Importing a used (nearly new) Mercedes from the USA to Canada

I am wondering if anyone has any experience importing a newer used Mercedes from the USA into Canada. I am looking at a 2 or 3 year old S or E-class Merc. and am wondering about the difficulty in bringing such a car into Canada. Given the favourable currency situation, it seems to make more sense to import than to pay the local dealers their crazy prices. Any insight into duties, shipping costs and general problems would be appreciated.

Larry B.

Toronto, Ontario

Reply to
Nukester99
Loading thread data ...

Take a look at

formatting link
Also note the VIN restrictions on certain S-class vehicles. Josh

Reply to
Josh

In the previous currency relationship a Canadian M-B dealer delivered "Canadian" cars to US buyers in border cities. Their claim was that the cars were built to "North American" specs and that only the gauges had to be reset from the metric standard. The car's warranty would supposedly be covered by MBUSA rather than MBCANADA. That's a point that I'd really check because one doesn't want to own a complex car with no manufacturer's warranty.

Reply to
T.G. Lambach

I took a look at the list and the VIN restriction for all 2001 to 2003 cars imply that you need to modify the bumpers to pass Canadian safety standards. Does anyone know how extensive this modification is?

Reply to
Nukester99

The warranty seems to be a north american warranty. At least my 2002 C-Class was that way. I certainly would want to be certain that I have coverage for a US vehicle in Canada. Again, If anyone has some insight and experience, please let me know.

Reply to
Nukester99

It's a well understood, fairly common and predictable procedure. It's easier for cars 15 years or older where you just drive up, pau gst and your off, because newer cars have to go through some extra crap but it's still well worth doing.

formatting link
I've done it three times. Recommended.

Reply to
Richard Sexton

Where is your threshold for "extensive" ?

1) Aquire Canadian bumpers. 2) Attach to car.
Reply to
Richard Sexton

The modification must be done at an authorized canadian Mercedes dealership. You can bet that it will be very expensive.

Reply to
mrelbe

Extensive to me means it is not worth the time, cost and effort to buy new bumpers and have a mercedes dealership install them. This could cost many thousands of dollars. This would negate most of the advantages from importing alone. There may be just a different mounting brackets required and this would be substantially cheaper. Have you imported a newer car and completed the mods required OR do you just import the older mercs? (better cars imho)

Reply to
Nukester99

Not a benz mech, and certainly not as knowledgable as 90% of these posters here, but, uh, are you suggesting that the crash test for cars in Canada is more stringent than here in the US?

Reply to
wolfpuppy

another thought...if you have an older benz, or any car for that matter, does it have to meet the requirements of a newer model? Of course, importing may negate any grandfather clauses. Here in the US, you don't even need a horn, if the car wasn't originally equipped with one, for example.

Reply to
wolfpuppy

Absolutely! that's common knowlege!

Reply to
Guenter Scholz

I stick with the old ones. Some of them are really in great shape.

And importing them couldn't be easier. Drive up, pay a little bit and you're on your way in 13 minutes. Teh faxing of the title to US customs for export control is a new pai in the ass, the line ups are huge, smelly and the customs guys there couldn't be bigger jerks.

The Canadian border folks are exacly the opposite. Lotsa fun.

Reply to
Richard Sexton

No. My 67 doesn't even have seat belts, let alone French instruments. It's a Euro so it does have kilometers though.

Reply to
Richard Sexton

Common to you, perhaps, but I didn't think anywhere on the planet was as sue-happy as here in the US, where tort lawyers have created more problems in more fields than you can imagine. You guys must hate lawyers even more than us.

Reply to
wolfpuppy

you mean like: How do you save a drowning lawyer? ......

take your foor off his head :-)

re common knowledge ... kidding.... here in Canada we do pretty much as you do in the good old US of A.

cheers, guenter

Reply to
Guenter Scholz

Actually, I like Canada. My wife and I have been up to Niagra a couple of times, not so much to see the falls (remember the movie National Lampoons Vacation with Chevy Chase, when he was in a hurry and got out to view something, bobbed his head a few times, and left quickly? Kind of what I did last time there) but to eat the food and drink blues. Like to pop up again soon; gettin' hungry and thirsty again ;-)

Reply to
wolfpuppy

The differnce being the loser pays the winners legal fees here; we have far far fewer dumb cases go to triel because of this.

I like layers. You wanna shoot all of them? Fine, but I'm keeping mine and you can argue the merits of your own case yourself.

Reply to
Richard Sexton

Well, that makes all the difference in the world, when the loser has to pay the legal fees of the winner. If that were the case here, we wouldn't have so many frivolous lawsuits, like suing over spilled coffee and such. It's because of these frequent ridiculous suits that liability costs are so high. Did you know that the average doctor has to pay around 100-200k dollars a year for malpractice insurance? And companies will generally always settle out of court over the lamest suits not because they feel they will lose but because they would be out 100k dollars defending themselves, so they take the cheapest way out, and, of course, pass the costs on to the consumer.

Reply to
wolfpuppy

Tsk..tsk..tsk, now. Just to interject one simple fact: believe not the MEdia! The media's portrayal of the McDonald's "hot coffee" case has been so in error as to render it unworthy of comment except to state that the myths are just that, myth. The restaurant had had many complaints, the burns were deep, the skin grafts numerous...blah, blah, blah. But that doesn't get attention for the mega-millionaire-media-mouths, whereas the deliberate mis-impression that's so prevalent did/does.

Having said that, however, there are US citizens whose constitutional rights are routinely trammeled asunder daily and not one attorney gives too hoots in hell. It must be some esoteric event to garner television cameras, etc. The legal system in the USA is so out of kelter that it is bound to go the way of GM and Ford as more people see it for what it is! Hint: it ain't about justice, unless you spell that "just-us". Frivilous lawsuits have become the norm. The more frivolity the better, because Tinsel Town is calling the shots.

Doctors, like others are a group who pay the price for what a few criminals do. So what's new? Medical malpractice is necessary to discourage murder! Sorry, but that's the way it is, and nothing gets attention like hitting the pocketbook. MD's played the stock market and lost! I'm not loosing one hour of sleep over their situation: they brought it on themselves. Medical malpractice is such a farce! Have you ever seen an MD at the food stamp office or sleeping under a bridge? Of course not, and you won't! They're whining about affording three Mercedes at a time instead of an entire fleet! Yeah, I know, the attorneys helped put them there, but the bottom line is that this is nothing but an argument between MDs and attorneys and it's a plot to take more from the non-lawyers and non-MDs. I've no sympathy or empathy for any of them! They don't do the work half the time anyway, but leave it to nurses and/or interns while they sip martinis and do another talk show or try in vain to create a new life form from bits and pieces from various of God's creatures.

Reply to
Helen

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.