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 )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> CA Smog Law, proposed changes
scruz914
post May 17 2004, 01:59 PM
Post #1


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 815
Joined: 26-February 04
From: Santa Cruz, CA
Member No.: 1,724



Anyone know about this? I pulled it off of "TheSamba":

Current 30 year CA rolling smog rules may be thrown out.....

Next hearing date for AB2683 is May 19th, 2004 in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_265...513_status.html

As amended, California vehicles with an original manufacturer year prior to 1976 would be exempt from getting the smogcheck though they would not be exempt from having the equipment on the vehicle. Bye-bye third party equipment to be legal.

The bill must be out of the Assembly and over to the Senate by May 28. With the budget on the agenda, that may be a tight priority schedule. DMV has said the deadline for planning mailer notices is July. If it isn't signed by July it means that the bill would need to be amended again to add a year.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
PorscheTom
post May 17 2004, 02:23 PM
Post #2


Will work for an Avatar.
**

Group: Members
Posts: 140
Joined: 12-May 04
From: Shingletown, CA
Member No.: 2,057



Hello all,

This is my first posting to the board. I was hoping to save this for when I actually have a 914 (should be anytime now!) but this is such an important topic, I thought I'd better supply some more detail to it.

Go to this website:
www.aassembly.ca.gov

then click on Legislation

Search for: AB2683

You'll be able to read the bill in its entireity. You can even leave your comments / feedback as well. I did this almost a month ago when I first heard of it.

Tell your lawmakers to leave the existing law alone and get on with the business of balancing this messed up states' budget (CA that is for anyone that doesn't live here).

Anyway, thanks for reading. I hope to have a 'New 914 Owner' post here pretty soon so I can join in all the fun.

Tom
'78 928
'73 914 - soon, I hope!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lapuwali
post May 17 2004, 02:39 PM
Post #3


Not another one!
****

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



Thanks. This bill has already been discussed at length on this board. I invite you both to do a search to read this discussion.

The existing law has always required compliance with the emissions regulations, they only exempted 30 year old cars from the biannual test. Third party equipment that affected emissions and were not specifically exempted through a CARB testing program have alwasy been disallowed.

However, one line in the new law indicates this MAY change this:

"This bill would instead exempt from the smog check requirements
, and the smog check compliance requirements, any motor
vehicle manufactured prior to the 1976 model-year."

The boldface stuff is new. I interpret this to mean '75 and older cars are exempt from the need to comply with the emissions requirements at all, not just from the test, as was the case before.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirAndy
post May 17 2004, 02:42 PM
Post #4


Resident German
*************************

Group: Admin
Posts: 42,469
Joined: 21-January 03
From: Oakland, Kalifornia
Member No.: 179
Region Association: Northern California



QUOTE(scruz914 @ May 17 2004, 12:59 PM)
As amended, California vehicles with an original manufacturer year prior to 1976 would be exempt from getting the smogcheck though they would not be exempt from having the equipment on the vehicle. Bye-bye third party equipment to be legal.

if i'm not mistaken, that's exactly how it works right now.

currently "smog excempt" means you're only excempt from the TEST but you are still (legally) required to run the smog equipment (if your car came with it) ...

that's how it was explained to me.
luckily, my car didn't have any smog-o-crap on it when it came to the US in '70.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/driving.gif) Andy
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
seanery
post May 17 2004, 03:07 PM
Post #5


waiting to rebuild whitey!
***************

Group: Retired Admin
Posts: 15,857
Joined: 7-January 03
From: Indy
Member No.: 100
Region Association: None



QUOTE
luckily, my car didn't have any smog-o-crap on it when it came to the US in '70.


yes, but anyone with a 2.4, 2.7, 3.0, 3.2, or 3.6 conversion must use the smog that came with the motor. Sooooo, if you did a swap, you will need the original smog equipment (to be legal) with either law.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirAndy
post May 17 2004, 03:24 PM
Post #6


Resident German
*************************

Group: Admin
Posts: 42,469
Joined: 21-January 03
From: Oakland, Kalifornia
Member No.: 179
Region Association: Northern California



QUOTE(seanery @ May 17 2004, 02:07 PM)
yes, but anyone with a 2.4, 2.7, 3.0, 3.2, or 3.6 conversion must use the smog that came with the motor. Sooooo, if you did a swap, you will need the original smog equipment (to be legal) with either law.

yeah, but that only matters if the cop who pulls me over knows that the car came with a 1.7L originally and it also assumes he can tell the difference between a 1.7 and a 3.6 ...

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Andy
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
anthony
post May 17 2004, 06:24 PM
Post #7


2270 club
****

Group: Benefactors
Posts: 3,107
Joined: 1-February 03
From: SF Bay Area, CA
Member No.: 218



Current law also includes a 30 year rolling exemption. The proposed law would do away with that.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Red-Beard
post May 18 2004, 06:17 AM
Post #8


"Ya canna change the laws of Physics"
***

Group: Benefactors
Posts: 1,124
Joined: 11-February 03
From: Houston, TX
Member No.: 288
Region Association: None



I don't know if it will pass this year, but I expect it will pass before my 1982 becomes SMOG exempt...

The 1970 doesn't have any anti-pollution equipment on it.

To me, keeping the pollution controls on older cars shouldn't be much of an issue. But then, I think if you can make mods and still pass, this should be allowed too.

James
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wheelo
post May 18 2004, 11:25 AM
Post #9


Dude
**

Group: Members
Posts: 265
Joined: 19-March 04
From: San Rafael, Ca
Member No.: 1,818



Newbie - (Shingletown,Ca)
Thanks for reminding us of this... sneaky-do-gooder/ PC-save the earth/ fat- cat-special intrest/ bullshit- bill... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/headbang.gif)
You know what our "Glorious" politician's are doing right this minute? They are wasting our precious tax dollars and time, while they change-into gym clothes, and "jog" around the Capital building! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/barf.gif)
Yup, saw-it on the local news this AM, seems they are starting their own "personal" weight-loss challenge... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/barf.gif)
For lack of better things to do! So I guess they are up to about 300k/year for probably, 4hrs x 5days = 20hrs x 50wks= 1,000hrs/yr, or ...$300/hr to jog around Sacramento!
I know how to help .... cut-out-the-fat... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sawzall-smiley.gif)
Do-More with less.... might save a school... or something.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 2nd April 2026 - 09:12 AM
...