CHP gives cliff a smog ticket for his teener Options

[Chris Hamilton]

Has a 2.0 with webers. Sounds like some kind of fixit ticket. Do 1971 teeners have to smog? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/WTF.gif) How would a six ever smog since those came with carbs too?

Do we have any california law experts here to explain this?

[rick 918-S]

I just gave that link a good speed read and it appears that pertains to the removal of a device like a cat or an air pump. This is my spin. If the car doesn't have a "pollution control device" to remove, there is no violation. I would call injection a "pollution control device" It's a fuel delivery system.

First the car is exempt for a reason. Most 1971 model cars wouldn't pass the basic standards for emissions set forth for their year of manufacture 37 years after they were made. It's an unreasonable expectation. Obsolecence has taken many of these cars off the road and more are expiring every year. Like all the 70's model daily drivers, more doors, old undesirable work trucks, 70's imports like the Toyota's and honda's with their complicated air delivery emissions with 30 vacum hoses.

Second, parts to run the FI are starting to become NLA and wear is causing these controls to fall out of spec. It would be reasonable to change the fuel delivery system to one that will still allow the use of the vehicle.

Third, all cars fall out of tune from time to time. Tune the car up and bring the part slips to court. Show a good faith effort to correct the problem the officer noticed and remind the judge that the car is "pre-emissions equipted" The ticket that was issued doesn't apply, and based on the year is exempt from smog.

Beatable! CHP was messin with ya. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/jerkit.gif)

[DanT]

I just gave that link a good speed read and it appears that pertains to the removal of a device like a cat or an air pump. This is my spin. If the car doesn't have a "pollution control device" to remove, there is no violation. I would call injection a "pollution control device" It's a fuel delivery system.

First the car is exempt for a reason. Most 1971 model cars wouldn't pass the basic standards for emissions set forth for their year of manufacture 37 years after they were made. It's an unreasonable expectation. Obsolecence has taken many of these cars off the road and more are expiring every year. Like all the 70's model daily drivers, more doors, old undesirable work trucks, 70's imports like the Toyota's and honda's with their complicated air delivery emissions with 30 vacum hoses.

Second, parts to run the FI are starting to become NLA and wear is causing these controls to fall out of spec. It would be reasonable to change the fuel delivery system to one that will still allow the use of the vehicle.

Third, all cars fall out of tune from time to time. Tune the car up and bring the part slips to court. Show a good faith effort to correct the problem the officer noticed and remind the judge that the car is "pre-emissions equipted" The ticket that was issued doesn't apply, and based on the year is exempt from smog.

Beatable! CHP was messin with ya. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/jerkit.gif)

the state doesn't care if the stuff is NLA or not. If it was an FI car at birth, then it is till supposed to be an FI car. and in CA the early cars did have stuff that was considered smog related. various parts of the FI on type IVs were there for smog.
blow by recirculation, cold start valves, hot start valves all had something to do with not only driveability but also emissions.
Even my stock motored 1967 Bug had a smog device or two, and when we still had to have it smogged, those pieces had to be there.
Remember California was requiring smog equipment on cars before the rest of the nation was, back in '66 and '67.

[Cap'n Krusty]

I just gave that link a good speed read and it appears that pertains to the removal of a device like a cat or an air pump. This is my spin. If the car doesn't have a "pollution control device" to remove, there is no violation. I would call injection a "pollution control device" It's a fuel delivery system.

First the car is exempt for a reason. Most 1971 model cars wouldn't pass the basic standards for emissions set forth for their year of manufacture 37 years after they were made. It's an unreasonable expectation. Obsolecence has taken many of these cars off the road and more are expiring every year. Like all the 70's model daily drivers, more doors, old undesirable work trucks, 70's imports like the Toyota's and honda's with their complicated air delivery emissions with 30 vacum hoses.

Second, parts to run the FI are starting to become NLA and wear is causing these controls to fall out of spec. It would be reasonable to change the fuel delivery system to one that will still allow the use of the vehicle.

Third, all cars fall out of tune from time to time. Tune the car up and bring the part slips to court. Show a good faith effort to correct the problem the officer noticed and remind the judge that the car is "pre-emissions equipted" The ticket that was issued doesn't apply, and based on the year is exempt from smog.

Beatable! CHP was messin with ya. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/jerkit.gif)

the state doesn't care if the stuff is NLA or not. If it was an FI car at birth, then it is till supposed to be an FI car. and in CA the early cars did have stuff that was considered smog related. various parts of the FI on type IVs were there for smog.
blow by recirculation, cold start valves, hot start valves all had something to do with not only driveability but also emissions.
Even my stock motored 1967 Bug had a smog device or two, and when we still had to have it smogged, those pieces had to be there.
Remember California was requiring smog equipment on cars before the rest of the nation was, back in '66 and '67.

The ONLY smog equipment on your '67 bug was the closed crankcase system, which consisted of a rubber boot at the bottom of the road draft tube. This started for ALL cars in 1965 or '66. The Cap'n