PEZi720 wrote:i'm still kinda new to all the skyline BS that happens... but let me see if i got this right...
even if the car is not registered and only used at the track its still illegal simply because it was imported? or am i getting something wrong here?
Hence the reason why I'm not just immediately jumping at the offer to trade for a non-Motorex R34. I want to be able to drive the thing without worrying about it getting impounded.edthemanjp wrote:Thats why I wouldn't trade a Motorex car for a non Motorex vehicle even an R34 and I really like the R34's. You just don't know the history of the vehicle and its previous owners
Because even "track/show only" cars have specific rules on how they're imported and for how long.Basically, the big "coming down on" that's occurring is with cars being illegally imported and/or illegally registered as if they WERE properly imported and converted.PEZi720 wrote:i'm still kinda new to all the skyline BS that happens... but let me see if i got this right...
even if the car is not registered and only used at the track its still illegal simply because it was imported? or am i getting something wrong here?
Since it would be illegal I cant condone it, but it would definetly work in most non fascist ( ie non cali) states.fukin240 wrote:I dont get why you can't just move the vins from a clean titled 240 onto a skyline chassis
Anywhere but california, these cops don't check vins unless car is stolen
If your name is on title of 240, all in the clear
Why can't i do that?
I subtley inquired about that to them (NHTSA guy when I called about the bond release form) because I know for a fact that there's a few major things NOT on my car that should be.Vandrel wrote:The dead horse has been beaten and it's well known that a vast majority of VCP17 Motorex cars had little to no conformance work done prior to being released or delivered. While it's almost safe to say that nothing will ever happen to VCP17 vehicles I'd always be aware of the fact that the NHTSA could inspect at any time and find discrepancies causing the vehicle to be seized or other.
That info alone will be what helps the Kaizo owners outCount Zero wrote:I subtley inquired about that to them (NHTSA guy when I called about the bond release form) because I know for a fact that there's a few major things NOT on my car that should be.
He basically said that they all know that the Motorex cars almost unanimously don't have the full 100% conformance they're supposed to, but they're not going to do anything about them like call for inspections, because it's not the buyers' fault. That was the major basis of half the fraud charges brought against Hiro...he was frauding the buyers as well as the NHTSA/EPA, so they're not going to punish the buyers twice.
I doubt it....the problem with the Kaizo cars isn't just if they've been modded to NHTSA/EPA regs and such.Vandrel wrote:
That info alone will be what helps the Kaizo owners out
Somewhat, Motorex still had it's history in altering vehicle manufacture dates on paper to circumvent the 1996-up EPA ordeal, just check a few VIN's in FAST and you'll see, makes perfect sense why the pre-96 R33's were such a hype for appealing the VCP32 when the rules changed to 96-98. And let's not forget the crash testing fiasco which initially sparked the fire. Motorex had it's share of circumvention, not nearly as bold as Kiazo but it was there.Count Zero wrote:It's mostly about them circumventing the whole import/registration process as a whole, trying to count them as kit cars, despite the final product being a full-on Nissan Skyline.