Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Ca. Smog Law Changes, Another amendment
Allan
post Aug 24 2004, 09:42 AM
Post #1


Teenerless Weenie
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 8,373
Joined: 5-July 04
From: Western Mesopotamia
Member No.: 2,304
Region Association: Southern California



Any politicos here that can interpret this stuff? What happens now that it's been amended or if it dosn't get finalized before the Senate adjourns next month?

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquer...arch_type=email
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
lapuwali
post Aug 25 2004, 04:07 PM
Post #2


Not another one!
****

Group: Benefactors
Posts: 4,526
Joined: 1-March 04
From: San Mateo, CA
Member No.: 1,743



Dave, you really have to stop being so angry over this. All politics is compromise. Until 1998, all cars had to be smogged all the way back to 1966, with a complete visual test. Things are still not that bad, even assuming this bill passes as is. How many 914s were junked from 1980 to 1998 because they could no longer pass smog w/o unaffordable expenses? Now we're only losing them to rust and accidents.

As for the "no collectors insurance is available to suit me", you can be certain the market will correct for this. As soon as collector insurance becomes a requirement to jump through this loophole, you'll see a few small insurance companies offering much less restrictive "collectors" insurance. If there are mileage limitations, you can be sure there will suddenly be a spate of broken odometers.

I'm not all that concerned about the cutoff date getting removed anytime soon. After all, it took them six years to get a bill modifying the 30 year exemption this close to passing (and it hasn't passed yet). Removing the '76 cutoff will be MUCH harder to do, esp. considering the language in this bill (the word permanent is used), and it could easily take a decade of serious effort.

By that same token, it could be that the collector provision be removed instead of the '76 cutoff, so all 35 year old cars would only need to pass a tailpipe test. IMHO, it's just as likely as having the '76 cutoff removed (maybe more so).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
Headrage   Ca. Smog Law Changes   Aug 24 2004, 09:42 AM
lapuwali   Very, very interesting. My read on this is that t...   Aug 24 2004, 10:19 AM
dmenche914   WARNING, DANGER! This Bill is still BULL, t...   Aug 24 2004, 01:18 PM
Marty Yeoman   Am I wrong or does it say: Sec 2 Section 44011 of...   Aug 24 2004, 01:46 PM
!   Has to go thru BOTH houses again....my opinion the...   Aug 24 2004, 02:16 PM
Headrage   (6) Prior to Ja...   Aug 24 2004, 03:05 PM
dmenche914   Right now, current law is 30 year rolling exemptio...   Aug 24 2004, 03:29 PM
lapuwali   I have to disagree that the admendment is worthles...   Aug 24 2004, 05:06 PM
dmenche914   then again, if my car was 35 plus years old, and r...   Aug 24 2004, 07:03 PM
Brad Roberts   You'll love this: BUY BOXSTERS... :D B   Aug 24 2004, 07:08 PM
dmenche914   Geer Ugh, oh well, Had to come to that, but I rat...   Aug 24 2004, 07:29 PM
Cap'n Krusty   "Maybe all 914's are exempt. I don't think...   Aug 24 2004, 08:10 PM
elwood-914   In Amador County, we don't have manditory smog...   Aug 24 2004, 10:23 PM
Headrage   Additional action has occurred. http://www.leginf...   Aug 25 2004, 10:15 AM
dmenche914   Ok, back to the Assembly, where it already has pas...   Aug 25 2004, 11:12 AM
mikester   If I'm required to pass the tail pipe test and...   Aug 25 2004, 11:56 AM
lapuwali   That's the idea of dropping the visual, which ...   Aug 25 2004, 12:19 PM
Cloudbuster   ...   Aug 25 2004, 12:45 PM
lapuwali   The bill DOESN'T add '66 - '75 cars ba...   Aug 25 2004, 01:09 PM
SirAndy   ...   Aug 25 2004, 01:22 PM
Cloudbuster   ...   Aug 25 2004, 02:05 PM
dmenche914   The real danger is if the 35 year classic exemptin...   Aug 25 2004, 02:55 PM
lapuwali   Dave, you really have to stop being so angry over ...   Aug 25 2004, 04:07 PM
Headrage   Another update. Don't know what it means when...   Aug 26 2004, 12:46 PM
lapuwali   Rule 77 (looked this up) has to do with procedures...   Aug 26 2004, 01:28 PM
Headrage   Anyone know how we could collectively oppose this ...   Aug 26 2004, 01:31 PM
Headrage   Here's another update. What the hell does all...   Aug 27 2004, 10:56 AM
Headrage   Sorry, was so pissed I forgot to add the link. :an...   Aug 27 2004, 11:00 AM
dflesburg   What do you expect from the place that made it oka...   Aug 27 2004, 11:17 AM
mikester   I know they are trying to get this in before the s...   Aug 27 2004, 11:49 AM
fiid  
QUOTE
  Aug 27 2004, 12:08 PM
Headrage   Actually wouldn't it be '76 and older if i...   Aug 27 2004, 12:14 PM
lapuwali   Yes, but if this bill passes into law, the cutoff ...   Aug 27 2004, 12:26 PM
Headrage   I don't know if this is good or bad. I notice...   Aug 28 2004, 09:44 PM
Headrage   :bump:   Aug 29 2004, 03:40 PM
dmenche914   Not a clue what that means, but there is the the A...   Aug 29 2004, 04:55 PM
!   It's dead....2nd year bills rarely pass.....   Aug 29 2004, 05:56 PM
Brando   my comment from this post on PAPBB: California al...   Aug 29 2004, 09:24 PM
!   First off...MOST if not ALL of the crappy re-tread...   Aug 29 2004, 09:29 PM
lapuwali  
QUOTE
  Aug 29 2004, 11:08 PM


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 6th July 2025 - 03:52 PM