Build date vs first reg

oz3litre · November 24, 2012, 11:35:59 PM

Just wondering what everyone's thoughts are on this. If your car was built in, say November 2001, but first registered and complianced in January 2002, would you call it a 2002 car on a personalised number plate, or a 2001? What is the official position on it? Would the model year of a car built late in the year like that actually be the following year?

colcol · November 25, 2012, 05:57:39 AM

If it was built in 2001, then its a 2001 car, rego has no effect on it, if its a popular car, then its registed, a few months after the build date, an honest description would say, 'built in November 2001 and first registed in February 2002', an example of this was the AU Falcon Lemon, they sat round in Dealers and Auction places for years until they could shift them, 'first built in 2001, and registed in 2005', if you see what i am getting at, how could you call it a 2002 model, when the build date is 2001?, Colin.

Evan Bottcher · November 25, 2012, 07:34:39 AM

I'd call it a 2001 car based on build date. Thats the date that it was being worked on in the factory, that's the interesting date. The cars birth year if you like. Compliance date isn't very interesting. My 2c.

MD · November 25, 2012, 10:29:42 AM

Build date, released date and registered dates all have different connotations. We can all appreciate what the build date and the registered dates mean. However the release date could be recognised as the build date because no model was ever released in between and so therefor the effective "build" date is the released date and accordingly the current model of the year irrespective when the ACTUAL build date took place.

In practice given shipping times, distribution times, getting ADR's if necessary etc could mean 6-8 months of delalys and hence moves a September model into April model of the following year.

So for example we have build date 1999 but a 2000 Model. Happens all the time.

Steve S · November 25, 2012, 10:42:33 PM

My 147 was sold and registered July 2002 but built in 2001. It was documented as a 2001 but classified an MY2002 ( I think they were only offered for sale from 2002?)

This is the way I see it. The "year" or model year is 2001, which represents the model of the car. Like the chassis number, it is a technical specification only. It should be classified MY2001.

The "age" of the car is referenced to 2002 since, regardless of the build date, the car is still brand new and does not encounter any wear up untill it is actually sold and then used. Most items, not just cars are manufactured some time before they are sold to the end user. If it were a TV, it would be "new" from the date you bought it.

So I think it should be a 2002 Alfa 147 (MY2001).

A good friend of mine in NZ is a Fiat/Alfa dealer and he just about fell off his seat when I told him cars here are documented by thier build year. Over there all documentation is as of the sale date or registration date. He said they would not be able to sell for example, a December 2001 build car in January 2002 if it were to be documented as a 2001 for full price. Buyers would just find a current year car to buy which is a little crazy. Dealers would not risk buying stock at the end of the year. The final process of a pre delivery is to reset the odometer to zero before the new owner pics it up. They usually have up to 30-40km on the clock by the time they are sold.

aggie57 · November 26, 2012, 07:08:24 AM

Many European manufacturers build cars by model year. Typically The "year" starts after the August factory shutdown. So a car built in September or October is often MY20'+1'. That is, built sept 2001 but MY2002. Very common. It's driven by the US market.

When it is registered is totally irrelevant except to the anxious first owner who wants to protect its resale value.

Example - my 911 is a MY2009 car. Built August 2008, first registered May 2009. I'd happily accept ot being called a 2009 car but it's not, it's a 2008 car.

oz3litre · November 26, 2012, 01:01:19 PM

Interesting discussion guys. Thanks. The TV analogy is a good one. It is tricky when you know the build date of the thing and it is different from the sale date. With TVs we don't worry about it because we don't know when they were built. Even though aggie57's Porsche was built in August, 2008, it was a new car in May 2009 and on top of that is a 2009 model. My daughter's Alfetta GTV is a good example because it was built very late in 1981, but it has all the bits of a 1982 car. It is clearly not a 1981 model. It gets more ridiculous with our 164, which was built mid 1990, but first registered in 1992. The fact that it wasn't driven for two years makes it very different in terms of wear and tear from a car that was built and driven in 1990. In this case the car has the bits of a 1990 model, not a 1992. Chronologically it is 22 years old, but wear and tear wise it is only 20 years old. How does all this affect insurance? There is probably no definitive answer to this conundrum.

Craig_m67 · November 26, 2012, 06:19:56 PM

New is factory fresh - three months tops. It only takes six weeks to ship a car around the palnet, clear customs etc.

I had a Series3 Sprint that was built late 1985 with Australian compliance noted as early 1988. Didn't bother me as i was the second owner (1991 40Ks), however i wouldn't have bought it new, it clearly wasn't. Any issues should have been addressed under warranty. It was always, in my mind (and everybodys after) a 1985 car, with all the age related issues belts, tensioners, fluids, tyres, RUST etc that came with that.

It passed away after 430K hard kilometres; one clutch, a water pump, a head gasket and a front wheel bearing oh, and several second gear synchros. Only rust was in the roof around the tailgate washer. Cracks in the inner wings/chassis rails killed it.

Loved that car.

colcol · November 26, 2012, 10:22:44 PM

It used to be a big deal years ago when used cars were worth something, like a 2 year old car would be worth more than a 3 year old car, so you would gild the lilly a bit, when dealing with spare parts, recalls and rogo, you usually go off your chassis number as opposed to saying you have a 2002 156, because it could be a twin spark or JTS, to add confusion, and cars sitting round for years before being sold is not a good thing, as the oil seals can dry out and the cam belts cold weld themselves to pulleys and tear themselves to pieces on startup, Colin.

oz3litre · November 26, 2012, 10:43:27 PM

Quote from: colcol on November 26, 2012, 10:22:44 PM
and cars sitting round for years before being sold is not a good thing, as the oil seals can dry out and the cam belts cold weld themselves to pulleys and tear themselves to pieces on startup, Colin.

I wonder what they did about the cambelts in the 164s that sat around for two years in terms of the replacement interval. If they went from the date of sale the belts would have been two years past their use by date when the three years came up. Did they have some failures?

ANG156 · November 27, 2012, 09:18:27 PM

What happens when you see a car you want to buy and its advertised as a 2007 model but on the rego it's stated as 2006 (the build year) but the compliance date is 2007? What year would you say the car is and what would it be sold as, 2006 or 2007?

In my opinion it really is an issue especially on the secondhand market when a situation like the above arises. I know most dealers go off the compliance date for brand new cars in order to to keep things current. Year of first registration doesn't mean anything to me. I only go off build an compliance date.

John Hanslow · November 28, 2012, 07:47:25 AM

In some instances Alfas are produced for Australian delivery post mid year holiday. Say August build and then imported to Australia through usual process to distributor and then for sale by the dealer.

So by the time the car hits the showroom, it could be December or more likely January the next year.

Cheers

aggie57 · November 28, 2012, 08:03:55 AM

Quote from: ANG156 on November 27, 2012, 09:18:27 PM
What happens when you see a car you want to buy and its advertised as a 2007 model but on the rego it's stated as 2006 (the build year) but the compliance date is 2007? What year would you say the car is and what would it be sold as, 2006 or 2007?

In my opinion it really is an issue especially on the secondhand market when a situation like the above arises. I know most dealers go off the compliance date for brand new cars in order to to keep things current. Year of first registration doesn't mean anything to me. I only go off build an compliance date.

That car would be a 2006. MY2007 is marketing, and dealer tells you whatever they need to maximise the price, compliance is Govt admin. Still a 2006 car.

MD · November 28, 2012, 08:07:11 AM

...so for buyers in the second hand market looking to ensure the vehicle has had minimal use and represents the best opportunity of buy a good one should have the first registration date as a primary consideration as it is the best reflection of how much actual use the car may have had.

aggie57 · November 28, 2012, 01:26:06 PM

Quote from: MD on November 28, 2012, 08:07:11 AM
...so for buyers in the second hand market looking to ensure the vehicle has had minimal use and represents the best opportunity of buy a good one should have the first registration date as a primary consideration as it is the best reflection of how much actual use the car may have had.

but not how its been looked after.....