SEMA Action Alert - CA

[Steve1968LS2]

And for you guys in other states.. if this passes here it will eventually happen in many other states as well. This is just a stepping stone to making ALL cars, regardless of age, non-exempt from emmision testing.

---------------------------

California Bill to Require ANNUAL Emissions Tests for Vehicles 15-Years Old and Older Passes Assembly; Moves to Senate

Legislation (A.B. 616) to require annual Smog check inspections for vehicles 15-years old and older has been approved by the California Assembly and has been sent to the Senate for consideration. The bill would also require that funds generated through the additional inspection fees be deposited into an account which can be used to scrap older cars. You may recall that in 2004 a new law was enacted in California to require the lifetime testing of all 1976 and newer model-year vehicles. Pre-1976 motor vehicles would remain exempt under A.B. 616. The bill has been now referred to the Senate Transportation Committee.

We Urge You to Contact Members of the Senate Transportation Committee (List Below) Immediately to Oppose A.B. 616

A.B. 616 ignores the minimal impact vintage cars have on air quality.

A.B. 616 could entice vintage car owners into allowing these vehicles to be scrapped.

A.B. 616 ignores the fact that vehicles 15-years old and older still constitute a small portion of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to look for emissions reduction.

A.B. 616 ignores the fact that classic vehicles are overwhelmingly well-maintained and infrequently driven.

A.B. 616 would increase costs by creating an annual inspection fee for owners of these vehicles.

A.B. 616 represents another attempt by California legislators and regulators to scapegoat older cars.
Please contact members of the California Senate Transportation Committee immediately by phone, fax or e-mail to request their opposition to A.B. 616.
Please e-mail a copy of your letter to [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance.

Senate Transportation Committee

Senator Alan Lowenthal (Chair)
[email protected]
(916) 651-4027

Senator Tom McClintock (Vice Chair)
[email protected]
(916) 651-4019

Senator Roy Ashburn
[email protected]
(916) 651-4018

Senator Gilbert Cedillo
[email protected]
(916) 651-4022

Senator Ellen Corbett
[email protected]
(916) 651-4010

Senator Robert Dutton
[email protected]
(916) 651-4031

Senator Tom Harman
[email protected]
(916) 651-4035

Senator Christine Kehoe
[email protected]
(916) 651-4039

Senator Joe Simitian
[email protected]
(916) 651-4011

Senator Tom Torlakson
[email protected]
(916) 651-4007

Senator Leland Yee
[email protected]
(916) 651-4008

[CraigMBA]

Do you really care about annual inspections of the fleet of 1989 Ford Crown Vics on the road?

It doesn't state that it repeals existing law on pre 1975 cars. Does it?

[zbugger]

...It doesn't state that it repeals existing law on pre 1975 cars. Does it?

Read this...


You may recall that in 2004 a new law was enacted in California to require the lifetime testing of all 1976 and newer model-year vehicles. Pre-1976 motor vehicles would remain exempt under A.B. 616.

Still exempt. But I'd now have to spend another $50 a year at least to smog my daily driver. And then another when I get my Camaro back on the road. These legislators just suck at their job. They should do some research and actually find the percentage of cars older than 15 years old that are actually on the road. Figure that out, and you can control things better rather than just blanket everything.

[69TAPoser]

Do you really care about annual inspections of the fleet of 1989 Ford Crown Vics on the road?

It doesn't state that it repeals existing law on pre 1975 cars. Does it?

"California Bill to Require ANNUAL Emissions Tests for Vehicles 15-Years Old and Older Passes Assembly."

So I am reading it wrong?

Phil

[69TAPoser]

Nevermoind, got it. Missed the prior exemption wording. :bicycle:

But you have to know that pre-'75 vehicles will be next on the hit list if this passes.

Phil

[CraigMBA]

"California Bill to Require ANNUAL Emissions Tests for Vehicles 15-Years Old and Older Passes Assembly."

So I am reading it wrong?

Phil

That's why I asked for clarification. I tried to find the specific bill and was unsuccessful at getting a good answer.

SEMA yells fire a lot. Most of the time there are fires. As far as I'm concerned everything 1995-1975 needs to get smogged every year. You wouldn't believe some of the stuff that's out there.

I am no tree hugger, but IMO I get something out of the clean air laws. To me, it makes sense to try to enforce them on cars that are most likely to violate them. Much the same way it doesn't make any sense to require my 89 year old grandmother to take her shoes off at the airport, or the recent recall of pet food that wasn't gluten related.

[CraigMBA]

But you have to know that pre-'75 vehicles will be next on the hit list if this passes.

No, I don't know that. Don't ASSume anything. Ask questions instead.

I seriously doubt they will go after pre '75. Frankly, it doesn't add up to much in the big swing of things clean air related.

[CraigMBA]

I have a customer who recently retired his 1989 Honda Prelude that he bought new. It had a funny Honda carburator that was worn out. The car ran okay, but it refused to pass smog. The last time it passed was 2000. He continued to pay the tags and insurance on it, even though it wouldn't pass smog. He'd get pulled over about once a year and explain to the cop (who was totally confused at this point because the car showed current regestration on the PO's computer) that he couldn't get it smogged and he was "working on getting parts". He finally sold it to Pick a Part and bought a new Toyota.

THIS HAPPENS A LOT. HE is who they are trying to get off the road.

Apparently it's not illegal to drive with expired tags if you pay the fee and don't mind getting pulled over from time to time.

[Steve1968LS2]

Do you really care about annual inspections of the fleet of 1989 Ford Crown Vics on the road?

It doesn't state that it repeals existing law on pre 1975 cars. Does it?

This is sorta like the tale where they came to take the jews but that didn't affect me so I didn't care. Then they came to take the next group and I didn't care.

When they came to take me there was nobody left to care.


This is just a step toward thier ultimate goal of repealing the exemption deal. I could see them changing it from '75 and older to '69 and older.. then '65 and older.. and so on.

It's called the "slow burn" where they creep up on thier agenda.

[Steve1968LS2]

I seriously doubt they will go after pre '75. Frankly, it doesn't add up to much in the big swing of things clean air related.

with the 'global warming' hysteria in politics I wouldn't bet on it.

[CraigMBA]

This is sorta like the tale where they came to take the jews but that didn't affect me so I didn't care. Then they came to take the next group and I didn't care.

A little hyperbolic don't you think?

You're out of line.

[Steve1968LS2]

A little hyperbolic don't you think?

You're out of line.

It's an analogy.. we shouldn't "not care" because it doesn't yet affect us.

That was the point.

[Steve Chryssos]

Aren't they still trying to outlaw Carbon Dioxide in California? Brilliant.

[CraigMBA]

It's an analogy.. we shouldn't "not care" because it doesn't yet affect us.

That was the point.

Understood. But using the death of six million innocent Jews as an equivlent to some slippery slope "The Government is out to get Us" argument by making smog inspections annual instead of bi-annual on cars that are likely the biggest contibutors to the problem is way out of bounds.

The state of California has a real problem getting certain areas to comply with Federal Clean Air Act requirements. Most of them are in areas of the Southern San Joaquin valley. The government is trying to clean this up. They are not trying to take your rights as an automotive enthusiast away, but may if you don't get involved in a proactive mannar.

SEMA's idea of being proactive is to stop all legeslation cold by stirring up the masses. Bad idea. How about getting the masses involved by edumcatin' on what the problem really is?

Naw, screw it. Just stir up the sheeple instead. Then listen to them complain when they get a half baked piece of junk legeslation instead of getting them involved to fix the problem.......

[zbugger]

...Apparently it's not illegal to drive with expired tags if you pay the fee and don't mind getting pulled over from time to time.

Actually, it is. I got pulled over three times, twice in the same day, and got three fix-it tickets. I had to get the car smogged and show the officer registration, proof of insurance, and proof of smog certification if I got pulled over again. Even then, I could have still gotten a ticket for driving an unregistered vehicle. As for the customer you mentioned, that doesn't happen as often as you think.


I seriously doubt they will go after pre '75. Frankly, it doesn't add up to much in the big swing of things clean air related.

They already have. They wanted to have everything 45 years old tested at one point. That meant you'd be smogging a 1958 Chevy when they first wanted to pass that. Jay Leno got involved and that one fell through.


Aren't they still trying to outlaw Carbon Dioxide in California? Brilliant.

Just to warn you, New York state is trying to follow closely in our footsteps...

[mdprovee]

Why not go after the big corporations that pollute. No they get pollution credits for doing this and/or crushing that, and dont have to clean up their act.

Why is that? Cant tell me that a little money to the election fund doesnt help.

[Steve1968LS2]

Aren't they still trying to outlaw Carbon Dioxide in California? Brilliant.

lol.. yea, they would ban cars if they could.. and everyone must hold thier breaths for one hour each day.

Gotta save the Earth.. ;)


Why not go after the big corporations that pollute. No they get pollution credits for doing this and/or crushing that, and dont have to clean up their act.

Why is that? Cant tell me that a little money to the election fund doesnt help.

Or the trucks coming over from Mexico belching smoke?

[Steve1968LS2]

Understood. But using the death of six million innocent Jews as an equivlent to some slippery slope "The Government is out to get Us" argument by making smog inspections annual instead of bi-annual on cars that are likely the biggest contibutors to the problem is way out of bounds.

The state of California has a real problem getting certain areas to comply with Federal Clean Air Act requirements. Most of them are in areas of the Southern San Joaquin valley. The government is trying to clean this up. They are not trying to take your rights as an automotive enthusiast away, but may if you don't get involved in a proactive mannar.

SEMA's idea of being proactive is to stop all legeslation cold by stirring up the masses. Bad idea. How about getting the masses involved by edumcatin' on what the problem really is?

Naw, screw it. Just stir up the sheeple instead. Then listen to them complain when they get a half baked piece of junk legeslation instead of getting them involved to fix the problem.......

Ok, substitue "plaid people" for the term "jews"...

It's actually an old saying (pertaining to WWII) that I paraphrased... but the point is the same. Sometimes LARGE changes are made from many small steps so that people don't notice or care.

[Larry Callahan]

Thanks for posting that Steve. I was working on this on my lunch break and was just about to paste it when I found yours. Now, It's time to start calling people.

I can't beleive we are having to do this again.

[trapin]

How exactly can you require a car to be smog legal that was not built in the era of emmisions standards? Would the guy in the big block '69 Chevelle have to put Catalyatic Convertors on his duel exhaust?

That's about the dumbest sh*t I ever heard in my life. Who are these idiots?

[Ralph LoGrasso]

Just to warn you, New York state is trying to follow closely in our footsteps...

We already have this law?

In New York State, anything newer than 1977(?) has to be inspected for safety and emissions every single year. You guys have it made with the bi-annual inspections/smog that you've got currently.

[EFI69Cam]

How exactly can you require a car to be smog legal that was not built in the era of emmisions standards? Would the guy in the big block '69 Chevelle have to put Catalyatic Convertors on his duel exhaust?

That's about the dumbest sh*t I ever heard in my life. Who are these idiots?

Duel exhaust, is that when they fight each other :enguard: ?

(jk)

[CarlC]

Nah, the dumbest thing about about the whole smog deal is that it totally disregards improvements made by the owner.

For example, if you put a non-factory carburetor on that is not CARB exempt, it's illegal. It does not matter if it runs cleaner and uses less fuel.

Another idiotic law is the engine swap requirement. Legally, if I put a 2002 LS1 engine in my car I have to use every smog related feature used in the 2002 car. Nevermind that it's 100 times cleaner than the original engine after I gut out the ever-necessary gas tank vapor canisters, I have to use EVERYTHING to be legal and it must pass the 2002 LS1 smog test. Dumb Dumb Dumb.

To me the smartest thing California, and any other state, could do for the automotive enthusiast and the taxpayer is to make it a tailpipe-only test based on the year and smog requirements for original chassis. Pass the sniffer, and see-ya-later.

[WS6]

That's about the dumbest sh*t I ever heard in my life. Who are these idiots?

They're California. Don't you know the world revolves around California and everything they do?

I could never live in California. The weather isn't that nice.

I have to agree with Carl though. My thought are exactly the same thing. It only matters what is coming out the tailpipe, so why not simply test that?

[toxicz28]

We already have this law?

In New York State, anything newer than 1977(?) has to be inspected for safety and emissions every single year.

Ahh! You must move to the north young man! The closest thing to a smog check up here, for now, is '96 and newer gets plugged in to make sure there is no SES light. No sniffer, not at all.

[nancejd]

I wouldn't mind this kind of stuff so much if all the legislators and people that support this junk volunteered to have their cars crushed first.

[MonzaRacer]

OK,
Here goes. Any car with OBD II (Onboard Diagnostics Second Generation) gets a pass IF the SES light is off AND all of the "monitors" hhave passed.
Reason is that the second generation version is set up to turn the light on IF the system checks and sees the results screwed up at 1 anad a 1/2 times the FTP standards.
They are assuming that with EO parts or stock parts that the car isnt emitting any poloution into the atmosphere.
Now this is also the emissions from the fuel storage system too.
So if you trash the vapor recovery your emitting unburned hydrocarbons into the atmosphere WHICH DOES MAKE SMOG WORSE, and the several gallons of gas lost every year by evaporation does amount to a lot in some respects.
I/M 240 results in a car being in a closed sealed booth and running for 240 seconds in a test pattern so as to ascertain if the complete car is emitting raw fuel.
Honestly there is nothing wrong with emissions devices in some respects, its been proven that cats (if properly matched) do not hurt performance. An EGR valve in the grand scheme of things does nothing more than help NOX production and quell spark knock to a point allowing the engine to retain spark timing advance hence making it more efficient.
Now I have asked several people who should care this question,,,What iff you could buy a custom vapor recovery/carbon canister, that minimally effects the looks and doesnt in anyway hurt performance,,, would you purchase one and maintain the system if it got you through a test station with a pass and providing your engine passes a pipe sniffer test?
The system doesnt hurt performance and unless your car has a fuel soaked carbon canister or millions of vacuum leaks IT ACTUALLY HELPS WITH MILEAGE.
A friend of mine built a street rod from his wrecked last year Camaro and wondered why his mileage went down 4 mpg when the car was so much lighter.and he couldnt get the check ngine light to stay off even with tons of retweaking.
so I went over and ask where certain lines went and he just looked at me like I ask what the composition of the moon was.
So since the car had the Camaro tank in it and the complete harness installed, I simply took the canister and solenoids and hid them on the car and hooked up the emissions (only thing not on car at that point was cats) I pulled out my new Snap-On Solus and cleared the codes, chased a few bad grounds and installed a simulator for the rear O2(all the rear o2 does is make sure the cat is there and functional) and tada after about 3 days the car had passed ll "monitor tests" and the light was out.
All for 5 lbs of parts that raised his mileage up 3 mpg(I figure his spirited driving got the best of him) AND he had no lights on and no emissions parts missing or inoperative.
And his car even dang near passed a tail pipe test with out cats.
He called Random Technologies and got 2 new 3 way cats for it.
We fabbed up some heat shields and removed his crappy stainless "streetrod mufflers" (ie glass packs) and low and behold the car sounded meaner.
Now to let you understand some things. Evap simply means it uses a vacuum or small air pump to pull the hot fumes from the tank into an activated charcoal canister, then when it assumes the tank/fule/system is cool enough,, it closes. Then after you start the car it uses a small amount of engine vacuum to pull the unburned fuel in and burns it.
Now as your engine starts it, if it has heated O2 sensors, they get up to the required 600 or degrees real fast, and the computer takes over managing fuel by reading the amount of air (either by MAF or speed density)ingested, injects the computed amout of fuel required to run the engine at the controled or requested rpm, sniffs the outcoming exhaust and thinks a nano second ,does some math, calles a friend the injector driver and says "hey less fuel dummy" and the injector does this. No all the while the ignition is sparking when told and that part of the sytem is listening to its bug (the knock sensor) to see if anybody is going where they shouldnt ,(ie is the fuel getting a chance to ignite too soon)and if its going ok its not doing anything but if it hears something it does the two steps back one step forward, all the while it is listening/timing a pause between the retards or advances (ok here is what happens if the ign/computer arent getting any knock it keeps adding timing a degree or 2 at a time till it sees this then the knock strategy comes in and pulls out some timing, and waits listening and counts, then when that timmer is over it listems to the knock sensor more closely, then if its ok advances the timing again if it still hears knock it pulls more timing out.All doing this and keeping the engine perfectly advanced at all times/loads.
Now for the more EPA minded cars the knock sensor and computer calibration add just enough old burn gasses in to "cool" or dilute the mixture so as to NOT create NOX (Oxides of Nitrogen) which causes a lot of traffic smog problems.
And remeber this thing is doing this on the order of 30 or 40 times a second constantly correcting your fuel ,spark and evap/EGR to optimum settings.
Yess they could get more aggresive with the WOT tuning but this stuff is for the masses not Joe Hot Rodder.
This is why the LS7 is a 11/12 second screamer AND gets good mileage AND passes a sniffer test.
BUT to get back to it if you could add on a $250 to $500 "kit" and get better mileage (results may vary due to driver technique)and keep unburned fuel in the car to be used,,,would you buy it?
And if the car community would take it upon themselves to make thier cars cleaner and prove it periodicly (I agree the system has flaws and costs too much but,,,, till a smart non politition gets ahold of it ,,,) then MAYBE some of these government types might let some of the crap go.
Or if someone won the lottery and ran a calss action suit against one or more companies that pollute and use emission credits to get by, then maybe we wouldnt have to work so hard to protect out favorite hobby/toy/sickness.
To be honest as a certified tech I know just how lame the systems of yesteryear where and how honestly simple and effective they current ones are if they are installed/maintained properly.
No the evap system gets even simplier if you use a returnless system like newer cars do as it isnt returning hot fuel into a cold tank to make more fuel vapor.
But they did a study some where using all of the registered cars, in California, 15 yrs old or newer ,and figured them putting out (in theory) right at the spec max out put for a year and then figured one of the dirtiest industrial plants in California (government registered specs as they had to be tested so they knew how many credits they would need)smoke stack out put and just measured the same components that came out of the stacks (ie if your car isnt emitting polybutylhexapropalene or some such crap into the air you may not need some polution credits)that CO,CO2,HC,NOX,O2 (ie 5 gas )and the factory was produceing approximately 1700times all of those 15yrs or newer CA registered cars per day, worth of polution, not including the other noxious polutants.
But if they crushed approx 300 cars per day , they didnt have to do anymore clean up,,,and they get to keep the funds from the srapping.
Now we all used to say that fine if they have old cars with nice, useable parts let us salvage them and any good useable restorable cars rather than waste the money/emissions already invested in production of that car/part.
But no thats to simple and smart and makes too much sense.
Wasnt it HotRod or PHR one one of them that saved a 67 Camaro from the crusher that requires less than $100 to get into emission spec for late 80s spec,,, without cats?
still I think if we as a community did more to make a point that we are helping/protecting the environment it might get noticed.
Oh well.
Lee

[Ralph LoGrasso]

Ahh! You must move to the north young man! The closest thing to a smog check up here, for now, is '96 and newer gets plugged in to make sure there is no SES light. No sniffer, not at all.

Since 2005 all OBDII ('96 +) vehicles receive the "plug-in" diagnostics to make certain there are no codes. There is no sniffer test. This is nice, beause with programs like HP Tuners, one can remove entire systems from their car (e.g. rear '02 sensors) and "pass" the OBDII test.

'95 and older (I think to '77) receive the old-school sniffer test, which they've had as far back as I can remember (although, that's not too far back, haha!)

I wish L.I. would adopt northern NY automotive legislature

[Damn True]

That's about the dumbest sh*t I ever heard in my life. Who are these idiots?

Liberals Tony. They are liberals.

[MrQuick]

Right now the cut off looks like it will be 1973 and newer. Still working on them. Lets see how SEMA does.

[CraigMBA]

Right now the cut off looks like it will be 1973 and newer. Still working on them. Lets see how SEMA does.

That's a change from existing law where the cutoff is 1975.

[jknight16]

...All the while, just one state away in Arizona, the state government recently set its own precedent of sorts by exempting all vehicles 15 years and older (on a rolling basis) that have collector car or limited use insurance policies. Went into effect at the end of April 2007, and completely saved me, since prior to this any vehicle 68 or newer had to get smogged.

Now I just have to find a decent priced collector's insurance policy for someone under the age of 25...

[6'9"Witha69]

Now I just have to find a decent priced collector's insurance policy for someone under the age of 25...Yeah, when my buddy was at the Phoenix UTI in 2000 he worked for the state smog station near there. He told me he had to fail a '70 Super Bee over and over. Try as the owner might, he couldn't get it to pass. As Californians we thought smog laws were crap then, that opened my eyes a little.

And yes, the tree huggers are trying to make everyone drive a prius or use electric trains. We need to resist this type of legislation but as MonzaRacer said we still need to do what we can, otherwise we become as closeed minded and fanatical as the people we are fighting.

[toxicz28]

Since 2005 all OBDII ('96 +) vehicles receive the "plug-in" diagnostics to make certain there are no codes. There is no sniffer test. This is nice, beause with programs like HP Tuners, one can remove entire systems from their car (e.g. rear '02 sensors) and "pass" the OBDII test.

'95 and older (I think to '77) receive the old-school sniffer test, which they've had as far back as I can remember (although, that's not too far back, haha!)

I wish L.I. would adopt northern NY automotive legislature

The reason you get the sniffer on the older cars, is the little "NYMA" on your registration. I'm sure, one day it will be state wide emissions testing. They've only been talking about it since the mid '90's.

[Rolling_Thunder]

Understood. But using the death of six million innocent Jews as an equivlent to some slippery slope "The Government is out to get Us" argument by making smog inspections annual instead of bi-annual on cars that are likely the biggest contibutors to the problem is way out of bounds.


can we keep this thread as non-political as possible ?

[CraigMBA]

can we keep this thread as non-political as possible ?

Exactly how is me getting offended because somebody (who writes for a living and should know better) compared the murder of six million innocents to a change in smog inspection from bi-annual to annual being political? I understand the point he was trying to make; the way he made it was offensive and I said so. FWIW, I'm not Jewish.

Frankly, this thread IS political.

You can make your case to the politicians involved that you think the smog testing shouldn't apply to your special interest (limited use) car, or you can be alarmist and just make a stink and watch them change the law with or without you.

In many areas of the state, we are out of compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act and the state is OBLIGATED UNDER LAW to get into compliance. This is not an attack on the aftermarket or the enthusiast car, but we will get sawed in half by putting the big old stall on this one. Federal law is not on our side and not likely to be changed with the Dems in congress.

[CraigMBA]

I wouldn't mind this kind of stuff so much if all the legislators and people that support this junk volunteered to have their cars crushed first.

For petes sake!

These cars are ALREADY GETTING TESTED.

The change in the law will require new cars to get tested LESS FREQUENTLY and older cars to get tested MORE FREQUENTLY.

[EFI69Cam]

Exactly how is me getting offended because somebody (who writes for a living and should know better) compared the murder of six million innocents to a change in smog inspection from bi-annual to annual being political? I understand the point he was trying to make; the way he made it was offensive and I said so. FWIW, I'm not Jewish.

Frankly, this thread IS political.

You can make your case to the politicians involved that you think the smog testing shouldn't apply to your special interest (limited use) car, or you can be alarmist and just make a stink and watch them change the law with or without you.

In many areas of the state, we are out of compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act and the state is OBLIGATED UNDER LAW to get into compliance. This is not an attack on the aftermarket or the enthusiast car, but we will get sawed in half by putting the big old stall on this one. Federal law is not on our side and not likely to be changed with the Dems in congress.

Actually Steve's use of that quote is quite appropriate. The path to totalitarianism is not a overnight change, but a slippery slope. Once a line is crossed there is no going back. SEMA is doing for the old car hobbyist what the NRA does for gun owners, they are keeping us off that slope.

Many intellectuals from the cold war era are warning us that radical environmentalism is even more of a danger than communism was.
We do need to be mindful of the impact of our actions on others, but that is not something I want the goverment doing for me.

[Jim Nilsen]

I would like to give all of the politicians involved in voting for the law an older car in excellent shape or better yet give it to one of their relatives. I think this would cause them to have to face the problem on a more personal and real level. When they have a perfectly good car that will cost them some personal grief they might get a taste of their own hypocracy.

Education is something most of them need in fields that they only really have opinions that are confused by false facts from others who only got their info from opinions and surveys that are biased. If they could just tax stupidity imagine how much they would get /have to pay?

[Steve1968LS2]

Exactly how is me getting offended because somebody (who writes for a living and should know better) compared the murder of six million innocents to a change in smog inspection from bi-annual to annual being political? I understand the point he was trying to make; the way he made it was offensive and I said so. FWIW, I'm not Jewish.

Frankly, this thread IS political.

You can make your case to the politicians involved that you think the smog testing shouldn't apply to your special interest (limited use) car, or you can be alarmist and just make a stink and watch them change the law with or without you.

In many areas of the state, we are out of compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act and the state is OBLIGATED UNDER LAW to get into compliance. This is not an attack on the aftermarket or the enthusiast car, but we will get sawed in half by putting the big old stall on this one. Federal law is not on our side and not likely to be changed with the Dems in congress.

Man, just let it go... what happened in WWII is a fact of history and it's a perfectly valid analogy.

If CA wants to be more in compliance they should do something that matters like go after industry and big rigs. Going after a relatively small number of hobbiest cars and such is a waste of time in the big picture of what pollutes in CA. I see this new law as more of a "feel good" revenue generating deal. Now they get to charge fees every year and the improvement to air quality will be zilch.

[Steve1968LS2]

Actually Steve's use of that quote is quite appropriate. The path to totalitarianism is not a overnight change, but a slippery slope. Once a line is crossed there is no going back. SEMA is doing for the old car hobbyist what the NRA does for gun owners, they are keeping us off that slope.

Many intellectuals from the cold war era are warning us that radical environmentalism is even more of a danger than communism was.
We do need to be mindful of the impact of our actions on others, but that is not something I want the goverment doing for me.

Brilliant! (in that Guiness voice)

Yep, and while we won't let this topic get political there's no denying the fact that politics do, at times, effect our hobby. There are certain groups out there that would ban all cars tomorrow if they could. It's up to us, as members of this hobby, to make sure that what the politicians do is reasonable for the entire hobby and not just wait around until it eventually effects us. By then it will most likely be too late.

[CraigMBA]

Many intellectuals from the cold war era are warning us that radical environmentalism is even more of a danger than communism was.
We do need to be mindful of the impact of our actions on others, but that is not something I want the goverment doing for me.

Oh?

Cites please.

[Damn True]

For petes sake!

These cars are ALREADY GETTING TESTED.

The change in the law will require new cars to get tested LESS FREQUENTLY and older cars to get tested MORE FREQUENTLY.

Which is exactly why the bill is so wrong-headed. There are far fewer "old" cars on the road to begin with. The majority of those "old" cars are driven by people who drive them because they elect to do so. Therefore they are more likely to take good care of them.

It's the 10 year old import that is barely running that is the real contributor. There are more of them, and people drive them because it's all they can afford. Therefore they are NOT well maintained and more likely to be in a poor state of tune.

[CraigMBA]

It's the 10 year old import that is barely running that is the real contributor. There are more of them, and people drive them because it's all they can afford. Therefore they are NOT well maintained and more likely to be in a poor state of tune.

Incidentally, that's exactly who they are targeting.

I called the transportation office this morning to get more informed on the subject. Their phone number is 916-651-4121. I asked them several questions about AB 616 – pointed, hard questions, was treated with professionalism and courtesy. Rather than take my word for it, I encourage you to do the same.

AB 616 is an air quality improvement bill that will mandate vehicles 15 years and older get inspected annually, and new vehicles less often. I asked if the exemption for pre 1976 vehicles would change. They remain exempt.

When I asked how this legislation came about, the lady at Transportation told me it had been suggested jointly by the Bureau of Automotive Repair and the Air Resources Board in an effort to lower vehicle emissions on the highest likely polluters.

I asked why they were targeting older cars. She told me that mobile source pollution was the biggest source of polution in the state of California, and they were trying to do what they could to make sure these older cars which are more likely to fail were in compliance. I baited her and said “I understand, get them into compliance or get them off the road” and she corrected me that their intention was simply to get into compliance.

The net effect of this is if you drive a 1992-1976 car or truck you can expect to take an extra trip to the local smog check. If you have a 1993-2007 car or truck you won’t be forced to go as often.

On a personal note, I make my living from the automotive business. My bread and butter is calling on technicians. I have twenty or so shops that do smog testing. I see first hand some of the crap that people bring in trying to get smogged and it just amazes me.

[Damn True]

Thanks for the clarification. I misunderstood.

[JMarsa]

Doesn't CA have a silly tax on cars coming in from other states to be registerd there?

--JMarsa

[Damn True]

We are trying to discourage people from moving here.

[Jim Nilsen]

Sounds like they are trying to deter certain people from living there too!

[CraigMBA]

Doesn't CA have a silly tax on cars coming in from other states to be registerd there?

--JMarsa

It's sales tax.

People were buying cars in states with lower or zero sales tax and bringing them into California to avoid paying CA sales tax.

This is one of the many far reaching effects of Proposition 13 that passed in 1976 that capped property tax. Love them or hate them, the government is going to spend money and if you take away thier ability to tax something they'll just bury you somewhere else.

[zbugger]

...I asked if the exemption for pre 1976 vehicles would change. They remain exempt....
Craig, I mentioned this earlier, and it's also in the original post here.

https://www.pro-touring.com/forum/showpost.php?p=280126&postcount=3

As for the politicians getting their cars smogged, many of them drive FLEET CARS that are exempt from emissions testing. While yes, they are newer cars, and supposedly well maintained by the state, they don't have to go through the things we lay people do. Oh, and for all the people talking about the governor driving a gas guzzling Hummer, it's a hybrid. He took the lead a while ago, and quite a few retards only see it for the vehicle body.

[MonzaRacer]

{quote}I asked why they were targeting older cars. She told me that mobile source pollution was the biggest source of polution in the state of California, and they were trying to do what they could to make sure these older cars which are more likely to fail were in compliance. I baited her and said “I understand, get them into compliance or get them off the road” and she corrected me that their intention was simply to get into compliance.

The net effect of this is if you drive a 1992-1976 car or truck you can expect to take an extra trip to the local smog check. If you have a 1993-2007 car or truck you won’t be forced to go as often.

On a personal note, I make my living from the automotive business. My bread and butter is calling on technicians. I have twenty or so shops that do smog testing. I see first hand some of the crap that people bring in trying to get smogged and it just amazes me.{quote}

HAHAHA you have got to be the most gullible person out there. The biggest source of polution in California is the industrial infrastructure that buys old cars regardless of condition or even if they will/wont pass a sniffer test.
A company that can buy emission credits for $750 per car rather than spend the millions on FIXING thier own emissions, is the problem.
If I can I will find the results from the BMV study in California the percentages of older cars(ie daily drivers from mid 93 down that do not have OBDII and cannot actually "pass" themselves on monitors.
The systems monitors are there to make sure that all systems that were designed into the car are still there and working in a satisfactory manner.
This is to insure that the car isnt messed with, and all of the devices that are installed to make the exhaust emissions as clean as possible.
Craig I cant believe you ask a question like that and just swallowed it.
No disrespect intended BUT I do know that for the fact that high horsepower, well tuned (late model OBDII, EFI) cars emit less unburned hydrocarbons and CO as they are usually working more efficiently AND getting better mileage.
I for one can show off a friends car after he gets back from Iraq and this car is a 66 Mustang, WITH a carb and it can and will deliver well over 400 hp from the 289, gets 32 MPG with the gears/OD, and it can darn near pass a California sniffer test,,,WITHOUT cats, for an 06 Mustang GT.
The Random Technology cats are sitting in my closet waitng till next Feb.
See guys this is the same stuff that gets passed around, someone comes up and says that this is for the best but the honest truth it is a load of hogwash.
IF they wanted to actually make a good standard, it would require only the limited parts for emissions on non OBDII cars as long as the Vapor recovery system is intact and functioning, the cats are properly replaced(ie functioning and proper for the year, one way,2 way or 3 way, which ever came on it) AND it passes a sniffer test AND the customer has to bring it in with an empty tank so they can use the spec California fuel (ie not some E85 or super mix brewed up to pass the test but you could specify regular grade or super unleaded) as this would just keep the playing field level for all people and then let say a specialy preped vehicle request say 100 octane unleaded (but this would get you a limit mileage tag rather than a unlimited tag (ie DD).
As long as the car doesnt peg the meter and runs well enough to be fixed under a specific repair amount (the old pass if it was over a certainamount to bring into compliance) then let it go as long as the owner gets specified repairs done THIS test session.
So this is similar to what I proposed.
Let companies make aftermarket vapor recovery equipment that looks good and functions AND let you do ANY mods you want as long as the car doesnt emit the bad stuff out the tailpipe and can pass it at anytime(ie you may get called to stop by on the way home or stopped along side the road to take a sniffer test)
As long as the car isnt modified you get the repair waiver, if it is you got X number of days to pass without any fuel tank gimicks and run State spec fuels. Then you can drive.
It simple instead of making it hard on our hobby we need to get thier attention and let them know that if they get off our back we would have clean mean cars rather than gross polluters.
Ther number of older cars on the road are FAR outweighed by the commercial industry in California and thier lack of cleanup.

[CraigMBA]

Craig, I mentioned this earlier, and it's also in the original post here.

https://www.pro-touring.com/forum/showpost.php?p=280126&postcount=3

As for the politicians getting their cars smogged, many of them drive FLEET CARS that are exempt from emissions testing.

Orange County Fire Authority smog checks every gas burning vehicle they have in thier 600+ car fleet. I can't speak for the state.

[CraigMBA]

HAHAHA you have got to be the most gullible person out there. The biggest source of polution in California is the industrial infrastructure that buys old cars regardless of condition or even if they will/wont pass a sniffer test.

If you make a claim like this you should be able to prove it. Cites please.

Further, I have no doubt you can build a car to pass the sniffer test. Give the change in the law, you should be able to do anything you want to it for the first five years because it looks like that will be the interval for the first inspection.