SB 708 Smog Check bill

[jackrabbit]

Are you Californians who have 1973 and older 4wd and muscle cars aware that Senator Dean Florez has authored bill SB 708 to change the smog check rules to include your vehicles? I just invested thousands of dollars to upgrade suspension, disc brakes, power brakes and lockers in my 73 bronco due to the fact that it was smog exempt and I no longer had to worry about finding old factory smog parts. It runs clean and strong but cannot pass smog test because it does not have all the origingal equiptment smog parts -- so even if it runs clean it will get failed when tested. SB 708 will roll back the earlier law change that exempted all vehicles from 1973 and older, and would have also exempted every gas vehicle that is 30 years old, starting this year for newer than 1973. The proposed language in SB 708 would require that your vehicle be at least 45 years old (to protect "classic vehicles"). This would mean that all those great '60's classic cars and the '66-'77 classic Broncos would not be smog exempt until they are 45 years old -- so all of us who have invested tons of money into these later model "classics" have just wasted our money! A check on the leginfo website today shows that the bill has not yet been assigned to committee or hearings yet, but I sure hope this bill fails. It will probably get support from other legislators who are unaware that we put tons on money into 30 year old "classics" and our investments will just go down the drain.

[karstic]

Hey jackrabbit how 'bout posting this in the action alert forum. Bring it up to the top.

[karstic]

Hopefully the aftermarket manufacturers and owners of these vehicles can get this defeated. There's a lot of VW's that would be affected by this also.

[jmabbott888]

Why is it everytime I read a post I want out of this losy state more & more? Now all I gotta do is get my wife talked into moving out of here. Would it be asking to much to ban all polititians from being in this state? How would we get that bill put thru? I&#39;m sure there would be enough people that would vote all of them out. But thinking again that wouldn&#39;t work since they have the say & don&#39;t vote the way we want them too. O well I guess I can keep hoping to get the wife to move. http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smiley-shakehead-blue.gif http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smiley-hitting-self.gif

[COHunter]

Hey I might have to come out there and look for a 67 Camero !!! If people cant drive them out there then they should sell for a lot less
http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smiley-idea-blu.gif

[jackrabbit]

Karstic, I&#39;m not sure how to move the thread to the Alert section; if a moderator wants to move it that would be fine; otherwise I&#39;ll just post the next follow-up on SB 708 in the alert section.

cohunter: you might as well set up a shop right on the California border so we can sell our classic cars real cheap; oh, and you might as well bring along your FFL so we can sell you our guns at a real cheap price also. Oh what the heck, just send us some gas money (expensive) and we&#39;ll drive our cars, fully loaded with our guns, and just give them to you for free (plus a bus ride home of course)!!

[COHunter]

Jackrabbitt,
Why would I need an FFL to buy a gun from a private party ???
Or let me guess......In CA you need to have some sort of Gov&#39;t oversight on private firearm sales ???

[JDC]

Originally posted by COHunter@Mar 12 2003, 05:07 AM
Why would I need an FFL to buy a gun from a private party ???
Or let me guess......In CA you need to have some sort of Gov&#39;t oversight on private firearm sales ???
Oh, you betcha!

In the C.R.C. all firearms transactions must be done through a FFL dealer, background check, waiting period, the whole ball of #$%%$.

[Qbn Hunter]

These people in Sacramento, instead of worrying about balancing the budget the yare worried about banning dove hunting and smog check. They don&#39;t care cause they know that the majority of Californian&#39;s will not vote for Republicans. http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smiley-shakehead-blue.gif

[LAgunman2K]

GGRRRRRR these damn politicians, its bad enough they want to raise the car fees. this bill is only going to make it difficult for the car collectors and the poor people cant afford a newer car.

just when you think they cant get greedy enough ....BOHICA

[arlow]

JDC,

What does C.R.C. stand for? Communist republic of california? http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smiley-sideways-laff-aqua.gif Dont feel alone though, Massachussetts is not far behind. Nothing seems to moving the right way these days. Way too many urban idiots thinking they can legislate into fantasy land.

Arlow http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smiley-cool-shades-down.gif

[karstic]

Here&#39;s a response from someone I know that works at the ARB when asked about the proposed legislation.

From a practical perspective, it would be a nightmare to
implement for a number of reasons: 1) Parts and accurate service information
are no longer readily available for these cars making it difficult to emission
test them and make emission related repairs. 2) Many of these cars (1965-1973
model years) have been out of the Smog Check program for a number of years. 3)
Some of these cars (1965 and older) were never certified to emissions
requirements which makes it difficult to establish "after the fact" emission
requirements.

[jackrabbit]

That&#39;s good news Karstic, I will be writing the legislators as this bill goes thru committee to point out that I cannot not get original equiptment smog parts or aftermarket smog parts for my currently exempt 1973 Bronco. I hope VW owners and muscle car owners, and other classic car owners will do the same.

[jackrabbit]

Good News/Bad News:

Just checked on SB 708 today and it has been amended. It will continue the smog check exemption for 1973 and older vehicles, but they must not be driven for more than 12,000 miles per year -- that covers my &#39;73 Bronco which I only use in the rough stuff, maybe 5,000/year max miles. [B]

The bad news is, vehicles newer than 1973 will need to become 45 years old before thay become exempt, so my &#39;77 RV with the 460 engine won&#39;t be exempt any time soon.

It has now been re-referred to the Senate Transportation committee: Kevin Murray (Chair); Tom McClintock (Vice-Chair); Roy Ashburn; James Brulte; Liz Figeroa; Dean Florez (author); Betty Karnette; Bill Morrow; Don Perata; Jack Scott; Nell Soto; Jackie Speier; Tom Torlakson.

This bill still needs to die. There are still a lot of specialty vehicles out there that can run pretty clean on unleaded gas but OEM parts won&#39;t be available for them when they are 30 years old. And for the most part, it is really just the specialty vehicles which have aftermarket product support for not only the engines, but more importantly, for the running gear -- like the 1974-1977 Bronco&#39;s, all the good trucks, good cars, etc. If any of these committee members represent your district, send them a letter to leave current smog exemption law as is -- I know there are some nice vehicles in storage in CA just waiting their turn to be exempt, based on the current law.

[bigtroutbane]

What the heck do these are these politicians think that they can tell us how many miles a year we can drive our vehicles?

[bigtroutbane]

What the heck do these are these politicians think that they can tell us how many miles a year we can drive our vehicles?