Notices
The Basement Non-Honda/Acura discussion. Content should be tasteful and "primetime" safe.

Arnold Schwarzenegger a wobbler

Thread Tools
 
Old Sep 28, 2004 | 01:41 PM
  #31  
MrFatbooty's Avatar
MrFatbooty
Wannabe yuppie
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 25,918
Likes: 0
From: Madison, WI
Default

Originally Posted by Tobra
I know for a fact that the emmission controls on my VW did not change from 1975, when fuel injection started, to 1979, when they stopped making them.
So essentially there's now a loophole where a 1975 emissions-controlled car would not have to pass, but a 1976 or later car with the same emissions controlls would?
Reply
Old Sep 28, 2004 | 01:44 PM
  #32  
DakarM's Avatar
DakarM
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 44,908
Likes: 0
From: Location Location
Default

Originally Posted by Bumnah
Did sema try to stop this?

yep
__________________
'00 Dakar Bus CRS Edition
LCD Squad #0001
Originally Posted by WiLL
...I really wanna get out and shoot people.
Reply
Old Sep 28, 2004 | 05:07 PM
  #33  
joebenz's Avatar
joebenz
nelson rules
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 36,124
Likes: 0
From: the best coast
Default

fawk that shiet!
__________________
no sig
Reply
Old Sep 28, 2004 | 06:44 PM
  #34  
Tobra's Avatar
Tobra
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,925
Likes: 0
From: Sacramelto, home after 10 years in Texas
Default

Originally Posted by MrFatbooty
So essentially there's now a loophole where a 1975 emissions-controlled car would not have to pass, but a 1976 or later car with the same emissions controlls would?
Precisely correct.
Reply
Old Sep 28, 2004 | 06:53 PM
  #35  
MrFatbooty's Avatar
MrFatbooty
Wannabe yuppie
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 25,918
Likes: 0
From: Madison, WI
Default

Well that's dumb, however my preferred situation would be to close that loophole and make the '75 cars subject to emissions testing. As long as they are only held up to the standards they had to meet when new, not current standards as that would require a lot of reengineering of old cars.
Reply
Old Sep 28, 2004 | 06:59 PM
  #36  
qtiger's Avatar
qtiger
Moderator
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,776
Likes: 0
Default

"OMG Cali is the bestest place ev4r!" :joshers:
Reply
Old Sep 28, 2004 | 07:00 PM
  #37  
FDragger's Avatar
FDragger
the F is a secret :shhh:
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,158
Likes: 0
From: Mt. Kilimanjaro
Default

yay for arnold

damn u idiots who voted for him

im glad i dont have an old car :happysad:
Reply
Old Sep 28, 2004 | 11:29 PM
  #38  
PacificDude's Avatar
PacificDude
Sharkbait OOHAHA!
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,982
Likes: 0
From: Held hostage :o
Default

Originally Posted by MrFatbooty
So essentially there's now a loophole where a 1975 emissions-controlled car would not have to pass, but a 1976 or later car with the same emissions controlls would?
Originally Posted by Tobra
Precisely correct.
Nice. I've been rebuilding the motor for my '75 280Z and may be finishing up the car next year. Now I'm stoked!
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2004 | 07:08 AM
  #39  
Tobra's Avatar
Tobra
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,925
Likes: 0
From: Sacramelto, home after 10 years in Texas
Default

Originally Posted by MrFatbooty
Well that's dumb, however my preferred situation would be to close that loophole and make the '75 cars subject to emissions testing. As long as they are only held up to the standards they had to meet when new, not current standards as that would require a lot of reengineering of old cars.
They had smog controls and standards prior to 1975, they just are not going to enforce them. It is political suicide to even give a whiff of non-PC, non-environmental thought in California. Arnold would have gotten crucified if he had vetoed 2683, though that makes me no less pissed. What this law does, is repeal the rolling exemption, but not make anyone who was exempted have to start passing the sniffer test again. They picked 1975 because they could not enact this prior to January 2005(2005-30=1975). It really has nothing to do with standards that have been put in place, they just did not want to get sued. In the 1970's they had California smog controls, and 49 state controls. MY bug for example, was originally sold in Utah, so no cat. If it would have been sold in California, it would have had to have a cat. I don't have an unleaded only sticker, or the narrow neck on the fuel filler. It is really all quite random.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2004 | 08:15 AM
  #40  
TheOtherDave™'s Avatar
TheOtherDave™
Apathy Kills
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 60,714
Likes: 0
From: The Left Lane
Default

Originally Posted by BonzoAPD
I think it is funny how the tree huggers complain when nothing is done to help polution and then when something is done, they complain :chuckles:

I personally think this is stupid since those vehicles didn't have the sources to make them clean vehicles in the first place but whatever. It doesn't affect me and I doubt it ever will
I care about the environment, don't get me wrong. One summer day in a smogged up metropolis will convince you that air quality is a big issue that we ought to address. But the laws of CA aren't addressing the problem realistically. (See my above post.)

What pisses me off is the unfair over-regulation of our niche market.

It is the height of hypocracy to make people like me worry over a lost CARB EO sticker, while AC Transit buses spit gallons of raw diesel fuel every day. :a:
__________________
:: :ToDspin: - supermod - but who gives a shit?

:: HAN Integra FAQ: If, by some miracle, yours hasn't been stolen... check it out!
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:55 PM.