger issues we are waiting on also, assuming you will be right is a bit risky.

Yes, I should have mentioned that DOTARS have indicated on their website that there's (in effect) a possibility that 1990 model cars may not be given import approval, so there's certainly a risk as you say

Zathris Contributor

Zathris

Posted
Posted
I hope this isnt going to happen, its pretty unfair, and i dont see a reason for it either.

Sure there's a reason Stormy, if to many ppl buy imports the local car makers will start to lose profits, and we cant have that now can we :P

I really hope this doesn’t happen ether!

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • GTSBoy
      My BMW E39 528i touring

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Well, that's kinda the point. The calipers might interfere with the inside of the barrels 16" rims are only about 14" inside the barrels, which is ~350mm, and 334mm rotors only leave about 8mm outboard for the caliper before you get to 350, And.... that;s not gunna be enough. If the rims have a larger ID than that, you might sneak it in. I'd be putting a measuring stick inside the wheel and eyeballing the extra required for the caliper outboard of the rotor before committing to bolting it all on.
    • Duncan
      Neil's R33 Gts-t Build

      By Duncan · Posted

      OK, so again it has been a bit of a break but it was around researching what had been done since I didn't have access to Neil's records and not everything is obvious without pulling stuff apart. Happily the guy who assembled the engine had kept reasonable records, so we now know the final spec is: Bottom end: Standard block and crank Ross 86.5mm forgies, 9:1 compression Spool forged rods Standard main bolts Oil pump Spool billet gears in standard housing Aeroflow extended and baffled sump Head Freshly rebuilt standard head with new 80lb valve springs Mild porting/port match Head oil feed restrictor VCT disabled Tighe 805C reground cams (255 duration, 8.93 lift)  Adjustable cam gears on inlet/exhaust Standard head bolts, gasket not confirmed but assumed MLS External 555cc Nismo injectors Z32 AFM Bosch 023 Intank fuel pump Garret 2871 (factory housings and manifold) Hypertune FFP plenum with standard throttle   Time to book in a trip to Unigroup
    • PranK
      My BMW E39 528i touring

      By PranK · Posted

      I forgot about my shiny new plates!
    • PranK
      My BMW E39 528i touring

      By PranK · Posted

      Well, apparently they do fit, however this wont be a problem if not because the car will be stationary while i do the suspension work. I was just going to use the 16's to roll the old girl around if I needed to. I just need to get the E90 back on the road first. Yes! I'm a believer! 🙌 So, I contacted them because the site kinda sucks and I was really confused about what I'd need. They put together a package for me and because I was spraying all the seat surfaces and not doing spot fixes I decided not to send them a headrest to colour match, I just used their colour on file (and it was spot on).  I got some heavy duty cleaner, 1L of colour, a small bottle of dye hardener and a small bottle of the dye top coat. I also got a spray gun as I needed a larger nozzle than the gun I had and it was only $40 extra. From memory the total was ~$450 ish. Its not cheap but the result is awesome. They did add repair bits and pieces to the quote originally and the cost came down significantly when I said I didn't need any repair products. I did it over a weekend. The only issues I had were my own; I forgot to mix the hardener into the dye two coats but I had enough dye for 2 more coats with the hardener. I also just used up all the dye because why not and i rushed the last coat which gave me some runs. Thankfully the runs are under the headrests. The gun pattern wasn't great, very round and would have been better if it was a line. It made it a little tricky to get consistent coverage and I think having done the extra coats probably helped conceal any coverage issues. I contacted them again a few months later so I could get our X5 done (who the f**k thought white leather was a good idea for a family car?!) and they said they had some training to do in Sydney and I could get a reduced rate on the leather fix in the X5 if I let them demo their product on our car. So I agreed. When I took Bec in the E39 to pick it up, I showed them the job I'd done in my car and they were all (students included) really impressed. Note that they said the runs I created could be fixed easily at the time with a brush or an air compressor gun. So, now with the two cars done I can absolutely recommend Colourlock.  I'll take pics of both interiors and create a new thread.
    • GTSBoy
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Power is fed to the ECU when the ignition switch is switched to IGN, at terminal 58. That same wire also connects to the ECCS relay to provide both the coil power and the contact side. When the ECU sees power at 58 it switches 16 to earth, which pulls the ECCS relay on, which feeds main power into the ECU and also to a bunch of other things. None of this is directly involved in the fuel pump - it just has to happen first. The ECU will pull terminal 18 to earth when it wants the fuel pump to run. This allows the fuel pump relay to pull in, which switches power on into the rest of the fuel pump control equipment. The fuel pump control regulator is controlled from terminal 104 on the ECU and is switched high or low depending on whether the ECU thinks the pump needs to run high or low. (I don't know which way around that is, and it really doesn't matter right now). The fuel pump control reg is really just a resistor that controls how the power through the pump goes to earth. Either straight to earth, or via the resistor. This part doesn't matter much to us today. The power to the fuel pump relay comes from one of the switched wires from the IGN switch and fusebox that is not shown off to the left of this page. That power runs the fuel pump relay coil and a number of other engine peripherals. Those peripherals don't really matter. All that matters is that there should be power available at the relay when the key is in the right position. At least - I think it's switched. If it's not switched, then power will be there all the time. Either way, if you don't have power there when you need it (ie, key on) then it won't work. The input-output switching side of the relay gains its power from a line similar (but not the same as) the one that feeds the ECU. SO I presume that is switched. Again, if there is not power there when you need it, then you have to look upstream. And... the upshot of all that? There is no "ground" at the fuel pump relay. Where you say: and say that pin 1 Black/Pink is ground, that is not true. The ECU trigger is AF73, is black/pink, and is the "ground". When the ECU says it is. The Blue/White wire is the "constant" 12V to power the relay's coil. And when I say "constant", I mean it may well only be on when the key is on. As I said above. So, when the ECU says not to be running the pump (which is any time after about 3s of switching on, with no crank signal or engine speed yet), then you should see 12V at both 1 and 2. Because the 12V will be all the way up to the ECU terminal 18, waiting to be switched to ground. When the ECU switches the fuel pump on, then AF73 should go to ~0V, having been switched to ground and the voltage drop now occurring over the relay coil. 3 & 5 are easy. 5 is the other "constant" 12V, that may or may not be constant but will very much want to be there when the key is on. Same as above. 3 goes to the pump. There should never be 12V visible at 3 unless the relay is pulled in. As to where the immobiliser might have been spliced into all this.... It will either have to be on wire AF70 or AF71, whichever is most accessible near the alarm. Given that all those wires run from the engine bay fusebox or the ECU, via the driver's area to the rear of the car, it could really be either. AF70 will be the same colour from the appropriate fuse all the way to the pump. If it has been cut and is dangling, you should be able to see that  in that area somewhere. Same with AF71.   You really should be able to force the pump to run. Just jump 12V onto AF72 and it should go. That will prove that the pump itself is willing to go along with you when you sort out the upstream. You really should be able to force the fuel pump relay on. Just short AF73 to earth when the key is on. If the pump runs, then the relay is fine, and all the power up to both inputs on the relay is fine. If it doesn't run (and given that you checked the relay itself actually works) then one or both of AF70 and AF71 are not bringing power to the game.
×
×
  • Create New...