Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadDad
Morgan,
I am very much aware of the grandfathered nature of classic cars having owned many. When, however, the argument for not allowing an S1 Elise, Europa S or 340R is "EPA and safety standards" and "wanting to clean up the environment" I get confused. It would do much more "for the environment" and for road "safety" to get all of these grandfathered cars with their 1940s brake technology and spewing engines off the US roads than to limit the sale of many of the currently "illegal due to not meeting EPA and safety standards" cars.
That "grandfathering" that you mention is a rolling grandfathering. 25 years from now all of these cars will be US "road legal," again, when their EPA and safety technology are far below the "25 years from now" standard. That makes sense... Just wait until they are considered even more polluting and less safe then we can make them legal. YEAH! My Seven doesn't even have to have the state mandated annual "safety and emissions" inspection. I just had to "attest" that it is safe when I registered it.
You can't honestly tell me that you think that an S1 Elise, a Europa S or even a 340R without airbags and with its Rover motor (illegal here btw because of, yes, the "environment"...) is less safe and clean than a 1962 Morgan +4, can you?
If it really were all about the "environment and safety" then a lot of old cars would be yanked today. I just don't think that is really the case and the "environment and safety" argument just doesn't seem to hold water for me.
|
Dad
There is a big difference between not allowing new cars that don't meet the requirements in to the country and taking away classic cars from private owners (or from people who can't afford to buy a newer car) that are already in the country and being used or are being traded as collector cars
Additionally, such old cars are really just a drop in the bucket in the whole scheme of things. But if they suddenly allow people to bring in new cars that don't meet the requirements, well that will just open the flood gates.
As to the 25 year rule, I'd bet the rational is that is when the cars become a "classic", not that many people would want them anymore or go through the trouble to get them.
That said, I sort of agree with Aedo, that the rules have quite a bit to do with protectionism (as well as safety and environmental reasons), every country has their own set of rules (you can't even buy a car from Canada or vice versa). It seems to me that everyone should have the same set of goals as to environment and safety
Quote:
|
That law wasn't to "protect consumers." It had to do with protecting insurance company profits.
|
Now if you were not being so cynical and anti-govt, you might see that keeping costs down for insurance companies keeps the cost down for the consumer
