[NOBBC] Discussion of SB 1224

[Greg Tatarian]

Re: New Senate Bill to exempt pre-1981 cars from smog! (Scroll down to 
see Clif's comments preceding my own).

Clif,

You make good points, but both of us may be making assumptions we can't 
support.
I have tried to find data on number of 1975-1980 vehicles registered in
California, but can't find them. Instead, I've used my anecdotal 
observations of
cars I see on the road everyday, and what I have seen is that there are 
fewer
and fewer 1975-1980 cars on the road each year. That includes the common
vehicles you mention. There are still a good number of 1985 and up vehicles,
particularly those that stay together like Honda and Toyota.

To me, it boils down to how many of these vehicles are actually still 
driving.
Mark gave his example of getting tagged for having a 1950s smoking MGA, 
which is
smog-exempt, but is still subject to anti-smoking vehicle laws. You 
bought your
1974 JH new, but what if you had bought a 1976 model year? Is it no longer a
classic? Not by your definition, which by the way, was determined by the
California legislature putting the cutoff at 1975.

Regarding the slippery slope you mention, the rolling exemption is used 
in most
other states with exemptions, based on the declining number of older 
vehicles
still alive and being driven, since it is statistically-based management.

Here's language from the existing Health and Safety Code Section 44011, 
relating
to percentage of vehicles California wanted to focus on:

"(4), any motor vehicle or class of motor vehicles exempted pursuant
to subdivision (b) of Section 44024.5. It is the intent of the
Legislature that the department, pursuant to the authority granted by
this paragraph, exempt at least 15 percent of the lowest emitting
motor vehicles from the biennial smog check inspection."

The existing Code recognizes the decreasing number of these vehicles, 
and this
amendment does not propose to increase the percentage of exempt 
vehicles, since
all older vehicles are decreasing in numbers and being driven less.

It's all about the numbers, and I'm not sure how fair it is to set an 
arbitrary
date (1975) and never advance that date over the years, since the same 
reasoning
for your 1974 JH will eventually apply to the ever-declining number of later
cars. Fewer cars, fewer miles, less emissions. If we don't agree with that
approach, we don't have a right to our 1974 cars being exempt, either, since
they originally came with smog equipment as well.

Thanks for adding to the discussion, Clif!

Greg

--- In NOBBC at yahoogroups.com 
<http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/NOBBC/post?postID=DqNS4fRC-U6ocmRa7dRqHNfpRdCK5blr4H8KiLojvlPdVewE--b9s48iW0Pr-SjpwcgfofJfdIgaio7fbBZJnQ>, 
"Clif & Deborah Williamson" <hawkview at ...> wrote:
 >
 > Hello all.
 > My first reaction to this idea was great, but then I though about the
ramifications.
 > I hate to say this because I like the idea of classic cars finding 
there way
back onto the roads. But have you consider how many, piles of crap, vans,
trucks, old beat up four doors, basically junk cars that this will be 
allowed to
keep polluting our poor planet. Think about what you are doing here. Ford,
Chevy, Dodge trucks, vans, and suvs with no pollution requirements. Yeah it
would be nice to allow the Corvettes, Camaros, Mustangs, and Ferraris to 
be able
to be on the road, but is it worth it? And donbEUR^(TM)t you think the 
first thing
owners of these cars will do is remove all of the pollution equipment 
that is
required today? These cars can meet the standards that they were 
designed for in
their generation. These so called up and coming classics make up a very 
small
portion of the cars that would become exempt if this bill passes. It 
might be
expensive, but nobody said owning a classic car was suppose to be cheap.
 > The next step of course would be to change the exemption from 1981 to 
1986
then 91, and then maybe no standard at all. ItbEUR^(TM)s a very slippery 
slope,
isnbEUR^(TM)t it?
 > Most of us in NOBBC drive cars that are pre 1976 because they are 
classic, not
because they are exempt or cheap. If you want to own a Ferrari, a 240Z 
or any
car from the 76-81 era, be aware of what it will take to put that car on the
road. DonbEUR^(TM)t make it your position that because you want it to be 
easy, that
all of the other piles of crap from that era should be allowed on the 
road. It
just doesnbEUR^(TM)t make sense, at least to me.
 > I vote NO. ItbEUR^(TM)s this simple. I care more about the planet, 
than I do about
classic cars from this generation being exempt.
 > Clif Williamson 1974 Jensen Healey (exempt)