CA classic owners better act fast

Discussion in '1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-' started by gp001, Aug 31, 2004.


  1. usedtobe 67p51d

    usedtobe 67p51d New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    On the days after Sept 11. When airplanes had been grounded the Air Quality was the best that socal had ever been scene. there's 5 major airports and 10 smaller ones in the LA basin. a lear jet burns like 4000#'s of fuel in the first 15 minutes of flight how much is controlled by carb? NADA! how much hydrocarbons are burned by one 747 let alone 2500 taking off a day? ps it's said that spilling one ounce of gas is like driving a car for a day from the pollutian standpoint i was on one flight that was going bad...they dropped however much fuel that it takes to fly from lax to hawaii over the pacific....we made a big 1/2 circle dumping this stuff
  2. Ares67Coupe

    Ares67Coupe New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is horsecrap, I have friggin e-mail and snail mailed as many people as I possibly could in california about this. I can't believe it passed. Why don't they ban some of the fuggin SUVs and Trucks that are being driven by stupid ass soccer moms, with NO KIDS, just because they feel like driving a big car. An SUV/Truck with a big motor that gets ****ty gas mileage is NOT a commute vehicle. :notnice: :notnice: :notnice: :bang:
  3. SadbutTrue

    SadbutTrue Founding Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Messages:
    2,351
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    49
    I mailed him, i suggest you all do the same. Still love the state though :p
  4. 2nd Mustang

    2nd Mustang Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    My son, who is a chemist, said that one study showed that the worst polluting vehicle is the fuel delivery truck. It pollutes the most of any vehicle, just pumping the fuel into the tanks at the gas station. Ironic!
  5. WORTH

    WORTH Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Got to fight celeb's with Celeb's, hmmmmmmm, I wonder what well know celebrity collects Classics????????????
  6. Dark Knight

    Dark Knight Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2000
    Messages:
    2,596
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    here in phoenix, everything from 67-up gets smogged.. they did away with the rolling standard in the late 80's... sucks.. guess they may move it to 75-up on oct.. we'll see..
  7. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0


    An idiot? That's bold talk for a pup, AND one who doesn't even own a classic. Just another wanna be huh? I'm talking about the daily drivers that do more than show up at parades. It's easy to blame big business, when you know absolutely nothing about the situation. :rolleyes:
  8. allcarfan

    allcarfan The Answer Man Founding Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,756
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Want to cut down on Pollution? I have said this for years....Look at the city buses, the city garbage trucks, the city dump trucks. I cant stand being behind any of them because of the fumes that they emit.

    I am sure if this was brought to the attention of the city that the response would be something along the lines of "those vehicles carry multiple people, thus cutting down on the amount of vehicles emitting pollution." However, that shouldnt stop them from running CLEAN!

    I live in deep southern, GA. We dont have emissions here. In Atlanta they do. I can understand running emissions tests on newer cars...well, really I cant, but anyway....on Classic Cars...Give me a break. How many classic cars in California (72 and older) could meet emissions right now if they were tested? 5%? 10%?

    What if these cars had to meet the emissions standards they had to meet when they were built?
  9. tjm73

    tjm73 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2000
    Messages:
    2,428
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    All I'm saying is that statement was dumb...real dumb. Maybe idiot wasn't the best choice.

    Pup? You don't know me. You have no idea how old I am, what I do for a living, what my knowledge base is, nor what my experience is. What makes youthink I'm a "pup"?

    And what possible difference does it make whether I own an old car or not. Does my lack of classic ownership diminsish my right to be concerned about such laws? Does my lack of classic ownership make my concern's less valid? My next car will be a classic car. And yeah, I do know something about the situation. I follow what's going on in California, because it will effect what's going on here in New York.

    And what purpose does saying
    serve? On second thought, I think I'll stick with my original tag of
  10. oboebrian

    oboebrian Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2002
    Messages:
    2,532
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    watch the name calling or this thread will get locked and people temporarily (or permanantly) banned, I'm really tired of this junk.
  11. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0



    I was in errer about the "pup" comment. I don't know you, and I don't know whether you are 14 or 20 years old. Sorry about that. The "idiot" comment directed towards me was in my mind uncalled for. You simply didn't like my perspective and retaliated. I forgive you. Since you live in a big town, you must be aware that the air quality is a big concern. Just trying to look at the big picture here, instead of only looking at what is comfortable for hobbyists.
  12. tjm73

    tjm73 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2000
    Messages:
    2,428
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    I'll agree the idiot comment may have been uncalled for. I was only trying to drive home a point. From what you wrote my interpretation was anti-classic car. I am aware that air quality is a legitmate and importent issue. However, I believe the evidence will show the impact of classic cars on the big picture is minimal.

    Before attackign the hobbiest, go after the city gov't's and big trucks that run 24/7, the Post Office delivery trucks, UPS, Fed-Ex, etc... Airplanes. Like someone posted, ever watch one take off. NO WAY is that thing even close to clean.

    :cheers: OK enough of this flowery crap, back to the cars we love!!!!
  13. WORTH

    WORTH Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Sorry OZ, but the people making these laws don't give two sHats about air quality. all they are looking for is a scapegoat. Old cars are not the problem and never were. ANd making newer cars run clean isn't going to do it either. If they want to take a chunk out of pollution they should be spending all their time on alternative transportation. There is absolutely no reason to have commuter cars in a city. It should be all mass transit. If they took all the money they waste making roads and trying to make cars clean and spent it on a good mass transit system in all the cities their would be no reason to worry about what any car poluted because they wouldn't be driven much.
  14. gp001

    gp001 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    4,445
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    The Gov doesn't care about air quality, they just want to appease the tree huggin groups. Here's proof:
    • State vehicles are EXEMPT
    • Mass transit, including many car pool vans, are EXEMPT
    • Businesses that pollute can BUY pollution credits for those that don't

    We are, as SEMA says, the SCAPEGOATS !!!
  15. one2gamble

    one2gamble Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    924
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    you should be doing the same, the amount of pre 75 cars driven on a daily bases is minimal compared to newer vehicles. Even if they are driven daily the amount of pollution they put out is usually no more than most newer cars/trucks/SUV's. Many things are smog exempt, and many things such as airplanes are not being modernizedt to run cleaner. Why dont we look at the school buses throughout the state? How about the military vehicles? None of these have to pass smog. Please get a clue because this isnt only about the hobby, its about the state trying to pass the buck onto classic owners because they are in the pocket of business and they dont want the state to have to pay in order to modernize their own fleets. This will cost some classic owners thousands in order to get their cars just to potentially pass new emissions laws with no gurantee that these laws wont again change on them. It is unfair to alter laws that are already in affect when they have a potential huge negative impact on the end user.
  16. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We have to start somewhere. You folks in Calif are killing yourselves. Really. My throat started to close up on me. New cars only put out a fraction of the emissions that the older ones do. Your topography is such that the smog is contained and since you can't change the weather, maybe you need to change the way you pollute. :shrug: There is currently the techknowledgy to mass produce fuel cell cars, and it is coming to that or the hybrids. We just have to wait until we run out of oil, or kill half the people first. I really don't care about your air quality, because it is diffused before it gets to me. I just like to soak my toes on the beach, and the water by Seattle is too cold. :D



    Off Topic, but didn't Arnold do a hell of a job last night? Even my 11 year old was captivated by him, and said "that was the best speech I ever heard." Look for my son to be President some day. His name is Boone, and yes, he is related to Daniel. :D
  17. rebel65

    rebel65 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    17
    dood..i'm sorry, i'm not calling you names or anything here, but that is sheer IGNORANCE. LA is not California. ok? LA has crappy air quality, but you know what areas have the worst air quality? farming land. not because of cars or air planes, because of the farmers putting crap in the air like dirt, pesticides, etc. i drive my classic daily, 10 miles to and from work. i've driven my car 7000 miles in almost 3 years..

    Los Angeles is NOT California.
  18. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I ran into it about 35-40 miles NE of San Diego. I too don't wish to call bad names, but the last time I was there, LA was in Calif. :shrug: Of course, the next big quake may make it the 51st state.
  19. gp001

    gp001 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    4,445
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    No offense Oz, but using your logic you should sell your Mustang and your (IIRC) Buick and replace them with hybrid or electric vehicles. The pollution in Ca does not come from old cars.

    Yes, the LA basin does have the worlds most unique combination for smog. But it is not from old hobbyist cars. It is from the people who buy POS road hazards. These vehicles could probably be eliminated from the road using existing laws and regulations, but no one dares be un PC enough to tell low income people their car is a hazard or a polluter.

    This program doesn't target the polluting vehicles. The people whose vehicles pollute can apply for either CAP (Consumer Assistance Program) or an economic waiver. With CAP a low income person gets money from the state to either repair the vehicle, or they can "retire" the vehicle. Either way that costs ME (Joe F'in Taxpayer) money. Under the economic hardship waiver they can REGISTER THE CAR IMMEDIATELY AND HAVE UNTIL THEIR NEXT SMOG CHECK TO CORRECT THE ISSUES. That's 2 years to pollute the precious air WITH the Governments blessing. So, this law will do nothing except to get more hard working folks that enjoy owning old cars to pony up the dough for a friggin smog check and the related BS that it brings.

    If they were serious about cleaning up the air they would do away with these "pollute with blessing" programs as well as require all state, mass transit, etc vehicles to test.
  20. Ozsum2

    Ozsum2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Maybe the Stang, but not the Buick. It gets 33 MPG. :D I just know that there were many smokers when I was there, and they were polluting. At what percentage to the whole problem, I don't know. I saw probably just the tip of the iceberg, so there were probably many more I didn't see. Now, if the current laws can get rid of them, then there is an inforcement problem, because they were definitely a problem. Maybe inforcement is the issue. Why have laws if they aren't inforced? :shrug: If that is the case, then folks shouldn't worry because they won't inforce them anyway.

Share This Page