Jay Leno’s star power wasn’t enough to persuade a California legislative committee to pass a measure to allow owners of classic cars like him to be exempted from the state’s rigorous smog-check requirements.
The Assembly Appropriations Committee on Friday blocked Bakersfield Republican Sen. Shannon Grove’s Senate Bill 712 from advancing for a full vote. Leno had testified in support of the measure in Sacramento earlier this year.
35 Comments
TimeNaan@lemmy.world · 41 pts · 361d
Classic cars are rare and they wouldn't really add any measurable pollution to the environment. Making them adhere to modern regulations makes no sense imo.
judgyweevil@feddit.it · 31 pts · 361d
If you have money for a rare classic car you have money for a smog-check. Let's not give exemptions to rich people again
psx_crab@lemmy.zip · 24 pts · 361d
It's likely gonna fail because old car design usually doesn't account for any of that. Carburetor, lack of catalytic converter, lack of exhaust gas recirculation system, so on and so forth, all those gonna add to the emission and if the strictness is of today standard, it's gonna fail.
Maybe give them a smog tax based on the emission would make much more sense.
Madison420@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 359d
I'm just curious did anyone actually read the article.
They have to pass the emission standard for the year of production. It means as long as your vehicle is on relatively good repair you'll probably pass, you're not likely to pass if you've made modifications which is what they're upset about.
TimeNaan@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 361d
How is a car designed before any regulations supposed to pass a modern smog test?
dentoid@sopuli.xyz · -14 pts · 361d
Does it have to? You could probably get by with some tuning, or if that doesnt work refitting some injectors maby? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Also how many classic cars are still running on their original engine?
chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 361d
Most of them? These are not custom hot rods, they’re restored stock cars. A careful and attentive restorer is going to try to match every detail to the day the car first rolled off the production line. This means keeping (and rebuilding) the original engine, not installing a modern emission-controlled engine in its place.
psx_crab@lemmy.zip · 16 pts · 361d
The aim of keeping classic car is to keep it as pristine and as close to the original as possible, modding in that way kinda defeat the purpose of most collector.
JigglySackles@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 360d
Tell me you know nothing about the topic witbout telling me.
Sarmyth@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 361d
Or you just still own your old car because it runs. Its not a rich people thing just because the guy in the article is rich. When I stumble upon classic car shows, the vibe is "long term project cars" and not "affluent collectors".
My father in law maintains a Triumph Race car with the machine shop in his garage. It'll never legitimately pass smog, but its also driven once or twice a month and he's owned it for like 50+ years.
neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 360d
It's not about the cost of a smog test.
It's that classic cars will never pass a modern smog test. They are wildly inefficient, and those inefficiencies manifest in a bunch of wasted gas and bad exhaust.
I think they should probably get a smog tax, like someone else suggested somewhere.
Madison420@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 360d
They don't have to pass a modern smog test.
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 361d
My classic Miata cost me $1900 and 150 hours of work. Fuck you 🤣
Philote@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 360d
If you don’t have money for a new car and only have an old beater, let’s not punish them with added cost to exist in this fuck the poor country. It goes both ways.
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 360d
I've you're driving a 90-year-old car, it's not for economic reasons.
Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 360d
Being poor isn't and shouldn't be a license to pollute.
resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 360d
They’re already grandfathered-in in that they only have to pass the regulations when they went on sale.
They should count themselves lucky they don’t have to pass current regulations.
ambitious_bones@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 361d
So it is not even about not getting what they want, it is about being slightly inconvenienced.
slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org · 28 pts · 361d
Wait what is ge talking about? You put the sensor in the exhaust and let it rund and then it tells you that your piece of shit car was build in a time where people believed that cigarettes are healthy
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 361d
Guys, don't mouth off unless you know what you're talking about.
You sometimes need to drive hundreds of miles to get the ECU to get into it's long-term running state and they'll pass you.
KraeuterRoy@feddit.org · -1 pts · 360d
It sure is gonna take forever to get the right ECU data from a car made in the 40s or 50s
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 360d
I'm sure you don't actually know what the fuck you're talking about.
1999's are 25 years old and fall under this shit.
DampCanary@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 361d
Sorry for my european ignorance,
but isn't eco test mandatory part of yearly vehicle inspection?
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 15 pts · 361d
US states generally (possibly all) don't do vehicle safety inspections. There are periodic smog tests and that's about it. Detection of unfitness to be on the road is entirely reactive, based on a system of police-issued "fix it" tickets. That can range from correcting a burned-out tail light to doing something about the rusty muffler dragging on the ground.
azimir@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 360d
My old city in the US didn't even have exhaust checks. Anyone could drive anything without oversight.
Serinus@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 360d
Some states do vehicle inspections, Virginia in particular.
Derpenheim@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 361d
No, you live in a sensible place that at least pretends to care about the environment. America is a shit hole that has nothing sensible about it.
DampCanary@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 361d
I'd say EU rules and cash grab opportunity is behind it here (in yearly registration extension price there are eco taxes included, but coutry doesn't guarantee that it will go thowards the eco projects. All that money ends up in general pot)
Sarmyth@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 361d
Early on in a car's life its isn't yearly, but at one point in my last car's 20 year life it became yearly and never went back. I think its age related.
DampCanary@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 361d
That make sense, I'm just used to ours way that I didn't question other possibilites.
E.g. here brand new cars get their first registration (for a duration of 1 year) and after few hundred kilometers they have they 0th car service at authorised service station. Then on yearly basis cars need to go for car service (practice is: one year small, then next year large servicing) then vehicle inspection at inspection station where, if car passes minimal safety standards, you extend registration for another year.
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 361d
He'd get a lot more sympathy if he were funny, and if he weren't such an obsequious toad.
HubertManne@piefed.social · 9 pts · 360d
I would be fine with this is they paid double what it would cost to mitigate their pollution assuming they are driven all the time. So no matter what it is treated like its running like a cab. There are so few the income from it would likely be worth it.
bytesonbike@discuss.online · 1 pts · 361d
Fuck cars. And fuck you Leno.
TheBat@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 360d
CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 360d
Yeah this just causes those cars to be registered out of state without any regulation at all and the registration revenue goes elsewhere.
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 361d
Nerds annoying the population into fascism.
You all just can't help yourselves 🤣. You would literally want a dictator vs .005% of the cars being less than optimal.