Home » Why Dealer Lobbyists Want To Bring Weird European Cars To Canada
- ByThomas Hundal
- April 25, 2025
- 11:51 am
- 66 Comments
ADVERTISEMENT
The car dealer lobby is a funny thing. Wealthy middlemen spending great deals of money trying to influence policy decisions, it can prove rather frustrating for consumers. While American dealer lobbyists are trying to ban legally imported kei cars state-by-state, the Canadian Automobile Dealers Association (CADA) just announced that they want to try to increase the availability of imported cars from Europe, Japan, and Korea by pushing for harmonized vehicle standards. Huh?
Yes, despite a shared border, there are some key differences between the Canadian and U.S. car markets. For one,Canada has no major domestic automakers to protect. There’s no homegrown equivalent of Ford or Volkswagen, and both American and Japanese automakers have extensive Canadian manufacturing footprints. The Honda facility in Alliston, Ontario is the global lead assembly plant for the CR-V, Toyota builds the RAV4 and the Lexus RX and the Lexus NX in Southern Ontario, the list goes on.
What Canada does have is a now unsteady trade partnership with the U.S. as tariff threats have upended a sense of normalcy. Since the days of the Auto Pact allowing free trade of cars between Canada and the United States, it’s made sense to align Canadian vehicle safety and emissions regulations with those of its closest trading partner. Now that roughly 60 years of free automobile trade has been partially upended, maybe it’s time for Canada to open up to other possibilities.
The current Canadian administration has already spoken about strengthening ties with Europe, and accepting UNECE-spec vehicles could allow for a whole bunch of glorious stuff to reach Canadian shores. Cars like the Fiat Grande Panda, the Hyundai Inster, and even Volkswagen’s forthcoming ID.2 already have dealer networks in Canada, they just need legislative approval and manufacturers willing to send them over should that approval come through.
Oh, and then there’s the non-electric stuff. Canadians tend to buy smaller cars than Americans, so models like the Volkswagen Golf, Ford Puma, Hyundai i20, Toyota Yaris and Honda Fit could have a market in Canada if they didn’t have to be modified for U.S.-led regulations. Granted, even if the lobbying were to work and Canada were to adopt UNECE safety standards, that doesn’t mean U.S.-spec harmonization would disappear overnight. Take a look at Mexico, a country that accepts UNECE- and FMVSS-compliant vehicles. It’s also worth noting that CADA presents a logical argument, with CEO Tim Reuss telling Automotive News Canada, “Do you really believe a vehicle that has been environmentally certified and deemed safe enough to be driven on a German autobahn … is not safe enough to be driven in Canada?”
ADVERTISEMENT
As for whether or not this push for change will result in anything actually happening, I’d say the chances are slim, even just judging by CADA’s other initiatives. The group calls for scrapping of zero emissions vehicle mandates, including the federal mandate to effectively go all-electric by 2035. Now, I like EVs, but with a federal mandate of a 20 percent zero-emissions vehicle sales mix for 2026 and an actual 2024 ZEV sales mix of 13.8 percent according to Statistics Canada, some sort of scaling back is a good idea. Maybe lower the target numbers closer to actual consumer demand and reintroduce long range plug-in hybrids to the end plan.
So far, there’s no sign that this will actually happen, just like how the dealers want an end to Canada’s luxury tax on cars over $100,000 Canadian (roughly $72,000 in greenbacks), a tax that made sense but really needed to be tied to CPI headline inflation. That’s probably not gonna happen. Oh, and lease protectionism wanting big banks to stay out of leasing vehicles? Yeah, that probably won’t fly. More options for consumers are good.
Still, with Canada looking beyond the United States for future trade,it’s not implausible that Canadian roads might feature a more interesting mix of cars in a few years. I say bring on the small cars, affordable EVs, and possibilities for Canadian enthusiasts looking to import currently forbidden vehicles. It’s about time.
Top graphic credit: Fiat
Support our mission of championing car culture bybecoming an Official Autopian Member.
ADVERTISEMENT
Enthusiastic Quebecers Might’ve Made Canada Run Out Of EV Rebate Money
Why The Audi TT And Audi R8 Look Totally Different In Canada
Canada Once Tried To Build A Tiny People’s Car So Cheap You Could Charge It To Your Credit Card
The Canadians Have Invented A $32,000 Lifted Three Wheel Adventure Bike And It’s Exactly As Silly As It Sounds
Toronto’s Talking Cop Car Is An Absolute Abomination Of Automotive Anthropomorphization
Please send tips about cool car things totips@theautopian.com.You could evenwin a prize!
- canada, Car Dealers, car laws, car tariffs, dealer lobby, Tariffs
Thomas is a Nu Rave-blaring, heel-toe downshifting, maple syrup-swilling, chassis-geeking, junkyard parts-hauling, floppy-haired Toronto-based scenester who's been writing about cars since college. His current fleet includes a 2006 BMW 325i with the six-speed manual gearbox, a 1999 Porsche Boxster with the five-speed manual, and a 2008 BMW 335i with the six-speed manual.thomas@theautopian.comInstagram: @thomas.hundalTwitter: @thomashundal
Read All My Posts »
PrevOlderHere’s The Engineering Behind Jeff Bezos’ $20K Slate EV
NewerOur 375,000 Mile Taxicab Crashed Into A Tree Before I Even Got To Touch ItNext
66 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JMJR
17 hours ago
As far as I’m aware, Canada doesn’t have a chicken tax, but because it would be so expensive to federalize small trucks just to sell to Canadians (~10% of the American market volume), we don’t get cool small trucks other countries allow.
I’m all for Canada accepting Euro federalization standards and giving us access to small, efficient vehicles that we’re not currently offered because they wouldn’t appeal to our southern neighbours tastes.
Canadians have always skewed slightly more European, with a greater percentage of drivers favouring manual transmissions, hatchbacks, and more practical vehicles.
Cars? I've owned a few
2 days ago
I like how the way you do the currency conversion from $CDN to “greenbacks.” American currency is boring to look at and being all the same size, impossible for blind people to differentiate a $1 bill from a Lincoln, a Jackson or a Benjamin. That and the artwork makes other paper/paperish currencies so much fun.
I keep a couple of Canadian $5 dollars, and 100 Mexican pesos bills in my wallet as mad money (in case I get deported) but normally reminders that I loved being in both of those countries and have fond memories of being in both.
And I have paper currency from a dozen or more countries that all added up to not enough to convert on the way out. Souvenirs.
When I was going to tip our interpreter roughly $100 in 1986 Russia, he asked me to go to a store and buy him a Panasonic boombox instead. I did and didn’t get detained, as I had in Moscow a week before for videotaping a line going around the block of people outside waiting to get inside of a liquor store.
Last edited 2 days ago by Cars? I've owned a few
1
Scott
2 days ago
All the cars pictured in this article are interesting to me (even the Inster, which is insteresting ;-)) but if they were all buyable here, I’d probably opt for the Grande Panda, or it’s more sedate platform-mate, Citroen’s eC3. A small, comfortable, practical hatchback EV for WELL UNDER $30K? Yes, please!
I can’t imagine that it’ll ever be economically feasible for many foreign manufacturers to come to return to American shores (Citroen, Renault, Peugeot, etc…). And I won’t hold my breath waiting for Dacia to give the States a try either. The U.S. will probably never adopt any sort of globalized/harmonized vehicle standards given the moneyed interests that have been at work/in control here for so many years (and I’m not alluding to lizard people, illuminati, or any such maligned group ;-)).
I WANT to be able to choose from EVERYTHING that a manufacturer makes when shopping for a car in America, and I’d like MORE manufacturers to sell here than is currently the case. At present, and for my personal needs, there’s literally only a tiny handful of new “American” models that I’d even consider… imports provide alternatives, and to me, THAT’S GOOD.
But that’s not the universe we live in, so…
1
Manwich Sandwich
2 days ago
“For one,Canada has no major domestic automakers to protect.”
Yes and no.
We do have automakers that build cars in Canada. And we do have Canadian automotive companies… but they’re making auto parts… the biggest being Magna.
So Canada DOES have automotive companies and local automotive-related production to protect.
But I’m all for bringing in more cars from the EU, Japan and Korea… particularly if it’s for one of the car makers that builds cars here in Canada (Honda, Toyota, GM, Ford, Stellantis).
I feel that Canada should offer car makers a deal similar to the old US-Canada Auto Pact:
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canada-us-automotive-products-agreement
Basically have a provision where for each car an automaker produces in Canada (with at least a minimum % of Canadian content), they can import one vehicle tariff-free from anywhere in the world
But one key difference should be that instead of limiting it to just a few automakers, make it open to any auto maker from any country.
So if a Chinese company wants to import vehicles duty free, they are welcome to set up a plant, produce some vehicles locally and import an equal number duty free.
And given that Honda, Toyota, GM, Ford and Stellantis already produce vehicles in Canada, Canada should recognize what they produce and give these existing automakers credit and allow them to import without tariffs the number of vehicles they produce locally.
2
Pilotgrrl
2 days ago
Oh, Canada! Fantastic idea, not that we’ll ever see it happen here. Elbows up, Northern friends.
4
EricTheViking
2 days ago
“…by pushing for harmonized vehicle standards…”
Canada was this –><— close in approving the legislation in 1999 or 2000 that would harmonise its CMVSS with UNECE WP.29 regulations (similar to what Australia has been doing with its Australian Design Rules).
What happened?
General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler screamed murder and threatened to shut down the Canadian manufacturing facilities if the legislation was approved. So, Canada backed down.
Why? The Domestic Three did not want Europeans or international customers buying up the vehicles built with WP.29 regulations in Canada and exporting them to Europe on the cheap when the exchange rate favours the Europeans. They did not want to be liable for the vehicles in Europe (that is why the grey imports do not have the manufacturer warranties).
Same with Mercedes-Benz USA getting all hissing fit in the 1980s with Americans importing the WP.29-spec vehicles and “modifying” them to “meet” the US regulations. In addition, the American product liability laws are one of most rigorous in the world. Regardless of how the vehicle ended up in the US, the manufacturers are still on hook if the vehicle blew up or caused crash due to technical defect.
United States was supposed to harmonise its FMVSS with WP.29 in the 1990s as part of World Forum for Harmonisation of Vehicle Regulations. Europe was willing to accept the side running lamps and retroreflective markers (with stipulation that the lamps and markers separate from the taillamps be amber-coloured). The only WP.29 regulations that United States accepted was headlamps with sharp horizontal cut-off and slope up to the right as well as “Z-beam”. The H4 bulb was recategorised as HB2 with “stricter built tolerance”. The headlamp reflector housing and glass lens were to be glued together instead of detachable lens (cost effective replacement).
United States ought to stop being a spoilt child and start harmonising its useless FMVSS with WP.29. This would lower the engineering and certification cost (reportedly by $2,000 per vehicle in the early 2000s). This would open up to more choices of vehicles, engines, and gearboxes for Americans.
10
Urban Runabout
2 days ago
Reply to EricTheViking
But we must protect our defenseless Shareholders and Oligarchs – No matter the cost!
Last edited 2 days ago by Urban Runabout
5
EricTheViking
2 days ago
Reply to Urban Runabout
What a really dumb comment! Why don’t you quit being a troll?
Urban Runabout
1 day ago
Reply to EricTheViking
I suppose sarcasm and irony are difficult to discern at 3am….?
5
Vanillasludge
3 days ago
No one person has even accelerated the death of an industry the way Trump has with the American automobile business.
He has managed to unite the entire world against American products precisely at a time when the Chinese have a raging hardon to sell their cheaper, better featured products to basically everyone.
Could he be the true Manchurian Candidate?
12
EricTheViking
2 days ago
Reply to Vanillasludge
Excuse me? Where did you get the news or op ed about Trump? Oh, yeah, The View, New York Times, and Washington Post as well as Rachel Maddow, the supposedly “gold standard” of “truthful” news reporting.
Trump has managed to secure more than $1.8 trillion worth of investments in the United States in less than three months. He also managed to secure more and more fair trade deals with the countries than Biden Administration could.
Of course, Chinese products are supposedly to be superior, cheaper, and “better featured”. Look at tofu buildings. Really great place to live, knowing that your apartment flat would unexpectedly go from 30th floor to ground floor in five seconds flat! Look at nickel smelting plants that China invested in Indonesia for electric vehicles. Really wonderful for the environment and health of Indonesian workers!
You are suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS).
Vanillasludge
2 days ago
Reply to EricTheViking
That cool-aid must be delicious.
5
Pappa P
3 days ago
I never thought I would side with an anti-consumer organization on any issue, but I fully support this initiative.
If the tariff/hostile takeover BS continues, most Canadian car buyers will be clamoring to purchase any vehicle not built in the US.
Last edited 3 days ago by Pappa P
11
Maymar
3 days ago
In light of US hostility, there’s been a few voices suggesting we need to open our market to China, which I don’t understand when there are so many cars from countries that haven’t tried to interfere in our politics available. I fully support this initiative.
8
M SV
3 days ago
Canada going dual standards makes sense. Mexico gets lots of interesting cars that the rest of north America is deprived of. A lot of those cars are even assembled in Mexico so assuming that portion of nafta or whatever it is now still exists could be some good deals for Canadians.
9
Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
3 days ago
Honestly sounds like a great common-sense idea!
I can understand feeling a need to keep things built to third-world safety standards out (though my libertarian side would still argue that), but I can’t see any real argument to keep out stuff from Europe!
Now, I do think we’re still closer culturally to the US than to Europe, so I wouldn’t expect that many Euro-spec cars to actually be popular here, but why not at least allow it?
I suppose the main people to lose here would be manufacturers selling in Canada that don’t have much European product they could send over, but really, who is that? American companies, I guess? I doubt we care what they think, and the European and Asian manufacturers would probably all gain roughly equally from this.
One annoying side-effect would be that any Canadians moving to the States in the future would have to check that their car is actually legal to export to there, though.
2
86-GL
3 days ago
Reply to Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
For what it’s worth, I have read that Canadians are somewhat more open to small cars than Americans.
Anecdotally, I live in rural northern Ontario, and for every 4×4 truck, there is a compact car. I feel like our area is crawling with Chevy Sparks, Trax, Trailblazers (the small ones) Ford Escapes, Ecosports, and Mavericks. Kia Souls as well. Still lots of Honda Fits around. We do get heavy snow, so the Subaru Crosstrek is incredibly popular.
4
Bracq P
2 days ago
Reply to 86-GL
The reality is still that Canada’s fleet has the highest fuel consumption, higher than the US’s
https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-markets/market-snapshots/2019/market-snapshot-how-does-canada-rank-in-terms-vehicle-fuel-economy.html
1
Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
2 days ago
Reply to Bracq P
That’s a very interesting statistic! I wonder what causes it. Is it just that everyone outside of southern Ontario and Quebec feels like they have to drive huge distances to get to the next city, and so they skew to larger, more highway-comfortable vehicles? Or just that people living in the “rugged North” psychologically feel like they need a “rugged” vehicle?
2
86-GL
2 days ago
Reply to Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
I think you would be correct. Most Canadians live in cities, but when they need a vehicle larger than a Civic, they tend to go straight for a big pickup truck or SUV. I’m generalizing of course, but I can think of like 25 friends or acquaintances who have done that exact thing.
1
86-GL
2 days ago
Reply to Bracq P
The average fuel economy numbers don’t lie, but they don’t necessarily tell the nuanced story of the mix or size of vehicles on the ground.
Car buying in Canada is very bi-polar, with compact & subcompact vehicles making up half the market, and SUVs and trucks dominating the other half. Small cars like the Hyundai Venue for example, sell much better in Canada as a percentage of the total population vs the USA.
Conversely, the USA still maintains a significant market for midsize sedans like the Accord and Camry, which despite their spacious size, can be impressively fuel efficient.
Another tell is countries like Peru. I visited Peru last year, and the country is positively crawling with small trucks and subcompact cars. That said, many of their active vehicles are decades old, and despite their size are not actually that efficient.
4
Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
2 days ago
Reply to 86-GL
Good point about the midsize sedans; those do seem a lot more common south of the border.
I guess another factor is just that people prioritize AWD a lot more here, so even if the exact same vehicles were being sold in the two countries, a higher AWD/4WD take rate in Canada would reduce our national fuel economy average somewhat.
1
86-GL
2 days ago
Reply to Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
For sure. Almost every truck is 4×4. I was visiting Mississauga the other week, and saw a Ford Transit AWD in Enterprise rental livery.
I always forget that many SUVs of all sizes were sold in 4×2 versions in the States. That’s basically unthinkable here.
2
Dogpatch
1 day ago
Reply to Bracq P
Cold weather makes for poor fuel economy…..
1
Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
2 days ago
Reply to 86-GL
Yeah, I’ve heard that too, and there’s probably truth to it, but I’m not convinced it’s that huge of a difference. One thing I do wonder about, though, is what it looks like in Quebec. If Anglo Canada copies the American culture we see in English media, does French Canada copy the European culture they might see in French media? I’m not really sure how that works, but I do recall hearing that small cars were especially popular there.
For what it’s worth, where I’m living in “urban” northern Ontario, I don’t feel like there’s much bias towards small cars. Lots of trucks, lots of midsize SUVs, a fair number of compact sedans, and a handful of subcompacts.
1
Bracq P
2 days ago
Reply to Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
There is a certain appreciation for the hot hatch or rally inspired setups in “la belle province”. Having driven from Halifax to Vancouver…I tend to think that cars are generally zippy and with small to medium footprint in the few urban areas, but the moment it gets rural, the pickup truck is king.
DENNISKFC
3 days ago
forgot about the alphabit soup of FMVSS and UNECE for a second, how about we switch it over to the metric system like the rest of the world? when the inventor of the imperial system had switch to metric and only USA, Liberia, and Myanmar officially uses it, it is time to let it go. but then changing the name to the Republic of U.S.A. to go along with the Republic of Liberia and the Republic of Myanmar does sound manacing. and Elon can build us some robotic storm troopers as the future of the imperial system!
Last edited 3 days ago by DENNISKFC
5
Jes Gagnon
3 days ago
Wait, don’t we already have the Golf, Yaris, and Fit in Canada? Or were those removed recently? We did have them!
Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
3 days ago
Reply to Jes Gagnon
No, I don’t think any of those are sold here anymore, except for the GTI/Golf R
2
Thomas The Tank Engine
3 days ago
Reply to Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
If the GTI/Golf R are sold in your country, surely a regular Golf can be too? Same crash performance etc.
Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
3 days ago
Reply to Thomas The Tank Engine
I’d assume so, yeah, but I think VW just decided that the market wasn’t big enough to warrant it. (Which seems like a pretty foolish decision to me!)
I think it’s exactly the same situation in the States?
This does seem to be a good example of a popular Euro-spec car that could be sold in Canada, but isn’t, and because of market factors rather than regulatory ones. Probably not a good sign for much actually changing if this proposal would go through.
2
RataTejas
3 days ago
I knew having that second passport would come in handy!
5
CSRoad
3 days ago
To quote somebody: No situation is permanent.
It is sounding like the 1960’s all over again.
Oh look there’s Lester Pearson and Lindon Johnson.
To me, now 50 years down the road it’s a whole different global ball game, politicians reversion dreams are fucked, the time of varying protectionist standards under the guise of safety and emissions should be over. Worldwide agreements on standards make sense.
ImissmyoldScout
3 days ago
The US needs to dump FMVSS and just go to UNECE. US automakers need to actually compete or die.
15
Paul B
3 days ago
Reply to ImissmyoldScout
One of the biggest hurdles going from UNECE to FVMSS is that FVMSS requires airbags strong enough to absorb a person not wearing their seatbelt. The other differences are generally minor enough to just have a few parts swapped for export to the US.
2
Jason H.
3 days ago
Reply to Paul B
…. and there is no reason for US standards to mandate airbags that restrain people not wearing their seat belts. It makes the car less safe for the vast majority of us that wear our seatbelts and makes cars more expensive.
(I got to see some of these requirements first hand when I worked for Delphi as was responsible for the M-Class dash assembly and center console. Crazy to see 6 different versions to meet different global standards)
11
SNL-LOL Jr
3 days ago
Reply to Jason H.
Those who chases after two hares, catches neither.
3
EricTheViking
2 days ago
Reply to Paul B
That was watered down for 1994 model year after the “killer air bags” had killed at least 130 people who didn’t fit in the “95-percentile” category, namely smaller women. NHTSA also mandated the “smart air bags” that can determine the weight of the person and adjust the explosive force accordingly. Lot of manufacturers protested because it would cost way too much.
The difference isn’t minor. NHTSA requires the frontal collision while WP.29 requires the off-side collision (which is more common in the real world driving experience). The amber turn signal indicators in the taillamps must have at least two square inch per bulb (no minimum size for red turn signal indicators). This was amended for the LED bulbs, but all of the LED bulbs have to be illuminated at the same time (so no sequential or gimmick blinking allowed). I can go on here…
Along with the bumper standards, motorised seat belts, shitty headlamps, and 85-mph speedometer, this shows how incompetent the people at US DOT and NHTSA are when it comes to regulating FMVSS. WP.29 were formulated by the teams of engineers.
4
Gubbin
2 days ago
Reply to Paul B
Interesting, I didn’t know that! I guess it’s because seatbelt mandates are a state-level thing and weren’t uniform when airbags were first mandated.
I’m still amazed by the number of news stories about crashes where the driver was ejected from the vehicle. (Note to self: check my Uninsured Motorist BI/PD coverage.)
Xt6wagon
3 days ago
Let’s ignore that Europe loves to put children in the rear crumple zone.
Ford didn’t, why the C-Max was a 2 row in America
1
Eggsalad
3 days ago
I could argue that the United States’ FMVSS is a form of trade protectionism.
17
Urban Runabout
3 days ago
Yet more proof that while the US plays stupid games thinking the rest of the world somehow needs us – The rest of the world are making other plans that do not include US.
11
SNL-LOL Jr
3 days ago
Forget the 51st State. Can we be the 11th Province instead?
16
Col Lingus
3 days ago
Reply to SNL-LOL Jr
GULF OF AMERICA!!! /s
2
SNL-LOL Jr
3 days ago
Reply to Col Lingus
We like to laugh but countries do that all the time. The Philippines always label South China Sea as “West Philippines Sea” for obvious reasons.
SCS wasn’t coined by the Chinese. It’d been in European maps for centuries. They already have their own Philippines Sea.
Who Knows
3 days ago
Reply to SNL-LOL Jr
I was going to say the same thing, where can I sign Colorado up to be the 11th province? Gimme my maple syrup too!
6
Cerberus
3 days ago
Reply to SNL-LOL Jr
I think US-occupied New England would go much better as part of Canada. The fascists don’t like us, anyway, and I don’t like paying for all their red welfare states with their outsized representation, either, while we have to beg to get our money back just to, say, build modern bridges used in support of an actual economy.
10
Ignatius J. Reilly
3 days ago
Reply to Cerberus
Minnesota is about as Canadian as you can get. We even have a foot in the door with the Northwest Angle! Screw all you southerners!
5
Christocyclist
23 hours ago
Reply to Cerberus
MA and VT here. We’d likely need a carve out for NH as they tend to be an outlier in New England. Interestingly the only New England state not to legalize cannabis
Cerberus
16 hours ago
Reply to Christocyclist
That’s why I like going there. Not that it made a difference to the vote, but I hugely regret buying into all of the positive arguments and voting in favor of legalization. What it has done now that I can’t go anywhere without smelling skunk ass is make me even more misanthropic, which I didn’t think was possible without taking the next step of founding a bio-lab with the sole purpose of creating a virus to wipe us all out. Maybe it’s just that I lack the resources to do so.
Dogisbadob
3 days ago
Yes. Time for harmonization, eh?
Mexico accepts both US and UNECE standards. No reason for US and Canada not to do the same.
14
Yzguy
3 days ago
Reply to Dogisbadob
At the very least, Canada should. Even if the assembly of vehicles for the NA market doesn’t miraculously disappear, manufacturers and dealer networks in Canada should be able to offer the buying public a wider choice of vehicles.
3
Jason H.
3 days ago
Reply to Dogisbadob
Two reasons:
- FFVSS is a non-tariff barrier keeping out foreign compitions
- Pride
The US should have gone to the metric system decades ago too but we stubbornly refuse to use logical units.
5
TheDrunkenWrench
3 days ago
TOYOTA.
HILUX.
GIMME.
Signed, a Canadian.
14
Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
3 days ago
Reply to TheDrunkenWrench
SUZUKI.
JIMNY.
GIMME.
Signed, another Canadian
11
TheDrunkenWrench
3 days ago
Reply to Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
I’d expect nothing less, given the Username.
4
Rebadged Asüna Sunrunner
3 days ago
Reply to TheDrunkenWrench
Yep, I think the Jimny is what comes closest to hitting the same points as the Tracker/Sidekick/Sunrunner/Vitara (Simple, small, reliable, fuel-efficient, body-on-frame, manual, 4×4), with better styling and an enthusiast-bait solid front axle, at the cost of giving up the convertible option.
Come to think of it, I wonder how much it would cost to import a Jimny should my beloved Tracker give out on me
4
Maymar
3 days ago
Reply to TheDrunkenWrench
SKODA.
OCTAVIA.
VRS.
WAGON.
GIMME.
Signed, a third Canadian.
8
Sklooner
3 days ago
I can haz Dacia Sandero to pickup maple syrup ?
7
Citrus
3 days ago
Given how toxic “made in the USA” is to Canadians right now, I imagine there are a lot of dealer networks desperate to have clearly non-US models available.
Also bringing over some French brands would be huge for Stellantis dealers in Quebec (and nowhere else).
21
Spikedlemon
3 days ago
Reply to Citrus
I would think French brands would do well elsewhere given the current track record of American trade – just look at the pushback in Canada against continuing to move forward with the F35.
Show off some Dassault Rafales next to the Citroen dealer.
4
Alexander Moore
3 days ago
Reply to Spikedlemon
Show off some Dassault Rafales next to the Citroen dealer.
I think you’ll find Renault makes a Rafale, not Citroën.
3
Guillaume Maurice
20 hours ago
Reply to Alexander Moore
yes, but the Renault one can’t be launched from Aircraft Carriers… While it’s been done for Citroëns ( Visa GTI advertisement )
1
Citrus
3 days ago
Reply to Spikedlemon
You’re right about how toxic the US brands are here right now, but I’m not sure how much anyone outside of Quebec wants a Peugeot.
Note that they will sell every single one they can import to Montreal, it’ll be on backorder if all of the infotainment is in French as default and it’s unnecessarily difficult to change it to English.
2
Maymar
3 days ago
Reply to Citrus
“I’m not sure how much anyone outside of Quebec wants a Peugeot.”
Obligatory “THERE ARE DOZENS OF US!”
8
Urban Runabout
2 days ago
Reply to Maymar
I would like a 308 SW Allure EV please – And I barely speak French at all.
2
Recent Posts
The ‘Bowling Ball Test’ Isn’t Real, But There Is Something Somewhat Like It: COTD
April 29, 2025No Comments
Monday Through Friday Maverick, Focus On The Weekend: Members’ Rides
April 28, 20252 Comments
I Drove The Quite Fast Chevy Blazer EV SS And It Made Me Question The Very Nature Of Cars And Fun
April 28, 202597 Comments
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
