Dave Legacy
Adventurer
That is exacty the type of scenario I was trying to get at. For a legal car I see no reason to swap a VIN at all. Is there ever a time to NOT be suspicious over swapped VINs?
rmr
- Thread starter gary in ohio
- Start date
That is exacty the type of scenario I was trying to get at. For a legal car I see no reason to swap a VIN at all. Is there ever a time to NOT be suspicious over swapped VINs?
11b4v
Adventurer
there's your dilema, you dont know the legal "loop holes".
Let me use the NFA-National Firearms Act as an example. Know anything about firearms silencers and machineguns michaels?? All illegal, restricted right? No civilian ownership right?
Similiar conversations often occur between the those who know and those who dont in this area. There is a whole / another world of legal loopholes when it comes to firearms. I bet you, as most folks, are "pretty sure" that machineguns, silencers and short barrel rifles are all illegal and restricted to govt / LE use right? Well guess what, they're not if you know, and apply, the legal loopholes.
UnfrozenCaveman
Explorer
I'm sure what was meant here was strict adherence to all NFA rules and the proper and timely application for and payment of the required stamps / taxes that may be associated with any and all NFA weapons....right?
Dave Legacy
Adventurer
But that also varies from state-to-state. In CA an assault weapon is legal so long as it is semi-auto w/tool operated mag release. Threaded barrels are not legal. I'm sure this is not the case in AL as fully auto weapons are legal in other states.
11b4v
Adventurer
thanks Monkeyboy for watching my back.
I often get in a hurry and make mistakes while trying to sneak in a post/reply during normal business hours.
Yes, Im a stamp collector as well.
PS. Hate it for you CA residents. Life is hard on you guys for just about every aspect of living.
Here's some gunporn from GA/AL for you guys living behind the lines in Cali. All civilian legal too!
I often get in a hurry and make mistakes while trying to sneak in a post/reply during normal business hours.
Yes, Im a stamp collector as well.
PS. Hate it for you CA residents. Life is hard on you guys for just about every aspect of living.
Here's some gunporn from GA/AL for you guys living behind the lines in Cali. All civilian legal too!
Last edited:
NICE collection! I especially love the operator with a can! We can have everything here except the SBR, silencers, and fully auto. Once again you can even own all of the above here if you are willing to jump through the hoops that the BATF puts in front of you. I just have the usual suspects as I didn't want the hassle of dealing with the legalities of it all, but I still have fun with the toys in the safe.
Back to the task at hand, and just to make sure I'm on the same page as everyone else, the way I see it is thus:
1.) If you have an '85 or older vehicle imported into the US at this point you are every bit as legal as any '93, '94, '95, or '97 Defender.
2.) As to follow the letter of the "DOT" law, the only thing that need remain from the '85 or older truck to make it still "legal" are the frame and bulkhead-I am sure this will change at some point, but today, March 8th 2011 that is the reading that I am getting from the IADOT. There are also provisions for repair and replacement of those parts as to make them road worthyas well.
With that groundwork laid, What is the difference between "modding" an '85 or earlier truck and what companies like ECR do with the trucks that they turn into rolling works of art? I have seen some INCREDIBLE trucks from them decked out with interior and exterior components that were NEVER offered on NAS trucks, and they are still legal to drive and own here in the US, correct? I was on their website a few evenings ago and they were even talking about putting a Safety Devices roll cage on one of their 110's in the for sale section onto an early 110. IF the groundwork has been laid out properly, I've registered and insured my vehicle, and it is legal to the letter of the law why should a person have to be guilted into feeling like a criminal for "jumping through the hoops"?
I am not saying that the truck that I have is even CLOSE to what ECR puts out, and I hate to even drag them into this dog fight, but if you get into the semantics of it there really isn't any fundamental difference in what the end products are as long as a person is starting out with a legal baseline...
Back to the task at hand, and just to make sure I'm on the same page as everyone else, the way I see it is thus:
1.) If you have an '85 or older vehicle imported into the US at this point you are every bit as legal as any '93, '94, '95, or '97 Defender.
2.) As to follow the letter of the "DOT" law, the only thing that need remain from the '85 or older truck to make it still "legal" are the frame and bulkhead-I am sure this will change at some point, but today, March 8th 2011 that is the reading that I am getting from the IADOT. There are also provisions for repair and replacement of those parts as to make them road worthyas well.
With that groundwork laid, What is the difference between "modding" an '85 or earlier truck and what companies like ECR do with the trucks that they turn into rolling works of art? I have seen some INCREDIBLE trucks from them decked out with interior and exterior components that were NEVER offered on NAS trucks, and they are still legal to drive and own here in the US, correct? I was on their website a few evenings ago and they were even talking about putting a Safety Devices roll cage on one of their 110's in the for sale section onto an early 110. IF the groundwork has been laid out properly, I've registered and insured my vehicle, and it is legal to the letter of the law why should a person have to be guilted into feeling like a criminal for "jumping through the hoops"?
I am not saying that the truck that I have is even CLOSE to what ECR puts out, and I hate to even drag them into this dog fight, but if you get into the semantics of it there really isn't any fundamental difference in what the end products are as long as a person is starting out with a legal baseline...
DividingCreek
Explorer
86 model year now
UnfrozenCaveman
Explorer
What's suspicious about it? It very obviously has been completely rebuilt. Every body panel, every nut and bolt, even the sunvisors are brand new. But if it's all assembled on a 1984 frame, what does it matter? The DOT doesn't care.
Why is it only Rover people seem to have a problem this type of thing?
Is this car going to be a "VIN swap" when it's done?
DividingCreek
Explorer
But if it's all assembled on a 1984 frame, what does it matter? The DOT doesn't care.
They sure do,& EPA is looking for the truck to have its original engine !
Rovertrader
Supporting Sponsor
yea, Boyd Coddington only spent a little time in prison for similar 'builds'...
Clearly you don't understand the law. Boyd Coddington never spent any time in jail. He was convicted of a misdemeanor, fined $3000, and served 160 hours community service.
http://www.streetrodderweb.com/hotnews/0410sr_street_rod_owners_potential_fraud/index.html
The actual crime you appear to be accusing him of committing was probably the one by Titles Unlimited, for which Richard Weaver was convicted. A completely seperate issue. In that, VIN's were sold to people assembling kit Cobras, using none of the original parts for which the VIN belonged, and declaring the value of the cars to be less than the actual cost.
http://www.streetrodderweb.com/hotnews/0410sr_street_rod_owners_potential_fraud/index.html
The actual crime you appear to be accusing him of committing was probably the one by Titles Unlimited, for which Richard Weaver was convicted. A completely seperate issue. In that, VIN's were sold to people assembling kit Cobras, using none of the original parts for which the VIN belonged, and declaring the value of the cars to be less than the actual cost.
Rovertraders comments were made in sarcasm. It is ridiculous what is going on with the rover mentality and the DOT.
They need to get their heads out of their ***** and move on to things of more importance.
I used to be a partner in a business and I cannot tell you how many 1965 mustangs were butchered and reassembled to make one nice convertible or K model, or other similar projects.
I have seen some street legal cars that folks should clear the way for because they presented a clear and present danger to folks around them on the road, yet, re-building a 1984 Defender on a Puma body is considered unsafe ...
GIVE ME A BREAK!!
D
They need to get their heads out of their ***** and move on to things of more importance.
I used to be a partner in a business and I cannot tell you how many 1965 mustangs were butchered and reassembled to make one nice convertible or K model, or other similar projects.
I have seen some street legal cars that folks should clear the way for because they presented a clear and present danger to folks around them on the road, yet, re-building a 1984 Defender on a Puma body is considered unsafe ...
GIVE ME A BREAK!!
D
That's half of my point. What exactly IS going on with the DOT? Does anybody have a DOCUMENTED case of anybody ever getting in legal trouble because of any of this?
So many Rover people constantly go on and on about how you can't get a 300tdi in the US because the EPA won't allow it. And you can't disassemble a 2006 Defender and reassemble it on a 1984 frame because the DOT won't allow it. Yet there is an entire cottage industry in the US doing exactly this thing. Certainly if this was truly illegal, SOMEBODY would have been hosed by now, and one of the people stating their opinion that this is illegal would be able to point to them as a case.
In the case of what went on in California, the government seemed WAY more concerned with getting their taxes based on vehicle value than they were about EPA. At the end of the day, Boyd got a slap on the wrist, they made him their example and.... he came out pretty clean. For $3000 was it even worth it?
So many Rover people constantly go on and on about how you can't get a 300tdi in the US because the EPA won't allow it. And you can't disassemble a 2006 Defender and reassemble it on a 1984 frame because the DOT won't allow it. Yet there is an entire cottage industry in the US doing exactly this thing. Certainly if this was truly illegal, SOMEBODY would have been hosed by now, and one of the people stating their opinion that this is illegal would be able to point to them as a case.
In the case of what went on in California, the government seemed WAY more concerned with getting their taxes based on vehicle value than they were about EPA. At the end of the day, Boyd got a slap on the wrist, they made him their example and.... he came out pretty clean. For $3000 was it even worth it?