I often will watch shows like Top Gear (UK), and wonder why so many of the cars they show aren’t available in the US - basically, what are the differences between US auto safety regulations and ones for the UK and Japan, as two prime examples. I can’t see that much of a difference between the three countries cars, so what about them makes it that they aren’t able to be sold in the US?
Beyond safety reasons, UK and Japan drive on the other side of the road so some cars aren’t designed to swap steering wheels. Most are these days but not all.
There are very different pollution standards that make certain engines not available in other countries. Crash standards are quite different, with many small cars sold in Japan and UK would never pass in the US.
I think almost any car could be re-designed with the steering wheel on the other side. The question is, do they expect the vehicle to sell well enough to justify the costs?
Otherwise, yeah, pollution and crash-worthiness standards are the big killers. Those ultra-cheap Tata cars they make in India will never, ever, see the shores of the United States because they’d be considered deathtraps here.
As far as safety regulations go (i.e. leaving aside emissions and other regulations) it does puzzle me that designs have to be modified so much to cross the Atlantic. From what I have seen, the US and Euro NCAP tests are quite similar. And yet, substantial modifications are often necessary. For example when Ford adapted the current Fiesta for the North American market, they spent ages redesigning the front end while trying not to spoil the lines.
Maybe it’s just that margins are so tight now that designs are optimised to a particular set of regulations (or, strictly speaking, recommendations, because Euro NCAP, at least, is not mandatory - good luck selling a car without a solid ENCAP rating, though).
Sometimes the safety regulations are just different - not more or less strict, just different. And this causes oddities. The US and EU can be out of step with one another, and not simply one being ahead of the other, just that different things get introduced at different times. I do note that some of the US crash tests are more strict - the EU crashes a car into a barrier made of a defined crushable material - effectively testing the car having a head on collision with an identical car. The US hits the test car with a moving mass - which represents an average car. The EU test means that small cars get an unreasonably high crash rating - because they are only tested hitting the equivalent of another small car. These cars will not do so well in the US tests. This could make a significant difference.
Engines differ between markets. The EU loves diesels. Also the EU has very expensive fuel. Both these things means that small more efficient cars and engines have an emphasis that won’t translate to the US. Pollution standards are pretty ubiquitous around the world now. Modern engine designs routinely exceed them by a significant margin.
As noted above, there are also classes of cars in the EU and Japan that you never realise exist until you visit. Tiny little death traps, tiny cars designed for very thin streets. They are never exported, partly because there is no use case, and partly because they would never pass many crash tests.
This is probably 99% of the correct answer. Just different.
European lighting is different and in generally better. Side repeaters turn signals are required, Rear turn signals must be amber (which has a proven safety benefit), side marker lights are not required, the headlight beam pattern is different, rear fog light required. Since amber turn signals, repeaters, and rear fog lamps are permitted in the US, and side marker lamps are permitted in Europe, you can get close to a universal except for the headlight beam.
I don’t think that is true. The Smart car sells in the US, and that has a relatively poor Euro NCAP rating, despite the fact the NCAP test favours lighter vehicles compared to the US crash test.
Also, the NCAP test is not necessarily less stringent than the US test, detailled analysis would be required to check that. Yes, it’s true the NCAP test only give a relative safety rating for similar size cars, while the US test gives an absolute rating. However, there are two vehicles in every head on collision. Driving a large, heavy car improves your own safety (if it’s crash-worthyness is engineered to the same standard as a smaller car), but increases the danger for other road users. A benefit of the Euro NCAP test is that it encourages efficient solutions to the problem of safety, rather than simply adding mass.
One big difference is that US standards don’t include pedestrian safety (mostly because the US DOT doesn’t know what pedestrians are). Otherwise, the tests are broadly similar (the Euro NCAP frontal impact test is at higher speed, while the NHTSA side impact test is at higher speed) now that the NHTSA has adopted the pole side impact test.
The NCAP ratings are not relative to vehicle size; a small car doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt. The ratings are relative in the sense that crash testing cannot account for differences in mass between crashing vehicles; that’s true of any crash test, however.
The Smart ForTwo actually has a 4 star NCAP score, and did basically the same in NHTSAtesting. The CityRover (the name the Tata Nano was sold in the UK under) was apparently never tested.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26444467/ns/business-autos/t/perfectly-safe-car-just-not-us/#.UPRH8FL4LIo
According to this article, the Smart was sold for 9 years elsewhere before it was modified (lengthened) in order to meet the US crash standards.
It wasn’t sold here for the first nine years because DaimlerChrysler thought nobody in the US would want one. I couldn’t find any direct quote from the Smart spokesman where he said that. I suspect he said something more along the lines of “we’re not worried about safety because the second generation model is longer”. They wouldn’t alter the design solely for the US market, since it’s very much a niche model here.
I’ve a thing for Euro-style city cars, and so I’ve owned a Smart Fortwo, Fiat 500, and currently a Mini Cooper S. From what I recall, the Smart was made longer to add reinforcements to the footwells, as US front impact test said the original would crush your legs in 45mph crash tests. The 500 was strengthened for side impacts and around the gas tank to the rear - the latter is why the Abarth only came in manual here, as the European models paddle-shift gearbox didn’t fit around the reinforcements. The Mini was designed for the US from the jump, which may explain why it’s the biggest of the three.
Thanks for the responses. Very interesting (at least to me 
)
Of course, a lot of the cars you see on Top Gear that aren’t available stateside are simply from carmakers that for a variety of historical reasons don’t have a presence in the US. Before the safety and emissions standards really got going in the 70’s, it was relatively easy for a foreign carmaker to start out with low volume in major markets and build from there. They also had a golden opportunity with the extremely poor quality cars Detroit was putting out at that time. These days, the certification process is so expensive that “dipping your toe” in the US market is nearly impossible-- you have to make a big commitment, which is a big risk. I would argue that Hyundai is the only company that’s really done it since the regulations went up. All the rest of the major import brands in the US market were already on the scene by the late 70’s.
As for why certain models don’t get sold here, another factor is that usually the cars missing from the North American market are ones that are smaller and cheaper and would undoubtedly poach sales from larger more profitable models. Americans are also not particularly tolerant of small underpowered cars, and so there’s a risk of blemishing the reputation of your entire car line by selling some miserable econobox.
Most car-makers think Americans are biased against smaller, cheaper cars, and don’t bother. Smart took a big risk on making the 2nd generation do-able for the US market and while there was a huge waiting list in the beginning, it looks as if everyone that wanted one has got one now.
And man, people are hostile about them. I drove a 60s Fiat that wouldn’t survive a crash with a skateboard, but when I had the Smart everyone wanted to know what I’d do if I were hit by a semi - because, you know, those 18-wheelers just bounce off a Camry. :rolleyes:
Ok, what are ‘side repeater turn signals’? I thought you meant side marker lights that flash out of phase with the regular ones, but you say side marker lights aren’t required(?) And what is a ‘rear fog light’? Just a more powerful back-up light? And do any new-ish US cars still use red rear turn signals?
The rear fog light is an extra or just extra bright red tail light. They are quite effective in fog but people seem to turn them on when not required and it ends up looking like they are driving around with a foot on the brakes.
A side repeater is like a side marker except that it only flashes when indicating and if off the rest of the time. A side marker is on whenever the headlights are on.
There is a fixed regulatory cost to certify a car for sale in a major market like the US. It’s substantial but not really a big barrier for an actual car company (as opposed to some fly by night Chinese tractor maker). Crash testing especially isn’t that big of a deal as 1) modern cars are pretty safe and 2) the regulatory requirements or a car to be sold aren’t very onerous. A lot of people are referencing various NCAP tests, but there is no requirement for a car to achieve any particular NCAP score to be sold, the NCAP scores purely a guide for consumers and the tests are voluntary. Lots of vehicles are not tested at all. IIRC The Hummer H2 has never been tested and has no NHTSA NCAP score, neither do a lot of iterations of Range Rovers and whatnot, the Land Rover Discoveries that I’ve seen tested usually fair quite badly. This is ironic as these are expensive vehicles that are often purchased due to their perception of being “safe”. All those shitty Chinese cars that got 0 stars on the EuroNCAP test are still being sold in Europe. The Nissan Versa, by far the most unsafe vehicle in North America and in its Chinese market iteration (which as far as I can tell is similar) actually gets worse scores on the Chinese NCAP test than many Chinese branded cars, sells in America by the hundreds of thousands every year because you can get them for like $9k brand new. For all we know a Hummer H2 or Range Rover might be even worse.
Anyway all the cars you see that are unavailable in the US tend to be some variation of tiny or diesel powered. All the Ferraris and other high powered shit the world are available for purchase in the US, mostly for much cheaper than their country of origin. They have to be as the US is the biggest consumer in the world for that kind of stuff, and it has the most open and free markets which drive prices down. Lots of tiny cheap cars aren’t sold in the US simply because large cars are so cheap and available, both new and used and these cars simply cannot command the kind of prices they would command in other countries when you can pick up a 2 year old ex-rental fleet Impala for $8k. Diesel adds an extra wrinkle because US emissions regulations for diesel are much more strict than many other countries, a perfectly reasonable thing since diesel emissions fucking cause cancer. This doesn’t make them unavailable, you can get all the diesel trucks and SUVs you want, but you’re not going to get a diesel Honda Civic because a small gas car is already on the edge of economic viability and making a diesel version that needs a bunch of expensive emissions equipment and a more expensive diesel engine will result in a car that costs thousands more and have 80hp. Again who would buy this over a very cheap used car? The price of diesel fuel in the US vs gas means that even on a large SUV it often doesn’t make much economic sense to go with diesel.
That’s true, but at least in Europe the NCAP programme is a de facto form of type approval. The Smart ForTwo had to be extensively redesigned following its poor showing (and its “elk test” problem) and the Rover 100 was discontinued altogether because of public response to its 0-star score.
Coming the other way I don’t see many US cars round in UK. I saw a Hummer the other day had to laugh really as it was fixing to go down a road i’d just negotiated and i knew the Hummer wouldn’t fit!