Great news! New York State ending emissions testing on pre OBD-II cars!

[Jgordon]

Sorry if this has been brought up before. I just got my other car (1985 land cruiser) through inspection, thinking that as its 25 year birthday, this would be the last year of emissions testing. However, the guys told me that safety-only emissions starts IN the 25th year, not after it.

And now the really good news (for you 86 and up guys). They also told me that beginning in December, NY state is actually ending the rolling road emissions requirements for all pre OBD-II (1995) vehicles! This means an acceleration of the 25 year rolling exemption, and everyone gets a free pass starting in December. No more annual torture sessions for the cars, with techs sweating the clutch, over-revving the engines on that damn dyno to "simulate real world conditions."

This made my day. Also marks the first time since I've been paying attention that a government agency has moved toward common sense, rather than away from it.

[Peter Zimmermann]

Enjoy sitting in traffic behind a car with a chip, over-rich mixture and advanced timing. Breathe deeply, and think about the good old days when that breath wasn't followed by a cough.

[Jgordon]

man, who peed in your cornflakes this morning?

[nesslar]

Non-partisan here, really, but hasn't NYC been polluted since, like, WAY before anyone alive these days was even born?

[Por_sha911]

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

Enjoy sitting in traffic behind a car with a chip, over-rich mixture and advanced timing. Breathe deeply, and think about the good old days when that breath wasn't followed by a cough.

Is that you Al Gore? Wow, I guess you want us all to drive electric cars that go a maximum of 50 MPH. Reality check: how many pre-1995 cars are out there? Of those, how many of them are chipped, over-rich, and advanced timing? My 1987 is chipped but not overly rich and it runs cleaner than the average granny-mobile that has never been over 35 MPH.

[sfoster13]

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

Enjoy sitting in traffic behind a car with a chip, over-rich mixture and advanced timing. Breathe deeply, and think about the good old days when that breath wasn't followed by a cough.

Makes me think of the track....mmmmm, track

[m110]

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

Enjoy sitting in traffic behind a car with a chip, over-rich mixture and advanced timing. Breathe deeply, and think about the good old days when that breath wasn't followed by a cough.

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Zimmermann. What percentage of vehicles on the road are
A) cars (not trucks or commercial vehicles that don't go through emissions)
B) older than 25 years old
C) owned by someone who would modify it after becoming exempt with "a chip, over-rich mixture and advanced timing"
D) sitting in traffic and presumably being driven regularly
E) bad enough to make me cough over all the other pollution out there

I would argue extraordinarily few vehicles fit all these criteria, thus why dyno testing them is a waste of time and money AND doesn't make the world cleaner or better.

I used to have to dyno emission test my dad's 1955 Mercedes 220 Cab A which was driven 50 miles per year in British Columbia. I complained once and the government goon just shrugged. 4% of the yearly mileage (and emission) was on the government dyno.

[Peter Zimmermann]

Originally Posted by Por_sha911

Is that you Al Gore? Wow, I guess you want us all to drive electric cars that go a maximum of 50 MPH. Reality check: how many pre-1995 cars are out there? Of those, how many of them are chipped, over-rich, and advanced timing? My 1987 is chipped but not overly rich and it runs cleaner than the average granny-mobile that has never been over 35 MPH.

For the record, I don't give a crap what you drive, as long as you're not in front of me on Rosedale Highway tomorrow morning. Also for the record, there are approximately 25 MILLION registered vehicles in Los Angeles County. That probably computes to 40 MILLION cars + in CA. You do the math, cars out here don't rust away, and then get thrown away. Our cars wear out, which means there are a lot of pre-'95 cars here.

In the '70s a thick brown layer of smog almost enclosed Los Angeles on a daily basis; now that sky, with five times as many cars, is actually blue in some places. Gee, I wonder how that happened? Could it be that smog inspections/mandatory repairs actually worked? Imagine that.

If anything less had been done a Los Angeles resident wouldn't be able to see his neighbor's house by now, let alone the beautiful mountains that ring the city. I'm not pushing electric cars and I don't try to force massage therapists to have sex with me. But I do believe that of all the things that CA has done wrong over the last thirty years, requiring and enforcing emission controls in cars was not one of them.

Now, if you want to debate points, I'll listen. If you want to make ridiculous, smart-ass comments; I'm out.

[vmisquez]

Can't wait till CA get a little of that common-sense.

[RWebb]

Calif. has a much worse smog problems for several reasons, one is given above, 2nd is the lack of public transportation, 3rd the sun & heat which drive smog forming rxns in the atmosphere.

It is good that NY now has air clean enuff to do this - and there is no way the feds would allow it if the air quality had not gotten better. The air quality measurements are taken at various places and considered together. So, even if very clean overall, you could still suffer sitting behind some gross polluter.

[m110]

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

For the record, I don't give a crap what you drive, as long as you're not in front of me on Rosedale Highway tomorrow morning. Also for the record, there are approximately 25 MILLION registered vehicles in Los Angeles County. That probably computes to 40 MILLION cars + in CA. You do the math, cars out here don't rust away, and then get thrown away. Our cars wear out, which means there are a lot of pre-'95 cars here.

In the '70s a thick brown layer of smog almost enclosed Los Angeles on a daily basis; now that sky, with five times as many cars, is actually blue in some places. Gee, I wonder how that happened? Could it be that smog inspections/mandatory repairs actually worked? Imagine that.

If anything less had been done a Los Angeles resident wouldn't be able to see his neighbor's house by now, let alone the beautiful mountains that ring the city. I'm not pushing electric cars and I don't try to force massage therapists to have sex with me. But I do believe that of all the things that CA has done wrong over the last thirty years, requiring and enforcing emission controls in cars was not one of them.

Now, if you want to debate points, I'll listen. If you want to make ridiculous, smart-ass comments; I'm out.

This thread details less restrictive testing for a certain group of older cars in a state where smog isn't as big of a deal as other states.
The point is not that we shouldn't check and enforce emission requirements but rather that at some point the marginal gain of testing every car becomes very low. I would argue the total excess emissions potentially saved from testing every 25 yo pre OBD II car in NY is low in comparison to the overall mass produced by every other car on the road.

[sfoster13]

don't forget that our cars are only on the road 3 months out of the year

[tmsautoart]

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

In the '70s a thick brown layer of smog almost enclosed Los Angeles on a daily basis; now that sky, with five times as many cars, is actually blue in some places. Gee, I wonder how that happened? Could it be that smog inspections/mandatory repairs actually worked? Imagine that.

I think I have to disagree with you on that one. I doubt it was the inspections rather the car manufacturers getting better at making cleaner burning engines w/ catalytic converters/ computers that made fuel/air adjustments etc. Over time, I believe that it was that which may have made your air quality better. Here in FL. they got rid of testing because almost all of the cars passed and there were very few that failed. It wasn't worth it.
Just an FYI: I won't bore you with what kind of car it was, but when we did test, it passed with flying colors and was chipped.
Not to ruffle feathers and i'm sure I don't wan't to start a political debate here, but has anyone heard about volcanoes and how they produce more carbon monoxide in a year (or something like that) than all combustion engines since inception? Has anyone heard that stat before?

[Peter Zimmermann]

Originally Posted by m110

This thread details less restrictive testing for a certain group of older cars in a state where smog isn't as big of a deal as other states.
The point is not that we shouldn't check and enforce emission requirements but rather that at some point the marginal gain of testing every car becomes very low. I would argue the total excess emissions potentially saved from testing every 25 yo pre OBD II car in NY is low in comparison to the overall mass produced by every other car on the road.

I fully understand this, but the OP states that testing will only go back 15 years, not 25. In Bakersfield, CA I would bet that would cover (1985-1994) 60% of our cars. Take away smog requirements for those cars and we face a very serious situation regarding AQ. And that doesn't consider that our cars are currently exempt beginning with 1975 cars, so if CA got "common sense", we would have twenty more years of exempt cars to generate pollution. That is significant.

California is a very expensive place to live, and because of that it's not unusual to be sitting in traffic, surrounded by older (pre-'95) cars. Let's say that CA has 40 Million cars, and only 10% of them are pre-'95 models. That's 4 Million cars that can now drive around with fouled plugs, no catalyst, carb conversions, and all manner of backyard fixes to keep the car running. 4 Million cars is a significant number, probably more total cars than the TN poster above has in his entire state.

I don't know if NYs pollution blows out to the ocean, or into a neighboring state, but Central CA suffers from air currents that bring all of the San Francisco Bay Area pollution down through the center of the state - right to where I live. Is it fair that some Northern CA counties don't dyno test, but we do? Probably not, but that's the way the ball bounces.

My '82 SC is dead stock, and the tester that does my car is professional and careful, and doesn't mind if I stand and watch. He doesn't slip the clutch or grind gears, he simply runs the car on his dyno and gives it back to me. Would I like to install S cams, PMOs and SSIs? Hell yes, I would. But not until I move to Idaho or Montana.

[m110]

Originally Posted by tmsautoart

but has anyone heard about volcanoes and how they produce more carbon monoxide in a year (or something like that) than all combustion engines since inception? Has anyone heard that stat before?

A hotly debated topic. I have seen estimates on both sides but the science appears poor. However, not entirely surprising since EVERY molecule of gas and water came out of a volcano at some point as the earth transitioned from a rock ball with no atmoshere to what we have now (no offence to creationists intended--just my opinion).

What is the California cut-off for no longer testing vehicles?

[Trackrash]

I think I have to disagree with you on that one. I doubt it was the inspections rather the car manufacturers getting better at making cleaner burning engines w/ catalytic converters/ computers that made fuel/air adjustments etc.

+1

Emission testing is just a way for politicians to feel warm and fuzzy. Like they are making a difference.

In california they don't test everyone. Many counties and even zip codes are exempt from testing. And cars older than '74. And all wheel drive.....

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by m110

This thread details less restrictive testing for a certain group of older cars in a state where smog isn't as big of a deal as other states.
The point is not that we shouldn't check and enforce emission requirements but rather that at some point the marginal gain of testing every car becomes very low. I would argue the total excess emissions potentially saved from testing every 25 yo pre OBD II car in NY is low in comparison to the overall mass produced by every other car on the road.

- well put

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

...

I don't know if NYs pollution blows out to the ocean ...

I suspect it does, as NY has had enormous problems with pollution blowing into the state from Ohio & Penn. and the coal plants and steel mills that they (used to) have. I think that NY even sued those states over it.

[Peter Zimmermann]

BTW; new cars in CA don't have to be tested until their 5th year.

[yelcab1]

And the long run goal for emission testing is to end all the testing because the ratio of newer OBD2 cars to OBD1 or non OBD cars will be so great that testing everything will be a waste of resources. How many more years til we get there, I really don't know but it is not next year.