taboo to talk

[DatGuyC]

It was my understanding that GP is the one stamping the SF97's with off-road use only, not the government. This would be no different than someone stamping a title for a personal vehicle they own, so it has no real legal basis. Its up to the state to decide if they want it on their roads or not.

 

[Sintorion]

It was my understanding that GP is the one stamping the SF97's with off-road use only, not the government. This would be no different than someone stamping a title for a personal vehicle they own, so it has no real legal basis. Its up to the state to decide if they want it on their roads or not.

If that is true, I wonder if they are allowed to alter a federal document?

 

[Retiredwarhorses]

If that is true, I wonder if they are allowed to alter a federal document?

the form clearly states "no alterations", that stamp is in NO box provided to be filled out, says it must all be "machine prepared", meaning, the data cannot be written in, but must be computer or typewriter print.
I have already had a DMV turn down my SF97's due to the stamp....nothing else, not what it said, but the stamp voided the SF97. But that goes back to the person behind the counter...

 

[Behr]

Got to comment because this discussion is important. The hmmwv in my opinion is road worthy, if you can build a vehicle in your garage, get it inspected and then have it titled and registered, how in the heck is a hmmwv not safe? Just the fact that motorcycles are street legal makes the case. If the local dmv rejects you for any illegitimate reason you must fight the decision because it is BS. If you pass safety and emmissions inspections you are legal. Now the whole discussion on the "off road use only" stamp is beyond my understanding of legality but I agree it is BS. First get a safety and emmissions inspection and any other documents you are required to have. Then go to the DMV and register. If they reject you for any reason, time to climb the chain of command. Request contact information for DMV officials that enforce the reasons you were rejected. Call and speak with them politely and inform them that you disagree for the obvious reasons and that you will continue to climb the chain of command and eventually take them to state court. There is NO reason to deny this vehicle from road use. I had this fight already and won early on. I was not rude or disrespectful, only stated the facts that I meet all requirements for a kit car and rejection of my hmmwv was discrimination. OK, so I know this seems hard and will take time and effort. But what do you have to lose? If you are already rejected, fight the fair fight for all of us. You will win at the end of the day if you follow the rules and your rig is up to the standards of the state. Don't try to skirt the laws, use the laws to win. No court will side with the DMV unless they have a legitimate reason to ban the truck. It's only an old truck remember, no different than any other old truck.

 

[tomelroy]

Just import a military (or civilian) land rover defender that was not legal to import at the time of manufacture because it did not meet epa and dot requirements. (Not road worty) After 25 years dod and epa requirements are exempt.(road worthy if it passes inspection). I agree that a full functional hmmwv rolling of the line is not toad worthy according to the epa and dot regs. 25 years later no problem. Greatest snow on earth. (Utah)

 

[springbok]

I just imported a 1990 Mercedes GWagon. It is diesel and meets no EPA or DOT requirements. The being older than 25 years is what allows it to be tagged.
The same thing "Should" apply but I do not make the laws as silly as they may be.
I do however take issue with GP selling "Titled" HUMVEEs that were clearly bought from their site and just painted up pretty.
What about the M1123s ? What makes them different so that they CAN be sold without restrictions ?
Just asking..
FYI the GWagon is a blast to drive.

 

[Wire Fox]

I just imported a 1990 Mercedes GWagon. It is diesel and meets no EPA or DOT requirements. The being older than 25 years is what allows it to be tagged.
The same thing "Should" apply but I do not make the laws as silly as they may be.
I do however take issue with GP selling "Titled" HUMVEEs that were clearly bought from their site and just painted up pretty.
What about the M1123s ? What makes them different so that they CAN be sold without restrictions ?
Just asking..
FYI the GWagon is a blast to drive.

Difference in contract. The vast majority of the HMMWVs on GP are through the DLA service and there's a requirement from them to list all the HMMWVs as not road worthy. The M1123s are all from the USMC directly-not through the DLA service-and they made no such requirement. That's really all the difference there is for roadworthiness...regardless of that, the M1123s are a better chassis and already come with 6.5L engines and 4L80E transmissions, so they're a nicer vehicle all around.

 

[patracy]

I just imported a 1990 Mercedes GWagon. It is diesel and meets no EPA or DOT requirements. The being older than 25 years is what allows it to be tagged.
The same thing "Should" apply but I do not make the laws as silly as they may be.
I do however take issue with GP selling "Titled" HUMVEEs that were clearly bought from their site and just painted up pretty.
What about the M1123s ? What makes them different so that they CAN be sold without restrictions ?
Just asking..
FYI the GWagon is a blast to drive.

We've been down this road. But a huge majority of MV equipment doesn't meet EPA requirements. The DoD was excluded from emissions for them. (You'll see that on many pieces of hardware) There was a scare a few years ago when ALL engine equipped items were halted for auction. There were concerns they'd retroactively try to pick up the hardware as well.

As to the 1123's, those are through the USMC. It fell outside the normal process. Just like the auction way back in 1999, the USMC can do as they please. (So to speak)

 

[ke5eua]

Edited.

My mind wasn't thinking right and got vehicles mixed up.

 

[patracy]

While the enhancements are true. The contract is the key factor.

 

[ke5eua]

While the enhancements are true. The contract is the key factor.

Oh I know that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sintorion]

the form clearly states "no alterations", that stamp is in NO box provided to be filled out, says it must all be "machine prepared", meaning, the data cannot be written in, but must be computer or typewriter print.
I have already had a DMV turn down my SF97's due to the stamp....nothing else, not what it said, but the stamp voided the SF97. But that goes back to the person behind the counter...

It does clearly state "Any alteration or erasure voids this certificate". Adding a stamp does exactly that. Not to mention that they are listing GP as the transferee. If that is the case, then GP would have to be the one filling out the EUC. I wonder if you can request a SF97 directly from DLA?

 

[Gunzy]

In my state (Utah) the DMV has decided that if the vehicle (HMMWV or any) is capable of passing the state inspection program (which is strict on safety equipment) it can be registered as "Road Worthy." Now, what this means is there are several upgrades that will need to be done. A good example is bumpers, unless the HMMWV has air lift bumpers it will need an upgrade. It is a farely simple requirement in Utah, meet state inspection requirements and your good to go. As far as "Not Road Worthy" from GP, that can apply to 95% of the vehicles they sell. Lights not working, wipers inop., flat tires, broken glass, missing parts, etc. the list can go on and on. So, the "Not Road Worthy" and "Off Highway Use Only" stamp are a in my opinion a CYA tactic. So in effect, buy 25 year old stuff, declare exemption from DOT, FMSS, and EPA and go play with your toy as you wish.

 

[ke5eua]

I think what everyone is failing to understand is that is isn't GP who decided to mark it as Off Road use.

Part of the contract to have GP sell them was to mark them as off road.

Take the time to look at the contract to see for yourselves.

When you bid on the item you are agreeing to the terms set forth by the auction per the contract. You win the item but then don't like the fact that it is stamped for off road use even though by bidding you agreed to it.

Personally I'd be surprised if the contract is renewed when it comes time.

On a side note, how many people use iTunes? Ok, how many of you know that you agreed to the following:

You also agree that you will not use these products for any purposes prohibited by United States law, including, without limitation, the development, design, manufacture, or production of nuclear, missile, or chemical or biological weapons.

With that, I know I can't use iTunes to manufacture a nuclear missile. If I did I can't sue Apple for any wrong doing.

Same applies to this. You get your 998 titled and put on the streets. You ended up hitting a soccer mom on her way to bible study as she was leaving helping the homeless. You kill someone. She gets a lawyer and the lawyer finds out that your 998 was purchased under the condition of off road use only. She sues and it comes out that you registered your vehicle for on road use even though per the auction you agreed to use it for off road use only. Well your insurance is going to drop you quicker than Canada dropping Bieber on us. DMV isn't going to hold any liability, and GP isn't going to. Now you're bearing the weight of a lawsuit and possible further lawsuits because you originally agreed to one thing but decided you wanted to use it for something different.

I get it, the 998 is cool, you want to show it off. That's what parades and events are for.

 

[Sintorion]

I think what everyone is failing to understand is that is isn't GP who decided to mark it as Off Road use.

Part of the contract to have GP sell them was to mark them as off road.

Take the time to look at the contract to see for yourselves.

When you bid on the item you are agreeing to the terms set forth by the auction per the contract. You win the item but then don't like the fact that it is stamped for off road use even though by bidding you agreed to it.

Personally I'd be surprised if the contract is renewed when it comes time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are absolutely right about the marking. I am sure GP doesn't want to be involved, but that doesn't mean that they can violate government policy even at the request of DLA. Have you by chance found the GP contract with DLA? I have been searching unsuccessfully.

 

[MWMULES]

I wonder if you can request a SF97 directly from DLA?

You can request it, but as I was told the "DLA did not sell me the MV they sold it to GP", so no form97.

 

[Recovry4x4]

As far as "Not Road Worthy" from GP, that can apply to 95% of the vehicles they sell. Lights not working, wipers inop., flat tires, broken glass, missing parts, etc. the list can go on and on. So, the "Not Road Worthy" and "Off Highway Use Only" stamp are a in my opinion a CYA tactic. .

Your logic confuses my simple mind. If this "Not Road Worthy" stamp is CYA, why do they use in exclusively on the HMMWV. By your own observation, 95% of the stock is not road worthy. Why only CYA on a few vehicles.

Ponder this for a second. As a part of your contract to bid and purchase, you agree to the off road part of the deal. Those that buy it from a reseller, don't necessarily agree to the same "Conditions of Sale".

 

[Wire Fox]

I just have to say...I really like this discussion being here. It's not talking about how to get around the law (as the worry usually would be), it's about why things are the way they are and some little tidbits about what we can do about it to try and clear the way for the future. Mods...thanks for not deleting this!

 

[Retiredwarhorses]

Well folks, unless you were a fly on the wall in the meeting between DLA and GP during the negotiations for the release of these trucks, or unless GP just comes right out and tells us, it is "my" beleif that the Off road use only was a DLA requirement that allowed " for the first time ever" HMMWV's be sold to the public.
What I want to know is, "after god knows how many years" why Gov Liquidations couldn't get these trucks cleared for sale as GP did in just a short period of time.

 

[springbok]

When I went to get my M923A2 inspected, the front bumper was 1" to high. They said they would not pass it because of that.
So what did I do, CTIS saved me, I put it in sand mode to let enough air out to lower it 1" and they guy was like, F it, it is Friday anyway, here is your paperwork.
It is funny though that the HUMVEE is safe enough to drive in combat but not on the road.