Wisconsin allegedly cancelling Military vehicle titles.

[Rattlehead]

I keep seeing the term HMV being used, but I hope that there is not too much focus on the H part in the final solution. Otherwise there may be some exclusion to MV's ONLY if they are X years or older.

 

[gimpyrobb]

Thats a very well thought out statement and if they can not see the err in their ways, no other speech would. I hope you get this resolved in your favor.

 

[DDoyle]

I think the term Historic Military Vehicle is appropriate. If WE as private citizens own it - its NOT a military vehicle. If Uncle Sam owns it, it is a military vehicle. The servicmen in Iraq are making history just as surely as their grandfathers did on Okinawa - both are history, one just a bit more recent than the other....age has nothing to do with it. Practically stating - and I am not making a statement that this is good, bad, or otherwise - but it is a reality of the age we live in - getting a piece of legislation/policy related to HISTORIC military vehicles through is going to be a lot more feasible than saying "military vehicle".

These guys, rightfully so, are trying to get titling for their hobby vehicles - not make a political statement. Knowing the players involved, I feel comfortable that they aren't "selling out" any era historic military vehicle.

Regards,
David Doyle

 

[Elwenil]

Good point David. I just want those involved to consider everything as like it or not, this is setting a precedent that other states may follow in the future and a mistake in the slightest detail could be a major problem for a lot of others in the long run. That may sound a little critical but it's been known to happen.

 

[Michael]

I have been worried that if you stress the HMV too much you might get a law that could be read to mean that it has to be a perfectly restored vehicle with absolutely no modifications. Kind of like the antique vehicle insurance requirements.

Another thought I had was what about the rural fire departments and such. I would assume they would be banned from public road also.

 

[DDoyle]

No offence, but if I take a M35A2, chop it, put earth mover tires on it, and drop a 454 in - then its now a kit car built by me - not something built by Reo, Kaiser or AM General - and it should be tagged and titled as a kit car. If the titling and licensing laws are supposed to be concerned with road safety, the regs concerning kit cars are much more applicable to such a modded vehicle than the ones concerning antiques. If the spring hanger on a Reo, designed by an engineer, made to mfr and government standards, hasn't broken in fifty years, it probably won't now - but the spring hanger welded up out back last year - its unproven - its a kit car part.

Where to draw the line? I dunno - at what percentage does it cease to be a factory-made vehicle and become homemade?

My .02 (sure to be unpopular),
David Doyle

 

[undysworld]

It is a common assumption up in Cheeseland that if WisDOT succeeds in banning HMVs, rural FDs are certainly in for trouble too. Personally, I hope any legislation does not dictate an exact restoration, I'd like to be able to paint mine purple or some such ridiculous color. Ditto the "no offense", but I'm just some broke down dude who wants to take his kid and dogs for rides in the woods and camping when we can. Thus I run (oops, RAN) regular light truck plates and do not insure the truck with Hagerty's. Else I'd be limited to "no payload". There is a loose grouping of HMV enthusiast clubs here who are communicating amongst one another to arrive at legislative wording which will be acceptable to all involved before it is presented to the lawmakers. It seems likely that this will allow individual members to comment and hopefully address everyone's concerns. Hopefully, if there are any restrictions whatsoever, they will be as minimal as possible. David, thanks for some creative thinking. I DO NOT intend to be denied my driving priveleges forever. Using "parts" from some anonymous Austrian built machine as the basis for a "kit car" is brilliant! How about a 6x6 Cobra roadster? Or a Lamborghini body for those rainy days on the highways?
BTW, just because that REO spring hanger hasn't broken in fifty years, who says it CAN'T break tomorrow? Don't YOU have a DOT like we do? Thankfully, I live in a state where the powers that be, benevolently see fit to save me from just such a threat. It's like that old saying that just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't watching you.
I know I've probably misconstrued your comments beyond recognition, it's all meant in good spirits and general automotive frustration.

My .223 (perhaps more popular)
Paul

 

[DDoyle]

BTW, just because that REO spring hanger hasn't broken in fifty years, who says it CAN'T break tomorrow? Don't YOU have a DOT like we do?
I know I've probably misconstrued your comments beyond recognition, it's all meant in good spirits and general automotive frustration.

My .223 (perhaps more popular)
Paul

I'm tired, and a bit slower than usual - so I'm somewhat lost. What I am trying to say is if you paint your Pinz purple, or a Reo orange, or an AM General in polka-dots, its still a factory engineered and assembled vehicle - a historic military vehicle.

If I take a Reo, rip one of the rear axles off of it, go into my back yard and weld up some spring hangers to lift the suspension so I can put 56 inch tires on it, install a 454 chevy and turbo 400 - is it still a Reo? IMHO, its no longer a historic military vehicle, its a kit car. And which vehicle do you think would be safer - the 50 year old Reo design, the 30 year old Pinz design, the 20 year old AM General, or my home-brew?

Hence, IMHO, such a modified vehicle should be registered as a kit car, and you and my friends in Wisconsin are trying to insure the registration of factory-made vehicles, not home builts.

Regards,
David

 

[undysworld]

Sorry David, my spring hanger comment was totally meant in sarcasm. You are, of course, right. There are a lot of differing reasons why we own/operate our vehicles. Hopefully the law gets amended to allow all ex-mil vehicle ownership and operation. The use of "HMV" seems approriate, and fitting as you defined it above. I was sort of going off on a tangent above, in that if WisDOT succeeds in banning HMVs, I'll do whatever it takes to keep my vehicle on the road. I need it. If I have to call it a "kit car", OK. If I have to call it a "blender", OK. It's still an old green truck by any other name. Probably smells like one too.
Hey, I only recently realized that you have a published literary presence. Nice. Pleasure corresponding!
Paul

 

[Michael]

My point was to be careful what you ask for, you might just get it. If you ask for restored HMV to be exempt, WisDOT might just decide that means factory class show queens are exempt and nothing else.

On another note, a funny image flashed before my eyes this morning. I am sure most of you have read the interview MV magazine did with a representative of WisDOT stating you would have to tow or trailer your HMV's in parades in Wis now. While I was thinking about that the image of a police roadblock checking tags, licenses and proof of insurance for everything in a local parade and writing tickets for all of the violators including all of the Shriner's.

 

[jeli]

Purple??? in cheeseland???? You aren't a Vikings fan are you?

 

[Michael]

After reading all of the posts here and on the G, it was my understanding that WisDOT is quoiting a law that specifically states that military vehicles are not road worthy. Did anyone ever find that law? I am sure a lot of us would like to see it.

 

[kcimb]

I'd like to have a link or transcript of the interview with the WisDot official.

 

[DavidB]

Let the dust settle, a clear path to resolution is being sought.This is an OPEN format and many read postings! It will be solved be patient and wait as we are.
DavidB

 

[undysworld]

2pm here. Sen. Erpenbach's office called and informed me that the WisDOT is currently researching this matter further, checking into other state's approaches, essentially, and investigating how to go about licensing HMVs. I said that was great news.
I asked that people, like me, who have rather utilitarian uses for our HMVs not be restricted in what we can do with the trucks. For instance, I want to be able to camp and haul 2x4s and fencing supplies in mine, not just to be able to enter it in a car show. Collector plates restrict you to 'no payload'. I've always carried Light Truck plates, good up to 8000 # gvw.
I also asked that for those of us already effected by this ban, ie. Pinzgauer drivers and Steve up in Appleton with the '43 Jeep, could we please get WisDOT to reinstate our title/plates immediately. We've already paid for the plates. Then they can take their time in working out details.
Mostly, I want to thank Senator Jon Erpenbach and his staff for hearing our pleas and looking into things. It ain't over yet, but it's a start.
Paul

 

[Floyd]

Thanks Paul for all your work on this issue. I'm realy surprised CA wasn't the first to try this idea out. I never thought it would happen in the mid-west and NE of the country.

I don't think Sen. Erpenbach and his staff have any idea how much they are helping all of us that collect MV's. My thanks to the Senator. It may not be over but it's going in the proper direction.

Floyd

 

[gimpyrobb]

I am very impressed by the fact that Senator Jon Erpenbach has followed through with his promise to look into this issue. It has renewed my faith in some of our leaders. Thank you Senator Jon Erpenbach.

 

[Blythewoodjoe]

OK, I have now taken an hour and read almost all of this thread. I have some questions.

First off, where did the designation HMV come from? I have been reading SC state law on these matters and I know your state laws must be different because prior ownership just doesn't come to mind when I read my states laws. Does Wisconsin have a specific law that deals with former ownership? There is no real difference in a M38 and a CJ2. Some one else brought up the Dodges and Chevys. I know I missing something here so straiten me out. I would like to see the law that defines the HMV.

Secondly, if the government sold things like MB's after the war and they where operated on public street for the past 50 years, what suddenly made them illegal to operate? What about the law specifically states that a vehicle that the military contracted someone to build makes it different that a vehicle build and sold to the public. If the vehicle meets the proper safety and emissions regulations for the year it was produced, what separates it from everything else. I am sure I have overlooked something, this was a lot to read at one time, but it looks to me like this is simply a matter of former ownership.

Good luck guys, there's lots of more bull where this came from,
Joe Trapp

 

[madsam]

I am glad you guys in WIS are fighting this. In the long run, it will help others. If any state is allowed to get away with this infringement upon property rights, that could affect us all. Any DOT should be able to give you a list of specifications on what "road worthy" is. Prior ownership should have no barring on "road worthiness". If I bought an old police car, it could be deemed unroadworthy. Only failures of specifications, like no brakes, no lights, should be a roadworthy issue. If I built a kit car, it's roadworthyness should be based on how safely it can be operated on the road. If I take a Hercules MF engined and attach it to a frame with 3 axles and put a truck body on it, it's safety, roadworthyness, sould be considered to a set of specifications, not an opinion.

I won't even talk about the issue of ignoring the "grandfather" clause.

Personally I think this is another instance of a government bureaucrat forcing his or her beliefs on the public by issuing policy and bypassing the truly elected representatives. (Probably a military hater who does not want to see any MVs in parades. )

Even in New York City they limit some large trucks based on vehicle length and can give you that specification. (Of course who wants to drive through New York City with a big truck anyway. )

 

[emmado22]

If you've ever driven thru NYC, you'll know exactly why they have length restrictions. I dont even want to drive my Quad Cab pick up with 6 foot bed theu there, it is too long sometimes..