Proposed changes to California smog check requirements 1976 - 1982 cars

(John Quilter) #1

Of interest to California British car owners with 1976 to pre 1983 model year cars, a new state bill has been submitted to extend the California required biannual smog check exemption to pre 1983 year cars from the existing exemption for cars pre 1976 model year. The bill, AB 210, is currently before the State Assembly Transportation Committee. If you chose to weigh in on this proposal, details on how to do that are at:

(Paul Wigton) #2

Having taken on City Hall, wrt to a Colorado state law concerning smogging cars that would NEVER pass a smog check (2-stroke cars) —and won— do get involved, do write your representatives, and DO arm yourself with facts.

(Greg) #3

Would cars with a “collectors” plate be exempt? May be a way to get by if it passes. I may do the same up here in Washington.
Over the next 10 years, a lot of green movements could start doing this to get old gas powered cars off the road.

(Doug Dwyer) #4

I don’t think a collectors plate would help, nor be required, for exemption.

If the legislation is enacted, pre-1983 cars would be exempt. As it presently stands, pre-1976 cars are exempt.


(Doug Dwyer) #5

“…doing this…”?

The proposed legislation makes it easier to keep an older car. Green movements would be against it.


(Paul Wigton) #6

Tis true… and old cars are an easy target.

The best piece of information you can be armed with, is the lack of impact old car use has, compared with new: as a approximate example, old car use in Colorado was something along the order of 1000 vehicle miles/day.

New, smog-equipped car use was 30 MILLION vehicle miles/day: I showed that the effect on air quality was negligible.

(Doug Dwyer) #7

Efforts from some quarters to outright ban old cars have failed but some regulations make owning an older car more difficult and costly…so there’s a “nibbling at the edges” result. Most car hobbyists will gladly take the steps to keep their older cars. Ordinary people will eventually relent and trade up to a newer car…which eventually happens anyway because it’s no longer practical to keep the old clunker roadworthy, with or without emissions testing . After all, even in 1970 you didn’t see many 1935 DeSotos running around :slight_smile:

Personally, I am not reflexively anti-regulation and I think emissions testing is a good thing. But, too often, the testing programs are very flawed and needlessly onerous.


(Paul Wigton) #8

Precisely the POV I inhabit: lawmakers are often misinformed WRT to the impact, or lack thereof, of older cars.

They need guidance.

(Carl Hutchins, Jr. ) #9

I surely will. But, it went down in flames the last time. The climate is even worse now!!

Belatedly it might aid me. Or would it just miss!! My Jaguar is an 83!!!

My 94 Jeep’s registration is up. I’ve not dared to look and see if it is an “inspection” year…

Ugh, my new “representative” is a former “environmental” lawyer !!! Elected as an anti DJT movement !!! The former, a very competent centrist. wrong party???

My guess is that the bill will be killed in committee… the party line thing… .


(phillip keeter) #10

Come on! I mean, how many cars are we talking about? Go after the real problem. COAL!!!Phillip

(Greg) #11

It’s more of a social issue, in that younger generations are very green and very anti-fossil fuel. I applaud their efforts, as global warming affects them more in 40 years than any of us who probably won’t be around, and IMO we do need to slowly ween ourselves off of oil.

But the problem is the pitchfork mentality that is sweeping the country. As people switch to electric cars, thinking they’re doing their part (although Philip;s right, they have to get their electricity from somewhere, like coal), and only use public transportation, they look down on gasoline cars, and will make them out as the bad guy, or the ones who don’t care or don’t believe in global warming.

In that future, what will they make of us driving our gas guzzling V12’s!??! We may have to remove our V12 emblem and put a fake green sticker on it to disguise our engines :wink:

(John Quilter) #12

There is no coal in California so the air quality emphasis is on automobiles.
John Quilter
Eugene, Oregon

(John Quilter) #13

Not sure about collector/historic plates in California but in Oregon those plates are a permanent registration with no periodic renewal so no emissions test in those counties that require it.
John Quilter
Eugene, Oregon

(Doug Dwyer) #14

I think might well be sweeping certain areas, or even certain cities. The entire country? I’m not so sure.

In my neck o’ the woods (Salem Oregon) there’s no emission testing and I feel fairly safe in saying that the overwhelming majority of the people couldn’t care less if someone drives a gas guzzler. In fact, in some circles, it’s considered good sport to openly torment and harass Prius drivers on the road.

In Portland, Oregon (or Seattle), however, you’re more likely to find pockets of rather intense environmentalists.


(phillip keeter) #15

what about this?

(Grooveman) #16

Or you could just move to Texas … No emissions testing on cars 25 years (1994) or older.

(Greg) #17

Same here in WA. But laws can change.

(John Quilter) #18

Well I stand corrected but I can’t believe this will last given CA’s renewable energy goals which I thought applied to imported energy as well.

(Greg) #19

It won’t last, but for now, when you see that smug Tesla cruising down the LA streets putting out zero emissions, tell them thanks for burning all that coal, asshole! :wink:

(phillip keeter) #20

Exactly!!! Where do all those car batteries get their juice to recharge? There is no free lunch. The only electric car that I will ever own is a “Hot Wheels”. Maybe a purple Cuda!