new law to come to effect in 2016
https://www.change.org/p/the-honora...r_starters_page&utm_term=des-lg-no_src-no_msg
https://www.change.org/p/the-honora...r_starters_page&utm_term=des-lg-no_src-no_msg
OEM or illegale
- Thread starter Nick_f
- Start date
daught
Well-known member
OEM or illegal is a huge overstatement. Looks like they are targeting wheel spacers and stupid slammed cars.
Found a more informative discussion here: http://www.toronto-subaru-club.com/forums/tsc-and-subaru-discussion/199386-oem-illegal.html
That thread links these pages here and here
I don't see why the ride height thing is even an issue - the way I'm reading states your vehicle only fails if one side of the vehicle is 25mm higher or lower than the other, and that's left-to-right. The only people on the planet that would legit set up their vehicle that way might be circle track racers.
Wheel spacers might be something I don't understand, some people are saying they are a legitimate cause of concern
That thread links these pages here and here
I don't see why the ride height thing is even an issue - the way I'm reading states your vehicle only fails if one side of the vehicle is 25mm higher or lower than the other, and that's left-to-right. The only people on the planet that would legit set up their vehicle that way might be circle track racers.
Wheel spacers might be something I don't understand, some people are saying they are a legitimate cause of concern
Looking through it; there is plenty of possibility of excessively stringent interpretation, but that's already the case now.
They want 25mm tire clearance throughout lock to lock steering movement ... some cars may not have that much clearance when they were originally built. I don't think mine does.
Aftermarket but "OEM standard" suspension appears to be OK as long as it isn't against the bump stops. But what is "OEM standard". My own car has an aftermarket Bilstein suspension kit in it. But Bilstein is an OEM suspension supplier for that car ... just not for my particular version of that car, and I didn't buy the kit from the dealer. I suspect that good quality aftermarket parts that are functional, have proper damping, aren't against the bump stops, and are installed the way they're supposed to be, won't be a problem - but the people who slot out strut mounts in order to achieve excessive camber are gonna be in trouble because that's not the way any OEM would build that car.
No more HIDs in incandescent housings, it's explicitly prohibited. Doesn't say you can't put LEDs in incandescent housings, although there are other clauses that could be subject to interpretation on that point ...
DRL's are now mandatory (no more disabling them) for vehicles that were originally built with them.
Fenders have to be the full width of the tire. Jeeps and similar with wheels sticking out past the fenders, beware.
Bumpers are to be rejected if "inferior to OEM design" or "incorrect for the vehicle". The 4x4 community should have a field day with the interpretation of that. Obviously the OEM bumper will pass, but anything else ... who knows if it's "inferior", and what does "inferior" mean? Is an aftermarket bumper designed for a Jeep and installed on a Jeep, but differing from the OEM design, "incorrect for the vehicle"?
Power windows have to work! Driver's side sun visor has to be there!
No tinting of side windows directly to the side of the driver for vehicles made after 1 Jan 2017. That stinks.
Aftermarket seats have the same interpretation headache with the "OEM standard" phrase. Are good quality Recaro seats OK even though they're not "OEM"?
No more inappropriately matched tires and rims (no more tire "stretching"). Tires have to be mounted on rims of sizes approved for that tire. Can't say I disagree with this one.
Wheel spacers aren't allowed. I don't really agree with this. It is possible to correctly engineer them ("hub-centric"). They shouldn't be a problem if correctly engineered. Interestingly, "adapters" are allowed - in these cases, the adapters bolt to the original hub and the wheel bolts to the adapter.
There is way more stuff for inspectors to check ... safety inspections are probably going to be more expensive.
They want 25mm tire clearance throughout lock to lock steering movement ... some cars may not have that much clearance when they were originally built. I don't think mine does.
Aftermarket but "OEM standard" suspension appears to be OK as long as it isn't against the bump stops. But what is "OEM standard". My own car has an aftermarket Bilstein suspension kit in it. But Bilstein is an OEM suspension supplier for that car ... just not for my particular version of that car, and I didn't buy the kit from the dealer. I suspect that good quality aftermarket parts that are functional, have proper damping, aren't against the bump stops, and are installed the way they're supposed to be, won't be a problem - but the people who slot out strut mounts in order to achieve excessive camber are gonna be in trouble because that's not the way any OEM would build that car.
No more HIDs in incandescent housings, it's explicitly prohibited. Doesn't say you can't put LEDs in incandescent housings, although there are other clauses that could be subject to interpretation on that point ...
DRL's are now mandatory (no more disabling them) for vehicles that were originally built with them.
Fenders have to be the full width of the tire. Jeeps and similar with wheels sticking out past the fenders, beware.
Bumpers are to be rejected if "inferior to OEM design" or "incorrect for the vehicle". The 4x4 community should have a field day with the interpretation of that. Obviously the OEM bumper will pass, but anything else ... who knows if it's "inferior", and what does "inferior" mean? Is an aftermarket bumper designed for a Jeep and installed on a Jeep, but differing from the OEM design, "incorrect for the vehicle"?
Power windows have to work! Driver's side sun visor has to be there!
No tinting of side windows directly to the side of the driver for vehicles made after 1 Jan 2017. That stinks.
Aftermarket seats have the same interpretation headache with the "OEM standard" phrase. Are good quality Recaro seats OK even though they're not "OEM"?
No more inappropriately matched tires and rims (no more tire "stretching"). Tires have to be mounted on rims of sizes approved for that tire. Can't say I disagree with this one.
Wheel spacers aren't allowed. I don't really agree with this. It is possible to correctly engineer them ("hub-centric"). They shouldn't be a problem if correctly engineered. Interestingly, "adapters" are allowed - in these cases, the adapters bolt to the original hub and the wheel bolts to the adapter.
There is way more stuff for inspectors to check ... safety inspections are probably going to be more expensive.
I guess you could circumvent that (if you're modifying your vehicle) by limiting steering lock, if you have any to spare
It defines that term in the beginning, in a not helpful way -
For example, does that rule out coilovers if your vehicle did not come with them? (different "service method")
Don't like the non tinting rule.
I've had a minivan with a power window issue, it just kept breaking, so I stopped fixing it...too many drive thrus, perhaps?
Wheel stretching? Had that on my Blazer ages ago. Slammed too. Talking 6" drop all around with non adjustable suspension. Man I'm glad I can't afford to do any of that anymore. But that tinting thing is an issue. Does that mean even factory smoke tint is not allowed?
Sent from a Samsung Galaxy far, far away using Tapatalk
I've had a minivan with a power window issue, it just kept breaking, so I stopped fixing it...too many drive thrus, perhaps?
Wheel stretching? Had that on my Blazer ages ago. Slammed too. Talking 6" drop all around with non adjustable suspension. Man I'm glad I can't afford to do any of that anymore. But that tinting thing is an issue. Does that mean even factory smoke tint is not allowed?
Sent from a Samsung Galaxy far, far away using Tapatalk
MarcosSantiago
Well-known member
Wow, this is HUGE, and it's the first I hear of it.
The only part I really liked is Section 6, all aftermarket headlights have to go back to OEM, no more HID / LED conversion kits. The reason I like it is because these mods are poorly done or botched 95% of the time.
I also don't agree with the concept of disallowing spacers. It is just a generic rule with no sound logic behind it.
The only part I really liked is Section 6, all aftermarket headlights have to go back to OEM, no more HID / LED conversion kits. The reason I like it is because these mods are poorly done or botched 95% of the time.
I also don't agree with the concept of disallowing spacers. It is just a generic rule with no sound logic behind it.
Splash
Well-known member
I'll show up with my Jeep doors off.. Good luck testing for tint or if my windows work.
Oh, This is just when you get your vehicle satisfied to transfer ownership (for now).
[h=2]Is this standard going to cost consumers more money?[/h] The cost of a Safety Standards Certificate (SSC) inspection is determined by the inspecting station and is market-driven. The Ministry does not regulate those charges.
The SSC inspection is intended to be a visual inspection only and is a requirement for transfer of ownership/registration. The inspection is completed to ensure the vehicle meets a minimum set of safety standards. If those standards are met, an SSC can be issued. It is not an indicator of vehicle performance and is not a warranty on the quality of a vehicle.
If the vehicle fails the inspection, it is up to the consumer to decide if the repairs required to pass the inspection are made.
Oh, This is just when you get your vehicle satisfied to transfer ownership (for now).
[h=2]Is this standard going to cost consumers more money?[/h] The cost of a Safety Standards Certificate (SSC) inspection is determined by the inspecting station and is market-driven. The Ministry does not regulate those charges.
The SSC inspection is intended to be a visual inspection only and is a requirement for transfer of ownership/registration. The inspection is completed to ensure the vehicle meets a minimum set of safety standards. If those standards are met, an SSC can be issued. It is not an indicator of vehicle performance and is not a warranty on the quality of a vehicle.
If the vehicle fails the inspection, it is up to the consumer to decide if the repairs required to pass the inspection are made.
Last edited:
superseven
Well-known member
How does this law improve anything? The problem for road safety is driver training and too much tech. Big tires, rims and various modifications are not the issue.
Revenue generation disguised as safety improvement
There have been collisions in which an excessively lifted 4x4 truck and/or equipped with a "stinger" front bumper went right over the crash structure of a vehicle that it hit, and people have been killed because of it. Caution, there are some gory pictures in this. http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...s-what-happened-to-a-friend&highlight=stinger
Installing huge tires and then not upgrading the brakes won't help such a vehicle stop very well, either. Raising the center of gravity isn't going to help with vehicle stability and such vehicles can be prone to rolling over.
But there is a biiiiig gulf between specific situations like that, and making a vehicle fail a safety because the tires stick out 1" past the fenders or has non-OEM shocks.
Driver error is something like 95% of the problem. All mechanical failures put together is something like 3% of the problem and I betcha a huge percentage of that is run of the mill stuff like underinflated tires, nothing to do with non-stock modifications.
Even the HID-in-incandescent-housing situation doesn't have to be addressed by banning all non-OEM parts. There are many cases where they work well enough, it depends on the optics in each case. This really should be addressed by getting out a light meter and measuring the amount of light a certain distance away and a certain distance above the centerline of the lights. Too much = fail. Doesn't matter HID or LED or OEM mis-aimed bulbs.
The vehicle manufacturers themselves have created what in my view is a MUCH bigger problem ... Instrument panels that are illuminated all the time, thus leading drivers to not realize that they have not switched on their headlights (and specifically, their taillights). This is something that needs to be fixed in the motor vehicle standards: If the instruments are illuminated, the taillights and running lights have to be on. Wanna make a newfangled fancy LED instrument cluster that has to be on all the time? Fine. Then the taillights and running lights have to be on all the time ...
Installing huge tires and then not upgrading the brakes won't help such a vehicle stop very well, either. Raising the center of gravity isn't going to help with vehicle stability and such vehicles can be prone to rolling over.
But there is a biiiiig gulf between specific situations like that, and making a vehicle fail a safety because the tires stick out 1" past the fenders or has non-OEM shocks.
Driver error is something like 95% of the problem. All mechanical failures put together is something like 3% of the problem and I betcha a huge percentage of that is run of the mill stuff like underinflated tires, nothing to do with non-stock modifications.
Even the HID-in-incandescent-housing situation doesn't have to be addressed by banning all non-OEM parts. There are many cases where they work well enough, it depends on the optics in each case. This really should be addressed by getting out a light meter and measuring the amount of light a certain distance away and a certain distance above the centerline of the lights. Too much = fail. Doesn't matter HID or LED or OEM mis-aimed bulbs.
The vehicle manufacturers themselves have created what in my view is a MUCH bigger problem ... Instrument panels that are illuminated all the time, thus leading drivers to not realize that they have not switched on their headlights (and specifically, their taillights). This is something that needs to be fixed in the motor vehicle standards: If the instruments are illuminated, the taillights and running lights have to be on. Wanna make a newfangled fancy LED instrument cluster that has to be on all the time? Fine. Then the taillights and running lights have to be on all the time ...
Driver error is a given when said driver builds a cheese machine of shaky engineering principles. Back in the day any greaseball could shackle the rear leafs to the sky and run skinny tires up front to make a pretend psuedo 1/4 mile car. Todays expressions of individuality may be technically different but the same headspace still applies.
daught
Well-known member
I really dont understand why cars still need to have lights turned on and off. Keep front lights(or drls) and back lights on all the time. Key in on, key out off. I owned a civic with a constantly illuminated dash and I forgot to turn my lights on and off a bunch of times.
Boots
Well-known member
Stretched tires are pretty dangerous if you hit a curb and pop the bead, or maybe even a deep pothole in the road.
But does this happen or is it dangerous enough to warrant a province-wide crackdown on it? Probably not.
The stance guys are tools to begin with anyway, half of these cars I see at meets aren't even functional. Let them ruin their oil pans, lips, fenders, wheel wells, exhausts etc. It's only going to come out of their pocket at the end of the day anyway.
superseven
Well-known member
I feel for any incident where people are injured or lives are lost. I just feel you can counter this with many examples of deadly accidents with stock cars running stock hardware. Yes some common sense should be used when modifying a vehicle. This may be the intent of the law but I feel it is a bit specific and designed to allow too much power to go to enforcement.
I have a hard time with this at some point we might as well create a system where we need to ask the government if we are allowed to walk across the street.
Too many laws trying to address the concerns and incidents of the very few instead of the masses.
