PNYXPRESS

Wrong. All 2002 cobras were built specifically for Australian export. Therefore they were initially built to the ADR. The roughly 100 cobras built do not exist in the svt official numbers as they weren't for the domestic market.

However you can still import the car to the US

jz78817

show me, please. 'cos the law as it stands says you can't just bring one over.

"A vehicle not originally built to U.S. specifications can, under certain circumstances be imported through a registered importer who modifies the vehicle to comply with US equipment and safety regulations and then certifies it as compliant. Also an independent commercial importer who modifies the vehicle to comply with US emissions regulations and then certifies it as compliant. Those who import nonconforming motor vehicles sometimes bring in more than one car at a time to spread the substantial cost of the necessary destructive testing, modification, and safety certification. Destructive crash testing is not always needed if the vehicle can be shown to be substantially similar to a model sold in the U.S. The Smart Fortwo was imported in this manner prior to its official U.S. release."

PNYXPRESS

I don't know as Ive never personally imported a car. However I do know of at least one 2002 cobra that is in the states so I know its possible.

It may (and this is strictly my thought) be due to the fact that the exported mustang is built in the USA along side the domestic cars therefore the chassis and structural safety components are the same. This would satisfy half of the import requirements of a vehicle. Therefore, the only issue is the emissions. Now, being that there are several members on here that live in European countries and drive imported mustangs, this tells me that the US emissions standards aren't much different if not the same as European standards.

The major reason to install the 4cyl back in the mustang was to take the car globally. They wouldn't sell 4 cyl mustangs here in the states if they had to make a completely different 4cyl engine for the European market. therefore, one could deduct, that at least the 4cyl car is safety and emissions legal for both markets.

LHD or RHD doesn't make any difference in the safety of the vehicle.

JIM5.0

^^^This.
This is exactly what I am saying.

It would be cheaper to manufacture one standard set of engines that are multinational compliant than to make multiple sets of engines that are compliant in only specific respective countries.
By having multinational compliant engines, that allows the manufacturer to mass produce an off-the-shelf part that can be sold in many more markets without the costs of having to tailor-alter each part to conform to specific laws and regs of only one country.
That is flexibility.

You hit it on the head. Even if LHD and RHD S550s are still only certified in their respective regions, if indeed the costs of certification for multiple regions is too costly, producing a car that is capable of multinational compliance would allow that car to one day in the future be certified without any modifications.

In this case, as people begin to import them in, since they are designed to be compliant in the US also, the USDOT will give them respective exemptions.

But to say that it costs too much to certify the S550 for multiple regions is just an assumption. And even if it is expensive for those certifications and approvals, I am very certain that FoMoCo expects the sales of the S550 in each respective region will be more than enough to pay for all those certifications.
Certifying a car is expensive. No questions about that.
But it costs the same to certify each region-specific variant in their respective regions than it would be to certify a single car design in multiple regions.

An example just for the sake of this argument (these costs are completely made up):
Lets say that it costs FoMoCo $250,000,000 to certify a car in the US.
And it costs FoMoCo $300,000,000 in Europe.
Total cost is $550mil
Ford has two choices: make two region specific cars and pay $250mil to certify a US car and pay $300mil to certify a Euro specific car; total $550mil.
OR Ford can simply pay $550mil for a single car that is compliant for both.
It still will cost FoMoCo the exact same in certification/approval fees.


Since the S550 is also meant to also be sold in Asia and possibly also Australia (sooner or later), I am sure that the S550 was designed to meet those respective laws and regs.

I am with you. LHD and RHD and no bearing in crash safety and emissions. I do not see why FoMoCo will not seek multi-regional certifications and approvals for the S550 to be made using only one set of templates that is multinational compliant.

jz78817

I thought as much.

Yeah, well there being one here doesn't mean it came in on the up-and-up. a couple guys were importing Skylines for a while until they got shut down and thrown in prison.

Not if the PCM calibrations are different! Look, even if they cooked up a calibration which meets standards for all regions, they still have to separately certify each vehicle configuration for each region's standards. Hell, we still have cars in the US alone which have different PCM calibrations/certifications just for California!

*sigh* I never said it would "cost too much to certify the S550 for multiple regions." I never said that because that is indeed what they're doing. What I said they're likely NOT doing is certifying all S550 variants for all regions. Because each variant of drive side and engine/powertrain combination needs separate safety and emissions certification. So that means each of these configurations:

V6 Coupe Manual LHD
V6 Coupe Auto LHD
V6 Conv. Manual LHD
V6 Conv. Auto LHD
EB Coupe Manual LHD
EB Coupe Auto LHD
EB Conv. Manual LHD
EB Conv. Auto LHD
EB Coupe Manual RHD
EB Coupe Auto RHD
EB Conv. Manual RHD
EB Conv. Auto RHD
GT Coupe Manual LHD
GT Coupe Auto LHD
GT Conv. Manual LHD
GT Conv. Auto LHD
GT Coupe Manual RHD
GT Coupe Auto RHD
GT Conv. Manual RHD
GT Conv. Auto RHD

ALL need to be individually tested and certified for crash and emissions performance. ALL OF THEM. You cannot use crash test results from a LHD car as surrogate for RHD car. And what I'm saying is that it would be a waste of Ford's time and money to certify RHD cars to EPA/FMVSS compliance when nobody would buy the damn things.

you know, forget this. You guys can't manage to respond to the things I'm actually saying, and just like erecting strawmen to respond to.

JIM5.0

Do you have some sort of insider info to know this?
And do you know for sure that a single finished S550 off the production line will not conform to all of all of these standards? (Compliant for both US and Euro in this case, not ADR)

Again, do you know for a fact that the PCM parameters will be different for each region? I sure do not, but knowing Ford's One Ford and Global S550 goal, it would contradict that goal of multi-regional flexibility to make a car specific for only one region and not pass another region's requirements.


I am not disagreeing with you that EVERY trim will be multi-regional compliant. As I already said, the S550 GT could be a trim that fails to meet Euro emissions.

Again, are you so sure it would be such a waste of time for Ford?
Look, I do not even know if you are correct that they have to crash test and certify each trim, package, option combination; that sounds extremely unreasonable due to the massive permutations of possible options just for the S550.
I can understand the necessity to crash test permutations of transmission, engine, and coupe/convertible options because those are all things that critically affect the vehicle's crash survivability performance.

But why would steering wheel location be a permutation factor that it would require its own testing for FMVSS certification?
Do RHD steering wheel columns collapse differently from LHD columns?
Are RHD steering wheels shaped so differently that airbags deploy differently?
Is the right side of the S550 so structurally different that it performs differently in a crash if the steering wheel were on the LH side?
Does mirroring the engine bay to move the battery and PCM to the other side impact structural performance in crashes? Or the ability to pass both US EPA and Euro T5 & T6 standards?

Yes, this point is a strawman or a red herring in your eyes, but I see it as integrally linked to the argument. And since we are entertaining this point, I just want to know exactly why relocating the steering wheel to the RH side would impact crash safety performance or the ability of the S550 to meet US EPA standards.
For all we know, the S550 could be so modular that simply moving the steering wheel from one side to the other will have no impact on it meeting both US and Euro requirements.

To answer your question, if moving the steering wheel to the RH side does not impact crash structural design and EPA and Euro emissions, no, it will not cost FoMoCo anything more for certification or approval.
Is it worth it? Probably not; I think it will be because just like you said, too few customers in the US would buy RHD S550s and too few Euro customers would buy LHD S550s.
But I don't care about that. Just like others in this thread, I am curious if it can be done feasibly and just like another poster, if RHD Euro S550s will be 100% both US and Euro compliant.


Well, you are saying alot of things. You put it all out there. You answered the OP's question: will Flat Rock make RHD S550s for US consumption? I agree, probably not.
After that, you fell into the strawmen fallacies we erected and debated details that are the "straw points" or "straw limbs" of said strawmen.

jz78817

a trivial example would be lighting; ECE regulations require auto-leveling feature for headlamps and won't be present on NAFTA cars.

http://www.motivemag.com/pub/feature...n_Lights.shtml

"One Ford" is about not treating regions as separate entities. It's about not doing stupid things like having a completely different architecture for mid-size sedans for in North America (CD338 Fusion, C170 Focus) vs. the rest of the world (CD340 Mondeo, C307 Focus.) It's not about making sure each vehicle model can be sold worldwide. If it was, the F-150 would either be cancelled or be a global vehicle. I don't see either of those happening.

then what are you arguing about?

yes. It costs time, money, and resources to do this work. That has to be repaid by selling cars. It would be patently stupid to do that work on a configuration that is a literal pain in the *** to drive. Like I said above, if you drive a right-hand-drive car in a country that drives on the side of the road we do, you are making things needlessly difficult for your self. All of our infrastructure and equipment is designed with the assumption of which side of the car you're sitting in!

I didn't say they did. another damn strawman. I said they need to certify each engine/trans combo and each "handedness." There are also regional homologation requirements like head impact on IP/dash structures, but that doesn't require a full vehicle.

I gave you the permutations that needed to be certified. For whatever reasons you extrapolated that to me saying they need separate certifications for cars with 4" and 8" displays in the dash.

Because it is physically a different car!

It depends. You can't just assume the car is a mirror image. The engine is not symmetric, especially in the case of a turbo 4-cylinder. On one side you have the intake system, on the other you have the exhaust/turbo. The steering column and steering shaft may not be the same assembly as the LHD version if it has to be routed differently or is a different part past the firewall.

it's not simply mirrored.

You're not just "relocating the steering wheel." You have a physically different IP/dash design. Your pedals are located differently in the footwell. Not everything underhood is moved to the other side of the car. The floorpans and firewall are physically distinct parts from the LHD car. You can't assume the steering column and steering gear are just mirror images.

yes, and if my aunt had ***** she'd be my uncle.

so you're admitting that you're trolling at this point? great.

PNYXPRESS

Let me rephrase, I started the process with getting the paperwork in order however the car I was looking at turned out to be misrepresented as to condition therefore the process was stopped.



There may be more than one, I only personally know of one.


yeah, I guess there is no way to reflash a pcm with a new tune.




No its not, it wouldn't be cost effective to develop and produce two completely different mustangs.

How do you know that the car wasn't designed to be more symmetrical to accept both LHD and RHD components?

The new chassis was developed and designed to go global from the beginning, therefore they were probably engineered to be symmetrical from the get go.

Im not aware of any pictures that show a bare s550 chassis to confirm any difference from USA specs to Europe specs, but again financial sense says they are the same.

Also, with the EPAS system already being utilized I wouldn't be surprised to see the steering shaft disappear completely in favor of a fly-by wire setup like the throttle has already done.


Remember these cars are built on a assembly line, you cant make them too complicated to assemble or drastically different from the car ahead of it or behind it. Your line worker needs to be able to install their part quickly without having to stop and analyze which chassis is what to install a part. Otherwise you will need a completely separate line with will double everything including cost.

JIM5.0

That is your opinion; and I have mine. Just because you don't see it the same way that I do does not mean that I am automatically wrong.
Just because you gave those examples is not proof that my guesses or opinions are wrong and yours are correct.

Your examples: where did I say that One Ford is about making EACH vehicle a global vehicle?
I said Ford's goal is simply to making cars that would be multinational compliant. I never said every vehicle from every Ford line will be multinational compliant.
For example, I do not think that Ford would intend the S550 GT350 to be multinational compliant, but then again, my thought could be wrong and the only way to know is when the GT350 is actually out on the market for public consumption.


Very honestly, I'm arguing because I'm just like you: a pendant.
I love a debate just as much as you do, even though I admit that I will drift the discussion to focus on specific points that interest me. You would call that red herring or strawman, but I consider it a segway to move on to a different point.
Just because I agree with you on some points does not mean I agree with you on other points.

Again, I'm not disagreeing with on the point that RHD in North America is needlessly difficult.
But back to what I asked earlier and disregarding difficulty in everyday use:
What makes RHD to cost more time or money?
I'm not buying that RHD makes the car perform differently in crash safety or emissions such that the S550 would not be compliant in both the US and Europe.



You only perceive a strawman. I specifically acknowledged your point with this sentence (I quote myself): "I can understand the necessity to crash test permutations of transmission, engine, and coupe/convertible options because those are all things that critically affect the vehicle's crash survivability performance."

Now that you bring up homologation, are there ones that either ban or require a vehicle to be RHD or LHD in the US or Europe?



I cannot agree without more information concerning the S550's crash certification testing.
Remembering your USDOT link, it says negatively about RHD cars MAY not be US compliant (emphasis on MAY which does not mean WILL).
Even the USDOT wrote an exception: "However, NHTSA will consider the vehicles "substantially similar" if the manufacturer advises the agency in writing, on the manufacturer’s letterhead (and not that of an authorized dealership or other such entity affiliated with the manufacturer) that the RHD vehicle would perform the same as the U.S.-certified left-hand drive vehicle in crash tests."


I cannot agree without more information concerning the S550's crash certification testing.
So a dash cannot be mirrored? Or mirroring the dash alters the car's crash safety performance?
The same for mirroring the floorpan and firewall?

I never made assumptions that mirroring will retain all crash safety performance. I only asked; in this case, I'm asking you if mirroring these components will always diminish the car's crash safety performance.



Look who's throwing out fallacies of his own.
I specifically chose my words carefully to avoid absolutes.
It should have been clear with my opening phrase "For all we know..." that this is only a POSSIBLE case and not a case that is going to happen conclusively.
Referring back to the USDOT exception "However, NHTSA will consider the vehicles "substantially similar" if the manufacturer advises the agency in writing, on the manufacturer’s letterhead that the RHD vehicle would perform the same as the U.S.-certified left-hand drive vehicle in crash tests."
This means my point COULD be correct. It is POSSIBLE for new RHD cars less than 25yrs old to meet US FMVSS crash safety standards.


No, you only perceive that. I am a pendant; I enjoy a debate.
I'm not here to insult you or demean; otherwise I would have committed a fair amount of ad hominem fallacies already.
Too bad you took our discussions as "trolling."