CA classic owners better act fast

[jikelly]

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

No way, they just dumped the fuel over the ocean? I guess there might have been a disaster but gee somehow that just seems wrong. Anyway the airlines are probable protected from the Air Quality regulators since they are so important to the economy and they have lobbyist in the legislature protecting their interests.

You guys need to nip this in the bud. If California passes this into law and begins generating revenue from it somehow other states might follow. I know Texas is pretty strapped for cash right now. My state went broke in 2002 and my college tuition has jumped like 60 percent since then.

 

[one2gamble]

I used to have a lobbyist in the legislature But honestly this is why we have groups like SEMA, they are the ones that need to be lobbying the legislature face to face while we write and call as many people as we can.

 

[gp001]

Maybe the Stang, but not the Buick. It gets 33 MPG.

Yes, but compare it's pollutants to a hybrid or electric. How would it compare? If you are so concerned with our air so you can dip your toes in our ocean don't bring your NON California emissions vehicle here to pollute our air Or get a hybrid/electric

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? If that is the case, then folks shouldn't worry because they won't inforce them anyway.

I've already given you the 2 scenarios by which low income people (or those just pocketing tax free money getting paid under the table) can circumvent the exact smog laws that are in place to reduce smog (and let's face it, those are the old cars polluting the air, not the hobbyist). It is not PC to say to Mr. Lowlife "Hey your car pollutes fix it or you can't drive it". I can just see the lawyers coming out for that one.

Most of these vehicles could be removed by citing for things like bald tires, cracked windshield, lights out, etc, etc, but again not PC

 

[Ozsum2]

I brought in enough revenue that the state can clean up my mess. It is a 2004 and is very clean, but not as clean as battery powered. But then, it takes fossil fuel to charge the batteries unless they use solar or geo, but that isn't wide spread yet. I'm not concerned about PC ness. Most of the smokers are illegally in this country anyway, so they need to walk back south.

 

[skywalker]

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?

You know as well as i do, since introducing emissions testing here, the air quality has continously gone down. Emissions tests simply do not help. What we need is cleaner power plants, less pollution from government and industrial facilities, cleaner city vehicles and a MARTA system that is worth riding. As for that last comment about MARTA, if you need proof that MARTA is worthless, I live in Douglasville, the western suburb of Atlanta, and I commute to school which takes me 20-30 minutes if I drive. If I take MARTA it is 30-45 minutes. Why? For one thing it takes 15 minutes just to get to the MARTA station! Then I have to wait for the train, I have to change trains at lil' 5. If MARTA actually extended to somewhere meaningful, I'd take it, but no county but Fulton will take it without the MARTA police keeping the homeless off of it because every other county doesn't want them coming in off of MARTA!

 

[mustangracer]

Oz, I really think you are either stirring the pot or are a wee bit short on knowing what you are talking about...


Hot Rod ran an article when the crusher programs were introduced in the mid 90's. Basically, the oil company pays 300 bucks to take old cars off the road, and gets credits against their pollution emissions for each car removed.

Hot Rod bought a 6 cyl 67 Camaro off some guy who was going to turn it in. They had it smog tested without doing anything to it, and it passed all requirements with scores less than the 88-89 model year maximums, and a couple requirements for the 91-92 model years..

They then modded the heck out of it and installed a mild 350 and it STILL passed all the 88 standards....

How is taking all these cars (which are a significantly smaller proportion of the emitters) to the smog stations going to do anything but make more money for the state and smog test operators?...(68 bucks a pop here)

It sure ain't going to reduce emissions appreciably, not when you have airliners dumping 28000lb of fuel in an emergency.

 

[Ozsum2]

Oz, I really think you are either stirring the pot or are a wee bit short on knowing what you are talking about...


Hot Rod ran an article when the crusher programs were introduced in the mid 90's. Basically, the oil company pays 300 bucks to take old cars off the road, and gets credits against their pollution emissions for each car removed.

Hot Rod bought a 6 cyl 67 Camaro off some guy who was going to turn it in. They had it smog tested without doing anything to it, and it passed all requirements with scores less than the 88-89 model year maximums, and a couple requirements for the 91-92 model years..

They then modded the heck out of it and installed a mild 350 and it STILL passed all the 88 standards....

How is taking all these cars (which are a significantly smaller proportion of the emitters) to the smog stations going to do anything but make more money for the state and smog test operators?...(68 bucks a pop here)

It sure ain't going to reduce emissions appreciably, not when you have airliners dumping 28000lb of fuel in an emergency.

Oh, you know me....I have a big spoon. But seriously, how do you clean up the air unless you stop the polluters? I belive I read 1975 and newer. Not our classics. I'm sorry, the key word you mentioned was EMERGENCY. I don't have any problem with a declared emergency. That's just good sense. Why not come up with solutions, instead of the ney-sayer bigotry? But do enlighten me on what I thought I saw when I was in Calif, beings how I was confused and all. Maybe I was having an acute reaction to all the fresh ocean air.

 

[tjm73]

Those of you that think that this is a car only problem, or that liberal tree hugging communists will be happy to stop with your hobby, better think again. I recently bought another dirt bike, guess what? The California Air Resource Board (eco-nazis with a degree) are trying full on to eliminate off road recreation. They are working hand-in-hand with eco groups to do two things: first they lock up all government owned land to keep off road vehicles off of it, limiting their use to off-road parks. BTW, there are NO off road parks near me, so where do I ride? Next, bikes newer than 2002 are issued "red-sticker" licenses, good for winter-use only, supposedly when the ecosystem is better equipped to handle the onslaught of dirt bike exhaust. Here's the problem, most humans I know of prefer to ride when it's not raining, right? Schools are not in session during the summer months, which is why most people plan off-road vacations during the summertime. Second, off road vehicles represent about .002% of the total registered vehicles in California, and are used on average about 8 hours per month. Think that's going to help your delicate lungs? Call it what you want, but I call it communist control. Also to my fellow stanger Oz, I say that LA is a sh1thole, pure and simple. Venture a bit north, even an hour or so outside of LA and you'll find a great, clean state all the way to the Oregon border. LA was called the "Valley of Smoke" by native indians many years before Henry Ford's cars ever poisened its air. Trust me, air quality is the least of LA's problems. Want to clean up California? Start executing hippies!

Awesome post! To quote Eric Cartmen "Damn dirty hippies..."

 

[zookeeper]

Those of you that think that this is a car only problem, or that liberal tree hugging communists will be happy to stop with your hobby, better think again. I recently bought another dirt bike, guess what? The California Air Resource Board (eco-nazis with a degree) are trying full on to eliminate off road recreation. They are working hand-in-hand with eco groups to do two things: first they lock up all government owned land to keep off road vehicles off of it, limiting their use to off-road parks. BTW, there are NO off road parks near me, so where do I ride? Next, bikes newer than 2002 are issued "red-sticker" licenses, good for winter-use only, supposedly when the ecosystem is better equipped to handle the onslaught of dirt bike exhaust. Here's the problem, most humans I know of prefer to ride when it's not raining, right? Schools are not in session during the summer months, which is why most people plan off-road vacations during the summertime. Second, off road vehicles represent about .002% of the total registered vehicles in California, and are used on average about 8 hours per month. Think that's going to help your delicate lungs? Call it what you want, but I call it communist control. Also to my fellow stanger Oz, I say that LA is a sh1thole, pure and simple. Venture a bit north, even an hour or so outside of LA and you'll find a great, clean state all the way to the Oregon border. LA was called the "Valley of Smoke" by native indians many years before Henry Ford's cars ever poisened its air. Trust me, air quality is the least of LA's problems. Want to clean up California? Start executing hippies!

 

[tjm73]

How did my post quoating his post get inserted prior to his post being posted, which I included in my post??!?!!?!?!? I'm confused!!!!!

 

[Ozsum2]

Those of you that think that this is a car only problem, or that liberal tree hugging communists will be happy to stop with your hobby, better think again. I recently bought another dirt bike, guess what? The California Air Resource Board (eco-nazis with a degree) are trying full on to eliminate off road recreation. They are working hand-in-hand with eco groups to do two things: first they lock up all government owned land to keep off road vehicles off of it, limiting their use to off-road parks. BTW, there are NO off road parks near me, so where do I ride? Next, bikes newer than 2002 are issued "red-sticker" licenses, good for winter-use only, supposedly when the ecosystem is better equipped to handle the onslaught of dirt bike exhaust. Here's the problem, most humans I know of prefer to ride when it's not raining, right? Schools are not in session during the summer months, which is why most people plan off-road vacations during the summertime. Second, off road vehicles represent about .002% of the total registered vehicles in California, and are used on average about 8 hours per month. Think that's going to help your delicate lungs? Call it what you want, but I call it communist control. Also to my fellow stanger Oz, I say that LA is a sh1thole, pure and simple. Venture a bit north, even an hour or so outside of LA and you'll find a great, clean state all the way to the Oregon border. LA was called the "Valley of Smoke" by native indians many years before Henry Ford's cars ever poisened its air. Trust me, air quality is the least of LA's problems. Want to clean up California? Start executing hippies!

Well, admitting there is a problem is half the battle. I was never north of LA except once, we dropped down to Crescent City from Oregon. Nice place. I'm not a tree hugger, but after being in Northern Calif, I could be. So if I read you correctly, most La folks deserve the air they are currently breathing. I would have to agree. Kind of a sheet hole place for sure. I have faith that Arnold will do the right thing....what ever that is. He can't be bought. Maybe it is time the masses address him and get the REAL cause corrected. One more thing, why did the indians call it that? Were there too many camp fires?

 

[65stanger]

How did my post quoating his post get inserted prior to his post being posted, which I included in my post??!?!!?!?!? I'm confused!!!!!

Let's Do The Time Warp Again!

 

[zookeeper]

Oz, from what I understand, the indians called it valley of smoke because it always looked like it was on fire, due to hazy skies. It's a geographical anomoly. Only LA looks like that, think they're the only ones with cars or industry? Also, I live about 90 miles south of Crescent City, and it's even more beatiful. I love the outdoors, I love spending time with my family camping, riding bikes and simply enjoying the peace and quiet. But I'm not so ignorant that I think you can't have cars or off road recreation to get a clean forest. Like most conservatives (politically speaking) I believe the world is a big enough place for everyone to enjoy his or her activity. I don't want to exclude or prevent anyone form enjoying the outdoors, so why can't everyone else feel the same? We all want clean air and water, but you don't need enviro-nazis to accomplish that goal! Here's another true story: several years ago, the local off roaders (mostly ATV's) enjoyed riding in dunes that were owned by a local pulp mill. The hippies saw people enjoying themselves, and sought to close the dunes to off road vehicles to preserve the dune grass. Now first off the dune grass was not and is not native to the area, it was planted during the second world war to try to keep the lookout bunkers a little less sandy. Second, IT WASN"T THEIR LAND! The local pulp mill's position was that either everyone can use the dunes, or nobody uses the dunes, period. So, that was good enough for the enviro-nazis, and they sought to close it, which they did. Now, years later, the pulp mill has sold, and the new owners granted the hikers access to the dunes. The hikers are the same bunch that got it banned for ATV's and ARE NOW ORGANIZING VOLUNTEERS TO HELP RID THE DUNES OF THE SAME GRASS THEY SOUGHT TO PROTECT! Their stand is that since it's not native, it shouldn't be allowed to take over the "natural" beauty of the sand. Now you know why I absolutly HATE tree-hugging jackasses who lie at every turn to get their way.

 

[tjm73]

..... Here's another true story: several years ago, the local off roaders (mostly ATV's) enjoyed riding in dunes that were owned by a local pulp mill. The hippies saw people enjoying themselves, and sought to close the dunes to off road vehicles to preserve the dune grass. Now first off the dune grass was not and is not native to the area, it was planted during the second world war to try to keep the lookout bunkers a little less sandy. Second, IT WASN"T THEIR LAND! The local pulp mill's position was that either everyone can use the dunes, or nobody uses the dunes, period. So, that was good enough for the enviro-nazis, and they sought to close it, which they did. Now, years later, the pulp mill has sold, and the new owners granted the hikers access to the dunes. The hikers are the same bunch that got it banned for ATV's and ARE NOW ORGANIZING VOLUNTEERS TO HELP RID THE DUNES OF THE SAME GRASS THEY SOUGHT TO PROTECT! Their stand is that since it's not native, it shouldn't be allowed to take over the "natural" beauty of the sand.....

Oh my F-ing GOD!!!! That really happened?!?!!? Unbelievable...... I hate them tree huggin', bunny kissin', bastards. I love nature and all, but these people need to get a grip. There are bigger problems to conquere (sp?).

 

[Ozsum2]

Oz, from what I understand, the indians called it valley of smoke because it always looked like it was on fire, due to hazy skies. It's a geographical anomoly. Only LA looks like that, think they're the only ones with cars or industry? Also, I live about 90 miles south of Crescent City, and it's even more beatiful. I love the outdoors, I love spending time with my family camping, riding bikes and simply enjoying the peace and quiet. But I'm not so ignorant that I think you can't have cars or off road recreation to get a clean forest. Like most conservatives (politically speaking) I believe the world is a big enough place for everyone to enjoy his or her activity. I don't want to exclude or prevent anyone form enjoying the outdoors, so why can't everyone else feel the same? We all want clean air and water, but you don't need enviro-nazis to accomplish that goal! Here's another true story: several years ago, the local off roaders (mostly ATV's) enjoyed riding in dunes that were owned by a local pulp mill. The hippies saw people enjoying themselves, and sought to close the dunes to off road vehicles to preserve the dune grass. Now first off the dune grass was not and is not native to the area, it was planted during the second world war to try to keep the lookout bunkers a little less sandy. Second, IT WASN"T THEIR LAND! The local pulp mill's position was that either everyone can use the dunes, or nobody uses the dunes, period. So, that was good enough for the enviro-nazis, and they sought to close it, which they did. Now, years later, the pulp mill has sold, and the new owners granted the hikers access to the dunes. The hikers are the same bunch that got it banned for ATV's and ARE NOW ORGANIZING VOLUNTEERS TO HELP RID THE DUNES OF THE SAME GRASS THEY SOUGHT TO PROTECT! Their stand is that since it's not native, it shouldn't be allowed to take over the "natural" beauty of the sand. Now you know why I absolutly HATE tree-hugging jackasses who lie at every turn to get their way.[/QUOT



Yea, you guys up there got the better end of the deal. There are tree huggers around here and we have issues with the closed-abandoned lead and gold mines from over 100 years ago. These are real health issues. If I ever became a tree hugger, it would be to preserve the natural (key word) beauty of all the places I've been in my life. Alaska, N. Calif, Oregon, Wash, here etc...... Some things need protecting and some people need to be protected from themselves. I don't have the answers, but from what I saw and experienced in S. Calif, it was a bad deal and I don't think I'll be back even if I hadn't have gotten the impeeding traffic ticket.

 

[mustangracer]

Oz....you still don't get it I think..

We all agree clean air is what we want, but this newest legislation won't do a thing to help, besides making money for certain groups. The percentage of gross pollutors in the 75 or newer cars is tiny compared to the pollution generated by industry and mass transit/aircraft.

And if it wasn't bad enough, CA and Az are experimenting with roadside remote pollution "sniffers" that take pictures and send tickets like the red-light cams.

AND if they can repeal what they've already done, who's to say they can't take it further back and make all cars get checked, or creating restrictions legislating out perfomance mondifications.

It's all crap anyway....big government in bed with big business...despite all the complaints auto manufacturers groan, they know these kind of laws end up making them money, either in repairs or people having to purchase new cars to replace unfixable ones.

 

[Ozsum2]

No, I think I get it. We have to start somewhere, we all agree there.

 

[tjm73]

Was this law signed?

 

[gp001]

Yes, sadly, it was.

http://enjoythedrive.com/content/?id=33338

Rumor is they are already trying to add the pre-76 cars back into the testing program. Since California had SMOG testing programs prior to the Federal Government, California can make their own laws regarding SMOG standards. Once California passes it others states can stay with the Fed program or adopt the California standards, most will adopt the California standards for the same BS reasons the Californian rats, I mean politicians, did.

If you care about our hobby, or performance cars period, you should visit the SEMA Action Network (SAN link below) site enjoythedrive.com and keep up on current legislation and/or join the newsletter.

http://enjoythedrive.com/content/?id=8250

 

[one2gamble]

No, I think I get it. We have to start somewhere, we all agree there.

your amazing.....california already started a long long long long time ago. This is what we call backtracking for no reason