Acceld Z

I just read an article in the Citizen that states that the gub'ment is going to kill the Drive Clean program. They plan to have it gone by '08. It's also been a topic on most of the AM news reports on the TV.

FruityOne

How come they are thinking of shutting it down?

trigger GTA

it will never die

heres what the gov had to say. but i cant see it ever happening. lets face it Eves has broken EVERY one of his campain promises. why would he do as his gov says now??

http://www.canada.com/national/natio...d-c7c5c6080309

johnyIROC

I agree with Trigger... Even though it can be proven over and over that the driveclean program doesn't work out in the cost/benefit analysis.... it will not go away. Things like signing the Kyoto agreement without considering the implications don't help.

Darklord1987

Was on the front page of the Windsor Star today too. Woohoo!

HeavyBreathinRS

trigger GTA said

Umm...wasn't there an election some time back where Eves lost power?

trigger GTA

sorry i stand corected i ment the Dolt

lol they all screw us in the long run just different names

mikesz1984

sounds like a future campaign promise, 4 years from now wont they be just calling anothe election, i can hear it now "if we get in to power again we will kill this evil money grabbing ploy of the old conservative government."

Cruz'N Bruz'R

Well, I m' thinking positively. Like a new cam for example.... much bigger...

Eric2ndGen

Let's look at this this way: Dalton McGuilty (not a typo) has to have an election before the end of 2008 at the latest. Usually, governments plan on calling one every 4 years and only stretch it to 5 if they think they'll lose an election held at the 4-year point and can bring themselves up in the polls in a year.

McGuilty has lied on a number of 'key' campaign promises right from the get-go (guess he learnt this from the federal liberals starting in 1992- anyone remember "we're going to cancel the Free Trade agreement" and "we will eliminate the GST"?).

Recently, McGuilty spoke about re-enacting photo-radar, without even pretending to make it a 'safety' issue- but actually called it a good "revenue generator" for the province (and, sickly, also for for the insurance companies).

Getting rid of Drive Clean is a fantasy for 2 reasons- first off, when and if the legislation is put forward to remove or alter the Drive Clean legislation, it will be right near the end of the current term (i.e. 2007/2008)- and will likely 'die' in the house before ever seeing a vote. Secondly, it generates the province revenue- to the tune of $11.30 per e-test paid for by consumers. If you pay $30.00 to a garage for your mandatory e-test, the garage surrenders $11.30 to the government right off, if you do a re-test and then need to pay for another test/re-test the government gets another $11.30- and this is basically "free" money- the system is already been set-up and all the government is doing for their "cut" is maintaining the MOE Drive Clean database (i.e. pollution chart) and keeping the data lines open for garage terminals/ECMs to transmit the data to them.

Add to this that Drive Clean is a great boondoggle in respect to pollution (using the MOEs own numbers, over 80% of all vehicles 3-20 years old don't pollute beyond the goverment's standards) and it helps the government from really doing something significant (and costly) to reduce pollution. An example of a real "solution" would be to build more roads and install intelligent traffic control systems in the GTA. When driving trips that took 10 minutes 10 years ago now take 20 minutes, and you find a new stoplight at an intersection that did not have one yesterday almost every day- there is a serious traffic control problem. And yes- you or I getting stuck in traffic for 20 minutes, at least 1/2 of which is idling at stoplights vs. driving in a relatively constant (i.e. little stopping for extended periods) trip for 10 minutes and pollution is easily double what it was ten years ago- if not 5 times what it was ten years ago (more cars means more delays, which means more cars, idling longer and polluting well over double that previously). Fact is, getting traffic to move efficiently and funding public transit properly is not going to "make" any money for the government, but cost them money. This is the problem with trying to make government a "business" and act/think like one- they rarely do the most efficient or "right thing"- but the most expedient, cheapest, or highest revenue-generating one.

Cruz'N Bruz'R

dude, your killing my mood, let's just pretend it is going to happen, and we can all celebrate.

87LG4FORMULA

But can't we just pretend for awhile?
:lala:
Oh yeah in 2008 most third gens won't care much

mikesz1984

in 2008 the emission requirements will still probably fail most of our cars, right now with my 1984 z if i failed to pass an e test i would have to pay 400 buck to get a pass, so you can figure on that doubleing before 2008, there for 1987 camaro's if they fail will have to pay alot to get through the test for the last time.

Acceld Z

Meh, I was just letting you guys know what I had read and heard

Cruz'N Bruz'R

It's 2004, you shouldn't have to even test your '84 anymore.

George

Why wait untill 08 - just cap the bastard now.

iroc2nv

my dad told me that actually yesterday..i thought he was smoking something but i did some research, and found that a leak determined that it was all for a money grab and thats it, plus the environment hasnt gotten any better so they are just gonna kill it..

i mean..i dont care, i only have one more test left..then..im free!!

iroc2nv

88firebird

I also heard that they are phasing out emissions testing, but who knows!

I have a question regarding the current emissions here (I live in the Welland/St. Catherines area)... I have an 88 Firebird V6... I'm putting in an 84 V8... 84 engine wouldn't need an emmisions test cause it would be 20 years old... a friend told me I could get out of e-testing my car because of the age of the engine... any idea if this is true?

RegaPlanet

Not true. Dating for your car on emissions is taken from the chassis.

88firebird

The guy that I heard that from has a 90s Ford Ranger with a 1969 289 in it... and he got away without e-testing it... and his trucks supposedly all legal... I heard that from quite a few different people...

Hawk92z-TDZ

RegaPlanet is right, its not true, if want try it and get laughed at, go for it.

The only chance then is getting tested as a hotrod, but since in 88 there was a 305 available in your car, good luck on that one too.

My block is a 1969 327, I had to get e-Tested, and had to fight abit to get the hotrod class even. So even though I am a 383 I was tested as a 327, still passed with flying colours though.

88firebird

huh.... ok, thanks for the info then... the guy I mentioned must not have as legal of a truck as he claims. I just hope I can get my carburated 305 to pass the test then... hopefully that won't present TOO many problems... (altho I'm sure it will)

RegaPlanet

passing a 305 with a cat should be pretty damn easy as long as you dont have anything crazy for a cam. Just check it over like you would do a yearly tuneup to see if anything needs replacing or adjusting. Changing your oil right before doing an etest also helps. We have a whole thread on tips for passing and im sure there are lots more on the board.

88firebird

Well, my 305 is partially torn apart in my garage right now... I plan on doing a complete rebuild before it goes into the car... I plan on putting on HO heads, mild cam, and a new exhaust (possibly headers)... haven't decided yet whether I'm gonna put a new carb on it yet. My engine won't be really crazy... the specs on my 84 rate it at 150 HP.... if I can get 200-225 out of it I'll be happy... a freshly rebuilt engine should run clean enough... I guess I'll find out when I get the car back together! ha ha

darbleinad

i tend to agree with Eric here, it would be great to have the etest gone, but it will likely not happen. If they really wanted to get rid of it, they would start the process now.

To be honest i am surprised they have even considered getting rid of the E-test program, because as Eric mentioned, it is basically free money for the government. You could also say it helps shop owners out too, as it brings them new business, although the only real benefits they see directly are when they have to do the work to make the car pass, after it failed the 1st test.

I will feel real bad for the shops that bought all the expensive equipment for the test if the program gets cancelled; that stuff is a major investment in capital. If the program gets cancelled it will be a huge waste. i know people that couldnt afford it at the start and it really hurt there businesses.

It would be nice to see the program gone, as it is just another tax grab, but i just dont see it happening.

as for whether or not it actually helps the air quality....that is certainly up for debate and a whole other issue.

Hawk92z-TDZ

If I'm not mistaken, the LG4 and the L69 have the same 416 heads, its the cam and intake thats the main diference.