Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!
The vehicles were designed from the beginning as being FOR MILITARY USE. The intention was not that they would later be sold for civvy use.
What about the H1? Why is that safe for on road use?
The imported Nissan Skyline R33/34's NEVER met regs established by the EPA/DOT/NHTSA... ever. Guys tried to bring them in on the coattails of the R32's that were converted by a couple Federally-certified importers - and the Feds have been scooping up/impounding/crushing the illegal Skylines. The imported cars didn't have US DOT-approved safety glass, emissions controls, crash certifications, etc...
Because the H1 came through specific design channels & had changes made to it that appeased the Feds from the get-go... the H1 cannot be compared to the HMMWV, as even though ~ 99% of the parts are the same, AM General never had the HMMWV certified by the Feds for road use after the military was done with them. And the argument about soldiers driving HMMWV's on the highway is another mute point - people have yet to learn that military vehicles used by military personnel don't have to follow the same rules.
H1's were built for road use and have about a dozen safety features that the hmmwv does not.
If one DMV office in the state can overrule the ruling of another DMV office in the same state, they why the &$*% would the state set laws/rules making the HMMWV unregisterable??
it happens all the time. no 2 people will interpret the same rule the same way.If one DMV office in the state can overrule the ruling of another DMV office in the same state, they why the &$*% would the state set laws/rules making the HMMWV unregisterable??
'Tanner'
Funny, isn't it? If the law/rule/regulation/etc., states 'don't register an HMMWV', then what is so hard to understand?
you would think so but then again your assuming that the person's working at the DMV are the best and brightest we have.Funny, isn't it? If the law/rule/regulation/etc., states 'don't register an HMMWV', then what is so hard to understand?
'Tanner'
Using this AUGREMENT , then NO MV in private hands can be registered for the road
A lot of people seem to feel that letter has some sort of legislative standing... it doesn't. That is a legal CYA response letter from a private corporation to the Connecticut DMV. All it says is that AM General never intended HMMWVs to be in civilian hands, and that they do not condone HMMWVs being in civilian hands. If I t-bone a school bus in my M1026 and the angry parents sue me, the State of California, and AM General, AMG can wave their CYA letter in front of the judge and back away slowly toward the door.
It's also an 11 year-old letter... so even if there was a DMV that took it as law, it's not like they've got HMMWV owners walking in every day and the letter would probably be buried in a file cabinet somewhere.
