![]() |
|
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. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Cap'n Krusty |
![]()
Post
#41
|
Cap'n Krusty ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 10,794 Joined: 24-June 04 From: Santa Maria, CA Member No.: 2,246 Region Association: Central California ![]() |
To stop the speculation, you might want to tell us exactly what the ticket says. Like the descriptive phjrases ans the CVC cited. Just for grins. We can then determine exactly what the alleged offense is and what needs to be done about it. I can find out with one phone call ............... The Cap'n
|
Chris Hamilton |
![]()
Post
#42
|
Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 611 Joined: 7-March 06 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 5,687 ![]() |
I'll find out as soon as he gets home. Thanks.
|
Joe Bob |
![]()
Post
#43
|
Retired admin, banned a few times ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 17,427 Joined: 24-December 02 From: Boulder CO Member No.: 5 Region Association: None ![]() |
To stop the speculation, you might want to tell us exactly what the ticket says. Like the descriptive phjrases ans the CVC cited. Just for grins. We can then determine exactly what the alleged offense is and what needs to be done about it. I can find out with one phone call ............... The Cap'n That was my suggestion in post #4.....38 replies ago..... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/chair.gif) |
rick 918-S |
![]()
Post
#44
|
Hey nice rack! -Celette ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 21,011 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Now in Superior WI Member No.: 43 Region Association: Northstar Region ![]() ![]() ![]() |
To stop the speculation, you might want to tell us exactly what the ticket says. Like the descriptive phjrases ans the CVC cited. Just for grins. We can then determine exactly what the alleged offense is and what needs to be done about it. I can find out with one phone call ............... The Cap'n That was my suggestion in post #4.....38 replies ago..... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/chair.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) scan the freakin ticket already yur drivin us nuckin futs! |
Wanna9146 |
![]()
Post
#45
|
Member ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 235 Joined: 19-January 08 From: Florida Member No.: 8,595 Region Association: South East States ![]() |
So what happens to a 914/8 conversion in a similar situation?
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/sparetimetoys.gif) |
computers4kids |
![]()
Post
#46
|
Love these little cars! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,443 Joined: 11-June 05 From: Port Townsend, WA Member No.: 4,253 Region Association: None ![]() |
this is what you say. I'm sorry officer but I do not consent to any searches. Any search he does after that is then done without your consent. If he still orders you to open the hood you repeat the same phrase. keep repeating until he asks you to step out of the car. If you have balls you will lock your door on exiting. sound like fun? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) "Please open the hood" Yes, officer (open the front hood). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) |
Chris Hamilton |
![]()
Post
#47
|
Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 611 Joined: 7-March 06 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 5,687 ![]() |
So what happens to a 914/8 conversion in a similar situation? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sparetimetoys.gif) So far the verdict has been that it's illegal? edit: I'm still waiting on that ticket info |
shoguneagle |
![]() ![]()
Post
#48
|
shoguneagle ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,180 Joined: 3-January 03 From: CA, OR, AZ (CAZOR); New Mexico Member No.: 84 Region Association: Northern California ![]() |
A V-8 conversion can be made legal if you follow the rules, and be smog compliant for California Smog Laws. Some time ago I built a Chev V-8 conversion using Renegade Parts, donor 1987 engine complete including the fuel system, and exhaust mufflers. I even went into the car harness to retrieve a transistor that was needed on the electrical side of the house. I built this car before Scott owned Renegade and used documentation from Rod Simpson (or whatever was available at the time which was very limited). The idea from the start was to build within the law and then have a referee certify the car for compliance. I even put a catalyst on the the car which was a 1974 year. I was so clean that it made water in the tailpipe. The engine had 70,000 plus miles.
Insured the car, temperary operating permit, and took it to the Referee who would not certify the car at that time since it had a catalyst on it. Took the car home, removed the catalyst and subsequently passed the Referee Certification and Smog Check. The reason I had to remove the catalyst: Not required on the car; belongs to the car side of the house, not the engine side. This build was done in Santa Clara, California and the main items are to build within the law, know and build with complete engine requirements that are going into the car, know what the Referee is looking for and what the exact engine smog equipment requirements are, and make you engine as clean as possible. Work with the requirements of the State and get it Referee Certified. I could have even run cerfified headers with appropriate mufflers and passed the Referee as long as the engine was sound and clean in meeting the required year smog requirements. Currently I am building another 1974 Porsche with 1987 Carrera engine (3.2) and will use all the engine requirements for smog etc with anticipation of meeting California State Smog Requirements. The only area I will be at risk will be the exhaust where I am running aftermarket headers (not required Catalyst). I am doing the building in Flagstaff, AZ which does not have any required smog checks, but I do live part of the time in California and I also expect Smog Laws every where will be similar to the California Requirements over future years. The very basic reason I build projects this way is to minimize expenses and potential hassles. I find by understanding the rules and working with the people I can achieve these objectives and enjoy a higher performance car, rather than using non certified parts. Incidently, both cars where shells that I recovered from going to the "crusher" and became running 914s again. I think the Smog Requirements are explained very nicely in the thread. Now, we need to see what violation is on the ticket. Steve Hurt |
Joe Bob |
![]()
Post
#49
|
Retired admin, banned a few times ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 17,427 Joined: 24-December 02 From: Boulder CO Member No.: 5 Region Association: None ![]() |
Interesting to see if the BAR would actually inspect an engine swap on a pre 76 car. Note to self: Call BAR Monday.
|
drew365 |
![]()
Post
#50
|
These are the good old days! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,004 Joined: 29-December 02 From: Sunny So. Cal. Member No.: 37 ![]() |
a lot of us are gambling that no one will ever peek into the engine bay ... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif) Andy While driving back from Our Lady of Mulholland services with Howard, CHP pulled me over. The car looked just like in this pic. If he'd wanted to, he could have kept me there all day while he wrote a book. I got my well deserved speeding ticket but nothing else. Life's a gamble. ![]() |
grantsfo |
![]()
Post
#51
|
Arrrrhhhh! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 4,327 Joined: 16-March 03 Member No.: 433 Region Association: None ![]() |
Is there some way for those of us here that have improved 914s to legally drive our cars then? I don't understand why some guy with a 30's roadster can put a blown 426 cube hemi in his car, but I can't put aftermarket EFI on my little 4 cylinder. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) Chris, Is that V8 equipped with all stock hardware or CARB approved? It might not be legal by letter of the law. FYI I noticed that your car is blowing a substaintial amount of smoke out the tail pipes that might attract unfavorable attention. Took a video of your car at the AX this weekend - love the sound of your car. I could post video on Youtube if you want to see it. |
Chris Hamilton |
![]()
Post
#52
|
Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 611 Joined: 7-March 06 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 5,687 ![]() |
Grant, the V8 doesn't have any parts that came stock on anything I know of, thats why this worries me so much. I had originally thought that pre 1976 cars were exempt from smog, not just exempt from the 2 year check.
The smoke is probably valve seals, engine was built by renegade. I'd love to see some videos! Anyhow, talked to cliff ( I guess he doesn't want to post in this thread ), but the section written up on the ticket is http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc27156.htm edit: he got written up for section b: QUOTE (B ) No person shall operate or leave standing upon ( )1 a highway ( )2 a motor vehicle that is required to be equipped with a motor vehicle pollution control device under Part 5 (commencing with Section 43000) of Division 26 of the Health and Safety Code or any other certified motor vehicle pollution control device required by any other state law or any rule or regulation adopted pursuant to that law, or required to be equipped with a motor vehicle pollution control device pursuant to the National Emission Standards Act (42 U.S.C. ( )3 7521 to 7550, inclusive) and the standards and regulations adopted pursuant to that federal act, unless the motor vehicle is equipped with the required motor vehicle pollution control device ( )4 that is correctly installed and in operating condition. No person shall disconnect, modify, or alter any such required device. |
CliffBraun |
![]()
Post
#53
|
Member ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 252 Joined: 26-April 06 From: San Luis Obispo,ca Member No.: 5,933 Region Association: None ![]() |
Just wanted to pop my head in and say hi, nothing really to add to the discussion. He probably pulled me over because of the general noise of the car, and quite possibly smoking. The carburetors are leaking vacuum so it doesn't idle well, and burns lots of fuel in the exhaust.
The entire confrontation went fairly well, officer was polite, as was I, the car is probably quite guilty of being a gross polluter at the moment, something that should be fixed in the next couple weeks with a solution that will still be Illegal! I'm looking for a bone stock 914 engine to swap in to get it to pass. |
orange914 |
![]()
Post
#54
|
http://5starmediaworks.com/index.html ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3,371 Joined: 26-March 05 From: Ceres, California Member No.: 3,818 Region Association: Northern California ![]() |
A slight clarification: The smog rule is that the equipment has to be correct and complete for either the engine or the chassis, whichever is newer. You can put a '32 Ford engine in your '72 914, but it has to have functional D-jetronic EFI, evap, vacuum controlled hot air riser, vacuum controlled spark advance and retard, and an oil bath air cleaner, and it must pass tailpipe emissions testing as appropriate for the area in which the car is registered. Conversely, you can put that 1.7L teener motor in the model A, but it has to be equipped as it was when the engine was certified for sale in 1972. As was mentioned earlier, the test exemption is just that: a test exemption. The state may, at it's discretion, compel you to have it inspected for both equipment and for emissions levels. The Cap'n i think i slipped through the cracks a few years back... years ago i had a 67 mustang with a 400m swapped in (of all the engines). edlebrook intake, no air pump, open p.c.v. system, holley/no choke, open air cleaner AND those are just what i remember. HERES what you do to get the ref to tag it for smog... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beer.gif) i couldn't make the appt. and my wife had to bring it in. i forgot to tell her the gas gauge read almost empty at all times... she gets it fired up heads to the appt. (she was late... as usual... opps did i say that?) she was nevered anyway to add to it all. shes half there, sees the gauge, trys to put gas in... can't, finally gets to ref. station late and fit to be tied. long story short the ref was working SO hard in appesing this crazed woman all i had to do was close the p.c.v. system (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) ref's can be humans, at least once in awhile by the way, and not trying to be johnny downer, but good old ca. is attempting to smog ALL cars AGAIN! i've seen this "no smog then smog" of old cars 2 times since the 80's. mike |
JimSar |
![]()
Post
#55
|
Fill 'er up ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 64 Joined: 28-July 06 From: Vallejo, CA Member No.: 6,527 Region Association: Northern California ![]() |
I've got a '75 that's all electric; no engine, no gas tank, no tailpipe. Technically, I'm probably in violation of a crapload of regulations. It's registered and insured, don't ask, don't tell. What's a reasonable expectation if I get pulled over?
-Jim |
swl |
![]()
Post
#56
|
Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,409 Joined: 7-August 05 From: Kingston,On,Canada Member No.: 4,550 Region Association: Canada ![]() |
Jim,
I've been thinking about that through the entire thread. Lord knows on a bad day someone would find something to write you up on but by the wording of the statute above it looks like you would be clear on that one - you haven't modified or ommitted any polution control device. Of course you won't attract any attention due to noise or smoke (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) And unless you have done an Otmar you probably won't attract any attention for speed! Could you imagine the public relations fiasco if someone wrote you up for polution violations on an EV! Might be fun taking it to the referee. He/she would probably have a good chuckle. |
ClayPerrine |
![]()
Post
#57
|
Life's been good to me so far..... ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Admin Posts: 16,439 Joined: 11-September 03 From: Hurst, TX. Member No.: 1,143 Region Association: NineFourteenerVille ![]() ![]() |
This (IMG:style_emoticons/default/stromberg.gif) is why I am HAPPY that I don't live in the People's Republic of California. Texas has a 25 year rolling exemption. After 25 years, they don't even look to see if the stuff is there any more. So all 914s are exempt from both visual and emissions test.
Now I have a curiosity question... My 73 914 has a 73 911 engine in it. What emissions standards would I have to meet in California? I blew through a drive by emissions test on my way home from work one day in my 914/6. Needless to say, I was a full song when I went by. Well, MFI runs a bit rich, so I must have attracted attention from the smog testers inside the van, because about 2 blocks down the road, I got pulled over. The cop proceeded to hassle me about my car "pegging the meter" of the emissions test station. He kept trying to tell me he was going to ticket me for excessive emissions. I reminded him that my car was emissions exempt, and asked him to call a supervisor. When the supervisor showed up, he looked at my car, and told me to leave. I parked the car for a week before driving it to work again. |
rick 918-S |
![]()
Post
#58
|
Hey nice rack! -Celette ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 21,011 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Now in Superior WI Member No.: 43 Region Association: Northstar Region ![]() ![]() ![]() |
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) |
Chris Hamilton |
![]()
Post
#59
|
Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 611 Joined: 7-March 06 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 5,687 ![]() |
Grant, lets see that video!
|
DanT |
![]()
Post
#60
|
Going back to the Dark Side! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 4,300 Joined: 4-October 04 From: Auburn, CA Member No.: 2,880 Region Association: None ![]() |
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. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 9th July 2025 - 02:06 PM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |