New CA smog law!
02-25-2003, 03:13 PM
#1
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: was: Palmdale, Ca
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: was: 1984 Camaro Z28
Engine: was: L69
Transmission: was: 700-R4
New CA smog law!
Write your local, state politician to vote against this, heck even email the dingus ... I mean "honorable" 
Governor.
Dean Florez is proposing some new smog legislation here in ca. They are rolling back the 1973 smog exemptions to cars which are 45 years or older only. So now I have to buy a 1959 or older vette. What about all of you guys that bought a 1973-1959 and removed all of the emmission equipment, what will you do when you get the TEST ONLY smog test in your registration?
Here's a little info:
His proposal: http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/...ntroduced.html
His homepage and contact info : http://democrats.sen.ca.gov/senator/florez/
His proposal: http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/...ntroduced.html
His homepage and contact info : http://democrats.sen.ca.gov/senator/florez/
Last edited by MRZ28HO; 02-25-2003 at 03:15 PM.
02-25-2003, 03:26 PM
#2
Supreme Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Woodland Hills, CA USA
Posts: 2,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Yes...
Engine: Last time I checked...
Transmission: See "Engine"...
I don't think this as severe as it may seem. You still only need to meet the smog requirements specific to the year of your vehicle.
Think about it, it's not like your pre '73 car will suddenly have to meet 2003 smog standards. Plus, smog pumps weren't standard until around '71 or '72 IIRC. Prior to that there was very little in the way of smog equipment on cars.
Think about it, it's not like your pre '73 car will suddenly have to meet 2003 smog standards. Plus, smog pumps weren't standard until around '71 or '72 IIRC. Prior to that there was very little in the way of smog equipment on cars.
02-25-2003, 04:15 PM
#4
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: was: Palmdale, Ca
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: was: 1984 Camaro Z28
Engine: was: L69
Transmission: was: 700-R4
The thing is ... most of those targetted vehicles are not used for daily purposes. It is mostly our cars, 5-15 years old. Though I know we keep our cars clean (emission related), they should be targetting those vehicles that are running around with no smog equipment. Either that, or they (the state) should provide a supplier of the required parts for emissions testing, since the OEM has stopped producing the parts.
IMHO, all they want to do is keep pushing the exemption years back to not allow the post 1973 cars to ever become emissions exempt. Which means when the 3rd gens are 50 years old, they will still require emissions testing, yet there will only be like 2000 vehicles out there.
Plus, if we allow them (politicians) to write these stupid laws ... where will they stop?
I don't even want to speculate on that.
IMHO, all they want to do is keep pushing the exemption years back to not allow the post 1973 cars to ever become emissions exempt. Which means when the 3rd gens are 50 years old, they will still require emissions testing, yet there will only be like 2000 vehicles out there.
Plus, if we allow them (politicians) to write these stupid laws ... where will they stop?
I don't even want to speculate on that.
02-25-2003, 04:56 PM
#5
Supreme Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Woodland Hills, CA USA
Posts: 2,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Yes...
Engine: Last time I checked...
Transmission: See "Engine"...
Originally posted by MRZ28HO
IMHO, all they want to do is keep pushing the exemption years back to not allow the post 1973 cars to ever become emissions exempt. Which means when the 3rd gens are 50 years old, they will still require emissions testing, yet there will only be like 2000 vehicles out there.
Plus, if we allow them (politicians) to write these stupid laws ... where will they stop? I don't even want to speculate on that.
IMHO, all they want to do is keep pushing the exemption years back to not allow the post 1973 cars to ever become emissions exempt. Which means when the 3rd gens are 50 years old, they will still require emissions testing, yet there will only be like 2000 vehicles out there.
Plus, if we allow them (politicians) to write these stupid laws ... where will they stop?
I don't even want to speculate on that. If your third gen survives for 50 years I'll be HIGHLY impressed.
By then, 1) it'll meet the 45+ exemption, 2) Any surviving third gen will be relegated to museum piece or display vehicle by that stretch of time. At some point in the not-to-distant future, the internal combustion engine is going to go the way of the Dodo.
Do you think we'd be so concerned about Iraq if they didn't have huge untapped oil reserves? Most likley the answer is NO.
Again, these cars only have to meet the emissions standards for the year they were produced. Before '73, there wasn't much of a standard. Heck, my '72 Monte Carlo engine passed smog with the pump by-passed. Visually, it all looked correct, but the pump wasn't pushing air into the exhaust system.
The downside I do see is that some political yahoo at some point may try to outlaw cars produced before a certain year under the premise that their emissions standards are too out of date.
Let's face it, emissions friendly/alternative vehicles ARE coming. It's only a matter of time before they are the norm.
Last edited by BretD 88GTA; 02-25-2003 at 04:59 PM.
02-25-2003, 05:39 PM
#6
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: I won't tell either
Posts: 2,862
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1986 Grand Prix TPI
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: 200 4R
I have to disagree with Bret. I have reviewed the smog certs I have received on my 86 GP for the previous three checks and the allowable emmissions is reduced meaning I am allowed less emmissions this year then I was allowed 6 years ago.
They are making it harder and harder to pass older cars.
And the worst part is that you cannot install a cat on a car that didn't have one to start with, and installing a cat greatly reduces emmissions.
They are making it harder and harder to pass older cars.
And the worst part is that you cannot install a cat on a car that didn't have one to start with, and installing a cat greatly reduces emmissions.
02-25-2003, 05:41 PM
#7
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: I won't tell either
Posts: 2,862
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1986 Grand Prix TPI
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: 200 4R
This is my reply to my State Senator and Rep. Copy or modify if you want.
I cannot see why this bill was introduced.
It appears to be a waste of government time since this was all debated just a few
years ago setting the exemption date at 30 years old.
Whatever minute amount of cleaner air, if any, generated by inacting this new law will
be defeated by the time and energy wasted smog checking these older vehicles that
are hardly driven.
You can find your Senator and Reps by loging on to your local County web site and going to the voter registraion section.
I cannot see why this bill was introduced.
It appears to be a waste of government time since this was all debated just a few
years ago setting the exemption date at 30 years old.
Whatever minute amount of cleaner air, if any, generated by inacting this new law will
be defeated by the time and energy wasted smog checking these older vehicles that
are hardly driven.
You can find your Senator and Reps by loging on to your local County web site and going to the voter registraion section.
Trending Topics
02-25-2003, 06:42 PM
#8
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: was: Palmdale, Ca
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: was: 1984 Camaro Z28
Engine: was: L69
Transmission: was: 700-R4
Those are some or the arguements I made against this proposed bill. That is serious 
that as the vehicle gets older, it should pollute less ... why don't the serious enviromental polluters (big companies) get this action as well, yet they get leaner regulations. (Yes, I am well aware they have emission credits and pay "high dollar" for them.)
Here is what I wrote (on the spur of the moment):
that as the vehicle gets older, it should pollute less ... why don't the serious enviromental polluters (big companies) get this action as well, yet they get leaner regulations. (Yes, I am well aware they have emission credits and pay "high dollar" for them.)Here is what I wrote (on the spur of the moment):
I am writting to you in regards to the proposed new bill SB 708. This bill proposes that the rolling emmision excemption be extended to 45 years, from it's currently accpeted 30 years. I would like to urge you, as my representatives, to consider rejecting this proposal. The reasons I feel strongly for opposing this bill are as follows:
Currently, most of the targeted vehicles for emission testing exemption are not used on a daily basis. This means that they, as a collective, have a lower emission impact on the enviroment than most "newer" vehicles. Much of which do not conform to current regulations.
The vehicles we need to address to protect our enviroment are vehicles that are a majority on the roads. Those are usually cars being 5 to 15 years old. These vehicles are used daily due to the fact they are still easy to maintain. Yet some are neglected or not registered, due to failing for emissions limits.
The cost of maintaining these vehicles, as they get older, has increased or the original manufacturer has stopped producing the needed parts to comply with emissions testing. Some proposed targetted vehicles also did not originally come equipt with the required emissions devices, so how can they be included in the emissions testing?
Most hobbyist that enjoy the restoration of these vehicles, which are part of American history, are not out to pollute the enviroment. We actually find ways to better the vehicles, performance and emissions. By selecting parts that have been designed with new technologically advanced methods, these parts will help older vehicles produce fewer emissions, yet provide the enthusiasts with the preferred performance they seek.
In closing, I urge you, my represntative, to help out the population as whole, not just one specific item. There is no reason to move the exemption years from 30 to 45 years. It will only serve to increase cost to the general public and hobbyist. Thank you for time to at least read my message.
Currently, most of the targeted vehicles for emission testing exemption are not used on a daily basis. This means that they, as a collective, have a lower emission impact on the enviroment than most "newer" vehicles. Much of which do not conform to current regulations.
The vehicles we need to address to protect our enviroment are vehicles that are a majority on the roads. Those are usually cars being 5 to 15 years old. These vehicles are used daily due to the fact they are still easy to maintain. Yet some are neglected or not registered, due to failing for emissions limits.
The cost of maintaining these vehicles, as they get older, has increased or the original manufacturer has stopped producing the needed parts to comply with emissions testing. Some proposed targetted vehicles also did not originally come equipt with the required emissions devices, so how can they be included in the emissions testing?
Most hobbyist that enjoy the restoration of these vehicles, which are part of American history, are not out to pollute the enviroment. We actually find ways to better the vehicles, performance and emissions. By selecting parts that have been designed with new technologically advanced methods, these parts will help older vehicles produce fewer emissions, yet provide the enthusiasts with the preferred performance they seek.
In closing, I urge you, my represntative, to help out the population as whole, not just one specific item. There is no reason to move the exemption years from 30 to 45 years. It will only serve to increase cost to the general public and hobbyist. Thank you for time to at least read my message.
Last edited by MRZ28HO; 02-25-2003 at 06:45 PM.
02-25-2003, 09:32 PM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by BretD 88GTA
Think about it, it's not like your pre '73 car will suddenly have to meet 2003 smog standards. Plus, smog pumps weren't standard until around '71 or '72 IIRC. Prior to that there was very little in the way of smog equipment on cars.
Think about it, it's not like your pre '73 car will suddenly have to meet 2003 smog standards. Plus, smog pumps weren't standard until around '71 or '72 IIRC. Prior to that there was very little in the way of smog equipment on cars.
This law is just another bunch of crap. If they were really concerned about it, they would let the people that own those cars make modifications to make them run cleaner, rather than retaining every piece of junk device slapped on there 30+ years ago.
02-25-2003, 11:34 PM
#11
Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Camaro of course
If you dont have to go to a smog only station. it's not too hard to find a guy that will pass anything for like $250. I say let them pass laws untill they are blue in the face, I'm still going to do what I want to my car, and ya gota be nuts to think I'm not going to drive it.
02-26-2003, 12:30 AM
#12
250, thats steep, most guys i know say they get it done for 120-160....i think its really lame that they keep enforcing laws...i mean what percentage of cars today are from pre 73? probably not that much, so why target such a small percentage for even more laws?
02-26-2003, 01:00 AM
#13
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mostly in water off So. Cal
Posts: 1,455
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: '87 Chev
Engine: 60*V6
Transmission: DY T700
Originally posted by lonsal
Wouldn't it be great if they let us drive in to the test facility and keep the hood closed. Just put the car on the rollers and the sniffer up the tailpipe. If it passes it passes.
Lon
Wouldn't it be great if they let us drive in to the test facility and keep the hood closed. Just put the car on the rollers and the sniffer up the tailpipe. If it passes it passes.
Lon
Secondly, You should all take note in the air quality toward San Bernadino on the weekends- It is always much cleaner-why? there are still as many if not more cars on the road- Its mainly because industrial polution is not occuring on the weekends!
Please take note and you'll see I am on to something.
02-26-2003, 02:47 AM
#14
Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: West Hills California USA
Posts: 367
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Assorted
Engine: Various
Transmission: Manual and Automatic
This kind of "Feel Good" Legislation is nothing new in California.Look at all the "Gun Laws" that have been passed here since 1989. You get these "Wana Be" noticed "politicians" that cant think of any other way to help their "Career's" except to screw with peoples lives,and they keep getting re-elected.Oh this makes me mad. What standard are they going to hold my 66 Chevelle to,It will never be anything close to todays cars emission standards on todays gas anyway.:nono: :nono: :nono:
02-26-2003, 08:55 AM
#15
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: was: Palmdale, Ca
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: was: 1984 Camaro Z28
Engine: was: L69
Transmission: was: 700-R4
Originally posted by SuperchargedRS
If you dont have to go to a smog only station. it's not too hard to find a guy that will pass anything for like $250. I say let them pass laws untill they are blue in the face, I'm still going to do what I want to my car, and ya gota be nuts to think I'm not going to drive it.
If you dont have to go to a smog only station. it's not too hard to find a guy that will pass anything for like $250. I say let them pass laws untill they are blue in the face, I'm still going to do what I want to my car, and ya gota be nuts to think I'm not going to drive it.
People like you make it hard for the rest of us who are willing to comply with emission regulations (cleaner air). They need to seriously crack down on all of those smog techs who are willing to accept bribes to pass cars illegally. I fully agree with you Lon, that is what I have also been saying. People who know how to build engines properly, also know how to make them run clean (which, incidentally means that it is tuned right
). Many cars that are about 20 years old, with new aftermarket parts, pass emissions test better than with the old antiquated parts designed many years ago. Which, back then the car manufacturers didn't know squat about reducing emission effectively. This old crap pollutes more then is required no a days anyway.AGood2.8
from where I live, I can see that area's smog cascade over to Victorville's area on weekdays, but weekends it diminishes and you can actually see the mountains (in that direction) clearly. Lang (and Bret), that is why we must keep voicing our opinions on these ludicrous propositions.
02-26-2003, 11:33 AM
#16
Supreme Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Woodland Hills, CA USA
Posts: 2,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Yes...
Engine: Last time I checked...
Transmission: See "Engine"...
Originally posted by MRZ28HO
back then the car manufacturers didn't know squat about reducing emission effectively. This old crap pollutes more then is required no a days anyway.
back then the car manufacturers didn't know squat about reducing emission effectively. This old crap pollutes more then is required no a days anyway.
I don't think it was a matter of the auto makers not knowing squat about reducing emissions. It was more a matter of money. Retooling or changing a design costs a lot more money than just throwing a "band-aid" device on the car.
This has burned me for years. The auto makers could have improved engine designs back in the 60's and 70's so they ran better and cleaner, but that would've cut into the profit margin. So instead they throw a bunch of "junk" on the engine as a quick fix.
I watched the movie Tucker again last night. If you've never seen it, I highly recommend you do. It will give you a good insight into how the auto industry has operated.
Last edited by BretD 88GTA; 02-26-2003 at 02:25 PM.
02-26-2003, 10:42 PM
#18
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mostly in water off So. Cal
Posts: 1,455
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: '87 Chev
Engine: 60*V6
Transmission: DY T700
Originally posted by MRZ28HO
If your car is not running clean, you are the reason the rest of us have to deal with this People like you make it hard for the rest of us who are willing to comply with emission regulations (cleaner air). They need to seriously crack down on all of those smog techs who are willing to accept bribes to pass cars illegally.
If your car is not running clean, you are the reason the rest of us have to deal with this
People like you make it hard for the rest of us who are willing to comply with emission regulations (cleaner air). They need to seriously crack down on all of those smog techs who are willing to accept bribes to pass cars illegally. I am a perfect example of this- I may have to go this route with the headers I have had made for my V6. The car will run clean but because of politics and the ol money game- I can't legally smog my car even though it will run cleaner than most. This is why I liked Lonsal's statement above about no visual checks.
Dean
02-27-2003, 02:18 AM
#19
Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: West Hills California USA
Posts: 367
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Assorted
Engine: Various
Transmission: Manual and Automatic
I sent off my letters,not that I think the "Dingus" can read, but it cant hurt.I agree with Lon about the visual.Having failed the "Visual"with my Chevelle,and having to prove several times that it was not a "California" car even though it passed the test.The end result was the same.
02-27-2003, 08:37 AM
#20
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: was: Palmdale, Ca
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: was: 1984 Camaro Z28
Engine: was: L69
Transmission: was: 700-R4
Originally posted by AGood2.8
If I could respectfully disagree with you on this- There are circumstances where this is necessary because of the B.S cost of E.O. #'s and lack of interest in certain vehicles aftermarket parts to acquire them.
I am a perfect example of this- I may have to go this route with the headers I have had made for my V6. The car will run clean but because of politics and the ol money game- I can't legally smog my car even though it will run cleaner than most. This is why I liked Lonsal's statement above about no visual checks.
Dean
If I could respectfully disagree with you on this- There are circumstances where this is necessary because of the B.S cost of E.O. #'s and lack of interest in certain vehicles aftermarket parts to acquire them.
I am a perfect example of this- I may have to go this route with the headers I have had made for my V6. The car will run clean but because of politics and the ol money game- I can't legally smog my car even though it will run cleaner than most. This is why I liked Lonsal's statement above about no visual checks.
Dean
That was my point. Most cars that I see that don't have emission equipment typically pollute more then OEM. Bottom line is we need to change the rules to be tailpipe only, regardless of equipment. If it pollutes less, excellent! If it doesn't, go fix it so it pollutes less.
02-27-2003, 05:50 PM
#21
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: I won't tell either
Posts: 2,862
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1986 Grand Prix TPI
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: 200 4R
MONEY & POLITICS
The car makers look at like this, put something on the vehicle to make it pass the smog tests, when the vehicle no longer passes the tests the consumer has to buy a new one - more money for them.
And, as previously stated, all the politions are after is headlines.
My car burns MUCH cleaner now then when it had the LG4, but getting it approved is a bitch.
The car makers look at like this, put something on the vehicle to make it pass the smog tests, when the vehicle no longer passes the tests the consumer has to buy a new one - more money for them.
And, as previously stated, all the politions are after is headlines.
My car burns MUCH cleaner now then when it had the LG4, but getting it approved is a bitch.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post