Oregon Reintroduces Bill to Limit Suspension/Tire Alterations

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by SEMA Action Network

Once you raise the vehicle with leaving the OE bumper height, you negate the purpose of raising it in the first place.

NOT TRUE. The bumper isnt always the lowest part of a vehicle..

[CRChevy]

I know everyone doesn't like donks but think of the money some guys (who still love camaros) put into there "donk" style. There would be all kinds of cars with huge problems ... Like it or not a lot of work goes into putting a camaro on anything bigger then 24" wheels , including cutting the fenders ... so imagine if the law comes in what is one to do with a camaro on 26-28" ??? the car would not be sellable after a fender cut.

Side Note : I'd rather have a bunch of kooky liberals in office then these Right Wing nuts with no IQ like Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck (with his $%#@$% chalkboard I hope someone chokes the shit out of him) ...

[THE EVIL TW1N]

SEMA needs to get their act together and fight a better fight and have a clear cut objective, not just fight because laws are being proposed on anything having to do with vehicles. You have to be ovjectively reasonable. There's sometimes a greater good for SOCIETY behind the thought of certain bills or laws.

[20Camaro11]

on the safety side of it...IMO, a vehicle lifted drastically higher than stock is could be a bigger safety liability to the person in that vehicle. Poorly designed and assembled lift kits introduce stresses on different parts of a vehicle that they were never designed for leading to different part failures. They also can lend to a higher propensity of rollovers. So what I am thinking, I think the bumper height is lower on the list of concerns for me. In actuallity, I don't believe I have ever seen a fatal accident directly caused by any of these issues. People can be crazy....lets vote them into office.

[AZCamaroFan]

Originally Posted by GrinderSS

That's what you get with liberals...Oregon is second only to California in the number of kook liberals it has. Once they get their way, we'll all be riding bicycles, much like like they do in communist China and socialist Europe.

Hell, thanks to them we already have toilets that can barely handle bird droppings, dumb curly light bulbs that take 5 minutes to fully light, and ugly hybrid cars people wouldn't buy without a tax credit.

Big government statists, I can't stand them!

they probably won't let people fly a flag in their yard either.

[20Camaro11]

I find it amusing how politics are pushed into this. How many people in this forum live in a subdivision with a HOA or some other form of homeowners association with draconian rules to "protect" their homes and neighborhoods. How we perceive anything depends on who's interests are being protected. On that note, this legislation seems like a lot of useless legislation. It is proposed knowing full well it won't pass, but will be a feather in some dumbasses cap come next election...

[ssump29]

I think its a great idea. I mean really what purpose does having a truck that high in the air serve. One they are scary when they right on your ass and two they serve no purpose and are very ugly. When I can see your whole underbody because your truck is so high in the air then thats a problem. If you can easily run over a car with ease, then whats to stop stop people from just getting the monster trucks on TV you see and drive those around.

Again good law if you ask me. Makes things alot safer. Hell can those stupid trucks even see who's beside them or behind them when they are that high up. I mean really, there needs to be a limit.

[rez333]

I agree with ssump. How many of these lifted trucks actually go off-road? Therefore the rest of us have to suffer because of the small minority of trucks that go off-road, but the majority of these trucks do not?

Put it this way - a lot of sports cars are getting uglier because the doors are getting higher because of these stupid trucks. Cars will never look as beautiful as they used to because their beauty is constrained by safety standards - because of those elevated bumpers.

The entire country of Australia survives with trucks at the normal height (utes) - and those utes go off-road just as much as the giant trucks in N.America.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

[SEMA Action Network]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

NOT TRUE. The bumper isnt always the lowest part of a vehicle..

Correct. But if you're raising the vehicle, why would you leave the bumper lower? What functional purpose would that provide you in navagating rough terrain or high snow, for example?

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

SEMA needs to get their act together and fight a better fight and have a clear cut objective, not just fight because laws are being proposed on anything having to do with vehicles. You have to be ovjectively reasonable. There's sometimes a greater good for SOCIETY behind the thought of certain bills or laws.

We do and are not opposing this simply because it pertains to something with four wheels and an engine. This legislation effects a large community nationwide, particularly in Oregon. If we allow this to pass, off-road enthusiasts in Oregon would be relegated to paying to bring their vehicles into compliance, not to mention the loss they would take on the parts/labor they can no longer use. Going further, it impacts their choice to do what they deem necessary for their own vehicle. If this legislation does pass, I'm certain you will see home-made remedies to bring bumpers into compliance, odds are they'll be bubblegum and duct tape soltutions that won't be very unsafe.

SEMA and SAN are very reasonable. Just check out our common sense model legislation for things like inoperable vehicles, exhaust noise, and registering/titling street rod and customs.

Originally Posted by 20Camaro11

I find it amusing how politics are pushed into this. How many people in this forum live in a subdivision with a HOA or some other form of homeowners association with draconian rules to "protect" their homes and neighborhoods. It just depends who's interests are being protected how we perceive anything? On that note, this legislations seems like a lot of useless legislation. It is proposed knowing full well it won't pass, but will be a feather in some dumbasses cap come next election...

This legislation is certainly unfair and misguided. However, EVERY piece of legislation has the chance to pass. That's why its important to stand-up and vocally oppose this.

[20Camaro11]

Originally Posted by SEMA Action Network

This legislation is certainly unfair and misguided. However, EVERY piece of legislation has the chance to pass. That's why its important to stand-up and vocally oppose this.

Agreed 100% I was referring to liberal slams and stereotyping of an entire state based on how they vote. I don't care what side of the politics this comes from, because both edges of our political system contribute to this dysfuntion.

[SEMA Action Network]

Originally Posted by ssump29

I think its a great idea. I mean really what purpose does having a truck that high in the air serve. One they are scary when they right on your ass and two they serve no purpose and are very ugly. When I can see your whole underbody because your truck is so high in the air then thats a problem. If you can easily run over a car with ease, then whats to stop stop people from just getting the monster trucks on TV you see and drive those around.

Again good law if you ask me. Makes things alot safer. Hell can those stupid trucks even see who's beside them or behind them when they are that high up. I mean really, there needs to be a limit.

Again, you're immediately thinking of the extreme. Under this bill, raising something as little as 3.1" would be outlawed.

Raised vehicles do serve a purpose to their users and everyone has a different cause. Some need them for extreme snowfalls in the winter. Some use them for recreation on the weekends. Others need them to navigate rough terrain on their property. The choice to alter a vehicle should be there for these owners if they so chose.

Originally Posted by rez333

I agree with ssump. How many of these lifted trucks actually go off-road? Therefore the rest of us have to suffer because of the small minority of trucks that go off-road, but the majority of these trucks do not?

Put it this way - a lot of sports cars are getting uglier because the doors are getting higher because of these stupid trucks. Cars will never look as beautiful as they used to because their beauty is constrained by safety standards - because of those elevated bumpers.

The entire country of Australia survives with trucks at the normal height (utes) - and those utes go off-road just as much as the giant trucks in N.America.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

How many lowered cars make it to the racetrack on the weekends? I would venture to say the figures of raised vehicles going off-road (or even used for their purpose) are higher than a slammed ride hitting a road course.

With all due respect, I think you're mistaken with the Australian example. While they do sell the smaller trucks like the utes, they do have a popular and avid off-road culture, including with raised vehicles.

Finally, doors getting "higher" on vehicles isn't because of larger or raised vehicles. It's due to factors like higher side impact safety ratings and styling. Not because of this subset of the hobby.

[20Camaro11]

Also, I choose not to participate in somebodies elses fight...this is an Oregonian issue at present. I doubt any Oregon state legislature gives two sh*&s about some Ohioans opinion. If this were up in Ohio or at a federal level, I would be inclined to let my voice be heard.

[ssump29]

Originally Posted by SEMA Action Network

Again, you're immediately thinking of the extreme. Under this bill, raising something as little as 3.1" would be outlawed.

Raised vehicles do serve a purpose to their users and everyone has a different cause. Some need them for extreme snowfalls in the winter. Some use them for recreation on the weekends. Others need them to navigate rough terrain on their property. The choice to alter a vehicle should be there for these owners if they so chose.



How many lowered cars make it to the racetrack on the weekends? I would venture to say the figures of raised vehicles going off-road (or even used for their purpose) are higher than a slammed ride hitting a road course.

With all due respect, I think you're mistaken with the Australian example. While they do sell the smaller trucks like the utes, they do have a popular and avid off-road culture, including with raised vehicles.

Finally, doors getting "higher" on vehicles isn't because of larger or raised vehicles. It's due to factors like higher side impact safety ratings and styling. Not because of this subset of the hobby.

OK, where I'm at that is what I see. There are five running around my town that are college stupids and they don't use them for any of those purposes. And lifting that high would be worse when off road, I mean way easier to flip those things over then say a Land Rover3 which are great off road vehicles and better then any of those stupid hiked trucks.

It's as simple as this, if they are gonna use those trucks for those purposes its a real simple solution never drive them on public roads and use them only where they are to be used. It's no different then a drag car that is only used at the track and gets hauled on a trailer to get there. Same for these vehicles. But if they want to be on the public roads, then noooooooooooooooooooooo it shouldn't be allowed.

[SEMA Action Network]

Originally Posted by 20Camaro11

Also, I choose not to participate in somebodies elses fight...this is an Oregonian issue at present. I doubt any Oregon state legislature gives two sh*&s about some Ohioans opinion. If this were up in Ohio or at a federal level, I would be inclined to let my voice be heard.

Precisely, but we posted this simply as an informational item to show what types of threats are out there. This could easily have been translated the other way, which has been done, to outlaw lowered vehicles.

Originally Posted by ssump29

OK, where I'm at that is what I see. There are five running around my town that are college stupids and they don't use them for any of those purposes. And lifting that high would be worse when off road, I mean way easier to flip those things over then say a Land Rover3 which are great off road vehicles and better then any of those stupid hiked trucks.

It's as simple as this, if they are gonna use those trucks for those purposes its a real simple solution never drive them on public roads and use them only where they are to be used. It's no different then a drag car that is only used at the track and gets hauled on a trailer to get there. Same for these vehicles. But if they want to be on the public roads, then noooooooooooooooooooooo it shouldn't be allowed.

That really isn't a simple solution. What if this is the only means of transportation someone can afford? A dual-purpose ride of recreation and transportation? A drag car has no purpose on a public roadway. Raised vehicles can operate lawfully on the public roads.