collector reg. 'offical letter'

[EchoMirage]

has anyone looked into getting collector reg. lately. from reading up on the njdmv.com site, it now says, effective set. 1 2007 (lucky me), that you need a letter from the manufacturer, car club, or recognized organization, on 'offical letterhead' stating the cars limited production or collector status. has anyone gone through this bullshyt yet? i got a card from the dmv today, and it doesnt say anything about an offical letter.......if needed, is it possible for this club to print something up, to make it easier for our members?

[Fast92RS]

I just read that. That sucks. I wonder if they need that for renewals as well.

http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/Vehicle/collector_vehicles.htm

Collector vehicles
Effective September 1, 2007

To be classified as a "collector vehicle" you need to apply when you register and make sure that the vehicle is:
A limited production vehicle or a vehicle made in limited quantities
Less than 25 years old
Not registered as a "historic vehicle" or a "street rod"
Not driven more than 3,000 miles per year
Insured as a limited use "collector vehicle"
To be classified as a collector vehicle, your vehicle cannot be registered as a "historic vehicle" or a "street rod." Download our fact sheet [23k pdf] for more information.

Vehicles applying for collector vehicle status must be approved by MVC. Follow these steps to apply:
Complete the collector vehicle application [41k pdf]
Submit a letter from the vehicle manufacturer, recognized car club or a collector organization attesting to the vehicle’s limited production status. Must be printed on official letterhead
Show proof of limited-use insurance
Include photographs of front, driver side, passenger side and rear of the vehicle
Mail all materials and photos to:

Motor Vehicle Commission
Collector Vehicle Status
I/M Support Unit
P.O. Box 680
Trenton, NJ 08666-0680

Applications can only be processed through the mail and will take approximately two weeks. Once you receive an approval letter from the MVC, take the original letter with raised seal, the original application, and $25 (check, money order, credit card or cash) to any MVC Agency to purchase a collector vehicle status voucher which will be issued immediately.

Call (609) 633-9474 or 9472 for additional information

[maroman88]

wat the craP, my camaro is deff not a limited production vehicle

[LS1Hawk]

I just went to the inspection station this morning and had mine renewed because the sticker on my car was expiring next month. All the guy looked at was my insurance card, registration card, license, and voucher. He then put the new sticker on my car, gave me a print out saying it passed and told me have a nice day. If you notice, the application that the dmv website provides a link to doesn't say anything about a letter from the manufacturer or photos. When I got the new voucher prior to going to the inspection station today, all I did was go to the DMV and fill out their application there and gave it back to them with $10 for the renewal and that was it.

EDIT: I'm thinking that might be for the first time you apply for collector's status. If your vehicle is already in their system as a collector's, I don't see why they'd make you do all that.

[NJSPEEDER]

can you forward me a copy of the letter and i will persue it from our end for everyone. as far as the letter of the law i was under the impression that the basis for collectors was to preserve vehicles, not prove their rarity.
this is definately something i will take to our friends at the SEMA Action Network as well. with their backing i am sure we can find the correct answer and protect our rights.

[jims69camaro]

can you forward me a copy of the letter and i will persue it from our end for everyone. as far as the letter of the law i was under the impression that the basis for collectors was to preserve vehicles, not prove their rarity.
this is definitely something i will take to our friends at the SEMA Action Network as well. with their backing i am sure we can find the correct answer and protect our rights.

good idea. just make sure that justin proofreads any correspondence before you send it out. :mrgreen:

[NJSPEEDER]

thanks.......smartass. lol

[LS1Hawk]

...i was under the impression that the basis for collectors was to preserve vehicles, not prove their rarity..

Exactly. Who are they to decide what's rare or not?

[ar0ck]

So Tim, all you would have to do is write a well written letter saying Camaro's & Firebird's are no longer produced or something to that effect.

Whenever I get the Camaro back I HAVE to get it inspected immediately.

[jims69camaro]

So Tim, all you would have to do is write a well written letter saying Camaros & Firebirds are no longer produced or something to that effect.

you just wrote the letter.

[Tru2Chevy]

Looks like I registered mine as a collector just in time then.....

- Justin

[ar0ck]

you just wrote the letter.

I figure it would have to be written and signed by the owners of the "Organization".

[Iroc-z86]

that is bull. I hate this state. good thing i got mine in june. it doesnt pay to go threw reg inspection, i think i drove my car 200 miles since june so why go threw the bs of inspection when the car sits most of the time? Im moving to florida, no inspection.

[ar0ck]

And the state wonders why people still purchase stickers... legit ones or phony.

[EchoMirage]

i sent in the card.....no pics or letter, as it wasnt stated in the card i got from dmv. so ill let everyone know what happens. i can hope this goes through without much hassle. my sticker is up this month......

[Fast92RS]

Acording to the application it says send intial apps to dmv in trenton, but it dosn't say anything about renewals. So if you already got one and just want to renew it probably wont be a big deal. I think the people who want it for the first time will be the people who get hassled. Buts it just another reason why I hate this state. After reading about this last night the more i think of it, the more it makes my blood boil because its just plain stupid.

[maroman88]

yea great, i was guna get it in feburary when my current regular sticker expires

[NightRydaSS]

SS's and WS6's are numbered, i wonder if that counts?

[ar0ck]

I'm sending in my form to Trenton today so we'll see what happens for my 95' Z. Its a year over-due on inspection.

[PolarBear]

According to the statement "limited production" ALL cars are limited to the amount people will buy :rofl:

This is crappy though.

[Teds89IROC]

I'm glad I'm already in the system, I'm up for renewel in november

[NightRydaSS]

According to the statement "limited production" ALL cars are limited to the amount people will buy :rofl:

This is crappy though.

:rofl:

I kno that, but the SS's and WS6's really were limited / numbered.

Even the 3rd Gen GTA T/A's were limited. I had a '90 and they only made something like 3k in '90 or something like that.

[maroman88]

alex, did u go by the new rules, or are u trying it with the old ones, let me know and ill do it ASAP also

[ar0ck]

I'm gonna make this my blog/adventure!

I'm using the application I got from here (http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/pdf/Vehicles/Application_for_Collector_Vehicle_Status.pdf) . I filled out all the required information, put it in a legal envelope and mailed it off at 2pm today the 10th.

I'm going to play it dumb for now and see how far I can get.

[maroman88]

ill get mine out tomarrow:)

[Wasted Youth]

:rofl:

I kno that, but the SS's and WS6's really were limited / numbered.

Even the 3rd Gen GTA T/A's were limited. I had a '90 and they only made something like 3k in '90 or something like that.


1990 in general is a very rare year for third gens as well as 1992....

[PolarBear]

1990 in general is a very rare year for third gens as well as 1992....

BUt not 91......

[maroman88]

nope, they made tons in 91 lol. the model year started early cuz the 90's were cut short due to the contract with IROC expiring on december 31st 1989, also 91 brought about the new body pieces

[mtnhopper1]

This may be splitting hairs, but that's what lawyers do, so here goes...

I'd venture that ANY vehicle that is not in the current year of production is a "limited production vehicle." Look at it this way, there will NEVER be another 1983 V6 Berlinetta produced by Chevrolet. Every one of these cars is rare in the sense that the number of original cars will do nothing but decline. Each of these prized and endangered vehicles that remains on the road must be preserved because if it is not, then the vehicles will become extinct.

It doesn't matter that in 1983 you could've ordered 100,000 v6 Berlinettas and Chevrolet would have ponied up and made the factory put them out. Now, in 2007, you couldn't get a brand new 1983 Berlinetta if you were willing to pay $10 Million. The number of original cars produced is "limited" by the fact that it is of a 1983 vintage, on the road in 2007.

Until I see a statutory definition of "limited production vehicle," I'm sticking to this story.

[maroman88]

got a letter back saying my application was denied!! i need proof of limited manufacture or remaining limited quantity

[WildBillyT]

i need proof of ... remaining limited quantity

Good luck with that. This letter deal is basically making approvals subjective. They are trying to kill off the exploitation of the collector car reg, I'm sure.

[ar0ck]

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e33/alexQTP/lastscan.jpg

So now what do I do? I'm on the phone with my insurance company right now to take care of the limited use issue. But now I'm hung up with this limited manufacture thing, Required photos? & SS-66 R5/06 form?

And the state wonders why they have to crack down on illegally obtained stickers.

[WildBillyT]

So now what do I do? I'm on the phone with my insurance company right now to take care of the limited use issue. But now I'm hung up with this limited manufacture thing, Required photos? & SS-66 R5/06 form?

And the state wonders why they have to crack down on illegally obtained stickers.

You MIGHT be able to contact GM VVS in Ontario (I think the guy's name is George) and obtain production numbers for cars like yours since some 3rd and all 4th gens were built at St. Therese.

[maroman88]

alex, i got the same thing

[ar0ck]

alex, i got the same thing

Yeah saw it after I posted :lol:

I called my insurance and they just have the Camaro listed as a "pleasure car - driven no more then 2 miles a day" they don't list it as a limited use. So its either I buy a sticker, or have my parents sign up for a collectors car insurance company and add me as a driver which would void my independence from them.

[Tru2Chevy]

You MIGHT be able to contact GM VVS in Ontario (I think the guy's name is George) and obtain production numbers for cars like yours since some 3rd and all 4th gens were built at St. Therese.

Pretty sure that no 3rd gens were built there....I think they were all Van Nuys, CA or Norwood, OH.

- Justin

[mtnhopper1]

I believe they require a letter from a "collector car organization" attesting to the collectability and limited remaining quantity of these cars.

A simple affidavit from your local F body club should do, which says something like "the Camaro has been produced since 1967 and has long been regarded as one of the most desirable vehicles to collectors. The desirability of the Camaro has caused the price of even the most base-model Camaros of the first generation (1967-69) and second generation (1970-1981) to climb dramatically, making many of the earlier models far too expensive for the modest collector. Consequently, later-model Camaros have also seen a marked increase in value among collectors. Models years such as the third generation (1982-1992) Camaro have become recently recognized among Camaro enthusiasts as legitimately collectable. Since these vehicles are desirable for racing purposes, the number of unmodified cars (even base models) has rapidly declined..... Blah Blah Blah." I'll even write it for you if you want.

If you can find an administrator or officer of your local F-body club that would be willing to sign an affidavit, you would probably be okay. Any volunteers?

[mtnhopper1]

More info from NJ Administrative Code Title 13:20-43.1:

""Collector motor vehicle" means a motor vehicle, not otherwise qualified for designation as an "historic vehicle," or "street rod," which was either: originally manufactured as a restricted issue make or model, or in a sufficiently limited quantity; or at the time of qualification for designation exists in such limited numbers; either one or the other or both of the above, according to any generally recognized compilation of motor vehicle statistical information on file with, or supplied by the owner to the Motor Vehicle Commission, as may be accepted by the Chief Administrator in his or her discretion, so as to establish it as a unique commodity having a current monetary value in excess of similar make and model vehicles with routine manufacture and distribution patterns, and, further, that is not driven in excess of the maximum mileage permitted by the terms of a valid limited use motor vehicle insurance policy issued for, and covering such vehicle, proof of which shall be supplied to the Motor Vehicle Commission at the time of application for designation as a collector vehicle, which mileage shall in no event exceed 3,000 miles per year. This term shall not include motor vehicles with elevated chassis height which are subject to inspection in accordance with N.J.A.C. 13:20-37."

This may cause a problem, but I really think the letter will work because it says "similar make and model", but not year. Also, the application materials say that you can submit evidence that "a limited quantity of the original production run remains."

[Teds89IROC]

wow that's crap, I hope that this doesn't effect me next month when I have to renew. Also, knowing someone who works at DMV helps :-D

[mtnhopper1]

Here's more; NJ ADC 13:20-43.2:

"(c) To qualify for designation as a "collector motor vehicle" the owner or lessee of a motor vehicle shall submit an application in the form specified by the Motor Vehicle Commission which provides evidence of the following:

1. The vehicle is not currently qualified for designation as an "historic motor vehicle," as provided at N.J.S.A. 39:3-27.3 et seq., and any rules promulgated pursuant thereto, or as a "street rod," as provided at N.J.S.A. 39:3-27.27, and any rules promulgated pursuant thereto;

2. The vehicle is not a motor vehicle with elevated chassis height which is subject to inspection in accordance with N.J.A.C. 13:20-37;

3. The vehicle is not driven in excess of the maximum mileage permitted by the terms of a valid limited use motor vehicle insurance policy issued for such vehicle; and

4. The vehicle currently qualifies for, and is covered by, motor vehicle insurance coverage of a kind intended for limited use collector motor vehicles, proof of which shall be supplied to the Motor Vehicle Commission at the time of application for designation as a collector motor vehicle, which policy shall limit the mileage of the vehicle to 3,000 miles per year or less; and either,

i. Proof that the vehicle was originally manufactured as a restricted issue make or model, or in a sufficiently limited quantity, according to any generally recognized compilation of motor vehicle statistical information on file with, or supplied by the owner or lessee to the Motor Vehicle Commission, as may be accepted by the Chief Administrator in his or her discretion, so as to establish the vehicle as a unique commodity having a current monetary value in excess of similar make and model vehicles with routine manufacture and distribution patterns; or

ii. Proof that at the time of qualification for designation as a "collector motor vehicle" that the make and model of such vehicles exist in such limited numbers, according to any generally recognized compilation of motor vehicle statistical information on file with, or supplied by the owner or lessee to the Motor Vehicle Commission, as may be accepted by the Chief Administrator in his or her discretion, so as to establish the vehicle as a unique commodity having a current monetary value in excess of similar make and model vehicles with routine manufacture and distribution patterns."

[mtnhopper1]

I wonder if this is a "generally recognized compilation of statistical information"?

http://www.camaro-registry.com/production.htm

... perhaps if it was recognized in writing by a certain F-Body club?

[mtnhopper1]

Actually, I think these are more accurate.

http://www.yearone.com/updatedsinglepages/Id_info/camaro/camaroprodnums.asp

http://www.fbodymotorsports.com/8292_f_body_production_numbers

[EchoMirage]

DMV sucks moose balls

[LS1Hawk]

wow that's crap, I hope that this doesn't effect me next month when I have to renew. Also, knowing someone who works at DMV helps :-D

Ted, I just renewed mine a couple weeks ago and got a new sticker. I think if you're already in the system you're fine. This may just be for people who are registering for the first time, as I didn't read anything in the posts or on the MVC site about showing all this proof when renewing.

[NJSPEEDER]

i have sent a few emails and i am waiting for replies about what this "official letter" has to entail to be qualified. the information was also forwarded to the SEMA Action Network so that they coudl look into it for us.
i will keep everyone posted.

[BonzoHansen]

Cool, facts make this thread good. A little devil's advocate here...I'm guessing they are tightening up lax enforcement. By what I read here it has been abused.

Really, how many of our cars meet these stipulations?

4. The vehicle currently qualifies for, and is covered by, motor vehicle insurance coverage of a kind intended for limited use collector motor vehicles, proof of which shall be supplied to the Motor Vehicle Commission at the time of application for designation as a collector motor vehicle, which policy shall limit the mileage of the vehicle to 3,000 miles per year or less; and either,
Can you get collectors insurance on a 99 Z28, or a 91 Camaro RS (just to pick some random late models)? Maybe at best. I actually tried on the 99 just for S&Gs, and Hagerty told me no. And many 3rd gens may or may not be in their radars yet. Maybe through 85 or so. Hell, I do not even have a mileage limit w/Hagerty, but they might add one if I ask. It's just a policy endorsement. And I am ignoring the age & driving record factors these companies look at. But let's assume we can get the required coverage from some company with policy language that will make DMV happy...

i. Proof that the vehicle was originally manufactured as a restricted issue make or model, or in a sufficiently limited quantity, according to any generally recognized compilation of motor vehicle statistical information on file with, or supplied by the owner or lessee to the Motor Vehicle Commission, as may be accepted by the Chief Administrator in his or her discretion, so as to establish the vehicle as a unique commodity having a current monetary value in excess of similar make and model vehicles with routine manufacture and distribution patterns; or
I do not think "They are not made anymore" <> "originally manufactured as a restricted issue make or model, or in a sufficiently limited quantity, according to any generally recognized compilation". And a 99 Z28 or a 91 Camaro RS are not "originally manufactured as a restricted issue". A Z06 might qualify. A 3rd gen 1LE car probably qualifies. Now, if I can get data down to the only 99 Z28 in this color/options package, maybe. But even that might be a stretch. And I got $2 that says a note from NJFBOA carries no weight at all. Imagine if they checked the site? :lol:

What's your thoughts mtnhopper1? What does "..., or in a sufficiently limited quantity,..." mean legally? Grammatically, I read that as "originally manufactured...in a sufficiently limited quantity". Meaning now does not matter, time of manufacture does.

And they are taking "current monetary value in excess of similar make and model" into their (subjective) decision? Collctor <> valuble. That just makes no sense to me. But this is NJ state law....

[PolarBear]

Really, how many of our cars meet these stipulations?

I do not think "They are not made anymore" <> "originally manufactured as a restricted issue make or model, or in a sufficiently limited quantity, according to any generally recognized compilation". And a 99 Z28 or a 91 Camaro RS are not "originally manufactured as a restricted issue". A Z06 might qualify. A 3rd gen 1LE car probably qualifies.

Not to be a D*** but if you go by numbers posted in the few links here your 77 had more in production numbers than my 91 did. And if you go back to the beginning this is for cars that "DO NOT QUALIFY FOR ANTIQUE". So in all honesty the whole process is bogus. The law is in an extremely grey area here. I think it will be interesting to see what Tim hears from the SEMA action network. Honestly who can say a car is more "collectable" than another car? Like I said in the beginning all cars are "limited" to the amount people will buy.
If other people that own f-body's have this registration then ALL F-body owners should be allowed to get this. It really should not matter what type of car it is but limited to the yearly mileage. It is my opinion this was instituted in the first place, so high pollution vehicles can still be used but cut down on the amount.
Maybe we can get something done about this, just like the whole issue with the subjective inspections at stations

[WildBillyT]

Not to be a D*** but if you go by numbers posted in the few links here your 77 had more in production numbers than my 91 did.

Exactly. The first two generations had significantly more production then the last two. I think that's why they say "current remaining number" so you can kind of qualify by that.

[ar0ck]

Tomorrow I am getting on the horn with Hagerty & switching the Camaro over to them under my moms policy (Since I'm not 25) and I'll see how much further I can get with this.

I'm going to get that sticker through hell or high water without a dollar spent!

[mtnhopper1]

What's your thoughts mtnhopper1? What does "..., or in a sufficiently limited quantity,..." mean legally? Grammatically, I read that as "originally manufactured...in a sufficiently limited quantity". Meaning now does not matter, time of manufacture does.



When read with the other available designations, I think it must mean cars made within the past 25 years. There already is a "historical vehicle" designation for older vehicles. It is a common statutory argument to say that where another statute directly addresses a particular issue (i.e. the "historical vehicle" statute), another ambiguous and seemingly duplicitive statute (the "collector" statute) must mean something else. The "collector vehicle" statute can't mean vehicles over 25 yrs old becasue those are already covered in the "historical" statute. If "collector" was intended to cover only older vehicles, why would anyone go through the trouble of having their 25+ year old car designated "collector" when they can get historical plates and be done with it without providing the additional proofs? Right? The "collector" designation would be useless, and legislators would NEVER waste time writing a useless law (Ugh! And ppl say lawyers lie!). The only other difference is the "display or educational demonstration" limitation on historical vehicles, but I think that is vague enough to cover whatever we do with our cars. Somerville on Fridays is unquestionably a "display" purpose.

As for the legal definition of "sufficiently limited quantity," that is one of those mushy phrases that get stuck into statutes that means the legislators who wrote the statute really meant to say: "we're going to leave it up to the administrators/courts to decide." "Sufficiently" isn't defined. What is "sufficient" depends on the person reviewing the file. The "proofs" provided need to explain the reason that late model cars can be collectable becasue the person reviewing the file probably doesn't care enough about it to think about it on their own. By writing the letter, we tell them what to think about it.

I really don't think the DMV is going to go much beyond was is sent to them to make the determination. It is unlikely that some DMV employee is going to do outside research to determine the legitimacy of a car club letter sent on club letterhead. Besides, they specifically ASK for a letter from a car club. NJFBOA is as legitimate a club as any to which I have belonged over the years. It has a community of enthusiasts, hundreds of members, a newsletter, regular meets, special events, etc, etc. Why would our club be any less legitimate than DuBz EaStSiDe LOW Boyzzzzz, or whatever? I can easily imagine some tool writing the same letter to argue that a 94 Caprice is collectable. Would that constitute "sufficiently limited quantities"? I think it might, for the same reason I think a 91 RS camaro qualifies... because people collect them, because enthusiasts buy them for the fact that they are Caprices (or because they can't afford Impalas). If Alex, or any of us wanted a regular daily driver, we would've each bought a new Yaris. In fact, there may even be Yaris enthusiasts out there for all I know. My apologies to the NJ Yaris owners association.

In any event, I would argue that the purpose of the statute was to allow enthusiasts who own vehicles that they consider collectable to own and operate those vehicles on a limited basis without having to meet the criteria required for daily drivers. Here's the trade off: the owner doesn't have to get the car inspected, but he can't use it as a daily driver. The proofs are required to show that driver's reason for owning the car is legitimately for its collectable value and not as its daily driver. The car club letter lends some legitimacy to the driver's claim that the car actually HAS collectable value because collectable value is show by the fact that people collect them. We collect them - they're collectable.

My GOD this post is long! I bet that's the last time you ask for my thoughts!

[BonzoHansen]

mtnhopper1, nice reply. That is what I was looking for, how the legal profession would read it.

Not to be a D*** but if you go by numbers posted in the few links here your 77 had more in production numbers than my 91 did. And if you go back to the beginning this is for cars that "DO NOT QUALIFY FOR ANTIQUE".You're always a d***. LOL That is why I didn't use my 77 as an example. It failed the historic part.

Exactly. The first two generations had significantly more production then the last two. I think that's why they say "current remaining number" so you can kind of qualify by that.:P

Only 14,349 1977 (or 1977 1/2 for those who like to say stupid 1/2 years) Z28s were made, and only 5,114 were 4-speed cars. So my Z may be more rare then most Z28s. That is where the 'real' numbers end.

Hell, if I could get that down by color I bet the number is well south of 500. Only 6.3% of 77 Camaros were code 75 Orange. If I use that #, I probably have 1 of 321 or so cars. Add AC to that and the number would probably drop to below 235, although I bet it would be less since many ordered the Z sans AC. Rear window defrosted would extrapolate down to less then 87. But GM doesn't offer that kind of actual breakdown.

And that is what I meant by getting down to color/options package details.

[PolarBear]

Only 14,349 1977 (or 1977 1/2 for those who like to say stupid 1/2 years) Z28s were made, and only 5,114 were 4-speed cars. So my Z may be more rare then most Z28s. That is where the 'real' numbers end.

I see what you are saying BUT I dont think the DMV gives two ****s about the fact your car is a "Z" or not. To them it is a Camaro and that is it but those would be good arguments if they were to factor the options in, and by that I would have a fairly "rare" car too. I think EVERYONE would explain how their car is rare....

In any event, I would argue that the purpose of the statute was to allow enthusiasts who own vehicles that they consider collectable to own and operate those vehicles on a limited basis without having to meet the criteria required for daily drivers. Here's the trade off: the owner doesn't have to get the car inspected, but he can't use it as a daily driver. The proofs are required to show that driver's reason for owning the car is legitimately for its collectable value and not as its daily driver. The car club letter lends some legitimacy to the driver's claim that the car actually HAS collectable value because collectable value is show by the fact that people collect them. We collect them - they're collectable.
I think this is an excellent point and thus is all we should really have to justify to the DMV, they should have no right to define what is or is not collectable! Have you seen all the crap people sell on eBay? :rofl:

[WildBillyT]

I see what you are saying BUT I dont think the DMV gives two ****s about the fact your car is a "Z" or not. To them it is a Camaro and that is it but those would be good arguments if they were to factor the options in, and by that I would have a fairly "rare" car too. I think EVERYONE would explain how their car is rare....


That's kinda what I was thinking. They don't give a rat's *** about rare options like a Z54 deluxe interior and underhood sound deadening. It's a 77 Camaro to them. They aren't going to care about many options or midyear changes. If they did I could register my GTP as collector since it's a '97 GTP with no traction control, a hood prop rod and a post antenna.

[BonzoHansen]

But I think it does matter in the way you present it. Plus with mine, there was a whole marketing campaign and such around it. I could supply Z28 specific ads. I'd sure throw it in the letter to DMV.

[WildBillyT]

But I think it does matter in the way you present it. Plus with mine, there was a whole marketing campaign and such around it. I could supply Z28 specific ads. I'd sure throw it in the letter to DMV.

I think the age of your car will make it qualify. All else aside I think that this is strictly to crack down on people with modern daily drivers that try to register them as collector cars.

[PolarBear]

But I think it does matter in the way you present it. Plus with mine, there was a whole marketing campaign and such around it. I could supply Z28 specific ads. I'd sure throw it in the letter to DMV.

You do have a point, One could say the same for other F-body's too. I suppose people with Firebirds could get the info from PHS and include the info in that. Sorry Camaro owners.....

[LS1Hawk]

It sounds to me that when the MVC says "rare" they mean a limited production number than normal, and that the car was intended to be limited from the onset of production. However, they need to do define that. At what point is a car not "rare" to them? Is there a cut off number? I know for sure my car is rare. Only 1,501 were made in '02. I guess if there were ever a problem, I could get a letter from SLP attesting to the build of the car.

[NightRydaSS]

maybe someone can clear this up for me:

1) how the hell can someone "expliot" the system? You can only drive 3K miles a yr, thats it. Clean and cut. Unless someone has 5 "collector vehicles" that they drive each 3K miles a yr. Even that, you still have to abide by the rules and regulations of your insurance company, and i highly doubt that there are enough ppl doing that to warrant them (NJ) to be such *** plungers.

2) Like i said before; SS's and WS6's truly are numbered, wouldn't that meet their "limited number" requirement?

3) they stated you could register a car as a "collector car" as long as it doesn't fall into the "historic" or "Hot Rod" class...is there a "Hot Rod" registration?

4) that sheet from the DMV says it can't be "altered" or a "hi-rise vehicle". is that just for trucks with major lift's? Like altered to be hi-rise? or are they also saying that your car can't have anything on it other then OEM parts too?

this state sucks ***. They constantly bend you over for everything from taxes to your car. I want to register my car as a "collector" so that i can have unlimited mods and not have it inspected AND so that if i put $20K into it and some tool smashes into me, i get that money back and not just BB value. The car will be driven less then 3K miles a yr for christ sake. Example; ever since i bought my beater, i have put about 25 miles on my car in 2 1/2 weeks.

Please keep this up-to-date; I won't be able to get colector insurance for another 2 yrs anyway (im only 23), but the mods i do after next yrs re-inspection date will depend on weather i can even get that kind of insurance now.

[LS1Hawk]

I think the age of your car will make it qualify. All else aside I think that this is strictly to crack down on people with modern daily drivers that try to register them as collector cars.

I agree.

[BonzoHansen]

I think the age of your car will make it qualify. All else aside I think that this is strictly to crack down on people with modern daily drivers that try to register them as collector cars.Absolutely.

For this conversation, I am ignoring the age thing. If I had to meet these requirements, how would I approach it. The 1977 Z28 is a sub model, backed by specific print & media ads (I can supply both). Known GM production numbers of only 5114 4-speed cars (can be documented by a number of sources). My cowl tag proves the Z28 heritage (f-u phony 1st gens). It was limited run, only going from March 77-July 77.

That is tighter then my 67RS would be (again, ignoring the age thing).

[NightRydaSS]

I think the age of your car will make it qualify. All else aside I think that this is strictly to crack down on people with modern daily drivers that try to register them as collector cars.

Only 3k miles a yr. So unless you never drive, this would be worthless.

[BonzoHansen]

I know for sure my car is rare. Only 1,501 were made in '02. I guess if there were ever a problem, I could get a letter from SLP attesting to the build of the car.Get any documents you can. They will be your friend forever.

[WildBillyT]

Only 3k miles a yr. So unless you never drive, this would be worthless.

It's intended to be a collector's registration- for cars that have value in the collector car market. It's NOT intended to be a partial use registration. The "no inspection" was meant to allow collector cars that were built in accordance with different emissions or safety standards than we have today to be able to be driven on the street- NOT to allow a car to have modern safety or emissions features disabled while maintaining legality.

And you think NJ is bad? I know a guy in PA who had to register himself as an automobile manufacturer in order to keep from having to install 5mph bumpers on his $100,000 Daytona coupe. Now THAT sucks.

[NightRydaSS]

It's intended to be a collector's registration- for cars that have value in the collector car market. It's NOT intended to be a partial use registration. The "no inspection" was meant to allow collector cars that were built in accordance with different emissions or safety standards than we have today to be able to be driven on the street- NOT to allow a car to have modern safety or emissions features disabled while maintaining legality.

And you think NJ is bad? I know a guy in PA who had to register himself as an automobile manufacturer in order to keep from having to install 5mph bumpers on his $100,000 Daytona coupe. Now THAT sucks.

oh...so THAT's the "exploitation" thay're refering to????

[mtnhopper1]

That's kinda what I was thinking. They don't give a rat's *** about rare options like a Z54 deluxe interior and underhood sound deadening. It's a 77 Camaro to them. They aren't going to care about many options or midyear changes. If they did I could register my GTP as collector since it's a '97 GTP with no traction control, a hood prop rod and a post antenna.

I think they might care about options if you could convincingly say that the options make the car worth preserving. Correct me if I'm wrong, but i think the IROC package was an option in 1987 (as opposed to a separate model). I think it would be pretty easy to back up the assertion that an IROC is collectable. Has anyone gotten "collector" registration in a third-gen Z or Iroc?

The point I'm trying to make is that particular models are collectable merely because they are that certain model which is no longer produced, regardless of which options they had. Such a car would have a "monetary value in excess of similar make and model vehicles with routine manufacture and distribution patterns" because it is of a body style that is no longer produced.

I'm really not sure if the NJ DMV would buy this argument, but I think it is pretty much the only one that you can make. I'm pretty sure that the intention of the statute is to prevent people from registering plane jane camaros that are less than 25 years old as collectable. It seems to me that the NJ legislature has decided that so-called "vehicles with routine manufacture and distribution patterns" (like my 1967 327/powerglide camaro) are not collectable until they are at least 25 years old, when they become "historical."

Just because this seems to be the case doesn't mean we can't try to find a loophole. The statute is poorly drafted. I think there is enough "wiggle room" in the language to register a 1991 Camaro RS as a collector vehicle. I think this is especially true because the people who are determining whether the proofs are sufficient are not lawyers, and probably have never read the statute. They are looking to see whether the vehicle seems collectable. If we write them a convincing letter, and attach loads of statistical charts, blah, blah, as exhibits, we might be able to convince them that a 1991 RS deserves the same treatment as a 1991 1LE (or even a Z28, for that matter).

Regardless of what the statute was intended to do, I think it can be done. In all honesty, these cars ARE collectable, and if the statute wasn't intended to allow plain jane camaros to be afforded collector status, than the statute is wrong. The legislators should've drafted a tighter statute.

[PolarBear]

Just because this seems to be the case doesn't mean we can't try to find a loophole. The statute is poorly drafted. I think there is enough "wiggle room" in the language to register a 1991 Camaro RS as a collector vehicle. I think this is especially true because the people who are determining whether the proofs are sufficient are not lawyers, and probably have never read the statute. They are looking to see whether the vehicle seems collectable. If we write them a convincing letter, and attach loads of statistical charts, blah, blah, as exhibits, we might be able to convince them that a 1991 RS deserves the same treatment as a 1991 1LE (or even a Z28, for that matter).

Regardless of what the statute was intended to do, I think it can be done. In all honesty, these cars ARE collectable, and if the statute wasn't intended to allow plain jane camaros to be afforded collector status, than the statute is wrong. The legislators should've drafted a tighter statute.


I think this might be an easy thing to do, especially if Tim hears back from SEMA. A LOT of laws were poorly written and loopholes can be found, sort of like stopping at a stop sign.....

[WildBillyT]

if the statute wasn't intended to allow plain jane camaros to be afforded collector status, than the statute is wrong. The legislators should've drafted a tighter statute.

I agree 100%. I think that's why they are backpedaling now. Way back when I got collector's sticker #000007 (or #000014 or something like that) all they did was check proof of insurance and handed it over. No voucher, no letter, no odometer check. Nothing but proof of insurance. They hosed that up, so they added the odometer check and voucher system. Now that isn't enough so they are adding new rules again...

[LS1Hawk]

I'm interested to hear what SEMA has to say as well. Hopefully with their muscle they'll be able to do something about it.

I kinda saw this coming when I got my last voucher and went to get the new sticker. The MVC and inspection station told me two completely different things about collector's reg. So I can understand the state wanting to make this more defined and avoid registering cars that aren't really collectible. But to make you show all these proofs now just to get a triangle sticker for your car is a little ridiculous.

[ar0ck]

All this fancy talk but it doesn't help me the little guy trying to get my modern 1995 Z28 that i care dearly about on the road legally with collectors registration...

Mike & my car are not our daily drivers, They are our pleasure vehicle because I'm noticing the word modern daily driver tossed around a lot.

[BonzoHansen]

Mike & my car are not our daily drivers, They are our pleasure vehicle because I'm noticing the word modern daily driver tossed around a lot.But this isn't pleasure vehicle registration. It's collector car registration.

This should help you try to put together the package to send them proving it is a collectible.

[ar0ck]

I'm using the collectors car & pleasure vehicle term here loosely.

[BonzoHansen]

I'm using the collectors car & pleasure vehicle term here loosely.

I know, but when you are in contact with them, you can't.

[maroman88]

All this fancy talk but it doesn't help me the little guy trying to get my modern 1995 Z28 that i care dearly about on the road legally with collectors registration...

Mike & my car are not our daily drivers, They are our pleasure vehicle because I'm noticing the word modern daily driver tossed around a lot.

exactly, i drive it maybe once a week if its nice out, and its either to a show or around the block to the GF's house lol. it doesnt have any emisions crap left, cuz it failed emisions last time i took it anyway. ive put 20k miles on it in the last 5 years and it was a daily driver for atleast one year in there.

my current regular inspection sticker doesnt expire until febuary but the care wont be out till maybe april, so i guess ive got some time

[mtnhopper1]

I know, but when you are in contact with them, you can't.

Right on. You get special registration because it's collectable, not because you don't use it all the time. The task is to convince them that ANY 1995 Z such as yours is collectable simply becasue it is what it is.

What I mean is that for you to say "It's a pleasure vehicle" is irrelevant to convincing them it is collectable. The fact that it is not your daily driver merely shows that you are willing to comply with the limitations of collector registration. We need to convince them that it is collectable because it is a 1995 Z. I think the fact that it is a Z28 should be enough for it to be considered "limited production."

[WildBillyT]

But this isn't pleasure vehicle registration. It's collector car registration.

This should help you try to put together the package to send them proving it is a collectible.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to say.

[NightRydaSS]

like i said before; who is anyone but your self to say weather a vehicle you own is a collectiable or not? You're a car collector, you collect cars. Hell; a 2007 Civic SI could be considered a "collectiable" car b/c maybe you have a "collection" of Civic's and you want to add this one to your "collection". See my point?

it shouldn't matter what you register the car as. Hell you could register it as a UFO, as long as you agree to follow the rules governing UFO registrations. W/ collector registration you agree that you will NOT drive the car more then 3K miles, that should be it. Clean and cut. It is up to the person to decide what they consider a "collectiable" or not...freedom of choice and opinion anyone????!!!! just realize that u lose "driveability" of that vehicle. u can't tell a rock collector or a stamp collector that one stamp or rock is better then the other one or one is a collector one and one isn't.

Pretty soon NJ will be telling you when to take a dump, what consitiutes a "dump", and what the requirements a "dump" has to meet inorder to be considered a geniune "dump".

[LS1Hawk]

We need to convince them that it is collectable because it is a 1995 Z. I think the fact that it is a Z28 should be enough for it to be considered "limited production."

Yes, I agree. But where do they draw the line and what do they base it off of? For example, if you go by production #s, in 2002 there were more Z28s and SSs built than V6 coupes. Would they then say the '02 Z28 isn't collectible? There's just too many gray areas and ambiguity.

[nj85z28]

their giving you a hard time because you want to strip out the emissions on a fairly new car in order to make it faster, or for whatever reason. and im sure the entire reason they changed the rules for collector cars is so every moron with a piece of ****, unsafe car isnt getting around inspection.

face it, as usual a few ******** ruined it for the guys with true collector cars

the only 4th gen they'll probably even consider is the ZL-1

[NightRydaSS]

their giving you a hard time because you want to strip out the emissions on a fairly new car in order to make it faster, or for whatever reason. and im sure the entire reason they changed the rules for collector cars is so every moron with a piece of ****, unsafe car isnt getting around inspection.

face it, as usual a few ******** ruined it for the guys with true collector cars

the only 4th gen they'll probably even consider is the ZL-1

well for that reason and so that i can get collector insurance and insure my car (and mods current and future) for what its worth, not for what some doushbag behind a desk says it is. And as far as making it fast, you can't drive it more then 3K miles so it would be a waste of a car for someone who doesn't need the registration. Further more, you need collector insurance in order to get collector registration. So if the insurance company says ur ok, who the hell is NJ so say ur arnt?

But i see your point also. it is so "Hank Hillbilly" can't pull up in an '92 F-150 with the floor missing and lawn chairs as seat w/ a walmart belt as a seat belt tryin to get collector registration b/c he truck will never pass inspection and he can't afford a new one. And if you say that they should use discretion, that also = discremination to some ppl. the "why is his car ok and mine isn't?" question will surely pop up. You'd have some dude roll up with just a rolling chasis and try to register it sayin it is a collector but obiously unsafe. lol. but that goes back to you having to have collector insurance first.

I think it is B/S. I think this state is B/S. I'm not yelling at anyone on here, I'm just venting. I think i need to find a better place to live, b/c everytime i trun around NJ is doing something else to ream u.

[WildBillyT]

I think it is B/S. I think this state is B/S. I'm not yelling at anyone on here, I'm just venting. I think i need to find a better place to live, b/c everytime i trun around NJ is doing something else to ream u.

But for a while, collector's registration was kick ***. :mrgreen:

[mtnhopper1]

There's just too many gray areas and ambiguity.

Welcome to my world. If it wasn't this way, I'd be out of a job!

[EchoMirage]

figures the one thread i start that gets this much attention is one that is screwing us all over......the only hope we have is official letters through this club, and whatever SEMA can do for us. theyre simply not going to listen to the common man. this governmant isnt like that anymore. pigs. i havent gotten my rejection letter yet, but im sure itll be soon. all this bullshyt just because some a-hole in trenton had a bug up his *** about the guy down the block registering his car as a collectable....

[LS1Hawk]

It's quite a paradox...the MVC seems to do everything it can to make owning our cars a pain in the ***.

[EchoMirage]

bump for the thread. just got my rejection letter from the DMV pigs. says the same as ar0cks.

atten Tim: howd the SEMA show go? any news about the letter or whatever you can do for us? my inspection expired in sept. already, and i dont know if i should pay for one or wait for the collectors. if ever.....

[cheppibear]

Hi All - Paul in Spotswood here (New guy to this board).

I recently heard of the new regulations effective 9/1 and it sort of ruined the plans for my 1984. Out of my three F-body's it is the one closest to completion so I was ready to go get the collector's registration. Well looks like based on this post I am not even going to bother and try (I would have to go historic or regular inspection in 2009 anyway).

I can kick myself because Steve told me on TGO last year to do this, and if I did I would not have this problem now. You see the car has a 355 that I used to run at e-town about 8 years back. Cam has recently been toned down but as is would not pass the loaded test. I am going to have to TBI it or something to get through.

Anyway, this would not apply to everyone but I found this bill out there for those have have QQ plates in NJ. It has been in committee since last year but it would at least make the QQ registration a little more friendlier.

Go here and type in bill #3540

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bills/BillsByNumber.asp

[BonzoHansen]

Hi All - Paul in Spotswood here (New guy to this board).

I recently heard of the new regulations effective 9/1 and it sort of ruined the plans for my 1984. Out of my three F-body's it is the one closest to completion so I was ready to go get the collector's registration. Well looks like based on this post I am not even going to bother and try (I would have to go historic or regular inspection in 2009 anyway).

I can kick myself because Steve told me on TGO last year to do this, and if I did I would not have this problem now. You see the car has a 355 that I used to run at e-town about 8 years back. Cam has recently been toned down but as is would not pass the loaded test. I am going to have to TBI it or something to get through.

Anyway, this would not apply to everyone but I found this bill out there for those have have QQ plates in NJ. It has been in committee since last year but it would at least make the QQ registration a little more friendlier.

Go here and type in bill #3540

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bills/BillsByNumber.asp

Oh wait, that is good news.

[JL8Jeff]

I'm really not sure what their intentions were with the "collectible" term. If they are referring to limited production vehicles, I would guess they mean less than 500 made and probably even lower but they don't give a specific number. Take something like the Buick GNX which was a performance engine option that had to meet specific emission's tests before even being produced. The 89 Turbo T/A, the 2002 ZL1, the 95 Mustang Cobra R. But looking at these examples, the GNX and turbo T/A meet emission's as required so they don't need the collectible label to pass inspection. The ZL1 and the 95 Cobra R most likely don't meet the requirements to pass emission's inspection and they were really built to be race cars. So this "collectible" term seems to refer to a way to get a car like that legally on the road. A plain 95 Z28 is not a limited production vehicle and won't have an increased value over similar models. Modifying the vehicle does not make it collectible but rather turns it into a "street rod" or "race" vehicle. A newer Firehawk, SS or WS6 is not a limited production vehicle either, it's a regular production option. Some of the custom "dealer" built cars are probably the "collectible" vehicles they are trying to help get a legal registration.

[Featherburner]

A newer Firehawk, SS or WS6 is not a limited production vehicle either, it's a regular production option.
I would have to disagree with you on this. My firehawk is one of 201 numbered cars produced in 1993. I don't understand how you can say it not a limited production vehicle.

[JL8Jeff]

I would have to disagree with you on this. My firehawk is one of 201 numbered cars produced in 1993. I don't understand how you can say it not a limited production vehicle.

Yeah, but when you group it with similar models which cover other years the Firehawk isn't that limited. I really think this "collector" idea was to cover cars that can't really pass safety or emission's inspection from the factory like the 95 Cobra R.

[NightRydaSS]

ok, well if this is how NJ wants to play it and handle "collector cars" then fine. Even though i think it is a violation againts the 1st amendment (being that NJ is now telling you what you the car owner can consider a "collectiable". freedom of expression anyone?). You bring this up and u will have more luck yelling at your wall.

So...IMO there should be a "hot rod" registration. For ppl that modify their cars; with in safty reasons of course. have a mileage restriction or w/e, but for those of us who want to soop up their rides and what not this would be great. it even works for ppl with lifted trucks and what-not.

if you think about it; if you hammer down a strick mileage restriction (2.5K OR 3K or so a yr) there won't be as many ppl as they think signing up for it. Therefore no one can exploit it.

I have seen posts on this issue with the word "Hot rod" as far as what NJ defines a car "collectiable, classic, historic, or hot rod", but there is no "Hot Rod" registration.

i think this would solve so many issues. i dunno... :banghead:

[WildBillyT]

ok, well if this is how NJ wants to play it and handle "collector cars" then fine. Even though i think it is a violation againts the 1st amendment (being that NJ is now telling you what you the car owner can consider a "collectiable". freedom of expression anyone?).

That's a hell of a jump. I don't even see a remote correlation.

However, I totally agree on the second deal. They should set up some type of registration to allow people to have partial use vehicles with a strict milage limitation.

[NightRydaSS]

like i said before; who is anyone but your self to say weather a vehicle you own is a collectiable or not? You're a car collector, you collect cars. Hell; a 2007 Civic SI could be considered a "collectiable" car b/c maybe you have a "collection" of Civic's and you want to add this one to your "collection".

Pretty soon NJ will be telling you when to take a dump, what consitiutes a "dump", and what the requirements a "dump" has to meet inorder to be considered a geniune "dump".

It is vague. They are taking away your choice (freedom) of what you can "collect". What's a "collector's item" to someone might be "junk" to someone else (think G.I Joe's and Hess Trucks). Does that mean that it is in fact NOT a collectiable b/c someone else says it isn't?

i see what their sayin; ppl modify their cars and get "collectors reg" so that they don't have to inspect their cars. Well what about the Low Rider builder who builds custom trucks for show and pleasure (think 2007 slammed Esclade). There is no way it will pass inspection. Or better yet, think of Chip Foose. What if Chip Foose took a 2002 V6 Firebird and modified it, i bet that would constitute a "collectors car" Why, b/c Chip Foose did it? What about Joe Johnson down the street who wants to do the same thing but can't afford a Chip Foose car. What if he built he the same way as Chip, would his be a "collectiable" in the eyes of NJ? See my point. You might have 20 cars that you "collect".

They either need to state that there has to be less then a certain number of cars of that model in existance or they need to get rid of the whole collector car reg. Historic and classic are carved in stone. they HAVE to meet a certain age, no gray area's there.

[NightRydaSS]

i mean i kno how this started; a bunch of "Johnny Tran's" came up with their $200 '93 Civic Hatch's with $20K in them and now they want to drive them around "legally".

i don't see a problem with that. There is a 3K mile a yr limit. I kno collector's reg isn't supposed to be a partial use reg, but that is what they made it when they put that limit on it. You were aloud to register any car as a "collector" the only catch is you can't drive more then 3K a yr. What did they expect was going to happen? I could see if there was no limit, then fine. You have to draw the line on the kind of cars or else ppl will expolit the 'ish outa it. I'm just sayin if you want to limit your $30K car to 3K miles a yr of driving and "collect" it, then that should be ur choice. Why does the state have to get involved with EVERYTHING you do???!!!

[BonzoHansen]

They are not taking away your freedom of choice. Just your freedom to circumvent the law in regards to emissions and safety.

[WildBillyT]

i mean i kno how this started; a bunch of "Johnny Tran's" came up with their $200 '93 Civic Hatch's with $20K in them and now they want to drive them around "legally".

i don't see a problem with that. There is a 3K mile a yr limit. I kno collector's reg isn't supposed to be a partial use reg, but that is what they made it when they put that limit on it. You were aloud to register any car as a "collector" the only catch is you can't drive more then 3K a yr. What did they expect was going to happen? I could see if there was no limit, then fine. You have to draw the line on the kind of cars or else ppl will expolit the 'ish outa it. I'm just sayin if you want to limit your $30K car to 3K miles a yr of driving and "collect" it, then that should be ur choice. Why does the state have to get involved with EVERYTHING you do???!!!

Exactly. It was their own stupidity that led them to where they are today. They didn't set it up right in the first place.

As you keep saying, it's purely up to an individual to determine what they think is "collectable" and what isn't.

However:

NJ is allowing people with vehicles that THEY DEEM to be collector vehicles to have special privileges. It's not our right to get special treatment, just like it's technically not our right to have a driver's license. You can choose to be part of the program but then you have to play by the program's rules.

They don't have to offer any special programs. They could just say EFF you all and force all vehicles to pass today's emissions testing. Thankfully that's not the case.

[Fast92RS]

Exactly. It was their own stupidity that led them to where they are today. They didn't set it up right in the first place.

As you keep saying, it's purely up to an individual to determine what they think is "collectable" and what isn't.

However:

NJ is allowing people with vehicles that THEY DEEM to be collector vehicles to have special privileges. It's not our right to get special treatment, just like it's technically not our right to have a driver's license. You can choose to be part of the program but then you have to play by the program's rules.

They don't have to offer any special programs. They could just say EFF you all and force all vehicles to pass today's emissions testing. Thankfully that's not the case.

I agree that they dont have to have a collector car registration or even a historic one, but they need to cleary state what a collector car consists of and not leave it open to interpretation.

[mtnhopper1]

They are taking away your choice (freedom) of what you can "collect".... Does that mean that it is in fact NOT a collectiable b/c someone else says it isn't?

Constitutionally protected "freedom of choice" doesn't mean that everyone has an absolute right to choose ANYTHING. That is anarchy, not the Constitution. Read it; you'll see.

Besides, no one is saying you can't buy a 01 SS and build it into a full-on pro mod car. If that's what you want to collect, fine. You just can't drive it on the street without passing an inspection.

The price of civilized society is to surrender freedom. Welcome to the civilized world. You can't carry a loaded handgun on the street (well, most of us can't); you can't watch kiddie porn; you can't pee in public; and you can't drive your race car on the street unless it passes inspection. Sorry.

The fact that there are enough voting car enthusiasts to force the NJ legislature to create an exception to the inspection requirement for some cars is a success for the enthusiasts! However, it doesn't mean EVERYONE is entitled to the exception. If you think the definition of "collector vehicle" should be broader, write your State congressman, vote, join SEMA, do SOMETHING. As an American, THIS is where your rights are protected, ...

...but for the love of god, stop just sitting there whining about your right to CHOOSE.

They are not taking away your freedom of choice. Just your freedom to circumvent the law in regards to emissions and safety.

Ditto

NJ is allowing people with vehicles that THEY DEEM to be collector vehicles to have special privileges. It's not our right to get special treatment, just like it's technically not our right to have a driver's license. You can choose to be part of the program but then you have to play by the program's rules.

They don't have to offer any special programs. They could just say EFF you all and force all vehicles to pass today's emissions testing. Thankfully that's not the case.

Ditto

[NightRydaSS]

Constitutionally protected "freedom of choice" doesn't mean that everyone has an absolute right to choose ANYTHING. That is anarchy, not the Constitution. Read it; you'll see.

Besides, no one is saying you can't buy a 01 SS and build it into a full-on pro mod car. If that's what you want to collect, fine. You just can't drive it on the street without passing an inspection.

The price of civilized society is to surrender freedom. Welcome to the civilized world. You can't carry a loaded handgun on the street (well, most of us can't); you can't watch kiddie porn; you can't pee in public; and you can't drive your race car on the street unless it passes inspection. Sorry.

The fact that there are enough voting car enthusiasts to force the NJ legislature to create an exception to the inspection requirement for some cars doesn't mean EVERYONE is entitled to the exception. If you think the definition of "collector vehicle" should be broader, write your State congressman, vote, join SEMA, do SOMETHING. As an American, THIS is where your rights are protected, ...

...but for the love of god, stop just sitting there whining about your right to CHOOSE.



Ditto



Ditto


No i agree; we should set something up then and write to someone. It has to be more then one person and it has to makes sense. Like we can't say "do this and do that. b/c this ain't fair". We also need someone or something thing with big enough "muscle" to stand behind us and get our voice heard so ppl don't think we r just another bunch of "hot rodders" who want to by-pass the law. I dunno, draw up some execptions and rules. maybe they should have a "partial use" registration or a "Hot Rod" registration, and with rules (i.e. car must have a muffler, seat belts, x-width tires w/ x-depth tread, mileage restriction, ect) i kno it would work.

I kno they're tryin to get the full blown race cars off the street so that ppl can register their top-fuel funny car as a "collector" and take it to Wal-Mart, or so that Joe Ho-bo can't take his rusted out '81 Ford pickup with lawn chairs as seat and a belt as a seatbelt, w/ a bean can muffler, register it as "collector" (b/c in his mind it is "old") and drive it.

But we need "mucsle" behind us b/c no one cares about what "Joe Nobody" has to say.

[WildBillyT]

No i agree; we should set something up then and write to someone. It has to be more then one person and it has to makes sense. Like we can't say "do this and do that. b/c this ain't fair". We also need someone or something thing with big enough "muscle" to stand behind us and get our voice heard so ppl don't think we r just another bunch of "hot rodders" who want to by-pass the law. I dunno, draw up some execptions and rules. maybe they should have a "partial use" registration or a "Hot Rod" registration, and with rules (i.e. car must have a muffler, seat belts, x-width tires w/ x-depth tread, mileage restriction, ect) i kno it would work.

I kno they're tryin to get the full blown race cars off the street so that ppl can register their top-fuel funny car as a "collector" and take it to Wal-Mart, or so that Joe Ho-bo can't take his rusted out '81 Ford pickup with lawn chairs as seat and a belt as a seatbelt, w/ a bean can muffler, register it as "collector" (b/c in his mind it is "old") and drive it.

But we need "mucsle" behind us b/c no one cares about what "Joe Nobody" has to say.

I think we would have to prove a benefit to the state in order to get something like this through. I am not seeing that, unless we try to play on how cruise nights and such bring revenue to small towns, etc.

I'd even put an driver's age limit on it to make it more appealing. The last thing the state would want is a bunch of high school kids with limited use regs on their car.

[NightRydaSS]

I think we would have to prove a benefit to the state in order to get something like this through. I am not seeing that, unless we try to play on how cruise nights and such bring revenue to small towns, etc.

I'd even put an driver's age limit on it to make it more appealing. The last thing the state would want is a bunch of high school kids with limited use regs on their car.

o no doubt. just like "collector" registration, i believe you have to be 25. I'm all for that, and agree.

Im not sayin we wouldn't have to "work" with the state, im fully understand that we will have to give and take a lil with that we would want.

i just seem like right now the state is just "taking" and not "giving" to everyone. In other words; If NJ wants to give special privledges to certain car enthusiest, they should at least try to appeal to all car enthusiest. Granted there will be some off the wall request that they can't honor, but it just seems like they are againts "hot rodders" and tryin to make it harder for ppl who enjoy this hobby to, well enjoy it. Kinda strange since NJ has a multitude of race tracks and is know for this kinda sport (as well as wheelin).

[NightRydaSS]

the end result is; as long as this is a "game" there will be ppl who will do what they have to in order to "win" (think Game Genie for all game consols). They will "cheat" and buy stickers, make their own (i have seen some sad looking stickers), and ect. The end result, the state makes no money on it. Granted, they make money on fines they give to ppl, but how many ppl do you think they really catch? When you take into account how how many ppl drive their "illegal" cars regularly? The state could have a 'ish load of money from ppl who want to "legally" mod their cars and who don't want to "cheat" if they don't have too. Everyone wins.

this is the same argument you can give on legalizing drugs and taxing them; ppl are going to do what they want so you might as well regulate it, bla bla bla.

[WildBillyT]

o no doubt. just like "collector" registration, i believe you have to be 25. I'm all for that, and agree.

Im not sayin we wouldn't have to "work" with the state, im fully understand that we will have to give and take a lil with that we would want.

i just seem like right now the state is just "taking" and not "giving" to everyone. In other words; If NJ wants to give special privledges to certain car enthusiest, they should at least try to appeal to all car enthusiest. Granted there will be some off the wall request that they can't honor, but it just seems like they are againts "hot rodders" and tryin to make it harder for ppl who enjoy this hobby to, well enjoy it. Kinda strange since NJ has a multitude of race tracks and is know for this kinda sport (as well as wheelin).

Yeah, but as I stated above- they do not have to do anything for anybody. And they also need to be in line with federal laws. As an example, removing a cat is a federal violation, not state. So if your car came with cats, you have to have them according to the federal government.

Historic reg is in place so that we can save history. Things like Model A's, WWII jeeps, etc bring historical value to the table, like a rolling museum. There is obvious good that comes from keeping them on the road.

I'm curious- what good do you think would come from a "limited use" registration from the state's point of view? (Aside from if they make registration $500 or something to increase revenue)

[BonzoHansen]

I'm curious- what good do you think would come from a "limited use" registration from the state's point of view? (Aside from if they make registration $500 or something to increase revenue)
Now you're talking. Make it $1000 and a 2000 or 3000 annual mile limit. Make some $$!

[NightRydaSS]

I guess; just that. They could make money on it. I don't want to bring drugs into this, but it might help prove my point....

Drugs are illegal, everyone knows it, but, ppl still do it. there has been a "war on drugs" since when, ever? it is still illegal, ppl still do, and jails get over crowed. They send soldiers over to Columbia to fight the cartels, they die; and, drugs are still illegal, and ppl still do it. Some say if you legalize drugs and regulate them / tax them you can make them "safer" (i use that term a loosly as possible) and make money on them. Just like they do with Alcohol and tabaco and firearms. ppl dies from drunk drivers, smoking gives u cancer and ppl use guns to kill ppl.

now, you might ask, "should we legalize anything just b/c ppl want to do it, what about societies safety?". No, but ppl who choose not to do drugs don't not do them b/c they r illegal. ur not going to create more drug users if u "legalize" them and tax them.

Ppl will do what they want to do, weather you say it is illegal or not. certain things can't bend, like legalizing the killing of other ppl. But you you can't stop ppl from using drugs, so you might as well tax it. the government can't control every aspect of your life.

I'm getting off topic, my point is ppl will mod their cars. end of story. they will also drive them weather they pass inspection or not. The State would make soooooo much money b/c ppl will pay what they have to in order to do it 'legally". Now as far as regulation, i agree totally. CATS, mufflers, seatbelts, tire regulations (no slicks or anything unsafe, ect), age requirement, mileage limit, ect. ppl will agree to it. If u agree with the rules and regulations you can do it, I'f not it is reg inspection and reg for you. you won't have as many "illegal" cars as you think b/c not everyone has 2 cars that they use and keep one of them a limited use. Limiting the usage lowers pollution of the "hot rods". You get caught with a car that doesn't pass inspection b/c you modded it when YOU HAVE THE OPTION of getting "hot rod" reg, them it is a stiffer penalty. Age limit lowers the number of cars total. Even saying you have to be 25 to own or OPERATE a limited use car gets rid of the possibility of daddy registring the car for his son who is 17.

the end result, everyone is happy. no more illegal cars, no more ppl getting fined and bitching about it, and the state makes a boat load of money which is all they want anyways.

[maroman88]

wats wrong with daddy registering cars for the kids? my dad always has and still does, you think i could afford my own insurance on 2 cars while in college and working part time?? yea thatd be nice. i pay my own insurance but its on his policy and the cars are all in his name. and whats it matter how old a person driving a limited use car is? its still limited use and ya still gotta play by the rules

[WildBillyT]

wats wrong with daddy registering cars for the kids? my dad always has and still does, you think i could afford my own insurance on 2 cars while in college and working part time?? yea thatd be nice. i pay my own insurance but its on his policy and the cars are all in his name. and whats it matter how old a person driving a limited use car is? its still limited use and ya still gotta play by the rules

Not a problem at all unless there is an age limit to drive the car. Then it's fraud.

[JL8Jeff]

It took a while to find but I found their definition of street rod.

“Street rod” is a registered modified antique automobile manufactured before 1949.

Source: 39:3-27.3; 39:3-27.15; 39:3-27.27.


So there isn't really a "hot rod" or modern modified designation. That's something that would probably be a good idea for the state. Come up with a designation for a modified vehicle with limited mileage so it can be driven on occasions or back and forth to "events". NJ would have to make some money on this special designation for them to even consider doing it so something like a $50 or $100 registration fee might get them to actually consider it.

[mtnhopper1]

THis guy is noted as the contact person for questions related to MVC proposals. I'm not sure if he's the guy to talk to about compelling new proposals, but he is listed on existing proposals. The title sure sounds like he's the right guy.

Steven E. Robertson, Director, Legal, Legislative, and Regulatory Affairs, Motor Vehicle Commission, 225 East State Street, P.O. Box 162, Trenton, New Jersey 08666-0162

Also, there is a public meeting on the second Tuesday of the month in Trenton. It's probably for public comments on existing proposals, but if someone will be around and has the time, they may be able to ask around to find out how to get the MVC to consider new proposals. http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/About/PublicMeetings.htm

[Teds89IROC]

Just got back from DMV to renew my voucher. I was worried with all this new crap I'd get hassled but nope! If the car was already established as a collector vehicle prior to this past september then you're fine.

[Fast92RS]

Just got back from DMV to renew my voucher. I was worried with all this new crap I'd get hassled but nope! If the car was already established as a collector vehicle prior to this past september then you're fine.

Thats good to here. Im glad I did mine in July.

[Iroc-z86]

YES that is the best news today :) i did mine in june :) this whole government is starting to be gay, taking away from the little guy and giving to the big guys who dont need it.

[LS1Hawk]

Just got back from DMV to renew my voucher. I was worried with all this new crap I'd get hassled but nope! If the car was already established as a collector vehicle prior to this past september then you're fine.

:w00t: I figured that was the case. But thanks for letting us know, Ted!

[maroman88]

screwww youu guys!!! lol

[Anti_Rice_Guy]

Damm that sucks for when I eventually get my car haha. Now if I buy the Camaro off my dad does that mean since its grandfathered in it will be OK?

[ar0ck]

I'm going to steal the sticker from Ted :D

[WildBillyT]

Damm that sucks for when I eventually get my car haha. Now if I buy the Camaro off my dad does that mean since its grandfathered in it will be OK?

I doubt it, if you re title it you will get new plates and a new registration.

[Anti_Rice_Guy]

Yea that's what I was thinking but I wasn't sure.

[//<86TA>\\]

well, ive had mine as a collector car for 5 years now, hope they dont start making this harder, for everybody. when i first registered mine i got alot of grief from the guys at the inspection station cause the car was not painted, never had a problem since.
________
Kitchen Measures (http://kitchenmeasures.com/)