Stevelovescars

The big change here is a move from testing every two years to annually for these older vehicles. Frankly, this will do very little to clean up older cars but does cost owners of those cars more money and makes the smog inspection stations more money.

I just smogged my 1991 Miata yesterday... it certainly passed with no problem but I had to go to three different testing stations. The first one simply wasn't performing smog checks that day (no idea why not). The second couldn't test my car... apparently there is a difference between licensed smog testing centers and "testing only" facilities. Even though the place had a CA approved sign on the wall the age of my car required me to go to a "special" place. I drove another few miles and found a correct place. The guy told me that the test procedure and equipment is the same but the cost is twice as much ($79 vs. $39.95).

Frankly, $80 every year isn't going to force people to give up their older cars and buy a new one (you still save more than that on registration fees by driving a used car) but this is nothing more than a roundabout tax increase on older cars.

I can think of a few ways to clean up the air and save gas in CA, but they are more complex and require some planning:

1- Fix the timing on traffic lights to keep traffic MOVING during rush hour. Every car idling at the light is burning gas and thus creating CO2. How often are you sitting at a light for three or four cycles waiting for your turn when the cross traffic is nonexistant?
2- Similarly, these lame attempts at "traffic calming" just keeps people from getting where they want to. It does nothing to slow them down, just frustrate them and require them to drive further and idle more.
3- How about limiting access to large commercial trucks on key roads during rush hour? Those guys can miss an hour or two of driving in cities if they plan better. Heck, they don't have any emissions controls on those heavy trucks and they've resisted cleaning up Diesel fuel for years so it's time they bare some of the cost.

Peter Zimmermann

Steve: You're absolutely correct, but my fear is that NOx levels, CO or HC specs will change, next year?, in three years?, for the group of cars in question. All of those wonderful long hood MFI 911s that we used to have in CA were forced out of the state/country when they were required to meet standards that they couldn't meet when they were new! I'm not really worried about my '82SC, the test only station told me a couple of tests ago, "Hell, these numbers are better than a 4-year old Honda." Other cars of the group, especially those '76-79 cars with smog pumps that are missing thermal reactors or have the cat hollowed out (I know, they shouldn't be that way!), will tread dangerously close to the upper limits of HC, that could be a big problem, and the fix will cost their owners big money.

baldman

There is no reason (other than money) to test these cars every year. Is it really going to make a difference from testing every two years?
Here's something to try if you live in Cal...
Next time you see a car puking smoke all over the road, write down the license plate number. Then go to the DMV website and look for the link to view smog history. Enter the plate number. I'll bet you dollars to donuts the car has been identified as a Gross Polluter, and then been waived. Why? Because there is a dollar limit to what the state can force you to pay to fix your car. And - should the fix be more than that - oh well, here's your waiver. If they really want to make a difference, why not take those cars off the road until they pass?

Peter Zimmermann

Actually, baldman, CA only issues waivers in the case of a hardship. In a nutshell, Gross Polluters must be repaired, and then re-tested by a Test Only inspection station. There is no financial limit for the required repair. In the case of waivers, they cannot be issued for Gross Polluters if smog equipment is missing or not working correctly. If financial hardship exists, after the car is inspected and found to have all its equipment, a waiver might be available that includes $500 in state subsidized repairs (by the Consumer Assistance Program - CAP) at a Gold Shield Station (only after exhaust limits have been reduced to no longer be a Gross Polluter), in order to try to get the car through its biennial inspection. Also, after a Gross Polluter is repaired and passes its test, it must be re-tested again in one year. Lot's of rules...

nkgosselin

Every car in CO must be tested every year after it is four or five years old. Ridiculous.

And ask me about the incompetent help. They put the front wheels of my 944 turbo on the dyno. Ugh.

After a car is 25 you can get a classic plate but it still must be tested every five years than.

You could drive a car in CO with no lights, rusted out, stuff falling off of it bald tires, etc but if it passes emissions it is good to go. Stupid.

And who this really hurts is not us classic Porsche drivers but poor people who can't afford to fix their old cars or buy newer ones. Sure, take their car away and move them further down the ladder.

JABSEA

Washington tests every other year, and they do have dyno testing for idle and 2,500. Don't know about the visual inspection issues. My 89 went through just fine for all tests.

rickdm

We have the smog checks on a dyno in Texas. My 82 Carrera does not have a cat and it has a Steve Wong chip. It will usually pass if I put the stock chip back in, and go on a cool day. If that doesn't work I go put the cat back on for a day, then it passes with no problem. I dread July every year when my inspection comes up, putting the cat back on in a 100 degree day is not much fun.

rickdm

dvkk

Would it make you feel better to know that in Mexico City they have to get their cars smog tested every 6 months?

Droops83

This is horrible news to 912E owners everywhere, and the poor slobs like me who have to rummage around and find a working smog pump (or maybe a better airflow meter, or try and source used thermal reactors if we're really lucky!) and hook it up and sit there for 3 hours and adjust stuff back and forth till the car is barely running but manages to squeak by the test somehow (or not!). At least this process was only every 2 years per car before, but as an annual event this would not be fun.

I unfortunately have a feeling that this will pass in this state. We all know how the state legislature works, anything that looks like they doing something about the environment will pass, whether it makes sense or not. Problem is, we all know that older vehicles like this represent an extreme minority of the vehicle population and aren't driven as frequently as the first poster mentioned.

Now I am all for regulations which actually help the environment. Go after the millions of big rig trucks and other machines that visibly spew nasty clouds of soot everywhere they go, not the relative handful of classic car owners who barely drive their cars. Close the loophole that was created by the federal government in the early '70s (well intentioned at the time) to help farmers and contractors and others who actually needed them, to buy trucks for work (but with which today a real estate agent can buy a Hummer H2 as a business vehicle and write it off). The same loophole makes it so buyers of trucks and SUVs don't have to pay gas guzzler taxes like buyers of Bentleys and Lamborghinis do, and that's BS. You've gotta pay to play! Hell, I wouldn't even be all that opposed to a gas tax to reduce overall gas consumption, and I'm a car guy who works on them for a living! All the CAFE standards and stuff like that are crap, no matter how well intentioned. Taxing consumption, though it is extremely politically unpopular, is the best way to go. And we all know the whole ethanol push is a load of BS as well, I hope we can all figure out something in the future that makes sense, but in the meantime I'll stop ranting . . . . write your esteemed representatives!

---Chris A.

Conekiller

Peter if your interested i just checked my emissions results.
Car 1987 SSI's M&K 2 in 2 out
Dyno tested at 1,700 RPM
HC (PPM) Limit 156 Mine 92
CO % Limit .5 Mine .22
NOx (PPM) Limit 1094 Mine 1004

As far as visual goes it passed but i think the only reason was that the tester thoguht my heater boxes were cats?

Hope that helps

Mike

Peter Zimmermann

Mike: Thanks for the post! Your NOx number is amazing because the 3-way cat, intoduced in 1980, was designed to take care of NOx, nitrogen dioxide and nitric oxide (both poisonous gases), and reduce them to nitrogen and oxygen. The other numbers are great, especially for an SSI car, you must have a near-perfect system.

Conekiller

Thanks Peter, i'm sure the main reason the numbers are so good was because the motor had just had a top end rebuild about 1,000 miles before the test. Also when the motor was rebuilt i had the cam timing bumped up. Do you think that might have effected the numbers?

Peter Zimmermann

"Also when the motor was rebuilt i had the cam timing bumped up. Do you think that might have effected the numbers?"

Now that is a good question! You would think that anywhere inside the factory cam timing range of 1.1 to 1.4 (ideal setting at 1.25) the emissions numbers would pass any required tests.