Importing R32 or R34 when Nissan GTR enters U.S.

[Ryoga4523]

Well I was thinking, and reading, and thinking, and reading... But after analyzing 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(l)(A)(i):

"General.--Section 30112(a) of this title does not apply to a motor vehicle if--

(1) on the initiative of the Secretary of Transportation or on petition of a manufacturer or importer registered under subsection (c) of this section, the Secretary decides--(A) the vehicle is--(i) substantially similar to a motor vehicle originally manufactured for import into and sale in the United States;"

I was thinking that someone might be able to attack this Statute under section (i) and get a GTR32-34 (probably not the 32 because Nissan Corp. already said the 32 did not have certain safety features) when the new GTR comes out, mainly because Nissan will have done all of the vehicle testing, etc. that is required to show to the Gov't that the old GTR's are similar to the new GTR, thus validating the section (i) requirement.

In doing so, I know I would have to show that the older GTR's, in comparison to the new GTR, would meet each Safety Requirement set forth by the NHTSA (they are listed in the 1999 Federal Register for the initial response from NHTSA, I think its Docket No. NHTSA 1999-5507 or something).

The only snag in this analysis is that the new GTR will have a new chassis and chassis code, and is substantially different from the GTR32-34. But I would definately attempt this option, the only problem is, I have no clue how much it costs to file for a petition and if they will even respond (I looked at some of the newer inquiries, the ones posted in 2007, but the ppl who were asking the questions did not do any research before posting or petitioning; and therefore I do not think that the NHTSA even bothered responding).

Anyways, what do you guys think, will this attempt stand a chance against the statute, especially considering the false info put forth by MotRextards?

[edthemanjp]

A similar concept was tried with the EVO5 but Mitsu USA stepped in and said it was different and they could not disclose the differences because of manufacture secrets, Sean Morris of RB motoring tried this. Mitsu did this so that they would have exclusive sale not importers its all about the bottom line. So you think Nissan would cut their profit to help people out, I don't think so either, they'll fight you

[Ryoga4523]

I figured as much, but Nissan has already "shot themselves in the foot" by telling the Agency that the petition they granted back in 1999 was under false info. Nissan did this by showing the safety info about the R32 and R34 to the Agency back when they rescinded the 1990-1999 Skyline petition.

I was thinking of using that info to match it up with the U.S. spec GTR; and proving, or attempting to prove, that the GTR34 and maybe the 32 might stand up to the US Nissan GTR safety standards.
Modified by Ryoga4523 at 7:56 PM 9/15/2007

[edthemanjp]

Nissan didn't submit the petition, JK Technologies submitted the petition for Motorex. Nissan didn't say anything, ie the petition was posted and anyone who has conflicting information should say something, Nissan didn't say anything at this time. (You have to note any information submitted to the petition is recorded and available for public view if you know where to look) Nissandidn't submit anything in writing at this time. This was 1999-2000.

NHTSA asked or they received information and inquired of Nissan and supposedly Nissan USA said 32,33,&34 were three different platforms and this led to NHTSA holding a rescinding petition in which anyone was allowed to write in with evidence proving why they shouldn't rescind or partially rescind the petition which allows the Nissan Skyline GTR to be imported. They only partially rescinded this agreement and allow the 1996,97,&98 year models to be imported through a registered importer and they have to comply with ODBII.

Good luck the people at NHTSA are sick of hearing about the Nissan Skyline and as a government entity they can take as long as they like to verify if they want to approve it and ODBII will rear its ugly head. There is someone who has all this information and has been with this since inception but is sick of hearing about it but for money is willing to work but I wouldn't call him unless your truly serious and have a well spring of cash, Sean Morris RB Motoring.

[Death By Thrash Metal]

Well im not legally inclined as you all are, but I am betting that nissan used the GTR name stand alone, so as not to compare it to a Skyline when exporting it. That way they wont have to do all the testing=not possible to do the r34 imports...I mean think about it, that is the only logical reason they wouldnt call it a skyline... and most likely they will compare it to the v35, simply because its newer and safer, and it will have a comon v6 engine....Im positive that no matter how you spin it, nissan wont want to do the testing (buying cars back, making them dot legal ect) to prove their legality for a new car...its kind of.... well you know....Just think about it for a second.I do hate to kill even my own dreams of owning an r34 but i think ^ is true....

[themadscientist]

It's not uncommon to split names like that. The Supra was once just a trim package on the Celica and evolved into it's own car.

[edthemanjp]

The real reason is Ford at one time manufactured the Skyliner.