Should ADRs be abolished for imported vehicles?

[Syndrome]

Now that Australia no longer manufactures cars, it would make sense to use the design rules of the EU. That would stop the unnecessary costs associated with designing unique cars for the Australian market.

[Junkyard-Dog]

I don't know man. A lot of people are dying from toxic diesel fumes in European cities.

I love European culture but Europe is a very different place to Australia. Maybe there is a good reason to stick with ADRs. I know that Australian cars have very good headlamps compared to European cars... wouldn't want to copy Euros in that regard as an example.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Syndrome

Now that Australia no longer manufactures vehicles, it would make sense to use the design rules of the EU. That would stop the unnecessary cost associated with designing unique vehicles for the Australian market.

EU, Then we can bring more of those single back wheeled motorhomes ready to roll over if they blow a rear tyre.
We could have organic Mercedes wiring looms, Renault and Citroen reliability. Just saying.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by Syndrome

Now that Australia no longer manufactures cars, it would make sense to use the design rules of the EU. That would stop the unnecessary costs associated with designing unique cars for the Australian market.

Still makes sense to have ADR rather than the EU crappy standards.


Cheers.

[Nikked]

No.

There still needs to be a standard for cars sold here, but some of the requirements could be adjusted.

[hayseed]

Originally Posted by Syndrome

Now that Australia no longer manufactures cars, it would make sense to use the design rules of the EU. That would stop the unnecessary costs associated with designing unique cars for the Australian market.

We'd end up a dumping ground for their second hand Crap...

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by Syndrome

Now that Australia no longer manufactures cars, it would make sense to use the design rules of the EU. That would stop the unnecessary costs associated with designing unique cars for the Australian market.

Many of the ADR's are already 'harmonised' with the with United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) regulations.

It has been a long term Australian Government policy to align the national standards for road vehicles in Australia with EU regulations.
This has been happening since the year 2000.

Australia has acceded to two United Nations Agreements that deal with UNECE regulations.
These are the 1958 Agreement and the 1998 Agreement.
Australia has applied 29 regulations and will likely apply more in the future.

[simon varley]

really? there is nothing special about Australia (in terms of cars and driving), and nothing unique about any ADR as far as I'm aware that justifies its existence any longer.

you know right, that we could bring in Focus and Mondeo exactly as homologated for the UK, without spending a single cent in re homologating to ADRs if they just changed the rules like NZ did.

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by simon varley

really? there is nothing special about Australia (in terms of cars and driving), and nothing unique about any ADR as far as I'm aware that justifies its existence any longer.

you know right, that we could bring in Focus and Mondeo exactly as homologated for the UK, without spending a single cent in re homologating to ADRs if they just changed the rules like NZ did.

Actually there is, and as silly and as obvious as this may sound, a regulation contained in the ADR is that a vehicle under 30 years old (and used for transporting people) must be Right-Hand Drive.

All of Europe with the exception of Great Britian are of course all LHD countries.

If you abolish the ADR's, then what is to stop new LHD vehicles being imported privately into Australia from the EU?

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

Actually there is, and as silly and as obvious as this may sound, a regulation contained in the ADR is that a vehicle under 30 years old (and used for transporting people) must be Right-Hand Drive.

All of Europe with the exception of Great Britian are of course all LHD countries.

If you abolish the ADR's, then what is to stop new LHD vehicles being imported privately into Australia from the EU?

That's easily fixed, just leave the one ADR stating any brand new or under 30 year old vehicle that is intended to be registered for our roads is RHD.

However I'm led to believe the cost of compliancing a vehicle is very expensive here and variants of the same model are independently certified. Maybe this can be streamlined.

[Trevor 57]

Definitely not, our cars are among the safest in the world, the car design and safety features, some of which are mandated in the ADR's play a major role in the reduction of the road toll

I can't believe anyone would want to reduce the standards

[simon varley]

it's not about reducing the standards, just harmonising and reducing duplication. What makes you think ADRs are any stricter than ECE regs?

here's a challenge: find me one ADR that mandates anything that is not covered by an ECE Reg.

[foxtrot3]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

Actually there is, and as silly and as obvious as this may sound, a regulation contained in the ADR is that a vehicle under 30 years old (and used for transporting people) must be Right-Hand Drive.

Hi. I dont think that is a "Design' rule but an infrastructure (import) rule. Design rules deal with current design of vehicles to relevant safety and environmental standards. Cheers MD

[Citroënbender]

Originally Posted by simon varley

...here's a challenge: find me one ADR that mandates anything that is not covered by an ECE Reg.

Not at all a criticism of your challenge; you remind me of when Isofix kiddie seats were technically illegal to use here as they were not within the scope of ADRs.

Result of that? Effectively pointless modifications to many imported Euros pre-sale, to accommodate the ADR restraint fixing points; the requirement of "Australia Only" spare parts listings for stuff like parcel shelves with cutouts for the fixing points, cockamamie brackets to hold anchors that Blind Freddie could see were understrength compared to Isofix.

[simon varley]

as an example - Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 3/04 – Seats and Seat Anchorages) 2017 contains in it the text:

7. ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS

7.1. The technical requirements of the United Nations Regulation No. 17 - UNIFORM PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE APPROVAL OF VEHICLES WITH REGARD TO THE SEATS, THEIR ANCHORAGES AND ANY HEAD RESTRAINTS, incorporating the 08 series of amendments, are deemed to be equivalent to the technical requirements of this standard

what value does the ADR actually add, if itself it claims the ECE is equivalent?

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by simon varley

it's not about reducing the standards, just harmonising and reducing duplication. What makes you think ADRs are any stricter than ECE regs?

here's a challenge: find me one ADR that mandates anything that is not covered by an ECE Reg.

Why is it that some, even more recent 4wd's with spare wheels attached against the rear door, need fabricated bumpers with the lights lower down, and the regular lights are disconnected. Presumably because of the spare wheel fitted impeding visibility of the regular lights at certain angles. I assume this would be caused by an ADR requirement which conflicts with the requirements when that vehicle was designed overseas.

Personally I believe the lights lower down in the fabricated bumper results in a less safe situation because of the lights being moved well away from the regular lights, are then not in the line of sight for the following driver who is also expecting the other lights to function when braking or turning.

[Sioso]

If it meant I could register an ATV on the road like in some euro countries I'd be all for it.

[simon varley]

the ADR that governs the position and visibility of lighting is 49/00. It states that ECE reg7 is an acceptable alternative standard.

next?

[simon varley]

by the way, you can find all ADRs here https://www.legislation.gov.au/Brows...72/0/principal

[bangm001]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

Actually there is, and as silly and as obvious as this may sound, a regulation contained in the ADR is that a vehicle under 30 years old (and used for transporting people) must be Right-Hand Drive.

All of Europe with the exception of Great Britian are of course all LHD countries.

If you abolish the ADR's, then what is to stop new LHD vehicles being imported privately into Australia from the EU?

Im pretty sure they are trying to push a new law stating that if a vehicle was manufactured with fewer than 300 units then we can rego them here in SA. I cant find the info i had but its in my emails somewhere.

[Syndrome]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Definitely not, our cars are among the safest in the world, the car design and safety features, some of which are mandated in the ADR's play a major role in the reduction of the road toll

I can't believe anyone would want to reduce the standards

So you say cars made in the EU (Germany, France, Italy etc) are substandard because they do not meet ADR?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Why is it that some, even more recent 4wd's with spare wheels attached against the rear door, need fabricated bumpers with the lights lower down, and the regular lights are disconnected. Presumably because of the spare wheel fitted impeding visibility of the regular lights at certain angles. I assume this would be caused by an ADR requirement which conflicts with the requirements when that vehicle was designed overseas.

Personally I believe the lights lower down in the fabricated bumper results in a less safe situation because of the lights being moved well away from the regular lights, are then not in the line of sight for the following driver who is also expecting the other lights to function when braking or turning.

because the dumba55 ADR required seeing the tail lights at a 45 degree angle,
imports couldn't guarantee that wiith spare tyre in place, hence lower light bar.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by simon varley

it's not about reducing the standards, just harmonising and reducing duplication. What makes you think ADRs are any stricter than ECE regs?

here's a challenge: find me one ADR that mandates anything that is not covered by an ECE Reg.

What about the child seat belt thingy......

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by simon varley

it's not about reducing the standards, just harmonising and reducing duplication. What makes you think ADRs are any stricter than ECE regs?

here's a challenge: find me one ADR that mandates anything that is not covered by an ECE Reg.

ESC mandatory on all cars

[simon varley]

Australian Design Rule 88/00 – Electronic Stability Control (ESC) Systems states ECE R140 and R8 are equivalent

[Dr Smith]

Just floating this out there, before I bought my Renault Trafic Crew van I found that Ford UK offer a similar 5/6 seater Tansit Custom with fixed rear bulkhead, wing rear doors, 125kW engine, auto, rear a/c...you get my drift. Now obviously Ford Australia don't import it and apart from very specific parts for this UK Transit Custom "Double Cab in Van" everything else is used on the local Transit Custom while the engine is used in the Transit cargo so parts are stocked here already.

Why can't I import this without any extra fee or levy or duty because Ford Australia choose not to import it however spares etc are already available here apart from rear seats and bulkhead?

[prydey]

The way I see it, the benefits of going ECE out weigh the negatives. Emission regs are a year or so ahead of Australia.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Syndrome

So you say cars made in the EU (Germany, France, Italy etc) are substandard because they do not meet ADR?

it would be nice if you stopped trying to wind people up.

This may come as a surprise but the EU isn't the only place that cars are made and nowhere was the EU mentioned in Big Trev's post!

[Franco Cozzo]

I say we drop the ADR's but accept any Japanese, American and European design regulations, as long as the car conforms to one of those then it can be registered in our market - reduce red tape so we reduce costs of bringing cars to our market.

It doesn't make sense to me you can drive a 30 year old LHD vehicle, but not a new one?

[GO FURTHER]

Playing the Devil's Advocate here....

What if we were to drop the ADR's, then sometime in the future, someone decides to start manufacturing cars here again? (Electric cars or small scale low volume production types).

Also, we still have HSV, that consider themselves a vehicle manufacturer, maybe not in the 'manufacturing from scratch' truest sense, but nevertheless a car maker.