GP Hmmwv's sold with On Road Titles.

[Recovry4x4]

But your right to free speech can be limited on a privately owned internet site , by the site owner and admin.

That's press, not speech.

 

[wheelspinner]

First, AM General contradicts itself in stating that the Humvee was not intended for "use on public roads or highways", as they originally stated otherwise to the NHTSA, the NHTSA reaffirmed AM General's statement, and the NHTSA stated that these were in fact defined as "motor vehicles" based on AM General’s own submitted information. Generally speaking, vehicles spend far less time, off of the public roads either in private parking lots or in driveways. In contrast to the stated use of the Humvee (60% of the time on primary and secondary roads) my Jeep Wrangler, during the course of a normal work week, is actually on a public highway or road at the very most two total hours a day (less than 10% on the road). In order to even be close to spending 60% of the time on public roads or highways, I would need to spend 14.4 hours a day driving on the road. Even considering that AM General meant over the life of the vehicle, the case would not be any different.

Lots of good background here, but this statement is flawed. So without researching further, I would be forced to conclude flaws in all statements. The "60%" mentioned is 60% of usage not life. HUGE difference. If you drive your Jeep 2 hours a day on the highway, and that vehicle is only operated 2 hours a day, it is operated 100% on road. As Mark Twain is famous for popularizing "There are 3 kinds of lies: Lies, DA*& Lies, and statistics".

I don't disagree with the folly of this whole process, but this point is important.

 

[mkcoen]

Lots of good background here, but this statement is flawed. So without researching further, I would be forced to conclude flaws in all statements. The "60%" mentioned is 60% of usage not life. HUGE difference. If you drive your Jeep 2 hours a day on the highway, and that vehicle is only operated 2 hours a day, it is operated 100% on road. As Mark Twain is famous for popularizing "There are 3 kinds of lies: Lies, DA*& Lies, and statistics".

I don't disagree with the folly of this whole process, but this point is important.

Another faulty argument is his definition of "commercial." In this context "commercial" means "sold commercially" or in other words on a "commercial market" not that it's used in commerce.

 

[Recovry4x4]

Commercial can mean green with yellow tires if that is what is explained in the definitions.

 

[Sandman02ds]

Sandman02ds
The thing you are over looking in your write-up is when buying a HMMWV with a "Hold Harmless Agreement" , you enter into a contract with the government agreeing never to drive it on a public road.

Although this is true, you're only acknowledgingthat the vehicle is "not roadworthy and agrees that the Humvee is for off-highway use only."

What happens when the vehicle "becomes" road worthy? I say that in quotations because these are technically road worthy vehicles to start with.

Of course I wouldn't drive it on the road when it's not in road worthy condition! ...but people would try, and that's why the "hold-harmless" is GP's and the DLA's"CYA".

 

[Sandman02ds]

Your first sentence says here are some facts, I read a lot of opinion and your interpretations.

Good to know that my "opinions and interpretations" where seen by someone. Hopefully the facts were more helpful.

 

[porkysplace]

Although this is true, you're only acknowledgingthat the vehicle is "not roadworthy and agrees that the Humvee is for off-highway use only."

What happens when the vehicle "becomes" road worthy? I say that in quotations because these are technically road worthy vehicles to start with.

Of course I wouldn't drive it on the road when it's not in road worthy condition! ...but people would try, and that's why the "hold-harmless" is GP's and the DLA's"CYA".

So I see your from Florida , so how is trying to title one there working out for you ?

 

[Sandman02ds]

Lots of good background here, but this statement is flawed. So without researching further, I would be forced to conclude flaws in all statements. The "60%" mentioned is 60% of usage not life. HUGE difference. If you drive your Jeep 2 hours a day on the highway, and that vehicle is only operated 2 hours a day, it is operated 100% on road. As Mark Twain is famous for popularizing "There are 3 kinds of lies: Lies, DA*& Lies, and statistics".

I don't disagree with the folly of this whole process, but this point is important.

That's definitely one way too look at it.

I based my point on overall use. I see where that example could be flawed, but correct me if I'm wrong, but based on your thinking, it would be inaccurate to say that the Jeep was made to be used 100% of the time on primary and seconday roads when it was made for both on- and off-road use.

 

[wheelspinner]

I simply stated where it IS operated, not where it is designed to be operated.

 

[Sandman02ds]

Another faulty argument is his definition of "commercial." In this context "commercial" means "sold commercially" or in other words on a "commercial market" not that it's used in commerce.

Different translation, but not faulty. You could be right in your translation (and probably are, because that's how I actually read it), but that's the point. This particular part could be left to reasonable translation too.

 

[Sandman02ds]

So I see your from Florida , so how is trying to title one there working out for you ?

I've had 3 titled, but can't discuss how on here!

 

[Sandman02ds]

I simply stated where it IS operated, not where it is designed to be operated.

Gotcha. Regardless of my poor example, the point is that the NHTSA concluded that these are in fact "motor vehicles" manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways, and that's important when faced with the "made for off-road only use" excuse.

 

[porkysplace]

Gotcha. Regardless of my poor example, the point is that the NHTSA concluded that these are in fact "motor vehicles" manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways, and that's important when faced with the "made for off-road only use" excuse.

You don't seem to understand that it has a EUC and the DLA has control over it until it is shredded into little pieces and shipped to china like they have been doing for years . All it takes is for the DLA to decide there are too many people trying to bypass the OFF ROAD USE ONLY part of the sales agreement and they change the de-mill code , recall them and shred them .

 

[rhurey]

Well, if this was an allowed discussion, it would be one heck of a urination match.

Oh well.

 

[Sandman02ds]

You don't seem to understand that it has a EUC and the DLA has control over it until it is shredded into little pieces and shipped to china like they have been doing for years . All it takes is for the DLA to decide there are too many people trying to bypass the OFF ROAD USE ONLY part of the sales agreement and they change the de-mill code , recall them and shred them .

I do understand that, but I highly doubt it would happen because they are being drivrn on the road. Don't get me wrong, it *could* happen and I would be shocked if it did, but it won't...unless extreme circumstances call for it. As long as they are making money off the sales and they aren't ending up in the hands of the wrong people, there is no reasonto do so. The effort of that would be financially irresponsible.

...and don't you think the DLA researched all this before they started selling these? Of ourse they did. Don't you think they knew what they were getting into and that people are going to drive these down the street because they are made for both on- and off-road? Don't you think they knew that it was up to the states to allow these on the road since there are no specifc laws pertaining to the Humvees? Yes, of course they did, and obviously the benefits of moving forward with these sales out-weighed the risks.

Heck, GovPlanet has their own two or three M998s that they drive to events...and you can't tell me that if putting them on the road was actually "illegal", the Government wouldn't pull their contract immediately.

Ultimately, the only way to cover their rears is by selling these to the public "as-is" with a hold-harmless. You sign the hold-harmess to release the DLA and GP from liability from Humvees that are being sold that aren't up to par, and wait for it - should rightfully be considered off-road...but only because of their "current" condition. Otherwise why wouldn't an up-to-par, road-worthy Humvee NOT be allowed on the road? To add to this, the EUC is basically your background check...that has nothing to do with the ability to drive them down the road. Besides, you sign it affirming that you are going to abide by it's intended use (which we already know what that is), not export them, and follow all the other specific laws pertaining to demil equipment.

 

[OilfieldRoughneck]

There is a lot of passionate debate here. That's all I have to say

 

[porkysplace]

I do understand that, but I highly doubt it would happen because they are being drivrn on the road. Don't get me wrong, it *could* happen and I would be shocked if it did, but it won't...unless extreme circumstances call for it. As long as they are making money off the sales and they aren't ending up in the hands of the wrong people, there is no reasonto do so. The effort of that would be financially irresponsible.

...and don't you think the DLA researched all this before they started selling these? Of ourse they did. Don't you think they knew what they were getting into and that people are going to drive these down the street because they are made for both on- and off-road? Don't you think they knew that it was up to the states to allow these on the road since there are no specifc laws pertaining to the Humvees? Yes, of course they did, and obviously the benefits of moving forward with these sales out-weighed the risks.

Heck, GovPlanet has their own two or three M998s that they drive to events...and you can't tell me that if putting them on the road was actually "illegal", the Government wouldn't pull their contract immediately.

Ultimately, the only way to cover their rears is by selling these to the public "as-is" with a hold-harmless. You sign the hold-harmess to release the DLA and GP from liability from Humvees that are being sold that aren't up to par, and wait for it - should rightfully be considered off-road...but only because of their "current" condition. Otherwise why wouldn't an up-to-par, road-worthy Humvee NOT be allowed on the road? To add to this, the EUC is basically your background check...that has nothing to do with the ability to drive them down the road. Besides, you sign it affirming that you are going to abide by it's intended use (which we already know what that is), not export them, and follow all the other specific laws pertaining to demil equipment.

So I take it you graduated from Harvard Law School.

 

[patracy]

Closed. Due to all the lawyers from all sides.