Smog Test: There should be an exception for classics...

[dshepp806]

..like I've always wanted to do: Move to Canada (seriously...),..I've always wanted to....

..glad I'm not (at least "don't live") in Cali....


Best,

Doyle

[the]

Originally Posted by avendlerdp

As an LA resident I can really see our smog laws paying off in clean air. The smog alert days of the 1970's and 80's are a over and I don't miss them.

Is that because of smog tests/fees, or is it more because modern cars (i.e., cars from say 1990 onward) are more efficient and emit only a fraction of the pollutant as cars from the 60s/70s/80s?

Even if Cal's smog test program were completely taken away, the smog situation would be much better than the 70s and 80s. 90% of the cars driving around in California, I'd guess, are newer than 15 years old, and don't pollute much.

Also, people in the 60s and 70s and early 80s messed around with their smog equipment a lot, for good reason. The carmakers really were struggling with meeting emissions laws, and the stuff they hung on the engines killed/cooked engines, made them run poorly, killed the power, were unreliable, etc. All the smog pumps, vacuum lines, thermal reactors, etc.

Modern cars don't have any of that, and there really is little incentive for 99.9% of people to mess with the smog equipment.

[RWebb]

IF you don't like a law then work to change it, don't just violate it.

All small motors (chain sas, edgers, etc.) are about to be regulated. EPA passed the regs already they will take effect soon.

Diesels are already running on cleaner fuel and new D. motors have to meet new regs. That includes trains & off-road earth movers, etc.

I also think power boats are regulated.

I am amazed at the amount of whining at the "loss" of 10 to 15 hp. Put the car on a wt. loss program or drop in a 3.6L motor.

People are dying from asthma because of the poor air quality in the central valley.

[Peter Zimmermann]

Originally Posted by the

Is that because of smog tests/fees, or is it more because modern cars (i.e., cars from say 1990 onward) are more efficient and emit only a fraction of the pollutant as cars from the 60s/70s/80s?

Even if Cal's smog test program were completely taken away, the smog situation would be much better than the 70s and 80s. 90% of the cars driving around in California, I'd guess, are newer than 15 years old, and don't pollute much.

Also, people in the 60s and 70s and early 80s messed around with their smog equipment a lot, for good reason. The carmakers really were struggling with meeting emissions laws, and the stuff they hung on the engines killed/cooked engines, made them run poorly, killed the power, were unreliable, etc. All the smog pumps, vacuum lines, thermal reactors, etc.

The reason that newer cars run so clean is because of testing, not in spite of it! California basically told the manufacturers, "If you want to sell your cars here, this is what you must do." Manufacturers responded with the development of excellent systems (Porsche used CIS, then CIS with a smog pump, then CIS with Lambda, then Motronic). Other manufacturers followed with their own systems, and all of a sudden Air Quality Management Districts were discovering improvement - at the same time that the quantity of cars increased. Test stations were the only way to control the entire air quality issue, and I feel strongly that if you took away the test station today the chip and exhaust industries would go wild, VWs and Hondas would have a hundred more horsepower and produce 1,000 times the HC and NOx. Keep the laws, keep testing, and let's all breathe a little easier.

[John Watson]

Mike, I see from your profile that you live in california. you do know that 1975 and older cars re exempt from smog? I have a 74 911S and don't have to smog it. In fact I just got my renewal notice and......no smog.

John Watson
74 911S

[Hester]

Wow! There are some very good points presented in this thread...

In the late 80's, I worked in a foreign and domestic auto repair shop in one of the nine down-state counties of New York state that required emissions testing on top of the State-wide safety inspection program. I have always been struck by the lack of safety testing here in California despite the State-wide emissions testing. The annual safety inspection never struck me as very effective, however, because the stuff that we checked (i.e., lights, horn, wipers, brakes) could be fine at the annual inspection and fail in the interim.

The emissions program in California has become quite unnecessary in its current form. My 1996 Honda Civic (the first year that OBDII was required on every car sold in the U.S.) wouldn't fail an emissions test unless it was running so poorly that I had to push it in to the smog check station, yet, I have to go through the motions (and pay through the nose) every other year (or every year now, I forget). Modern cars with their computer controlled emissions systems just run cleaner than the cars produced in the sixties, seventies, and eighties.

Life in California is very regulated. California is also the tenth most densely populated state in the Country, the third largest in land area, and has the largest population. Thank God there are some regulations in place to keep the unwashed masses (aka., my neighbors) from getting out of hand. There seems to be quite a few places in this Country that you can go and do pretty much whatever you want. Those places tend to be less populated. Like most things, its just a matter of priorities.

Why do you have to prove that your 1976 and newer car that you drive on the public highways in California emits less than qualified maximums of CO and HC every other year? For the same reason that you have to stop at a red light: because other people live here too!

As far as changing the law, I lost faith in our republican form of government years ago. Now I just regularly vote against incumbents as a way of expressing my dissatisfaction with the status quo. The only thoughts that keep me from getting to upset about it are (1) I have no children, and (2) with any luck, I will be dead before it gets much worse.

[Peter Zimmermann]

Originally Posted by Hester

Wow! There are some very good points presented in this thread...
I have always been struck by the lack of safety testing here in California despite the State-wide emissions testing.

As a long-time resident of California I think that safety testing was never implemented here because of our mild climate. Cars just don't tend to deteriorate here like in some areas of the country. I always get a laugh when we travel to Minnesota to visit my in-laws, if there was ever a place that needs safety testing, that's it! You see cars there with holes in fenders, bumpers dragging on the road, exhaust systems that aren't anymore, and rust from the belt line down. But even there, on the surface many cars that are newer than a few years old look pretty good. But that doesn't mean that the average mechanic's favorite tool isn't his torch!

[ossiblue]

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

As a long-time resident of California I think that safety testing was never implemented here because of our mild climate. Cars just don't tend to deteriorate here like in some areas of the country. I always get a laugh when we travel to Minnesota to visit my in-laws, if there was ever a place that needs safety testing, that's it! You see cars there with holes in fenders, bumpers dragging on the road, exhaust systems that aren't anymore, and rust from the belt line down. But even there, on the surface many cars that are newer than a few years old look pretty good. But that doesn't mean that the average mechanic's favorite tool isn't his torch!

Actually, safety testing was implemented here in the early 60's, maybe some of the other old timers remember. It was a bit haphazard though, not an annual inspection.

The CHP would put up rolling road blocks and randomly route cars into an inspection area off the side of the road. There, the car got the once over for basic safety/operation equipment. These moving inspections would appear/disappear overnight, but were always set up on a stretch of road where there was no turning around once you spotted it. Needless to say, it wasn't too effective for much except worrying the poor drivers who got nabbed. Maybe that's why it was discontinued.

[Joe Bob]

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

I've lived in CA long enough to see our smog problem reach China levels, and then watch it get better, and better, and better... I've driven to work at 6:00 am through stunningly beautiful Malibu Canyon (from the Conejo Valley to Santa Monica) and I've been stuck behind cars that spewed so much pollution that I had trouble breathing, had to drop back a little and open all my windows. I now live in Central, CA (Bakersfield), and am experiencing, on a daily basis, some of the worst air quality ever (and even here its nothing like China). Here in the south valley we generate pollution, like anywhere else, but because of air currents we are also inundated with all of the smog created in the San Francisco Bay Area. It comes down through the center of the state, runs into the mountains south and east of us, and gets stuck there. I can only shudder at the level of smog that we would have if legislation regarding emissions laws had not been passed. That said, I drive an '82 SC, I faithfully take the car to the local test-only station every two years, and leave there knowing that my 25-year old P-car runs cleaner than a 5-year old Honda (this from the tester) - and that I'm not contributing to the problem. In CA, if you want to build a performance-based car that can be licensed for the street, buy a '75 or older model, with a '75 or older engine number, and build away - no one will bother you.

The above mentioned criteria for 4 years/15K miles, whichever happens first, has substance, but the state will never do that because they have no way of monitoring your mileage. It's much easier to disconnect the wire in your tunnel than to jack up your car, remove its exhaust, install the SSIs and muffler, drive it about 22 months, and then put it all back to original again. The problem with not complying is not about, "My car is only one car, what difference can it make?" It's about where one goes thousands will follow, and when you see the CO and HC readings on an average 911 with carbs or MFI, it's not a pretty picture. One car can pollute worse than hundreds of cars in compliance, and in a state with 30 million cars it's just not worth the risk. Leave CA? Sure I could, but it wouldn't be because of emissions laws...

I agree.....I remember hacking up a lung after recess on a smoggy day when I was 6 years old....about the time Kennedy just got shot....the first one....

[Peter Zimmermann]

Originally Posted by ossiblue

Actually, safety testing was implemented here in the early 60's, maybe some of the other old timers remember. It was a bit haphazard though, not an annual inspection.

The CHP would put up rolling road blocks and randomly route cars into an inspection area off the side of the road. There, the car got the once over for basic safety/operation equipment. These moving inspections would appear/disappear overnight, but were always set up on a stretch of road where there was no turning around once you spotted it. Needless to say, it wasn't too effective for much except worrying the poor drivers who got nabbed. Maybe that's why it was discontinued.

Well son-of-a-gun! You learn something new every day. I got my first CA driver's license in 1961, had done a high school driver's ed class, worked in a SoCal gas station since I was 14, and never heard about those inspections!

[ossiblue]

Originally Posted by Peter Zimmermann

Well son-of-a-gun! You learn something new every day. I got my first CA driver's license in 1961, had done a high school driver's ed class, worked in a SoCal gas station since I was 14, and never heard about those inspections!

Well Pete, since you lived in SoCal back then, I'm kind of surprised too--then, again, they were very random. I personally got nabbed three different times in three different locations. Luckily I only had one violation and that was for a misadjusted headlight.

BTW, it's kinda good to know I'm not the only long-tooth on this thread

[Emission]

Originally Posted by John Watson

Mike, I see from your profile that you live in california. you do know that 1975 and older cars re exempt from smog? I have a 74 911S and don't have to smog it. In fact I just got my renewal notice and......no smog.

John Watson
74 911S

Well, mine is an '86... and it is easier to put on a CAT than to back-date the whole car.

There are some excellent points being brought up in this post. I'm impressed (and some of you really got me thinking).

BTW, some Porsche engineer at the LA Auto show last November was making a speech. He mentioned that "...if every single Porsche on the planet was to turn off its engine for the day, there isn't a scientific instrument on the planet that is sensitive enough to notice the difference in air quality."

Interesting spin, don't you think?

- Mike

[LeeH]

Arizona exempts cars that are 15 years old with collector's insurance. It's a wonderful thing!

"HB2357 defined a collectible vehicle as a vehicle that either (a) bears a model year date of original manufacture that is at least fifteen years old, or (b) is of unique or rare design, of limited production and an object of curiosity, and also is both (a) maintained primarily for use in car club activities, exhibitions, parades or other functions of public interest or for a private collection and is used only infrequently for other purposes; and (b) has a collectible vehicle or classic automobile insurance coverage that restricts the collectible vehicle mileage or use, or both, and requires the owner to have another vehicle for personal use."

[BernieP]

In PA classic and antique plates get you an exemption but my daily driver, 1980 SC, has to pass emissions every year. So far it has passed without a cat.

Bernie

[Emission]

Just my luck... I take off work to get the smog test done. The car easily passes the emissions test, and the visual inspection... but FAILS the functional check due to an idle speed that is too high!

Idle speed, according to the OEM sticker on the decklid, is supposed to be 900 +/-50 rpm. My idle was 1030 rpm! Of course, the tech working the station was of no help. He happily failed me (%#$@ prick), took my $67, and sent me on my way.

According to the tech, I need to changed my idle/timing, and then return for a whole new test.

I am hating California right about now.

- Mike

[Nine9six]

What I find even more interesting is the data that is created each time your vehicle visits the smog test station. Would it be to much to ask a computer to handle the data and waive vehicles that consisently pass with low emission numbers? Ohhhh noooooo!
My 87 which repeatedly passes with flying colors, is tested every other year even though it burns cleaner than most 3-4 year old cars. (Per the smog station guy)
Its all about the state skimming your wallet and not much about cleaner air. If it was about cleaner air, the previous statement would be enacted.
Arrrnood and his cronies are a bunch of no good rotten CSers
...and always have been

[jurhip]

1. If HB2357 is an actual statement of Arizona's law, that is the biggest piece of BS I have ever seen. Any car older than 15 years can fit. The other criterion can be argued based on the owner.

2. I lived in PA and their "safety inspection" is BS. It is inherently corrupt as the shop that does your inspection also does the repair. I had a friend who failed for a bad shock. I went to the shop and asks them why they put that there and the car drove fine adn no leakage was present, nor was tire wear uneven. After some arguing and talking with the owner, they eventually took it off.

3. +1,000,000 for all P. Zimmermann comments. Air quality matters. Just because one drives and maintains a well running 25 year old car 1500mi a year doesn't mean that the other million people do or even care. That is living in a box clueless to how many people are actually inhabiting this earth.

[450knotOffice]

The ongoing requirement for better and better fuel economy has had a big impact on air quality. The testing requirements are not the sole reason for the cleaner air that we breath today.

[Emission]

Originally Posted by 450knotOffice

The ongoing requirement for better and better fuel economy has had a big impact on air quality. The testing requirements are not the sole reason for the cleaner air that we breath today.

Yes, the air quality is much better than it was just twenty years ago.

I'm just *****ing about the fact that my lowly <100-mile-per month Porsche is being attacked by smog-czars. It's going to cost me a couple hundred dollars -- and at least four hours of my time -- to make things "right" on a miniscule scale while the real problem (old clunkers, diesel trucks, cargo ships, leaf blowers, trains, etc...) keeps puffing away.

- Mike

[jurhip]

...while the real problem (old clunkers, diesel trucks, cargo ships, leaf blowers, trains, etc...) keeps puffing away.

Its hard for a government to confirm "clunker" status without testing. So they are doing exactly what you asked for.

BTW, trains and ships are relatively clean by mass transferred. Its like cargo carpooling.