Get out of SMOG testing any Vehicle in CA, use this DMV form!

[Hugh R]

Just posted this in the 911 forum, here is the link to the DMV website and the form "Statement of Facts" and print out the PDF (form REG 256). Attest that the car is out of state (one of the boxes on page 1). I'd send it in as a double sided form, which is what DMV/AAA gives you.

A friend turned me on to this and he said he did it a few years ago and has never gotten a registration renewal requiring a smog test. Says he does it for all his cars, so no smog check or smog certificate fees again!

Here's the link. http://www.dmv.ca.gov/forms/formsmost.htm Go to "Vehicles" and then "Statement of Facts"

[widebody911]

Um, if you do that, then I doubt they'll send you your new year stickers...

[Hugh R]

It's intended for use if your car is out of state during the time it's supposed to be smogged.

[Jeff Higgins]

Sounds like your friend belongs in jail.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Did he not read the part at the bottom about certifying the truthfulness of the claims made on the form under penalty of perjury?

Courts tend to take perjury pretty seriously.

[onlycafe]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

Did he not read the part at the bottom about certifying the truthfulness of the claims made on the form under penalty of perjury?

Courts tend to take perjury pretty seriously.

sounds like all you need is a road trip and a postmark [except nevada and mexico.]
now perjury proof.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I suppose if the car is out of the state on the specific date you sign & date the form for, it's not really perjury per se, but it would also depend on what you write in your "statement of facts".

I guess if I drive my car to Oregon or something and then sign/date the form WHILE I'M THERE and send it in, technically it's not perjury. If the CA DMV is too stupid to ask the question "is there any reasonable way you can have the car back in CA for smog testing in the foreseeable future" or something, then they are bringing it on themselves to some extent. But it's still really stretching the limits of ethical behavior I'd say...

I hate this state's smog laws and the entire revenue-based scheme surrounding it, but this just makes me uncomfortable. Hell, three of my five vehicles are smog exempt anyway so I guess I don't care about complying too much for the other two.

Ya can always buy a pre-75 if it really bugs you ya know...

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Thinking about this some more...

Years ago I ran into a similar issue with my car (registered in Massachusetts). The car really was out of state (Florida) since I was attending school down there and I was unable to get the state inspection sticker normally required to get the registration renewed. I filled out a similar form which did allow me to get the registration, but it came with a stipulation that the car HAD TO BE inspected within 7 days of re-entering the state (punishable by all kinds of nasty stuff). I eventually did bring the car back to MA and had it inspected like I was supposed to. I wonder if the CA "exemption" being discussed here comes with a similar stipulation? If so, I suspect you could be setting yourself up for nasty surprises... Lots of automated license-plate checker things on police cars now, etc.

[9dreizig]

All my cars in NH will be inspected upon re-entry to NH ( Like that will happen LOL)..
Any of you CA guys need to store their car in Reno for a few days let me know!!!

[Hugh R]

I had a cat bypass which I sold. I want to contribute to keeping the air quality in CA good, afterall I live here. Nevertheless, I have a friend with a 76 MGB who can't get it smogged because he doesn't have an OEM air pump, and he only drives it about 30 miles one Saturday a month. I sent the link to him.

BTW, I noticed that a few of you on this thread and the one I also posted on the 911 Technical Thread have modded cars, or cars that are exempt from smog testing.

[mikester]

Being exempt from testing doesn't mean the car can be modified from stock according to the law.

It totally sucks and was a big part of the reason I let my 911 go recently. It was a pain to get smogged and the state tied my hands to very few options: Keep it stock or replace the power train with something else entirely (say a 3.2 or 3.6 dream).

The facts are I could have built my own EFI system that would have brought the car from its CIS roots into today, improved emissions and drivability but CARB does not allow this option.

Lame.

I miss my '74...

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I completely agree. The current system is a sham and (like everything else in Kalifornia) it's really ultimately all about the money...

The only way you can touch something - ANYTHING - on your own vehicle - upstream of the exhaust is if it has a C.A.R.B. Exemption Number (and certificate), or if it's a straight R&R (remove & replace) with an identical stock OE part. I looked into the process of getting a C.A.R.B. number and certificate for the Callaway turbo conversion I was going to do to my 944 a few years ago (I had managed to get my hands on one of Reeves Callaway's original 944 turbo conversion setups from the 1980s). It would've taken literally thousands of dollars for "engineering review". Gimmee a break - I could have furnished them with exact fuel maps, projected fuel consumption rates, etc. I guarantee it would have performed well and cleanly and could have complied easily with the emissions requirements for an '85 944. No dice. C.A.R.B. would not budge unless they got their money. So basically you have three choices:

1. Perform the conversion and make the car "track only" or more specifically "for off-road use only". You still need to pay CA DMV every single year though, even though you'll never be issued a registration certificate again though.

2. Perform the conversion and get it smogged "gray market". Obviously this means either paying off an inspection station (illegal for both parties) and you run the risk of having your car impounded if you're ever checked roadside by CHP on a visual inspection. And of course if you take it in for smog and they fail you, you'd then have to undo the conversion before bringing it back in for recheck (a humongous PITA).

3. Pay C.A.R.B. something like $5,000 to perform their "engineering review" of my turbocharger and off-the-shelf ECU combination. Stupid.

Ultimately C.A.R.B. only cares about the money. If someone has deep enough pockets, they can buy whatever exemptions and certificates they want. If not, you get no say.

Follow the money.

[KaptKaos]

Originally Posted by mikester

I miss my '74...

Your '74???

[mikester]

Yes, my '74 - except for that targa squeak - man I can totally live without that...

[KaptKaos]

Irregardless, you should get another one. I'm just sayin'!

[RWebb]

"Ultimately C.A.R.B. only cares about the money."

- not at all true

I appreciate your frustration tho.

Those who live in Calif. could put a nice clean 3.6L motor in their car.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Originally Posted by RWebb

"Ultimately C.A.R.B. only cares about the money."

- not at all true

I appreciate your frustration tho.

Those who live in Calif. could put a nice clean 3.6L motor in their car.

Half-truths.

Yes, you CAN put a 3.6L engine in your car, but (1) it'll no longer be smog-exempt and (2) I'd be required to have all the current-year (or whatever year the crate motor is) emission control stuff on it. And of course there's the little matter that a 3.6L crate motor will set one back about $12,000, but who's counting?

CARB is most definitely driven by money rather than any sense of duty. Of this, I am 100% convinced. If not, please explain how any manufacturer of aftermarket parts can essentially buy their CARB exemption number so long as they're willing to throw enough money at the approval process and why CARB issues blanket exemptions to major polluters like trucking and bussing companies every year...

Follow the money. This is yet another bloated Kalifornia agency which exists solely to legitimize itself by controlling as much money and budget as it can while mission statement is an incidental.