Look out, 1966 thru 1973 California registered Buick owners, the CARB is at it yet again. Beginning in January, 2003, the California Air Resources Board gets their way with these older vehicles. The new law goes into effect January 1, 3 days from now. This law allows the CARB to set up and run roadside mobile test stations to visual/particulate check any vehicle they desire, to test for emissions control parts missing/disabled/non-functional, and gross polluting emissions. This program is designed to give the state, through the CARB, over 1 million roadside inspection data inputs in 2003, for various actions they will come up with later. In truth, these stations will "randomly" pull any vehicle they desire into them, test and if the vehicle fails, will be designated a gross polluter, and will require the vehicle to be repaired before the next registration renewal will be processed and completed. The law allows the CARB to pull ANY year/type/make vehicle into the test site it to be tested, that the test operators desire. If your vehickle is pulled into one of these test sites, you have NO RECOURSE but to do as the testers wish, and abide by what the machines/testers come up with. If your vehicle is a bad enough polluter, these people have the authority to confiscate it on the spot. I saw this in a pilot program about three years ago, on Anaheim Blvd, just off of harbor Blvd. Smog check officials were pulling vehicles over at random, and there was both a CHP officer and a tow truck sitting on a side street, for confiscation purposes. It doesn't matter if your vehicle is a test or no test year, they are alowed to, and will do inspections on any vehicle they choose to check. Through a CARB insider I know whom happens to own a muscle car, this program is solely aimed at any and all pre-1973 vehicles, as far as the CARB is concerned. Other years of vehicles will be drawn into it just to make it outwardly appear to have a different, un-impeachable goal. This program is a thinly veiled attempt at the CARB to stop and take a look at EVERY 1966 thru 1973 and even earlier vehicle they have been trying to get off the roads for many years. Their efforts to data every one of your vehicles is simply aquisition of ammunition to prove to state legislators that what the CARB has been screaming all these years is correct, these older vehicles are serious polluters and need to be crushed, ALL OF THEM. The CARB has been unable to get the '66 thru '73 vehicles back on the smog check roles, so they think getting all this data will change legislator's minds and enact whatever one sided, backwarsd measures that actually will not help anything, the CARB deems worthwhile. They'll be able to wave all these data pages ansd scream that they were right, get all the old cars off the roads, etc. I think they'll be able to yell and scream in 2004. I see part of this tactic as needed, to some small extent. California law states that those stock emissions controlled vehicles NOT on the smog check system, shall retain any and all emissions systems and parts, and shall not be altered as to raise exhaust particulate emissions. Fair enough, but this ain't the right way to go about policing the older cars. This is just another CARB witch hunt. This time, they just might get their way. If yuo've taken the smog stuff off your vehicle, better be ready to put it back on, or not drive the car. Look out, everybody, these test stations will be in one place one day, someplace else the next, and at random. You will probably not even see them until it's too late. Don't get caught in one of these rolling test stations if at all possible, it will not be pleasant. BTW, air quality here in the Los Angeles area is now better at this time, than it was 34 years ago. First time that has happened here since the smog check program started, those 34 years ago, and, yup, the CARB is taking all the credit. What a bunch of BS.
Look out Pomona! Let's just hope that they don't plan on setting up one of those things anywhere near the Pomona swap meet. ou: I could just see that turning into a rather large money making machine for Sacramento. :af:
WOW! I can't believe this! When driving truck over-the-road, California is one of the few states out west where they seem to want to take away people's freedom with all these rules and regulations. I'm sure, later on in the future the rest of the country will follow. It's weird how we are fighting for freedom overseas when we should be fighting for it over here. These politicians and government offices are a real pain in the ass. Thank god there is nothing like this in Pennsylvania (so far). People have to take a stand against this kind of action. They expect the government to take care of them instead of having the government give them the ability to take care of themselves. It just gets worse and worse. I hope people wake up and do somethig about this. We got to stand up for our freedom sometime. Voice your opinion and try to get things turned around before its too late. Rob
OTR Driving? Hey Rob, I did the OTR driving thing for three years. I didn't see my house once in that time! I've been down the Penn tpk. many times on the way to east coast and back. Who do you drive for? I've been thinking of going back to it since I can't seem to find anyone who needs a steering wheel holder to do local runs. Got any recommendations?
This is a bunch of bull sh!t, how do they expect a car to pass emmision if it wasn't made to pass it in the first place. you'll see me in a high speed chase on the I 405 if my car fails. they ain't taking a damn thing!!!! i'll smash up my car before some crusher will!!!:Brow:
Robert, When I ran out west I was an owner operator. I had two trucks, a 1999 Western Star with a 600 Cat and an 18 double overdrive transmission and I had an old 1985 Ford LTL9000 with a turned-up B model CAT and a 15 speed. I use to haul produce. Boy, they were some fun times. LOL! The Western Star top speed from the factory was 127 mph. I couldn't hit 18th gear until I got over 70+ mph.:grin: The Ford was a 100+ mph truck too. DOT loved me. LOL! For some reason they aren't fond of 6" straight pipes that smoked as black as coal. After I got out of that game I drove for Classic Motorlines. They're a small outfit out of Philipsburg, PA. They declared bankruptcy this past summer and they're still going downhill. When I started there, a majority of drivers were there for over 10 years but, not no more. When I got diagnosed with cancer I was out for a year and then came back. I drove for them for 5 months and got a local job because, of them going downhill. Now, I work from 6 to 2:30 everyday and drive only 40 miles. LOL! It's too easy compared to the over-the-road scene. So, I figure I'll stick with this for awhile. With the drivers these companies are throwing out on the road, it gets worse everyday. Almost got ran off the road a few times with those damn Swift drivers. Rob
Gross Polluters I have no hard data to back this up but i dare say there are ALOT more Diesel trucks on the road, For ALOT more hours in the day than 66-73 detroit Iron. probably on the order of 100/1 or even 1000/1 perhaps even quite higher !! Id be willing to bet a weeks wages that at least 10% of these trucks are out of tune and adding ALOT more pllutants to the air than our cars which are driven far fewer hours per week/month/year. This is a sad turn of events that involves us all, since what stems on the left coast usually washes east across our country.
Your correct Alan but, without trucks America stops. Basically, everything that you have came by truck. It's something that can't be shut down so, they need to find something else that they seem is partially at fault with polluting the enviroment. The one stupid thing that the government imposed on trucks are emissions standards this past year. The past few years diesel engine manufactures were lying to the government about the emissions they were putting out from the factory so, instead of having the regulations enforced by 2004, they decided to change it to 2002. The stupid thing I'm referring to is, in order for these engine manufactures to get the emissions standards the government imposed, the reliability and fuel economy of the trucks went down. So, what's the sense of having these emissions standards when there will be more fuel used and less reliability then there is now? It just dosen't make sense. I know one thing. The day the government comes for my car because fo emissions is the day I'll be waiting with my gun. Rob
The CARB doesn't want ANY of the vehicles they test to pass, that way, they can get their info, convince the legislature they are right and get their way, any vehicle over 6 years old, crushed. THAT is their plan. I'd think outside any car event would see at least one of these rolling testers, maybe more than one. What, nobody read 'Ol AlGore's book, "Earth for the Un-Balanced". In it, he states the internal combustion engine is the worst thing this planet has against it. And,, our own misguided, backwards screwball of a governor, Gray-Out Dufas is "ol Al's pal, as are our state senators, and lots of other liberal Democrats that like this kind of CARB stuff to convince the general public they have the right plan to run everybody's lives. That's theior way, always has been, always will be. We here inCalifornia are in for some very tough times, starting in three days.
Smog Cops...? Fellow Automotive Aficionados: Just by chance, does anyone have the California Vehicle code number and/or section number so that I could read this for myself? I was forwarded this post from my brother and tend not too believe what I hear about laws until I see and read them myself. That they could "confiscate" a vehicle, to me, sounds a little harsh. What exactly is the penalty for failing to comply with their request to check and when exactly did we loose our right to being inocent until proven guilty, and being searched without probable cause, I didn't see that on my ballot? Last time I checked, the fuel used in commercial airlines IS LEADED and if my physics lessons are still correct, it takes allot of fuel to generate the thrust needed too lift one of those sky pigs into the air and maintain it's velocity (usually mesured in litres per second). And wouldn't emissions delivered at an altitude above the level where it might be filtered out by the earths natural filter element (clouds) do more damage to this precious earth than the minuscule amount of smog generated by vehicles which are usually maintained and in most cases driven low miles. I'm curious too; how much pollutants are generated by the four LA Metro airports each day and does the AQMD and/or CARB measure and track this data? Please remind those political icons suffering from cranial rectal inversions this, if in fact this new law is true. A. Stern Concourse and Classic Automotive Beautification Specialist by referral only: dr_detail@excite.com
Please cite a reliable source for your statement. I have seen several posts on other boards which state that CARB wanted to do what you say, but that it was not approved by the legislature. Accordingly, the 30-year reachback stays in effect, which covers cars back to 1973 for emissions testing. So, unless you can cite a CA state website which has the language of an approved 2003 regulation, you are just spreading hearsay.
Very scary rumor. I have heard things like this before. What is happening is the peoples republic of Kalifornia wants to make driving an eliteist activity. They do not want any cars older then 10 years on the road PERIOD. That will remove millions of people who can't afford a new car every few years from the road. That way the state can save millions on road construction and look good to the greenies (most of whom can afford a new BMW every few years). It seems like death to the middle class. Just have the royalty in their luxo yachts and the drones and workers in busses and trains. They are trying to take away my truck right now. I have to go to a "test only" station this year to smog my truck. For the last 10 years I have always had a smog mechanic friend of mine take care of my truck. He wouldn't do anything illegal but he would tweak here, plug a vacuum line there and get it to pass. Now I am looking at over $1,000 just to get the thing to pass smog. BTW, if your car or truck fails smog as a "gross polluter" you are required to get it smogged EVERY year after that from then on. That way they can make more money off you. I swear, sometimes I hate this state. NY inspection consisted of shaking the guys hand, slipping him a $20 and he would give you the sticker. RR
I can vouch for that!:grin: :grin: How long is an actual inspection supposed to take anyways??:Brow: It's kind of a waste of time anyways...it's not like I'm going to drive something that doesn't work right.ou: Dave - If that's what is really instore for everyone out here in CA - that spells some pretty serious trouble!!!:stmad: Seems like political suicide though!! Why would they want to iritate that many people?? Of course, gov't and 'making sense' rarely go together....
Re: Smog Cops...? Well, Avgas(aviation gasoline) is leaded, but this is only used in piston aircraft, jet aircraft use a kerosene type of fuel(jet-A, Jet-A1, JP-5, JP-8 and if you fly an SR-71 you use JP-7) I'm still willing to bet that a whole bunch of polloution comes from aircraft
Not that I don't believe ya, but I too would like to know where, what and how it's written for the '03 laws.. I hate the CARB with a passion. For too many reasons to mention here.. But if I have to stop driving my '71 because some dipshit says a new '02 Excursion is better I'm gonna go awol with a M1 tank.. Only I won't get hung up on a freeway divider.. :stmad:
I too would like to hear the source of the information on this stuff. My pick-up was given the moniker of "gross polluter" last year and what a nightmare that turned out to be. After having to pay for the test that I failed, I had to go to one of those "test only" stations just to pay for another failed test before I could have any repairs done to fix the problem. It turned out to be a burned valve, or so I was told. I then had to go to a "repair station" to get the heads rebuilt and then had to pay for test number three before I could finally get my registration renewal! WHAT A SCAM!ou: The strange thing is that is actually ran better before any of those smog techs touched it.uzzled: I sometimes wonder if it really had a burnt valve or not.o No: All that for a truck that I drive less than 1500 miles a year. Rob, Sounds like you had yourself a couple of those triple didgit chicken haulin' large cars! :Brow: It's too hard nowadays to make decent money as an owner operator, unless you've got a spouse driving with you and you run constantly. The bigs have pretty much messed it up for the independents with their lousy lease-operator deals. Sorry to hear about your C-trouble, but it sounds like you've come thru it OK now and have a found a pretty good local deal too. I hope I find one soon or it's gonna be back to the big road for me.:ball: Hey Scott, When you do, could I ride shotgun with you? :Brow: I have my own that I can bring, but I would really like that .50 cal. better! :blast:
I find that hard to beleive, but it seems all too real. Why are lawnmowers, personal watercraft, chainsaws, and portable generators not regulated? California should consider ALL IC engines, not just the ones in old cars. I also find it difficult to beleive that if I happened to be driving along, they could FORCE me to take the test right then and there. Not only is it discriminatory, and acting on the assumption I am breaking emissions laws without any proof, I could actually be on my way to a hospital, airport, repair station, hearing, courthouse, funeral, etc. A police car just randomly pulls me over and I have to take the test? Can anyone say "profiling"? What I have the most difficulty in accepting is that they think they can take away a private citizen's property and destroy it. What type of emission controls can be in place in a 1966 passenger car? Or a '70? They can check for the vapor return line and that's about it on my '70. My car's body tag also clearly states that my vehicle conforms to all US laws applicable at time of manufacture. That's hard to argue against. I foresee a lot of court cases if all this is true. The State government may have the right to tell you that your vehicle is illegal to operate on it's roads (which you pay for, by the way, with excise tax and so forth), but I cannot imagine a State being able to tell you that your property such as a car is now instantly not your property anymore, based on one random test that you cannot possibly, in most cases, prepare for. If the car has all emission devices in place (if it even HAS any) and it does not pass their test, whose fault is THAT? Not the owner's fault, he's been complying with Law. Fortunately, most of the 'good' cars are kept in a very good state of tune and are mechanically sound. If this test is anywhere near fair, there should be little problem. But what about the poorer people who are not into old cars, but need transportation? So when did the fascists get in power over in Cally, anyway?
emissions guys: cars/trucks should be checked against the pollution laws that existed for the year the vehicle was manufactured . they will never meet 2002 rules!! there is technology in europe & in u.s., to make the diesel engines run more cleanly, but also using low sulphur fuel . if the europeans can do it , why can't north america ? i used to work for a trucking company, but i wholeheartedly believe that the crap exhausting from the diesel engines must to reduced . i am in windsor, ontario, and i am sure that u have heard about the long lineups of trucks waiting to cross the ambassador bridge to detroit. thsy somtimes sit & idle for hours ! in ontario, canada, government introduced legistration to perform pollution checks on all vehicles 20 years old and newer . all licenced cars, trucks have to be checked every 2 years or when the vehicle is sold, according to the emissions standards for the year of the vehicle. there is a lot of leeway . costs $35.00 & u get one chance to repair & retest the vehicle. if the vehicle pollution is too bad, the plates will be removed & the car is history. there is no testing of vehicles over 20 years . this excludes the classic cars ! i hear that the leeway is going to be reduced in 2003 , but this uncomfirmed . as long as u maintain your vehicle & replace the O2 sensor before the test (especially on chrylser products) , u will pass . i really wish that we had safety checks every 2 years so that when the pollution tests are run , safety checks would also be performed . this would remove a lot of junk from our roads . my 2 cents worth. gerry 72 gs 350 ht #s 98 gs sc3800
i live just north of san francisco and it doesnt surprise me one bit that the liberal comunist hippies around here would want to do this. look what californis is now reduced to. the government gives itself power to hunt down and kill its own history that we all love and cherish. this is indeed a modern day witch hunt. how dare they do this to us! what was george w bush driving in the 60's and 70's? what were all of those fat greedy political bastards driving? the same cars we now love and cherish! is the fact that they all drive bmw's and mercedes' make them excempt from loving our rich automobile history? democracy is dead. the only reason senators and the like are put into office is for money. what ever happened to a government for the people by the people? i cant remember last time i got to write a law, can you? i will not tollerate this facist dictatorship. my car will not become scrap for some piece of crap honda to be allowed to enter our streets. california's government is weak and stupid. take for example the person who bought coffee at mcdonalds and spilled on themselves, then filed a law suit saying they didnt know it was hot!! they won millions of dollars!!! :af:
Don't get the idea that I think old cars should pollute all they want! What I am against is a State trying to tell it's citizens that their property can be confiscated on the spot, and that a vehicle that is such a low percentage of those on the road (I am going to say it's not even 1%) has such a strict regulation passed. How much money was spent on this, I wonder? And CARB is crying about this? The number of old gross polluters goes down every year from cars simply wearing out as it is. And more money is being spent on cars that were made 30 years ago being monitored closely for particulate emssions, when any gas lawnmower will do the same or worse, but they are new? There's no excuse for that. I hate the "Old car bogeyman" mentality. It's so easy to go after old cars. SUVS can get bad mileage and waste resources, and they are still being made. The difference is that the car conpanies are no longer making money off of the old cars, so we have no voice, no lobby to say, "It's what the people want, so give us a break on mpg standards". I really don't see the issue as being very much different in regards to emissions, when you consider that a new portable generator has no emission controls that I know of, and certainly doesn't have to get an emission inspection every two years. But nobody complains about it when they talk about emissions. Why? becasue it's easier to go after cars, and because of money being made. So the percentage of polluters that is ironically the smallest portion of the polluter pool is targeted by an unfair law? I still can't understand how a poor person will overcome the confiscation and enforced destruction of their means of transportation. The State gov't is going to reimburse them somehow? If they really cared about clean air instead of votes, they would somehow give each of these people 5 grand to buy an efficient newer car. Think they will? Only one chance to repair the vehicle up in Ontario? Wow, that seems a little harsh...what if a certified repair facility made the repair and it STILL failed? They just take your car and crush it? I'm not Canadian, but I can't see that being legal. To me that means "theft". They didn't pay for it, and the last time it was check by the gov't, they said it was legal. Now it's not, and I pay the penalty by destruction of something I have potentially put thousands of dollars into? Then there's the issue that destruction of the vehicle means less parts sources to make other old vehicles of the same type comply with set standards. We are some of the best recyclers there are. And how many cars did NOT get made to replace the old car I have now? 15? 20? This thing is a driver for over 30 years. No way it could make as much pollutants as 15 or 20 other cars through the years. This whole thing makes me mad, because it makes no sense, there's no logic to it, and it can be argued against so well and so easily. these cars will stop being an issue all on their own in 35 years; all that's left will be too rare to drive, or POSs that should be in a junkyard. But they are STILL spending taxpayer's money on this issue that affects a tiny percentage of the overall picture? The State legislature should hear loud and hard from California car enthusiasts.
