Stupid California

[red13]

So some information that I feel should be know on the craziness that California is going to get more of.  Went to go get my car smog and talking to the smog tech California might be starting smog requirements on vehicles 1966 and newer.  What he told me was that the first time you smog your vehicle you have to go to a referee and he will allow or deny what you have under your hood.  Being stock or modified.  After that, that is the standard your vehicle will be smogged at.  So I believe this is another plot to get rid of carbureted

vehicles.  California is already implementing a daily driver tax to recoup lost revenue from having more fuel efficient cars.

[Farmer]

Agreed with your thread title. I will never live there

[datzenmike]

Get a second opinion. WTF does a smog tech know? If he was brighter he'd be flipping burgers.

[CrazyHawaiian760]

That will be the day I fucking move out of cali!

[Eomund]

Won't happen. Use to be a smog tech. California didn't have any smog regulation before 1972. Per a law written in 1962 when they passed the seatbelt law, they can't enforce regulations on vehicles that were built before the law was introduced. It was put into place so people with older vehicles don't have to rebuild their car every time a new law is passed. Currently the exempt status is 1975 and older.

 

I can see them possibly go back to 72, unlikely but possible, they cannot legally go further back than that without amending several other laws first. It'll never happen.

[red13]

oh ok the guy told me he had his machines updated also and the go back to 1966 now.  The one thing though is how to smog a vehicle that really doesn't have smog equipment.

[Eomund]

Think he was bullshitting you. Just did some digging and not seeing anything about it. Nothing that's been officially announced anyway.

 

If you do hear anything, let us know, but unlikely it'll come to pass thankfully.

[red13]

yeah he said it was a letter from the BAR

[john510]

Your smog guy is an idiot,find a new one.And yes California is stupid,more people should move to better states

[datsunaholic]

California has had smog laws since 1967.  Federal standards started in 1968, so ANY State can do smog testing for 1968 and newer.   Most don't.  California was allowed to have its own regulatory system because it existed before the Clean Air Act.

 

That's why anyone who alters or removes their smog equipment is treading a fine line.  Just because you don't have testing now, doesn't mean you won't in the future.

[Eomund]

California has had smog laws since 1967.  Federal standards started in 1968, so ANY State can do smog testing for 1968 and newer.   Most don't.  California was allowed to have its own regulatory system because it existed before the Clean Air Act.

 

That's why anyone who alters or removes their smog equipment is treading a fine line.  Just because you don't have testing now, doesn't mean you won't in the future.

Partially right. They had regulations on newly sold vehicles (why some late 60s cars have things like smog pumps), but no laws regarding emmisions and emmision testing until august of 1973. They didn't introduce the visual check until the mid to late 70s. And the laws didn't effect the consumers until late '72 either.

 

Now for all us that have engine swaps, if they wanted to be cocks, they could inspect to see if its a same year motor. If it's a newer motor, they can force you to keep it to emmisions standards of the year of the engine. Thankfully for most of us, they don't really check on that.

[datsunaholic]

California has tested cars from the 60s in the past.  There are Federal standards for 1968 and newer. I'm not saying they will, but they CAN go back to testing 1967 and newer if the State wanted to.  And there are federal standards that they could fall back on for 1968+ if they wanted to- I have a packet full of smog check receipts for my 1968 520, until it became testing exempt in 2001.

 

That said, California set the first standards for HC and CO in 1966, effective for the 1967 model year, and started random roadside testing that year.

 

I again emphasize TESTING exempt.  Folks confuse that with SMOG exempt.  No cars 1968 and newer are trule smog exempt, and many cars before that  had some form of smog equipment.

[smoke]

Get a second opinion. WTF does a smog tech know? If he was brighter he'd be flipping burgers.

This is like how the appraisal I got from a VW shop (for a VW) was not good enough for the D.O.L. No, I had to take it to Jimmy McShinyshoes who sells brand new Hondas to get an acceptable appraisal, because he would clearly know more about a 50 year old VW.

[datzenmike]

Earliest 'smog' device I can think of was the PCV valve introduced widely on '62 (ish) N Am automobiles. Though it technically it reduced hydrocarbon emissions it's greatest achievement was far and away keeping the engine oil cleaner of gas and water sludge mixed with combustion blow-by. Engines with it lasted longer with fewer needed oil changes. Also the system is totally benign using no power to operate and if it fails, the motor continues to operate normally without it. ... well the oil gets dirty sooner.

[DanielC]

I honestly do not think the emission requirements on a 1966 or even a 1974 car should be all that difficult to meet or easily beat   If the engine is worn out, needs rings, and a valve job, sure it could be difficult.  But if the engine is in decent mechanical condition, adjusting the valves, setting the timing, and tuning the carb idle mixture should do it.

 

If the HC is too high, the engine is misfiring.  The ignition system needs attention,  or the mixture way too lean.  High CO, it is too rich.

Fixing those problems will result in the engine having fewer emissions, having more power, and getting better fuel economy.

[thisismatt]

I honestly do not think the emission requirements on a 1966 or even a 1974 car should be all that difficult to meet or easily beat   If the engine is worn out, needs rings, and a valve job, sure it could be difficult.  But if the engine is in decent mechanical condition, adjusting the valves, setting the timing, and tuning the carb idle mixture should do it.

 

If the HC is too high, the engine is misfiring.  The ignition system needs attention,  or the mixture way too lean.  High CO, it is too rich.

Fixing those problems will result in the engine having fewer emissions, having more power, and getting better fuel economy.

 

That would be great and all, if CARB only concerned itself with emissions...

[Eomund]

Even with the visual, still pretty easy, at least for me. Still have the stock carb if I needed to swap back for any reason. Problems passing emissions, just flange in a CAT.

[datson4life]

I tried to smog my 1972 521, just for fun a couple days ago, they said their machines dont go back that far, and it would never pass because they came without a catylitic converter etc

[datzenmike]

If they didn't come with a cat then the emissions standard (if there was one for the 521) would reflect that. You can't fail a test where there is no test.

[paradime]

First off, my family is 5 generations Californian, and although there is plenty of crazy here, I submit if you can't handle that  you don't belong here. Personally, if this State ever becomes what the rest of the country calls "normal" I'm getting the fuck out and moving to Alaska. 

 

Before getting your rump in a bunch over third party hearsay consider this. There is no way Sacramento could covertly change emissions testing laws like that. There would be huge political backlash from car owners like you and me, the collector community, after market industries, on and on. There is not enough cause or political will to fight that battle. The simple fact is there aren't enough pre 1975 cars on the road to present a significant emission issue. While California legislation is sensitive to the environment, this state is every bit as sensitive to the sovereignty of the individual. Maybe that's because people push back against authority here. 

 

 

http://japanesenostalgiccar.com/2012/03/22/california-bill-may-exempt-pre-1981-cars-from-smog-testing/

 

California Introduces Bill to Exempt pre-1981 Vehicles From Emissions Inspection Requirement

In 2004, legislation was enacted to repeal California’s rolling emissions-test exemption for vehicles 30 years old and older and replace it with a law requiring the lifetime testing of all 1976 and newer model-year vehicles. This year, a bill has been introduced in the California Senate (S.B. 1224) by Senator Doug LaMalfa (Senator.LaMalfa@senate.ca.gov ) to exempt all motor vehicles prior to the 1981 model year from the emissions inspection requirement.  The bill will be considered in the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee on March 27, 2012.

Outcome was unfavorable 

http://legiscan.com/CA/bill/SB1224/2011

[dhp123166]

Yeah well it is bad for newer vehicle owners as well.

 

3 years ago I cracked the exhaust manifold on my 1998 Honda Civic LX because of a design flaw.

 

The manifold and catalytic converter are integral one piece so the whole thing has to be replaced.

 

I found a shop in L.A. which replaced it with one which was legal and had the CARB number and it was relatively cheap @ $350.00.

 

The vehicle then passed both the emissions test and engine inspection.

 

Now the state is also going after vehicles which are 1999 and older as I found this year when I had to  take my Honda to a "Star" classification smog inspection station for its' biannual inspection.

 

The state now considers 1999 and older vehicles to be capable of being gross polluters so the higher level of testing is found at these "Star" stations.

 

So I go to this smog station and he aborts the test as I have the wrong CARB number on my catalytic converter, it is supposedly for a Civic EX or DX, never mind that my vehicle passed the emissions test.

 

I called the referee and set up an appointment this past week, he tested emissions (it passed natch) but flunked me based on my incorrect CARB number.

 

It turns out the correct catalytic converter and the one I have on my car are from the SAME ENGINE FAMILY, THEY ARE FUCKING IDENTICAL, the only difference is my vehicle classifies as an "LEV" (low emissions vehicle) and the other one is a "TLEV" (whatever that means) so it has slightly different anti smog piping.

 

The company that produced my current catalytic converter was not granted an exemption one month before I got it installed so now it is illegal when it was not before.

 

So I am going to be in the hole for $635.00 for a steaming pile of bureaucratic bullshit when I supposedly fixed this right already.

 

I ask myself why and of course conventional wisdom is that " oh we have to fight smog and pollution"...maybe... but I gotta call bullshit and assume  that this is just another income stream for the state.

 

I also would not be surprised if major car companies backed these stringent anti-smog laws as a way of increasing their sales...

 

My truck is a Datsun 80 diesel 720 WHICH IS COMPLETELY IMMUNE TO THIS FUCKING BULLSHIT (at least for the time being), thank God for that!!!

 

I love California because the weather cannot be beat, the people are cool, but some of these laws are just...needlessly Kafkaesque

[datsunaholic]

521s had a standard.   All 521s, including L521s with J-series engines, had a PCV.  PL521s had air pumps, dual points, and evaporative systems, though only the air pump and dual points affected the tailpipe emissions (and the dual points had no effect on idle emissions).  Catalytic Converters weren't even in mass production until the 1975 model year.  Honda managed to meet emissions without a catalytic converter as late as 1982.

[MikeRL411]

 

3 years ago I cracked the exhaust manifold on my 1998 Honda Civic LX because of a design flaw.

 

Check with Honda and see what the California warranty is on the polution control hardware.  You might be still under warranty for emission control, which needs a compliant exhaust manifold.  My daughter fought the Toyota dealer on her pickup truck when it developed a crack and won by contacting the local manufacturer's headquarters and getting a written statement that the exhaust manifold was essential to conforming to California exhaust warranties.  The dealer was pissed but my daughter was elated!

[thisismatt]

this state is every bit as sensitive to the sovereignty of the individual.

 

 

Thanks for the chuckle :D

[MikeRL411]

This is an example of stupid compliance without any sort of thought.  I had a 1970 Buick Electra LTD, built in California and equipped with the California unique intake and exhaust manifolds.  The part numbers were unique to California, and the driver's handbook had "pink pages" specifies the modifications unique to California built and intended for sale in California and met all polution control requirements for that model year.  I took it to the State sponsored inspection station.  Passed with much margin.  FAILED!  There was no visible smog retarding add-on aftermarket piece of crap visible.  No amout of part number, date of manufacture, California final assembly, and driver's handbook certification of as built comformance.  So I asked what was lacking.  Answer was an after market POS spark reterding lump on the inner fender,  So I bought the cheapest POS after market retarder, bolted it to the fender, tied off the wiring harness and returned to the inspection station.  I showed them the prior report that said I needed a retared installed.  I pointed out that their regulations did not require that it had to be connected and that I had already passed the functional test requirements,  Verifying that an inert piece of useless hardware was in fact bolted to the fender was all I needed to get my "pass".