Red Mountain Rovers

[Oscar]

I guess it's risk management. Exchanging a chassis on an SII is highly unlikely to get noticed. Taking the chassis and vin off an SII and sticking it under a 1999 110 is hard to miss.... We all make choices.

[ECR]

All these vehicles in question are illegal to some extent (some more than others).

Anyone who ever built a limo is also illegal according to the DOT due to the frame/uni-body mods.

Every Tdi conversion or Tdi powered Rover in the USA is illegal too (even if it is an older truck because import of a Tdi is illegal according to the EPA).

Basically, who cares and do what makes you happy within your own bounds.

[leafsprung]

Ike is so squeeky clean he never does anything illegal. He just likes to find others that do and bash them on it.

I'm pretty much stuck on the series trucks (though I have had a couple of coilers) and on the west coast, dont need to do many frame swaps so I dont have these issues. You've been the grey market police for some time over on D-90.com while simultaniously cranking out illegal rigs. That would be the only issue Ive ever had with you. I applaud the candor in your earlier post and hope thats the end of our disagreement.

[mechman]

+1 Pretender.

Mech,
You state in your last post that the average citizen probably would be dupped into thinking that the vehicle was legal, yet you still say that you would sue him till he bled out his eyes? Why, he probably wasn't the one who swapped the VIN in the first place? Nobody would drive the vehicle that they swapped the VIN on... Even Red Mountain Rovers isn't willing to take that risk (assuming these are VIN swapped vehicles). They are passing the risk on, yet you would sue the victim of their crime. Not good.

The DOT are a bunch of ball-washing-bastards, who live to make it more difficult for me to register my vehicles. This is a case where government should be working for me, not against me.

Pretender? WHAT?!

I've been a professional antique car mechanic for over 20 years now. I held a PA inspection license, but have let it lapse because I no longer need it (I now fix Zambonis and work for the Federal government). I started with aircooled Volkswagens, later branching out to antique French, Italian, German and British cars. I worked for a Rover shop in Philly for almost three years, mainly on ex-NATO Series Rovers, and at an MG shop for a while after. I have been a part of MANY body/frame swaps and have seen LOTS of VERY illegal cars. This is one of the things that happens to STOLEN cars, too, you know. How do you know that the rebadged car isn't HOT? I PERSONALLY know a person who STOLE a 1970 VW Bug, swapped out the VIN and chassis, then spent a week driving it past the man she stole it from, just to piss him off. Then she sold it to some sucker. She bragged about it to me.

I've not only worked on but OWNED many grey market cars, including a BMW 316, a Porsche 924 (Federalized) and a 1964 Bug (still have it too). At the Rover shop I personally helped reassemble a D110 that the boss had brought over from England in pieces, in a sea container. If you've been following the dealers' inventories for a few years, it was blue. He titled it as a 109 (VIN from one of the 100 he brought over). It was illegal as HELL. The windshield was non-laminated glass. Non-safety glass sides. No roll cage. A CARBURETOR on the 3.9. Non-DOT seat belts, no inertia reel tensioners. I helped install cats, to make it look at least a LITTLE legal. The man who bought it knew what he was getting into though. And if he ever hit me on the street, HELL YES I'd sue. If I were the one driving that abortion, I would expect the other guy's lawyer to feed my liver to me.

The DOT may be ball lickers, but they are pains in the ass not only to protect the guy behind the wheel, but all the people he might HIT. Not to mention the passengers.

The law states that nonconforming vehicles entering the United States must be brought into compliance, exported, or destroyed. Motor vehicles not more than 25 years old must conform to the Department of Transportation (DOT) motor vehicle safety standards that were in effect when these vehicles were manufactured. Passenger cars manufactured after September 1, 1973 must also meet bumper standards. The importer must file form DOT HS-7 at the time of entry, indicating whether the vehicle conforms to applicable safety and bumper standards. The original manufacturer is required to affix a label to the vehicle certifying that these standards have been met if the vehicle is intended for sale in the United States. Vehicles that do not bear a certification label attached by the original manufacturer must be entered as a nonconforming vehicle under a DOT bond for one and a half times the vehicle's dutiable value. This is in addition to the regular Customs entry bond. Unless specifically excepted, the importer must sign a contract with a DOT Registered Importer (RI), who will modify the vehicle to conform with all applicable safety and bumper standards and who can certify the modifications. A copy of the RI's contract must be attached to the DOT HS-7 form and furnished to the Customs Service with the DOT bond at the port of entry. A list of RIs is available from DOT and should be obtained before you decide to import a vehicle. Furthermore, DOT requires that the vehicle model and model year must, prior to entry, be determined eligible for importation. A DOT RI can advise you whether your vehicle is eligible; if it is not, the RI can submit a petition in your behalf to have your vehicle considered for eligibility, if you so desire. Understand, however, that fees must be paid at the time such petitions are filed. (clipped from a RI's site)

Pretty clear cut and simple. If it's under 25 years old, it has to meet US safety regs to be allowed on the road. Apparently there are a few state legislated exceptions. Japanese "Kei" mini trucks (top speed of 50 MPH) are allowed on the roads in a few states, but not on the Interstates or highways. ATVs (if a DOT approved kit is installed) are allowed to be registered as motorcycles in a few states as well. And, of course, anything over 25 years old (classified as an antique by the feds and thus not likely to be imported in great quantities) is legal to bring in and drive under federal regs (but not some state regs, this differs state to state).

I own a 1964 Citroen 2CV. A less safe car would be tough to find. Don't believe me, want to see pictures?

https://www.webshots.com/user/mechman71

Can you imagine trying to bring something like that into the country as a NEW car? Guess what - manufacturers are building cars TODAY that are NO safer. For the crowded streets of Beijing or the empty roads of Kashmir India these cars may be perfectly fine, but in modern US traffic? NO WAY.

Just because someone builds it and someone, somewhere drives it, that does NOT make it safe for US roads.

So PLEASE don't tell me what people would or would not do, especially to make a quick and easy buck. I'VE SEEN IT. I've even (to my shame) been a PART of it.

Mech

[leafsprung]

Pretender? WHAT?!

"+1 Pretender" means he was agreeing with the post from the guy whose screen name is "109 Pretender" I chuckled when I saw that huge response to a perceived slight. Your work with Gabor probably does qualify you as an expert in whats illegal though. Ultimately, since you can drive vehicles that are unsafe legally (like your old 2cv) while safer vehicles are illegal (like a brand new diesel BMW) one is left to assume that safety is not in fact the main purpose with these regulations.

[Eric W S]

"+1 Pretender" means he was agreeing with the post from the guy whose screen name is "109 Pretender" I chuckled when I saw that huge response to a perceived slight. Your work with Gabor probably does qualify you as an expert in whats illegal though. Ultimately, since you can drive vehicles that are unsafe legally (like your old 2cv) while safer vehicles are illegal (like a brand new diesel BMW) one is left to assume that safety is not in fact the main purpose with these regulations.

I have heard horror stories about Gabor's trucks. Him and Creed need to have the rover community vote them out of the tribe so to speak.

[mechman]

"+1 Pretender" means he was agreeing with the post from the guy whose screen name is "109 Pretender" I chuckled when I saw that huge response to a perceived slight. Your work with Gabor probably does qualify you as an expert in whats illegal though. Ultimately, since you can drive vehicles that are unsafe legally (like your old 2cv) while safer vehicles are illegal (like a brand new diesel BMW) one is left to assume that safety is not in fact the main purpose with these regulations.

Oops! Well, that's my bad. I thought he was calling me names. I got pretty worked up there. Time to take a deep breath, and a deep draught.

I don't actually drive my 2CV, y'know, I just happen to own it. I like to think I'm smart enough that I wouldn't drive it out of town, but in all honesty I once took Gabor's 2CV home to do some work on it and drove it right down Rt. 95. Twice. In Philly rush hour traffic. Eek.

A big part of the federal laws as I understand them, in regards to the 25 year rule, is that they don't expect huge numbers of any car that old to come into the country. The NATO demobbing of Series trucks was an event that (I think) took them off guard, but is not common enough to legislate away. There just aren't enough antique cars coming in for them to worry about each and every one.

Hehehe, about Gabor... I could tell stories... Part of why I left had to do with my "over fixing" the trucks. Like insisting on new wheel cylinders so they would stop more than once. But that was only a small part of why I left...

Mech

*Edit: FWIW, if any of my posts seem a bit... odd.. right now, I must apologize in advance. I've just been diagnosed with kidney stones and a resulting infection. I'll probably be online quite a bit for the next week or two, until I recover (and can stop shivering and stand straight agian). I'll try not to fly off the handle any more!

[Oscar]

I own a 1964 Citroen 2CV. A less safe car would be tough to find. Don't believe me, want to see pictures?

That was my daily driver from 1978-1980...Is it a -6 or a -4? They are actually safer than they look. They handle quite well and are almost impossible to roll. Now, getting run over by an 18 wheeler would be a different story. One will have to drive accordingly. Is it for sale?

[mechman]

It's a 2CV...uhh... 4 originally (if I remember right), but it has a 602 with Visa cylinders. It was built in Vigo, Spain, during the time they were building Saharas there (I understand they only built them because they got the new sedan dies by mistake - usually they built Camionettes and Truckettes). It is for sale, too! PM me for more info.

Have you seen the 2CV crash video on Jeroen Cats' site? It's... enlightening. Or horrifying. Or both.

Mech

[Oscar]

Have you seen the 2CV crash video on Jeroen Cats' site? It's... enlightening. Or horrifying. Or both.

I have seen them crashed live. As a spectator, a passenger, and an operator...... PM in the mail.

[Leslie]

As an aside, Tennessee has a new class of "medium-speed vehicles", such as ATV's and modified golf carts.... so, you can drive them around town, etc. http://state.tn.us/revenue/notices/titlereg/08-21.pdf

Back to Rovers..... I've been in this discussion upmp**** times over the years, and I must be sadistic as I enjoy it every time.... lol.....

I work for a state agency, that enforces the state version of federal regulations... As federal regulations laid out, then the state enacts their own rules that can either reiterate, or go above and beyond (or within limits of), but don't have to exactly match. The feds have an oversight, but the state runs its own show. At times, there are plenty of things that the feds disagree with how the state does, and while sure, there are sometimes when the feds can call the shots, there have been *many* instances where the state's opinion stands, over the fed view. My point being..... while yes, there are federal laws that may not be adhered to, if you are meeting the letter of the law of your own state, then you're mostly in the clear (*no*, I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not giving one the okay to break federal laws, etc. etc.).

On a state-by-state level, things are all over the board. Cali has laws that no one else has, yet many states feel they have to follow suit on a lot of them. Some things, like swapping VIN's, I think we're all on the same page about it being outright illegal, any way you cut it. Then, the other approach often bandyied about is the kit-car route. Starting off from ECR's site, Mike's site makes the point that they've checked California, New York, Maine, New Hampshire, that building a Defender out of parts and calling it a kit isn't legal. It also goes on to mention specially constructed vehicles, etc. (A lot of good info there, such as the info on titles, too.) (Have to admit, I wonder if a CKD could be legally defendable as a kit, eh? I know the initial answer is no, but, a good lawyer might be able to.... anyway...)

But some states don't specifically deny such. Some states, it's scary what's allowed to run around legally. If you can bolt together a bunch of parts and get something to run, tow it to the DMV, a state trooper here will inspect it, and if he's signed off on it he'll issue you a VIN, and it's street-legal here. (Again, I'm not gonna come bail you out if you find otherwise.... )

And, there are plenty of other facets.... liability, insurance, service, maintainability, etc. etc. etc. There are a lot of people who want a Defender, want one cheaper than buying one of the NAS ones, try to get one via other routes.... but, I think most of the folks here realize, not that I'm trying to be harsh or judgemental, but there are some people just not quite cut out for living with a Rover.... be it a Series or a 'special project'.

I think a problem with special Rovers is keeping them up. It's one thing to have a vehicle that you can run to a dealer and they can go through it by the book. When a Rover is put together by someone else, no matter how well done, it's not going to be an assembly-line vehicle. (That can be a good thing! but...). When someone hadn't built a vehicle themselves, or doesn't have the builder at-hand, then when a problem comes about, they have difficulty in dealing with... some people (the kind that lives w/ a Series), probably has a basic skills set and enough of a sense of adventure that they can roll up their sleeves and have a go, but I dare say we all know of at least one case where someone was enamoured with the idea of a Rover, obtained one, and really started to find that it wasn't a Honda (again, a good thing, but....).

Anyway, I'm rambling, and have a long Rover day tomorrow, so, adieu.......

[Eric W S]

All grey market and most VIN swapped trucks have state titles. Doesn't make them in "the clear". Nor does a state titling a truck make it legal.

[Leslie]

I agree, but I wasn't talking about titling.... that's separate. As previously mentioned, all the title does is demonstrate ownership. I agree, a title doesn't help.

Swapping VINs then getting a new title is still fraud. Being honest about the process is another matter. Be deliberate in your interaction in trying to do things the 'right' way. Don't know about other states, but here does things differently than elsewhere. FWIW....

[lr110def]

As for the green "1998" Def. 110 on Red mt rovers site. All I can say is I owned it about 7 years ago and it was right hand drive,red, had a Disco 200tdi engine and was titled by the person I bought it from as a 109. He said it had been rebuilt. I said ok and drove it a couple of years and then sold it. The guy I sold it to rebuilt it to its current state and then he sold it, again as a 109. So how it became a 1998 D110 is beyond me. it is a darn fine truck though. I also noticed that Red Mt has removed all of the "questionable" trucks from their site.

[mechman]

Leslie, EricWS, you are both absolutely correct. Some states don't even have inspections! I know in Washington, your car has to be inspected when you first register it, but NEVER AGAIN afterwards. Oklahoma abolished its inspection program - it used to cost something like $15 to get your car inspected, price mandated by the state. The mechanics fought it in court, public advocacy groups fought the mechanics, and the state refused to subsidize the difference, so they abolished the inspection requirements altogether. I was in Oklahoma while this was going on (late 2001).

I've been involved with building kit cars, both here in PA and in NJ (where I worked for the VW shop). A kit car has to be substantially different (if I remember right, 40% of the parts have to be non-OE supplied) from the car(s) it is built from. ANY parts coming from any other vehicle have to be documented. For instance, if you use a VW chassis to build a dune buggy (I have one, too), you have to have the title that matches the chassis and (it's highly suggested) receipts for the other parts. VW kits were easy to build, because the other parts usually came off of the car you used as a base, or came with the kit.

If a car is fundamentally unchanged from it's manufactured specs (or option range), then it's NOT A KIT but a CKD car, and has to meet DOT regs before it can go on the road. Any engine that's on the road is supposed to be covered by an EPA certification and have all of the emissions equipment mandated for the car's date of manufacture. Heck, these days LAWN MOWER engines have to have EPA certs, too! Some state are more stringent about this than others - it's tough to catch "illegal" cars if you don't even do annual inspections. But if you have an accident with an illegal car and someone gets hurt, expect to get reamed by the other guy's attorney.

One good example of this was CX Auto. Back in the 90's they imported Citroen CX's into the US, even though Citroen hadn't had a US presence since 1974. They were buying the cars in Europe, refitting JUST ENOUGH parts in the Netherlands, then shipping them to the US as a car of their own manufacture under a small manufacturer exception. The government eventually closed that loophole (I think with airbags being mandated, it became too expensive anyway), but there are still a whole bunch of CX's running around (and they're awfully nice cars, too).

lr110def, you got pretty lucky. I wasn't saying that that truck is necessarily bad (though some of the reassembled trucks definitely ARE), just illegal. If you'd have hit someone, or even been hit by a drunk driver, you'd have been in for a world of legal hurtin'. According to Red Mountain's ad, the truck was a "police impound", so someone else may have gotten that legal screwing you avoided. If it had been involved in an accident, you might have been contacted, as a previous owner of record. It usually depends on how hungry the attorney or DA is, though.

I'm glad to hear that they removed their "questionable" trucks for their site, But I'd still be leery of them. Gabor didn't widely advertise all of the trucks he sold, either.

Mech