View Full Version : new smog laws ????/Sema Smog exepmtion bill.


muscl car
03-08-2012, 02:28:20 AM
found this on YB and is from the autoshop instructor at rim of the world high school near lake arrowhead ...



Anyone else heard anything? or BS?
This from another board.....

"I just found out that there has been a bill introduced in the California State Senate that would change the cut off year for smog exempt status from 1975 to 1981!! This bill, SB1224, was introduced by California State Senator LaMalfa, and at this early stage, I do not have a lot of details about it. I believe it is to be heard in its first committee on March 25. I am just trying to get the word out, so as many California State senators as possible can be contacted with phone calls and letters of support. If anyone in the Los Angeles area could do a little research and find contact information for State Senators and pass that info along to as many places as possible it would help out. I am in Bakersfield, so LA people contacting my Senators will not do a whole lot of good. We will need to start on the Senate side, and then contact Assembly members when it gets over to that side, since this is a multi-step process. I do realize that getting Fontana back to racing is priority one, but if people have the time, supporting SB1224 would be very good for the car hobby, and bring more possibilities for future car enthusiasts to enjoy. I will try to do what I can to keep finding more information and updates on this. I just mainly wanted to make as many people aware of this as possible. Please pass the word along, thank you!!"

Knuckle Dragger
03-08-2012, 02:43:57 AM
found this on YB and is from the autoshop instructor at rim of the world high school near lake arrowhead ...


Seems like they jack with the cut off point every 4-6 years. I have no idea if it's true, but it sure fits their pattern.

muscl car
03-08-2012, 03:02:40 AM
Seems like they jack with the cut off point every 4-6 years. I have no idea if it's true, but it sure fits their pattern.


would be nice if this is true then you can do whatever mods to a car up to 1981 and not worry about the smog program !!!

Knuckle Dragger
03-08-2012, 03:13:33 AM
would be nice if this is true then you can do whatever mods to a car up to 1981 and not worry about the smog program !!!

Yeah, but remember they have done this before. Move the cut off up, and then a few years later back down again. :eek: :eek:

SG71SS
03-08-2012, 12:09:43 PM
Quick Google search shows this senate bill is real:

http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/billtrack/text.html?bvid=20110SB122499INT

Some of the text:

INTRODUCED BY Senators La Malfa and Vargas

FEBRUARY 23, 2012

An act to amend Section 44011 of the Health and Safety Code,
relating to vehicular air pollution.


LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


SB 1224, as introduced, La Malfa. Smog check: biennial inspection:
exemption.
Existing law establishes a motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance (smog check) program, administered by the Department of
Consumer Affairs. The smog check program requires inspection of motor
vehicles upon initial registration, biennially upon renewal of
registration, upon transfer of ownership, and in certain other
circumstances. Existing law exempts specified vehicles from being
inspected biennially upon renewal of registration, including, among
others, all motor vehicles manufactured prior to the 1976 model-year.

This bill instead would exempt all motor vehicles prior to the
1981 model-year from being inspected biennially upon renewal of
registration.

Batman
03-08-2012, 12:14:36 PM
I'm all for clean air, but if I don't have to deal with taking the car in for smog every 2 years I'm OK with that too! Besides, it's not like I drive it, right Dave? :D

SG71SS
03-08-2012, 12:28:33 PM
^ Amen, plus there aren't that many pre 1981-ish cars out there. I drive 40 miles from Downey to Rancho Cucamonga to work and I'm always car watching on the 605/10 and RARELY see older cars. Just a sea of Imports like my two DD'ers.

I wonder if La Malfa and Vargas are car guys??

3504SPD
03-08-2012, 01:10:31 PM
That would be great. Then just move it up a year every year. That might be too simple though. I'm good for 2 more years though. Just got the 78Z smogged.

flowjoe
03-08-2012, 03:02:19 PM
^ Amen, plus there aren't that many pre 1981-ish cars out there. I drive 40 miles from Downey to Rancho Cucamonga to work and I'm always car watching on the 605/10 and RARELY see older cars. Just a sea of Imports like my two DD'ers.

I wonder if La Malfa and Vargas are car guys??that's because it's the freeway Sal....most of the older cars I see (and I'm not talking about well maintained restorations or hot rods) are on surface streets doing the type of driving that pollutes more than freeway driving.

flowjoe
03-08-2012, 03:04:58 PM
Do you remember when it was a rolling 25 years old scale? Then it was a cutoff date...which moved up and down. Dave's pretty much called it I think. Doesn't really matter to me much though as most of mine are stock and all of them are older than '75....:crazy:;)

Knuckle Dragger
03-08-2012, 03:36:51 PM
Do you remember when it was a rolling 25 years old scale? Then it was a cutoff date...which moved up and down. Dave's pretty much called it I think. Doesn't really matter to me much though as most of mine are stock and all of them are older than '75....:crazy:;)

I can't remember how many times they changed it in the 30 years I was there. One of the reasons the smog laws are so miss understood is all the changes. What was standard procedure becomes obsolete and then standard procedure again. Crazy stuff.

IMO, 75 + should be tested. Visual for passive emissions (evap, PCV etc). Then check the tail pipe. Don't worry about anything else. Newer cars with OBD II should have it scanned to makes sure the monitors have run without fault and let them roll. New cars should be tested starting the year after purchase to stop the gross modifications the "buy new every three years" crowd has started doing.

One thing Arizona has right is their emissions program. No black magic rituals to figure out if it fits the criteria or not. All very simple and all very easy to deal with. You can always insure under a classic policy and be exempt.

flowjoe
03-08-2012, 03:55:29 PM
I can't remember how many times they changed it in the 30 years I was there. One of the reasons the smog laws are so miss understood is all the changes. What was standard procedure becomes obsolete and then standard procedure again. Crazy stuff.

IMO, 75 + should be tested. Visual for passive emissions (evap, PCV etc). Then check the tail pipe. Don't worry about anything else. Newer cars with OBD II should have it scanned to makes sure the monitors have run without fault and let them roll. New cars should be tested starting the year after purchase to stop the gross modifications the "buy new every three years" crowd has started doing.

One thing Arizona has right is their emissions program. No black magic rituals to figure out if it fits the criteria or not. All very simple and all very easy to deal with. You can always insure under a classic policy and be exempt.I agree with you 100% (well, not on AZ law as I have no idea what they do or don't do;)). I had to start testing my diesels this year...what a joke...strictly a visual followed by a patch to the car's computer to see if "everything was OK"....the tech had no idea what they were looking at (there's a longer story there). If they're going to test then they should make it meaningful.

SG71SS
03-08-2012, 08:16:03 PM
I'm a big fan of 77/78 Trans Ams and would love to have one but not deal with smogging it. I hope this SB passes.

flowjoe
03-08-2012, 09:18:33 PM
I'm a big fan of 77/78 Trans Ams and would love to have one but not deal with smogging it. I hope this SB passes.You and a lot of other people...have you looked at prices for those things lately? Through the roof - who would have thought:confused:

MidnightBlue72
03-08-2012, 10:19:50 PM
I'm a big fan of 77/78 Trans Ams and would love to have one but not deal with smogging it. I hope this SB passes.

THis is quite possibly the ONLY car from the 75-81 era that I like. I cant think of ANYTHING except the TAs that I would buy, modify or drive.

Joekool
03-09-2012, 01:30:33 AM
I agree with you 100% (well, not on AZ law as I have no idea what they do or don't do;)). I had to start testing my diesels this year...what a joke...strictly a visual followed by a patch to the car's computer to see if "everything was OK"....the tech had no idea what they were looking at (there's a longer story there). If they're going to test then they should make it meaningful.

The diesels are getting the tail pipe test in some areas now. Motorcycles are also getting emissions testing now. Before I use to see a diesel every so often, now with the emissions testing Im seeing alot more of them coming in to troubleshoot check engine lights so they can pass the smog test.

flowjoe
03-09-2012, 02:24:56 AM
The diesels are getting the tail pipe test in some areas now. Motorcycles are also getting emissions testing now. Before I use to see a diesel every so often, now with the emissions testing Im seeing alot more of them coming in to troubleshoot check engine lights so they can pass the smog test.Had to do our truck (7.3 power stroke) back in July...I had to replace the cold air/intercooler boots there previous year and they gave me grief for "modifying" the motor (used non-Ford parts). Took 5 minutes of talking to the tech and having him call another shop before he signed off...it was a Joke. Had to do our TDI at the end of January...same deal where the tech had no clue what he was looking at but was being asked to inspect and pass. To be fair, I use a test only facility for ease of use and cost.

GOLF72
03-09-2012, 07:51:35 PM
There are a lot of desirable cars (not just Camaros) that people dont want merely because of Californias' smog law. I know, if it passes, I would be interested in 78-81 Camaro. As it is, mine is a 76 and I have it registered in AZ where there is no smog required.

They need to revamp our DMV system. The AZ DMV is such a treat. I have spent more time standng in line at 7-11 than at the AZ DMV. :eek:

Joekool
03-10-2012, 04:37:15 AM
Its only going to get worse, was talking to a buddy that owns a test only station and he was telling me about the database they are building. Anytime a tech makes a mistake and it gets flagged they will be compared to all other techs in CA. The techs with the most mistakes will be scrutinized and forced to either get their crap together or stop doing smogs. This sucks for us because they will be really looking at everything closely so they dont get flagged, so what might squeek bye now prob wont in 2013 when/if the system kicks in.

Also CATs are being laser inscribed, sooner or later (prob sooner) they will be inspecting cars to make sure they have the right CAT(s) on the car. No more avoiding the often $$$ factory CATs (Ive seen them run as high as $3500+) and using a much cheaper aftermarket CAT that might or mightnot be "compatible" even though the car/truck will pass the tail pipe test. The aftermarket will produce compatible cats but its purely up to the companies if they will produce them.

Knuckle Dragger
03-10-2012, 08:55:45 AM
Its only going to get worse, was talking to a buddy that owns a test only station and he was telling me about the database they are building. Anytime a tech makes a mistake and it gets flagged they will be compared to all other techs in CA. The techs with the most mistakes will be scrutinized and forced to either get their crap together or stop doing smogs. This sucks for us because they will be really looking at everything closely so they dont get flagged, so what might squeek bye now prob wont in 2013 when/if the system kicks in.

Also CATs are being laser inscribed, sooner or later (prob sooner) they will be inspecting cars to make sure they have the right CAT(s) on the car. No more avoiding the often $$$ factory CATs (Ive seen them run as high as $3500+) and using a much cheaper aftermarket CAT that might or mightnot be "compatible" even though the car/truck will pass the tail pipe test. The aftermarket will produce compatible cats but its purely up to the companies if they will produce them.

None of that is new

Joekool
03-11-2012, 03:59:15 AM
None of that is new

Well pin a rose on your nose, thanks for the helpful post there buck-a-roo.

mgoad1971
03-11-2012, 05:24:08 AM
I remember going through hoops of fire to get my 68 Impala inspected. I'd drive it from Riverside to AZ just to get leaded gas!!

David_56
03-17-2012, 01:53:56 AM
Have anyone here gotten the email about the bill trying to push the smog year, to 82? 76-81 exempt as well? seems promising

Kamikaze
03-17-2012, 01:56:15 AM
We can only hope it gains more support.

But there was a thread here about a week or two ago about the SB#

David_56
03-17-2012, 01:59:21 AM
California Introduces Bill to Exempt pre-1981 Vehicles From Emissions Inspection Requirement

In 2004, legislation was enacted to repeal California’s rolling emissions-test exemption for vehicles 30 years old and older and replace it with a law requiring the lifetime testing of all 1976 and newer model-year vehicles. This year, a bill has been introduced in the California Senate (S.B. 1224) by Senator Doug LaMalfa (Senator.LaMalfa@senate.ca.gov ) to exempt all motor vehicles prior to the 1981 model year from the emissions inspection requirement. The bill will be considered in the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee on March 27, 2012.

We Urge You to Contact All Members of the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee (Contact Info Below) Immediately To Request Their Support for S.B. 1224

S.B. 1224 recognizes the minimal impact of pre-1981vehicles on emissions and air quality.

S.B. 1224 acknowledges that pre-1981 vehicles still constitute a minuscule portion of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to look for emissions reduction.

S.B. 1224 endorses the fact that pre-1981 vehicles are overwhelmingly well-maintained and infrequently driven (a fraction of the miles each year as a new vehicle).

For years, legislators, regulators and stationary source polluters have felt the heat from failed efforts to meet air quality goals and have looked to older cars as a convenient scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to further their case. S.B. 1224 helps validate the truth. The old car hobby should not continue to carry the burden of past mistakes!
DON’T DELAY! Please contact members of the California Senate Transportation and Housing Committee immediately to request their support of S.B. 1224. Please e-mail a copy of your letter to Steve McDonald at stevem@sema.org. Also, please forward this Alert to your fellow car enthusiasts. Urge them to join the SAN and help defend the hobby! Thank you for your assistance.

Knuckle Dragger
03-17-2012, 02:10:24 AM
Chuck beat ya to it by weeks. Merge bump :)

David_56
03-17-2012, 03:08:15 AM
Just got the email this afternoon, Darnit. As I'm scrapping my 79...

sbca96
03-20-2012, 06:04:03 PM
You can use the online letter here :

http://capwiz.com/cal4wheel/issues/alert/?alertid=61105461

This is what I sent to my Representative :

For years, legislators, regulators and stationary source polluters have felt the heat from failed efforts to meet air quality goals and have looked to older cars as a convenient scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to further their case. S.B. 1224 helps validate the truth. The old car hobby should not continue to carry the burden of past mistakes!

These overly restrictive smog laws have hurt the resale value of potentially collectable autos in California, all because people want to avoid the smog hassle. For example, the values of 1970-1975 Camaros have steadily increased as the first Generation Camaros (1967-1969) values skyrocketed. Pollution controlled Camaros 1976-1981 have been scrapped, parted out and crushed because their pollution control devices simply don't work, and never really did. The 1970s were the first attempt, which saw amazingly restrictive efficiency reducing equipment. These devices, even when new, barely did anything to reduce emissions, and in many cases increased them. It has been proven 10 fold these devices decrease MPG. Perfectly solid cars left to rot because they did not pass emissions testing or became to expensive to operate.

I am all for clean air, but not for wasting fuel resources. These original devices can, and do, lower fuel efficiency by 10 to 30% due to their highly invasive design. People have found, overwhelmingly so, since their production, that bypassing these original Catalytic Converters, removing the smog pumps and related tubing, and replacing intake systems can produce MPG numbers that don't hurt the wallet as much, and yet do not effect emissions output negatively.

At the very least, allowing the update of these devices to modern honeycomb type CATs, as well as dropping the visual inspection would ease the burden on owners. It would also see a reduction in emission output. Due to the visual inspection, our current project 1978 Camaro would fail a smog test. We have installed a 1994 Firebird EFI engine and its associated smog equipment. This engine, and its components I expect to lower pollution output drastically over the stock 305 V8, perhaps to less than 20% of its previous footprint. Unfortunately, this is not allowed under the current smog laws, unless we visit a Smog Referee for certification. If the smog laws are truly about reducing the actual emissions, why is the hood lifted at all? Simply put the testing equipment into the tail pipe and check the output, or drop the testing all together for these years.

There is a reason people call it "Smog Nazis", why is it a concern what's under the hood? Why does it matter if the vehicle has the original engine, carburetor, CAT or smog pump as long as it passes the output requirement for that year vehicle? Its time for California to revisit the whole smog requirement "business", but this is a good start. Lets move back to what this was originally about : reducing harmful emissions, and away from control for controls sake. Prohibition didn't work in the 1920s for the same reasons, there are always ways around laws. These "ways around" make a few people very rich, but why make it so difficult for those who want clean air, but also want an efficient running vehicle? Wake up California.

flowjoe
03-20-2012, 07:51:31 PM
You can use the online letter here :

http://capwiz.com/cal4wheel/issues/alert/?alertid=61105461

This is what I sent to my Representative :

For years, legislators, regulators and stationary source polluters have felt the heat from failed efforts to meet air quality goals and have looked to older cars as a convenient scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to further their case. S.B. 1224 helps validate the truth. The old car hobby should not continue to carry the burden of past mistakes!

These overly restrictive smog laws have hurt the resale value of potentially collectable autos in California, all because people want to avoid the smog hassle. For example, the values of 1970-1975 Camaros have steadily increased as the first Generation Camaros (1967-1969) values skyrocketed. Pollution controlled Camaros 1976-1981 have been scrapped, parted out and crushed because their pollution control devices simply don't work, and never really did. The 1970s were the first attempt, which saw amazingly restrictive efficiency reducing equipment. These devices, even when new, barely did anything to reduce emissions, and in many cases increased them. It has been proven 10 fold these devices decrease MPG. Perfectly solid cars left to rot because they did not pass emissions testing or became to expensive to operate.

I am all for clean air, but not for wasting fuel resources. These original devices can, and do, lower fuel efficiency by 10 to 30% due to their highly invasive design. People have found, overwhelmingly so, since their production, that bypassing these original Catalytic Converters, removing the smog pumps and related tubing, and replacing intake systems can produce MPG numbers that don't hurt the wallet as much, and yet do not effect emissions output negatively.

At the very least, allowing the update of these devices to modern honeycomb type CATs, as well as dropping the visual inspection would ease the burden on owners. It would also see a reduction in emission output. Due to the visual inspection, our current project 1978 Camaro would fail a smog test. We have installed a 1994 Firebird EFI engine and its associated smog equipment. This engine, and its components I expect to lower pollution output drastically over the stock 305 V8, perhaps to less than 20% of its previous footprint. Unfortunately, this is not allowed under the current smog laws, unless we visit a Smog Referee for certification. If the smog laws are truly about reducing the actual emissions, why is the hood lifted at all? Simply put the testing equipment into the tail pipe and check the output, or drop the testing all together for these years.

There is a reason people call it "Smog Nazis", why is it a concern what's under the hood? Why does it matter if the vehicle has the original engine, carburetor, CAT or smog pump as long as it passes the output requirement for that year vehicle? Its time for California to revisit the whole smog requirement "business", but this is a good start. Lets move back to what this was originally about : reducing harmful emissions, and away from control for controls sake. Prohibition didn't work in the 1920s for the same reasons, there are always ways around laws. These "ways around" make a few people very rich, but why make it so difficult for those who want clean air, but also want an efficient running vehicle? Wake up California.

If I interpret the proposed bill correctly your letter misses the point. The bill calls for an exemption from any testing while your letter argues for Dave's point of looking at the end result - i.e. tail pipe testing to meet a standard regardless of engine year or mods.

There are a lot of reasons that '75-81 cars are less collectible than earlier cars and most of those have little to do with whether or not the car has to be smogged. Besides most collectible cars that attain the highest values are fully equipped as originally delivered from the factory meaning that collectible cars from '75-81 have smog equipment intact and would not really be impacted by the proposed law.

The real push here is for modified cars which is why SEMA is on board. I would argue that modified cars are very different than collector cars.

sbca96
03-20-2012, 08:35:22 PM
If I interpret the proposed bill correctly your letter misses the point. The bill calls for an exemption from any testing while your letter argues for Dave's point of looking at the end result - i.e. tail pipe testing to meet a standard regardless of engine year or mods.

There are a lot of reasons that '75-81 cars are less collectible than earlier cars and most of those have little to do with whether or not the car has to be smogged. Besides most collectible cars that attain the highest values are fully equipped as originally delivered from the factory meaning that collectible cars from '75-81 have smog equipment intact and would not really be impacted by the proposed law.

The real push here is for modified cars which is why SEMA is on board. I would argue that modified cars are very different than collector cars.

A car you can not smog because of a useless widget makes it worth nothing.
Smog control directly affects value, I have heard it over and over, and others
even posted here - required smog is the reason they wont by a 1976-81. My
letter both addresses exempt AND changing restictions, but I make it clear
that I support either/or. I expect the measure to fail, since California is much
more inclined to give money to Toyota for Prius Cal-Trans cars, then allow the
auto hobby enthusists a break. Whats the real difference between the early
2nd gens and the later 2nd gens ... besides a rear window and bumpers? The
modified car can also be a collector car and visa versa. I have a 1963 Avanti
which is smog exempt, the engine is stock, but the brakes/trans is modified. I
dont get how you can say current smog laws dont affect value. Very odd.

Tom

RaycerX81
03-23-2012, 03:42:58 AM
My camaro is an 81 so i get screwed again if this passes. first time was when arnold killed the 30 year rolling law. Well it looks like I will have to register it at my friends mom's house. There are no smog tests in her county. Its not that I want to do a bunch of stuff to her( like headers, big cam, etc), I dont, I just want to ditch the crap computer controlled crap that makes her run like doo doo. I had to drill the mixture screws so I could adjust them to pass, because to computer wants to tune the car to the rich side. I have replaced everything and it still does it.

kdracer73
03-23-2012, 05:05:46 PM
k. Whats the real difference between the early
2nd gens and the later 2nd gens ....

Tom
Catalytic converters.

SG71SS
03-28-2012, 01:11:09 PM
UPDATE:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The hearing scheduled for March 27, 2012 on California Senate Bill (S.B. 1224) has been postponed until April 10, 2012. As you are aware, S.B. 1224 would exempt all motor vehicles prior to the 1981 model year from the emissions inspection requirement.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Sure hope this things passes!.

In reading the analysis, it says that 162,000 vehicles between years 1976 and 1980 received smog checks during the past two years. There are roughly 27 million motor vehicles in California so the new exemption would be for about one half of one percent of all motor vehicles.

rogerh
03-28-2012, 06:24:06 PM
when arnold killed the 30 year rolling law.

Actually it was Dean Florez.

red78z
03-28-2012, 07:26:54 PM
what about if you get antique tags? theres no inspection on those after you buy the tags. And most of our cars burn cleaner than the new ones on the show room floor

RaycerX81
04-02-2012, 01:45:25 PM
Actually it was Dean Florez.


But Arnold signed it in to law. he could have vetoed it.

SG71SS
04-11-2012, 08:05:18 PM
California Bill to Exempt pre-1981 Vehicles From Emissions Inspection Requirement Fails Committee Vote; Granted Reconsideration

Legislation (S.B. 1224) to exempt all motor vehicles prior to the 1981 model year from the emissions inspection requirement has been granted reconsideration after failing to be approved by a Senate Transportation and Housing Committee vote. The bill failed on a 3-4 vote, with two committee members not voting. The bill will be reconsidered in a future committee hearing. Those who voted in favor of the bill are Senators Gaines, Harman and Wyland. Those who voted against are Senators DeSaulnier, Lowenthal, Pavley and Simitian. Senators Kehoe and Rubio did not vote on the bill.

Posted from:

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/politics-religion-and-controversy/3037014-sb-1224-denied.html