are we screwed?

fresh off the heels of our discussion about cash for clunkers ....i heard that obama admin gave the A-OK for states to set their own emmissions standards. this of course would mean that for automakers to become profiable, they would have to adopt the toughest states standards as the industry standard. ....this would be california.

from what i understand, the emmisions standard that CA wants to impose are almost impossible to meet. except by a 4cyl or hybrid.....forget any pickup, vans, or suv's not to mention V8 or V6 powered cars!

great....just when our domestic auto makers need all we can do to help get them back on their feet....the gov comes along and kicks them in the teeth...!

cali wagon lovers: no offense to you all your presence on this board demonstrates your sanity.

 

Wow...Just wow, can the junk science fascists on the global warning scam ever be stopped in the name of economic and scientific sanity? Perhaps we are truly screwed. H.L Mencken was right, no one has ever gone broke underestimating the American people's intelligence.

 

We'll be fine... they cant take our cars...just like they cant take our guns. We'll find the loopholes.

 

your right. if i am correct, the state inspection of the cars is held to the manufacture date. so youd be grandfathered in by the emmisions of your cars year. i use this in MA to get by the emmisions sometimes.

 

In Illinois, the inspection is held to the manufacture date of the car. Since my wagon is a 1984, it is 25 years old and now considered an “antique vehicle” and I no longer have to take it to get emission testing.

 

Thank God for grandfathering. I'm really hoping that the government sees that this is just going to make it harder for US auto-makers to get back in the game. They should be lowering the restrictions on cars, so that we can get them out faster and more affordably. My car is just as safe as the new ones on the road, if not safer by its pure mass and fuel economy, I feel is a joke, but that's just my opinion.

 

let each State set thier own standards???????????????????

OMF'nG....that sounds like a recipe for disaster!!!!!

 

tell me again whos idea this was?

 

barack obama
nazi pelosi
shall i continue?

 

Actually California started all this in the mid 70's. Now 26 states have jumped on the band wagon using California standards. I really don't mind it so much except my car has been giving me fits for a while attempting to pass. My car runs very clean above 2000 rpm, 23 ppm HC. It's the idle where it's filthy. Now it's three times over the allowable standard for 1982 which is 120 ppm HC which in itself is pretty bad. My wifes 92 has the same limit of 120 ppm HC at idle and her car measures at 8 ppm. So, I don't think the standards in California are unreasonable or unacheivable.

What California wants to legislate is CO2. They want new cars sold in Ca. to be less than whats allowed now. Obviously they cannot and have not changed the emissions standard for existing cars. These standard were established years ago through the CARB research. The standards are not set at the minimum emissions for each model year. The measured standard in fact is the same, in my case, for 1982 through 1992 cars and trucks. They have not lowered their numbers at all. The changes through the years were based on changes in testing methods. For example in some high smog areas emissions tests take place on dynometers to get a true picture of emissions in actual use scenarios. In my area they test at 2500 rpm and idle. In 2007 they added the evaporative system test where they pressurize the fuel system at the tank filler to 0.5 psi with nitrogen and check for leakdown over 30 secounds. In January 2008 they added a visual smoke test. If the car smokes during the test it will fail. However they do not consider smoke on start up.

What's interesting is by richening the mixture the CO2 levels go down. I saw this with my own eyes when my car was hooked up to the gas analyser attempting to get it to pass. The mechanic could tell that I had the mixture too lean by the level of CO2 being emitted. He richened the mixture and not only did the CO2 come down but the HC as well. The CO went up but remained within the standards.

I discovered several things during this exersise. The Holley carbs I bought rebuilt are junk, a misrouted evap control vacuum hose caused the HC to be 10 times allowable, I have a valve problem which I will correct by replacing the head assembly with new valves. This will be cheaper than rebuilding my current cylinder head.

Currently in California all gasoline powered vehicles built before 1976 are exempt for testing. All that are built after 1975 will be tested every two years. In 2010 testing begins on diesels. I don't know what year models are exempt. There is a auto retirement program for those vehicles that fail the emissions test. However it's a volentary program in some counties. There are 9 counties in California that are not required to emissions test vehicles at all and there are 4 others where testing takes place in some of the zip codes.

Yes, California has been setting emissions standards for over 30 years. But, did you know that Georgia requires emissions testing of Hybrid vehicles? In California all hybrids are exempt. Why is this? Hybrids can't idle, nor can they run at 2500 rpm when sitting still. But, in Georgia they consumer has to pay $25 to smog test a vehicle which does not run sitting still. They hybrids automatically fail the test and the test is aborted. Then the consumer has to go to the DMV to file paperwork to permit the use of the vehicle even though it has failed. The process takes several days to sort out in order to register the vehicle. An folks thinks California is bad. Georgia takes your money for a test that cannot be performed rather than to just exempt them.

 

expo facto laws

When they do this kind of thing,they are supposed to have to take into consideration the laws of the past.If your car met the smog,mileage and safety standards when it was made,then it supposed to be always legal---within reason.The California laws are that for your car to pass the Smog Test,it has to meet or exceed the standards of the time it was made.No safety standards existed when Ford made Model T's,so your T-Bucket Roadster doen't have to have safety equipment.Although,they really would like it if it did.When children come into play,it all changes.Your T-Bucket will need seatbelts---and probably rollbars or a cage,if there's going to be a kid in it.

 

just a thought

Was just thinking...Maybe what that's about is;some states don't care if the cars meet the California standards or not.So,it'd be okay if you polished and ported your valves and burned a little more oil...All cars come brand new with engines that meet the California standards,it's about whether or not they continue to meet them that's up for debate.Do they really run that much dirtier as they age?..Part of California's budget problem is the standards they're setting and the requirements that go with them.The State sets the standards and then requires that they be met by the State as a whole.So,when not enough people buy up Priuses and CNG vehicles and electric vehicles,the State HAS TO buy enough to meet the requirements.So,they buy up 1000's of brand new hybrids,electrics and alternative fueled vehicles and use them as fleet vehicles.Which,I'm sure saves them $$$ on fuel costs,BUT they've bought all these vehicles at brand new prices.

 

that stuff too

While I believe that global warming is,in some part,due to human activity,and actually happening;I don't prescribe to the now prevalent philosophy of---it's all those cars older than ten years old that are making most of the smog...They got people saying that %10 of America's cars make %90 percent of America's air pollution. And,I'm just not buying it! My 86 Colony Park still runs cleaner and get better mpg's than most brand new full size pick-up trucks and SUV's. I don't prescribe to the philosophy that "the only good car is a brand new car" either.Brand new Flexes brag about 17 and 24 mpg's.Brand new Oddysees brag about 18 and 14 mpgs.My Colony Park gets 17 and 23 mpgs.Why should I go new?To look and be trendy?

 

i have a feeling that most "tree huggers and bleeding heart liberals" tend to have a herd mentality....so looking trendy is of course the status quo.

i work with a bunch of hicks. and i get made fun of at work for having an "old man car" instead of a 4wd pickup of suv. hmmmm....so their is some herd mentality on bothsides of the rail i guess. never mind

 

It's my wife's opinion that those men who flaunt their big trucks and fast cars have less than average size man parts and this is how they compensate.

Sort of like a Nepolean complex....