Folks Of Interest "Dodgeville Brad" needs our help ****JULY 1st 2019***

Found out today......July 1st, 2019 that Brad's 32 Coupe failed the Wisconsin State Patrol inspection.
It didn't pass their inspection because of:
1. No fenders
2. No hood
3. No bumpers
4. No windshield wipers
5. No windshield washer fluid
6. No defroster
7. No rear view mirror

Wonder what law book they are using at the Wiscomsin State Patrol???

Please call your Legislators and ask them to explain things.
To find your Wisconsin Legislators. https://legis.wisconsin.gov/
Enter your ZIP CODE
Call their #'s and talk to one of their assistants......DON'T bother doing an Email!

 

...'they' get to make the rules and it is up to 'us' to follow them. If Brad didn't check in advance to find out what the minimum equipment standards were, for his particular build, then its on him.
Not likely that all of those failure items magically appeared in the dmv equipment manual overnite. If the cops referenced an incorrect section of the 'book' then go to the dmv for correction.

.

 

The legislature makes the laws, and everyone has to follow them.....car owners AND cops!

 

No windshield wipers and no rearview mirror? In what state would just those two things alone not be an issue trying to pass inspection?

 

Have you been following the other threads on this subject?

https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum...nforcement-by-wisconsin-state-patrol.1147949/

 

New Jersey?
By the way, where is the factory windshield washer reservoir mount for a 1932 Ford coupe?

 

Sometimes we create our own problems.

 

Enjoy your hoodless car for now...

I don't have wipers, seat belts, front fenders, hood and some rear tire uncovered by fender...I don't drive in the Rain..Nobody said I couldn't but I use common sense...I wasn't trying to be difficult or a problem creator just experiencing a more primitive way of travel...thats all...heck I drive this thing a few times a week and none of these things has caused me any grief...it's tough enough to get it all going as it is...

I would like to see stats justifying altering the status quo...

I fully support a rear view mirror by the way but as alluded there has to be written specifics and guidelines at inspection to check off.

Pretty soon it will be a old car body on a 2000 Vette chassis the way their going...Highboys...Bye Boys...sad



...The calm before the storm

Thank you again for fighting this Tooth and Nail Hambers

Stogy

​

 

I live in California with some of the most restrictive automotive laws in the country. I just went through CHP inspection, BAR certification and the DMV process with the roadster and passed with flying colors.
I have:
1. No fenders (except for small motorcycle front fenders)
2. No hood
3. No bumpers
4. No windshield wipers
5. No windshield washer fluid
6. No defroster
I do however have a rear view mirror.

I've glanced at some of the other threads on this subject. It sounds like WSP is a little overzealous!

 

Some should try to keep up. The guy bought the car from out of state. WI registered the car and gave him plates. A state police officer with a grudge against hot rods pulled him over and issued a "fix it ticket" for no fenders, no hood, and the exhaust.
WI has street rod legislation that pretty well covers all these topics that has been on the books for several years, and up until just the last year has been trouble free.
The guy decided to go to court because he felt the car was legal under the street rod laws.
After the time to repair the "fix it tickets" expired, the State police made the WI dmv pull the plates and registration.
The court dismissed the case, requiring another inspection by the police.
The Police have completely disregarded the street rod laws and have failed the car according to "regular" car laws.

As a street rod, that resembles a 32 Ford street rod, the car should be inspected under the street rod laws that have been on the books for a long time, but it was not. If the laws exist, how is it that the Police can choose to ignore them when ever they choose? When the Police decide to ignore the laws on the books, what recourse do we the people have?

What was posted were the results of the last, just completed Police inspection. The guy has a car that may be, or may not be, legal by the street rod laws on the books, but he can't use it because the Police have chosen to ignore the laws the car falls under and inspect it under a different set of laws.

If we allow this to continue, none of us will be able to travel through WI without the fear of having our cars taken away from us. I encourage everyone that resides in WI to call your Legislators. Gene

 

Funny when I was first trying to get my Stude truck inspected - I kept going to a school buddies dad's station....his dad kept failing me on rear tail lights.....after finally reading the inspection book - needing only one brake/tail light here in Texas and no blinkers pre `1959....went to the station across the street and they passed me....went to get gas at Ronnie's dad's place many times after that as Ronnies wrecked pace car trimmed Camero SS sat wrecked behind it !

 

Might be time to hire an attorney and go back to court with the Street Rod standards.
Seems to me NSRA would do well to get involved at the State level?

 

Here is a pic of Brad's 32.
Has mirror on the passenger door....don't know if there is an inside mirror, or if one is required.

NSRA and SEMA help would really be nice!

 

Yep, SEMA is also a good idea. How about Goodguys? They certainly have a vested interest in the hobby and may be able to ''give back" ( $$$) a bit in this mess, maybe some legal team help. Does Wisconsin have a State wide Street Rod Association Like Minnesota does (MSRA) or a State wide car club council?
While Brad needs immediate help here, this really needs to be confronted/attacked at a State level. That's why I', suggesting the large, National and State big boys. Need lawyers and lobbyists for that scene. Something set off the WSP or their was wholesale direction from the top. What did you guys do to deserve this crap?
Not to go political, but of all the stuff for law enforcement to look for (auto theft rinds, etc) they're going back 50 years to chicken shit vehicle code infractions. What's next, "obstructed vision" impounds for any vehicle with a chopped top? If it doesn't get stuffed bigger shit can come like Aussie and UK styled engineering signoffs for suspension mods etc.

 

from one of the other threads on this:

Apparently there's an issue with the car having an aftermarket frame, so it's not considered to be an originally manufactured car. So, according to the law, it needs fenders, etc.

If the law doesn't let you do what you want to do, don't blame the enforcement. You have to change the law.

Or move to a state that's a bit more lenient.

 

Is it registered as a new construction,?

Here in South Carolina if you have a new construction title it has to meet new car requirements. HRP

 

^^^^
Jim and HRP......before making incorrect assumptions, it would probably be a good idea to study the DOT TRANS 305, that has been linked to these threads. Here it is again:

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/admin_code/trans/305/IV/53

CurtR here on the hamb was involved in the writing of these laws. He thinks there is a missinterpretation of these laws.
The laws don't need to be changed!
The 32 should be classified as a replica 1932 ( fiberglass body) by the DOT in Wisconsin.....as it was titled as a running 32 in the state it was purchased from. It needs a inside mirror and a windshield wiper to pass inspection if it was classified correctly and the inspector reads and follows the laws as they are, for what it is.
He has been unable to drive this car since Novenber of 2018!

 

Nope... gets to close to a political discussion and I get pretty damned political at times......
But this subject has been covered many times over the years with the same basic issues. Each state will decide what they allow and how the 'vehicle' is classified. Just because it passes in state 'X' does not mean that state 'Y' has the same laws/rules/classifications.
Unless/until a state legislature changes the rules then you play by the rules that exist. You do not have to 'like' the rules but, you will comply... If you don't like the way your car is classified then figure out how to reclassify it.
So, if buying a car from another state could be a problem then check the applicable statutes first. Just sayin......

.

 

If you were actually following this issue, it has been mentioned many times that "things" have been working in Wisconsin since the mid 1990's. The laws haven't changed. The Wisconsin State Patrol is just missinterpreting the laws. The DMV, well it's the DMV......a government agency. Might be that the clerk at the DMV typed in a wrong classification. To me it seems like Wisconsin's left hand doesn't know what it's right hand is doing......add to that it seems like some un-elected employees in Wisconsin government DON'T Like Hot Rods.

Monkey see monkey do.......coming to a state you live in soon?

 

A lawyer, or many lawyers will be needed to correct this "injustice", hope there's some cash left over for gas when it's all said and done.
-Dave

 

I know this will not set very well with a whole lotta folks. I think you should have fenders. fenderless vehicles and trailers pick up road debris and sling it and crack the windshields and do damage to oncoming vehicles. especially here in Arkansas. the hwy dept sprays hot sticky road oil on the roads and then covers that with a thin layer of washed stone called pea gravel. and those get in the tire treads and are catapulted at high speed. The Fact is driving upon the public roads is not a God Given right. It is a permitted privilege. So you are legally bound to comply with whatever laws your respective governing agency deems applicable.

 

I am surprised we are allowed to even own an old car at all here in California.

 

(1) Every motor vehicle originally manufactured after January 1, 1950, every homemade vehicle registered after January 1, 1975, and every vehicle registered as a reconstructed vehicle after March 1, 1996 shall be equipped with adequate fenders covering the front and rear tires to prevent splashing of water and throwing of gravel, stones or other objects.

Ok what am I missing? where would a replica fall on this list? The way I read it it would fall under the homemade vehicle section since it is glass on an aftermarket frame is there another section for streetrods not shown here

 

If you think the police or courts are misinterpreting any law. All you need to do is to have a member of the state legislature to request a opinion from the state attorney general. Here in Arkansas there was some confusion over a gun law. The State attorney General was asked for his opinion. Now we can open or conceal carry no permit needed.

 

It would appear to fall under both the Homemade and reconstructed vehicle catagorys?

 

Lawyers are a waste of time & money.

 

By Trans 305 standards, needs an inside mirror.

 

I'm surprised they haven't figured out an extra tax for it.

 

"Dodgeville Brad" needs our help ****JULY 1st 2019***
After reading the above posts, I'm not sure what we could do. It seems it was inspected to the wrong standards for some reason. That's just plain hard to back out of. I suggest that he add some bobbed rear fenders, cycle fronts, a half hood, some nerf bars, a wiper and the needed mirrors. If it has a heater, the defroster is no sweat and I'd try to negotiate away the windshield washer at re-inspection. It's not like it's a "period correct" car so maybe some of those additions could de-streetrod it and push it more toward Traditional styling.
Not trying to be a dick but in my experience, once your screwed it's damn near impossible to get unscrewed. As an old California hot rodder, many of us who ran fenderless with slicks had street tires and "slap-on" fenders at the ready to clear the many fix-it tickets they used to write us.

 

Does Dodgeville Brad's car have a fiberglass body? If It does and he cannot prove it was manufactured before 1950 he is required by law to have proper fenders.