Clunker Law Changed for over 25 year cars.

http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=62578

. Mine is 30 which is fine in the US. Now I gotta rant my Province... maybe... They just aren't very open about their gameplan, here.

 

yeah but im still screwed!

 

Maybe I can trade in my 94 Explorer that gets 14MPG on a good day. Too bad I can't afford $400 a month car payments.

 

what in Bajebuz name made our idiot goverment....think that giving us what...1000.00 bux for our "clunker" would make us go and buy some 1/2 used bar of soap looking thing!!!!?????:confused:....IDIOTS!!!!
just imagine how many classics already went to the big Toilet in the sky!!

(no offense to anyone owning a new car)...just my 2bits

 

Here in MA there making the pay in to $3000. but with whats stated above, mines right on the line. Either way, they'll have to pry my wagon out of my dead cold hands.

 

You been watching Charlton Heston again?

 

I have four cars and none qualify. One is too old (my wagon) which is inelligible in my book anyway and too get too good of gas milage. The 86 tbird qualifys but I dropped the insurance in March. The cars have to be insured and registered for the last year.

Oh darn. No car payments for me.:banana:

 

I don't know how they think they will keep the engines from being "recycled", as they call it. I have an '81 Malibu with a '71 Camaro 350 in it. My buddy at the junk yard has dozens of old engines sitting around, each one for sale. Just a big joke, just like the new cars they are trying to peddle.

 

Do you recall the old car mag classifieds offering military (WWII and Korean War) jeeps for sale? Cheap like borscht? Don't see those anymore. In the 60's, when I was a Mech/Tech in our Army, we had thousands of old deuces. They never showed up in Canadian Auctions. My bet is that they went to smaller armies or farms in other countries. These old trucks were built forever! Washed every time they were used, honestly!

I think it's counterproductive to shut down a KNOWN industry demand like the Aftermarket parts factories, for an undetermined, lean and mean Government Motors game.

Just for argument's sake. When I was about 9 years old, 1957, there was a Boy's Reform TRADE School north of town. The town had 8,000 people, the Police Chief was the ONLY cop. The Reform School was run by the State (Province). In 1966, Canada had 6 national gangs. In 2008, Canada had 950 National Gangs:
http://www.cisc.gc.ca/products_services/products_services_e.html

In 1970, the Provinces (all 10) shutdown the Reform School systems. The kids went to these schools/young offender prisons, built school bleachers, school desks, blackboards, fixed Provincial vehicles (cop cars, ambulances, hydro trucks) and got a cash credit at the end of their sentence. If the sentence was long enough, they could take an apprenticeship course and finish with trade papers. If it wasn't that long, they'd get their cash, buy a vehicle that they had repaired for cheap at the school and start some kind of a business. They rarely went back to crime (my point).

Instead, today, we keep building more jails, hiring more police, buying new CSI lab equipment, getting our police to learn spy techniques to infiltrate the gangs. DOES THIS MAKE ANY FOCKING SENSE????? :banghead3:

Why not ramp up these old REFORM TRADE SCHOOLS and have the kids work on making old cars greener with engine upgrades and technologies, if just for our Cities, Counties and States?

Losing your liberty at a young age is bad enough. I'm all for 'do the time, if you're gonna do the crime', but for cryin' out loud, lets do what worked to get a win-win? It costs us, here in Canada, $75,000 per year to house and feed one criminal for one year. A Federal Prison costs more to build than a 5 star hotel!!!

If our governments are going to ship our old publicly funded vehicles to a 3rd tier country, under their Charity programs, then send them cleaner running ones with the updates. We get fewer gangs, fewer prisons, fewer repeating criminals, and probably lower emissions on vehicles that would have been smeltered for parts on a rice-rocket from Asia.

 

ok, i just thought of something here

maybe im spoiled with my buick, but i had the unfortunate pleasure of riding in the backof my wifes 08 focus. ya know, .....one of the cars the gov. would like you to own if you cant get a hybrid. im 6'0 and my wife and her dad are also 6'0. here i am in the backseat....legs up across the seat and hunched over for lack of headroom. then came the motion sickness.

ill keep my wagon till its dead. then ill look for another!


another thing these dip**** people pushing this stuff dont think about.....
the batteries go to 4 different countries over the corse of their production
pollution pollution pollution!

accidents... crumpled metal = conductive
battery pack located in the trunk floor = 300 volts
what does that mean?

not to mention a $4,000 bill in 6-8 years to replace the battery...my buick is 14 yrs old and on the original drivetrain. oh yea...what about the spent battery?

 

Ian, I like your writing style. You ramble and throw all kinds of stuff on the wall, and it ALL sticks!

300 volts and crumbled metal means huge savings in crematoriums.

I read that the GM Volt batteries cost $8,000 to replace, and curiously their useful life ends just about at Trade-In time. Disposable cars, basically. Can you imagine the bill to rewind the motors, update all the high-voltage contact switches, and still have to deal with normal stuff like front ends, suspension, steering and brakes? Even the synthetic plastics have a useful life before they breakdown, like Airbags, etc.

I think that car-owner lobbies need to step up and argue the obvious. That all new cars come with an "EMISSIONS CONTENT" label. Wouldn't it be fun to drive around in any post WWII car listing all the 'recycled' and saved emissions since its day of fabrication? North American steel, rubber, plastics, wiring, plating, painting, glass.

Why won't our elected officials even press for an 'Emissions Content' label or certificate? Not all states have an Automobile plant. We've only got 2 provinces with car assembly and parts plants. I don't know why they don't put the pedal to the metal. There'd be more national production, less cargo shipping emissions, lower costs, and better vehicles for our own terrain, rather than some one-size-fits-all buggy madefor everywhere.

 

The question that haunts me, but perhaps not our environmentally-concerned politicians, is, "what is the fate of today's cars when their useful life comes to an end?"
"Land-fill" is the first thought that comes to my mind. I mean really, does anyone see today's <computerized> cars as being future collectables? The useful life of anything computerized seems to be just a few short years at best. I think of how quickly most folks today want to trade in their laptop, cell phone, etc for the next iteration because the "old" technology is no longer supported. If computers are considered "outdated" by age 5 years or so, what does this imply for the cars being built today? Will there be (is there now?) a market for "OER" computer parts? I'm all for being "green", so long as we are looking ahead and not just at "today." We may be working towards cleaner air, but I wonder if the price tomorrow could be more severely polluted land and water as junk yards become populated with useless computer parts and fuel cells/batteries. Seems to me the collector car hobby for the last several decades has been a friend to our environment...a recycling plan of sorts. Hmm, too bad we can't get federal funding for our contributions... (Just my worth )

 

"green" and the carbon footprint thing

Was in on a family discussion of such things on The Fourth.(1)when you factor in the buying(leasing)habits of the average driver,most people have their cars for three years,then move on to the next car.Guys like us buy a car with the intention of having it for as long as possible.If I have my Colony Park another nine years(God willin' and the river don't rise)my personal carbon footprint will be smaller than someone who gets "the new Prius" every third year.(2)Since,the newer versions of most cars aren't really that much better than the old versions,in both mpg's and emissions,using older versions of cars really isn't being that bad a thing...And,when you go back to way older versions of cars---like Checker Marathons and other light on their feet classics,there's SEMA and the likes,showing up with ways to make THEM run cleaner and more efficiently...All carbeurated 8's,6's and 4's can be given throttle-body injection or even direct injection.(3)When the correct vehicle is found(preferably one that started out diesel)going bio-diesel,or even just more efficient diesel,is also an option.(4)If Detroit really wants to kick sales up a notch,they need to kick mpg's up a notch.If that means making cars lighter,than that's what they need to do.A 2008 Crown Vic gets the same mpg's as my 86 Colony Park.There's something inherently wrong with that picture.By now,V8's should be getting at least 20 and 25-26 mpg's.(5)People will gladly buy into new cars again,,,IF they think the new cars will be worth it...Right now,people aren't thinking new cars are worth it...And that is the major flaw in this clunker law...

 

this is the kind of thinking we are up against....found this post at the hybridcars.com forum in the cash for clunkers section

"This country needs to adopt what Japan has...where cars are required to be renewew within a certain time period.
Of course it'll never happen here because God forbid we trample on stupid people's freedoms."