At 03:41 AM 11/12/2009, Janne Ruohom�ki wrote:
>I think previously, before this E-approval thing, they used to be more
>interested in the shape of the light pattern here. And they are still
>if You have something wrong with it, but they cannot fail the
>inspection just because the pattern if You have all the parts
>E-approved and meant to be used with each other. They have a device
>specifically for checking the lights here.  And yes: the conversion to
>HID without correct reflector would probably be noticed by experienced
>inspector.

Whereas in all of the US-east coast states (Rhode 
Island '92-now, Massachusetts '79-'91, Maine 
'72-'78 and '80, Maryland '72, Florida '71-72) 
where I've had vehicles inspected, not inspector 
has ever even glanced at the headlights except to 
make sure they light up.  I suppose if one of the 
cars had thrown a flapping bat symbol on the wall 
they might possibly have noticed...or not.  Same 
with all other lights.  I've never had an illegal 
driving or fog light installation but they never 
appeared to pay the slightest attention to the 
installations I did have.  Rhode Island and New 
Hampshire care about holes in the sheet metal, 
Maine and Massachusetts don't.  No inspector has 
ever lifted the hood (bonnet) or engine hatch.

Typical check is, lights, horn, wipers all light 
up, no cracks in windshield (windscreen) 
handbrake effectiveness in Maine, audible exhaust 
leaks (possibly at-a-glance visual inspection in 
Rhode Island and Massachusetts?), brake lining 
thickness, wiggle test on lifted front wheels to 
make sure the suspension is actually attached to 
the vehicle reasonably snugly.  In Maine at 
least, if you have multiple-segment tail lights 
(think late-'70s Detroit iron) all the segments 
must light up.  In Maine in the '70s you could 
have no more than 4 cm play at the steering wheel rim. (!)

For emissions, Massachusetts started using a 
tailpipe sniff test while I was there; Rhode 
Island already was when I came and a few years 
ago shifted to a dynamometer test; now on OBD-II 
vehicles they simply query the ECU.  Rhode Island 
waives the fuel cap pressure test/gasket 
inspection for Vanagons, incidentally, which 
leads me to suspect that it's waived for all pre-OBD-II vehicles.

None of these states have had any official 
interest in non-obvious vehicle modifications 
like the TUV in Germany does -- I can't say for 
obvious ones, but in various places in New 
England there are some pickup/SUVs with wheels 
and tires that lift the chassis maybe as much as 
40 cm (?) for flotation on marshy ground and I 
don't *think* there are any additional inspection 
or certification requirements.    Likewise "hot 
rods" i.e. Model A or similar bodies with 
uncovered V8 engines and (I certainly hope!) 
modern suspensions.  There *is* official concern 
about wheels that that protrude from the fender 
wells, but I'm not sure it's rigorously enforced 
-- undoubtedly some of the big-tire marsh rigs flunk this one.

Rhode Island (the state you can put in your 
pocket for later but the name will stick out -- 
its full name is "The State of Rhode Island and 
Providence Plantations") presently charges USD39 
for a biennial safety/emissions inspection.

Motor vehicle regulations are largely left to 
individual states; however whenever the federal 
gov't feels strongly about an issue is simply 
threatens to withhold funding assistance for 
highways unless its desires are met.  This is 
commonly how traffic laws are changed in 
Massachusetts, a curious example of New England 
cussedness.  The three issues I'm aware of there 
over the last 40 years or so are passing 
(overtaking) on the off side, right-of-way at 
rotary/traffic circle entrances (where MA hung on 
to the physically ridiculous "entering has 
right-of-way" for probably twenty years after 
everyone else had seen the light; and right-turn 
against the lights unless otherwise posted, which 
happened while I was in state and was 
amazing.  They finally gave in to the Fed at gun 
point and the absolute last minute -- and the 
weekend before the law went into effect they put 
up 100.000, that's one hundred thousand, 
no-turn-on-red signs.  They gradually came down 
over the next ten years.  On the traffic-circle 
issue they didn't bother to educate older 
drivers, so during an entire generation of 
drivers you had no freaking idea what anyone was 
going to do in a rotary.  A law-abiding driver 
could easily get into a crossing collision 
leaving the rotary or a rear-ender 
entering.  This faded as the new generation took over, in the late '80s.

Rhode Island, having only 1.2% the area of 
Finland, has the curious habit of putting warning 
signs when a multi-lane highway loses a lane -- 
exactly at the point where the lane goes 
away.  Most other places give you a little more warning.

Finland has slightly more area than our eleven 
smallest states combined, BTW, and the entire 
country has 74 times the area of Finland. :)

Yours,
David