I have taken a lot of cars over the years to smog shops but I have never had a mechanic get so upset & frustrated that he refused to smog one of my cars. Smogging older cars in Ca. is a more lengthy process. (mandatory visual inspection of hoses, canisters , EGR, evap test, etc) so I know my car is not their favorite. What set him off was that he was having a heck of a time verifying the embossed number on the bottom of the cat. He has to make sure it's Ca. certified. He had a mirror but insisted my car was too low to use it and he didn't have a jack. He then set a big piece of plastic by the side of the car in an attempt to read the number that way. At this point I got in to a conversation with another customer for about 10-15 minutes. Next thing I know him & the owner start really arguing back and forth for a few minutes. Then the owner calls me over and says sorry, my mechanic does not want to work on your car. So I got in my car and left..... Kit
[This message has been edited by Kitskaboodle (edited 07-03-2015).]
If that had happened to me, I would have reported the inspection station to the state authorities. Suppose you were there at the last minute of your last day to get an inspection before being penalized. What would you have done, then?
Sounds like the station was poorly equipped, especially with so many of today's cars of the younger crowd being lowered to the max.
If I ever live in CA I'm not bringing a Fiero there. Thank goodness in Texas Fieros are exempt from smog inspections. Back when they did them all they cared about was tailpipe emissions. They could care less about what is under the decklid making all the smoke.
But I did have to walk out of a shop when the idiot insisted on putting the front wheels on the dyno. I asked for my keys back and left.
I took my Fiero to Green Star Smog at the corner of Keyes and 5th street?? Right next door to "Super Cheap Tires". Don't go there! On another subject, I'm getting damn depressed hearing all these guys saying they have never even been to a smog shop. Mark my words.......there's coming a day when YOUR state is gonna tighten the noose on your Fiero. And it aint gonna be pretty. Kit
I'm hoping someday soon, California gets some sense smacked into them, and they start thinking, "Gee, maybe we're NOT smarter than the rest of the world?"
Smog seems to be an issue here because cars spend hours and hours just sitting in traffic barely moving, because the infrastructure can't begin to support the actual amount of traffic that exists? The HOV lanes eliminating a much needed additional lane doesn't help, either. The shitty non-grid system road designs effectively force people onto the gridlocked freeways in order to get anywhere.
If electric cars become common enough and popular enough, maybe we won't need smog testing anymore? Gas prices could plummet, and gas cars would just become an enthusiast pastime?
I took my Fiero to Green Star Smog at the corner of Keyes and 5th street?? Right next door to "Super Cheap Tires". Don't go there! On another subject, I'm getting damn depressed hearing all these guys saying they have never even been to a smog shop. Mark my words.......there's coming a day when YOUR state is gonna tighten the noose on your Fiero. And it aint gonna be pretty. Kit
Most states, know that the limited number of older vehicles on the road are not daily driver and are used as a fun vehicle driven only in the good weather and doesn't get that many miles put on it in a year.. They have also found that cars 25 years old or older are over cared for, if an issue comes up the owner fixes it, and keeps it in tip top tune. This state used to test older cars but found it was a waste of time, as those used as a daily driver have returned to earth.. and those used in the good weather, are running better than they did when new.. The data has told them that the vehicles used daily that are 8-17 years old are the group of worst offenders, as they are not worth much and owners tend to put off repairs until it is on a hook.. They have high miles, and owners that many times don't have the funds to keep it in good running order, if it starts they are good.. It's also the group that has shown to go the most miles a year.. to the tune of 25-55k Vehicles 1-4 years old as a group are low miles as 65% of them are leases 5-8 years old get more miles but the owners tend to take care of them as most buyers of these are buyers that can't buy new, and can't afford to replace it any time soon.. And that brings us back to the 8-17 year old group, that the buyers that can't buy new have traded in or sold because it's starting to show it's age, and can't have the daily breaking down and/or needing repairs one after the other. So, these vehicles if traded in, go straight to wholesale auctions and the little car dealers resell them, and don't do much to them.. as they are not worth much.. and the buyers are kids or those with crap for credit, or in the case of the rustbelt, the winter beater.. So, most states target the group that doesn't get repaired and tends to go the most miles needing repairs, The 1-5 year old ones if the engine light comes on, it's off to the dealer, the 6-8 year olds light comes on, they bring it to their trusted shop asap, the 9-17+ year old ones are driven with the light shining until it get the hook, of the inspection sticker is about to need to be replaced..
Most states unlike Cali, read the data from the last 30+ years of yearly inspections, and used it to target the group that will do the most good for clean air...
Cali, if they had their way, vehicles ten years or older would be outlawed from daily driver use, and would be limited to limited miles and week ends,cruises,shows. Your state isn't all that smart, as I'll bet The cali freeways, that are parking lots 14 hours a day, cause more smog issues than all the older cars/trucks.. As other than hybrids everything else is it's dirtiest while idling, and the stop and go grind.. Maybe they should fix that cluster_________. cause frankly what is the point of requiring vehicles to get x miles to a gallon of fuel, if the unit will be running 4-6 times longer than need be to go 35 miles. And at a engine speed that will not give that mileage . ?
Here is an idea, If you cause a wreck that is the cause of a back up, And isn't vehicle part failure but driver error you get a 1000.oo smog fine , commercial vehicles 2500.00 big rigs 10000.oo. That put a huge dent in the rush hour stupidity causing wrecks.. That has more of an effect on clean air, than most of the emission testing crap.. And because it be a fine that come out of the drivers pocket.. they just might pay more attention to the road, than they do now.. as insurance has made causing a wreck un-painful to the wallet..
[This message has been edited by E.Furgal (edited 07-05-2015).]
Mark my words.......there's coming a day when YOUR state is gonna tighten the noose on your Fiero. And it aint gonna be pretty. Kit
Illinois has loosened the noose on older cars. Seems too many were getting damaged on the dynos at the testing centers (or flying OFF the dynos and causing damage) so they did away with the dynos entirely and now test OBDII only. So after spending millions to equip all the test stations with dynos, they then removed all the dynos just a few years later.
Illinois has loosened the noose on older cars. Seems too many were getting damaged on the dynos at the testing centers (or flying OFF the dynos and causing damage) so they did away with the dynos entirely and now test OBDII only. So after spending millions to equip all the test stations with dynos, they then removed all the dynos just a few years later.
I don't know about there, but here, the shop that wants to do inspections has to pony up and buy the equipment.. when they stopped with the dyno's the shops took the bath..
Ya 'all make good points about why older cars (mid 80's and down ) should not be smogged and I agree with you. The reality is (in Calif .) that most cars, 94 and down are continually singled out and sent to the "Star" station. California's smog program is working. Older cars are failing like flies. These older cars are polluting California's air far less now.....cause they end up in the local PickNPull. Mission accomplished for CARB. Don't you guys get it? They want these older cars ("gross polluters") off the road. Why? So you'll buy a new car! Kit
Ya 'all make good points about why older cars (mid 80's and down ) should not be smogged and I agree with you. The reality is (in Calif .) that most cars, 94 and down are continually singled out and sent to the "Star" station. California's smog program is working. Older cars are failing like flies. These older cars are polluting California's air far less now.....cause they end up in the local PickNPull. Mission accomplished for CARB. Don't you guys get it? They want these older cars ("gross polluters") off the road. Why? So you'll buy a new car! Kit
A Fiero with a good engine in a good state of tune with a CAT is no more polluting than a new car. The totalitarian rule in California is sickening but the people voted for having less rights. The citizens of California apparently want more government and now they've got it. I won't as much as visit a place like that. NJ's inspection requirement is just a plug in to your diagnostic connector and that's it. Classic and collector cars are totally exempt from any inspection. Anything more than this would amount to government coercion.
------------------ " THE BLACK PARALYZER" -87GT 3800SC Series III engine, custom ZZP /Frozen Boost Intercooler setup, 3.4" Pulley, Northstar TB, LS1 MAF, 3" Flotech Afterburner Exhaust, Autolite 104's, MSD wires, Custom CAI, 4T65eHD w. custom axles, HP Tuners VCM Suite. "THE COLUSSUS" 87GT - ALL OUT 3.4L Turbocharged engine, Garrett Hybrid Turbo, MSD ign., modified TH125H " ON THE LOOSE WITHOUT THE JUICE "
You have people making laws that could not even check their own oil in many cases. The sad part is I have seen cars that are modified and make less emission but yet will not pass as they so not have EO numbers on some of the parts.
People like to try to claim the south is full of Dimwit Gomer Pyles but if you look around they have more common sense and less issues than most other parts of the country.
What is sad is what starts in California goes to NY and New England next. The people with D behind their names vote this stuff in and then we all pay for it.
In Ohio it is just a total rip off. We have select counties that were forced into emissions programs by a Democratic Governor and then the contract for testing was given to a company invested by those in state government that voted in the program. Then to get out of the blame of the charges for testing. They take the money the state got from the Cigarette companies and put that to pay for the state emissions testing. While we do not pay for it now they are basically taking the Cancer money and collecting it from the company they invested in. It is all legal.
The real crock is while we have testing here I have two counties just a few miles away and they don't. Yet they have the same air I have depending on the wind direction.
It's not just the "D" states with emissions nonsense. Texas has some of the most ridiculous smog laws. Like reduced speed limits because we all know cars pollute more at high speed, right? So of course we have 60 mph on an interstate freeway designed for 70 mph. And we have emissions testing on cars from 24 years to brand new. The only silver lining is they capped it at 24 years old and eventually when the 96's get 24 years old the dyno will go away completely.
I'm hoping someday soon, California gets some sense smacked into them, and they start thinking, "Gee, maybe we're NOT smarter than the rest of the world?"
Ha, good luck with that... There's a reason I don't live there anymore.
We've had emissions testing here in the UK for a long time now, however catalytic convertors were only mandatory from 1992. New cars didn't even have to be able to run on unleaded fuel until 1990!
A car first used before 1st August 1986 has to be under 4.5% CO and < 1200ppm HC at idle, from 1st August 1986 it became 3.5% CO, and a cat equipped car must do 0.3%CO and 200ppm HC at natural idle, and 0.2%CO at 2500 rpm.
If a pre 92 car fails the HC at idle, it can be retested at 2500rpm.
There are more stringent requirements for later cars with EURO III/IV/V emissions specs but these are the basics here.
My 86 GT was MoT'd the other day, came out at 0.08%CO and 86ppm HC. That's with a new cat on there. When tested a few years ago without a cat, it measured 0.45%CO and 112ppm HC - almost a cat test pass!
I've never had a car fail an MoT on emissions which wasn't fixed at the time by adjusting the mixtrure screw on the carburettor (which cost me the same as the purchase price of the car - £15!)
[This message has been edited by Gandalf (edited 07-09-2015).]
A Fiero with a good engine in a good state of tune with a CAT is no more polluting than a new car.
That is so far beyond false it's almost funny. Engine controls on new cars are so good old cars can't even compete. A perfectly running '80s car (of which I have about a dozen currently) that *flies* through smog still emits dozens or hundreds of times more pollutants than even a primitive OBDII car. My Fiero - which runs very way below "average" on the statistical scale - dumps tens of ppm of HC and hundreds of ppm of NOx. My '03 Jaguar with 100k on it emits single-digit numbers across the board. My '07 Solstice emitted 0. Just 0.
I don't think properly running "old cars" are a useful part of the air pollution problem, but suggesting they run as clean as any car made in the last ten years is just flat-out false.
[This message has been edited by thesameguy (edited 07-09-2015).]
OT: I don't think a smog shop can legally refuse to test your vehicle for it being difficult. I believe they are allowed a surcharge of $5 or $10 for "old cars" but the rates are fixed, it's not discretionary. I believe the only reason they can refuse to smog a car is if it is deemed unsafe to test OR if they do not have the equipment to service a particular type of vehicle. These rules must be posted and be policy, they are not arbitrary. Once they have taken your keys and you've signed the paperwork, they must perform the test.
I would personally call the BAR and report them - at least get a professional opinion on the matter. You can also schedule an appointment with the BAR for a referee inspection. The cost is the same, so there really isn't a penalty for doing it.
I o If a station lacks the equipment, tools, or reference materials necessary to inspect a particular vehicle, the station must reject the vehicle before starting an inspection. o If a station lacks the equipment, tools, personnel or reference materials necessary to repair a particular vehicle, the station must reject the vehicle before starting a repair. o If, as a matter of policy, a test-and-repair station does not repair certain types of vehicles or inspection failures, the station must reject the vehicle before starting
Ya 'all make good points about why older cars (mid 80's and down ) should not be smogged and I agree with you. The reality is (in Calif .) that most cars, 94 and down are continually singled out and sent to the "Star" station. California's smog program is working. Older cars are failing like flies. These older cars are polluting California's air far less now.....cause they end up in the local PickNPull. Mission accomplished for CARB. Don't you guys get it? They want these older cars ("gross polluters") off the road. Why? So you'll buy a new car! Kit
Cali, is setting themselves up for a class action lawsuit that they will not win.. you see they are sneaky and every few years up what the model year emissions for that year is.. forcing vehicles to try to pass emission standards that they were never designed to .. if you know of a shop that saves the data, you'll see that what the emissions standard a 1986 model had to meet to pass.. in 1986, and what it has become as years gave gone by, you can't set standards for vehicles of a model year and then keep moving the goal post after the fact.. That's why so many are failing, and cali will get hammered on it soon..
Originally posted by E.Furgal: Cali, is setting themselves up for a class action lawsuit that they will not win.. you see they are sneaky and every few years up what the model year emissions for that year is.. forcing vehicles to try to pass emission standards that they were never designed to .. if you know of a shop that saves the data, you'll see that what the emissions standard a 1986 model had to meet to pass.. in 1986, and what it has become as years gave gone by, you can't set standards for vehicles of a model year and then keep moving the goal post after the fact.. That's why so many are failing, and cali will get hammered on it soon..
No they won't. It's no different than many other things. Just because you buy a house that was built in the 50s and had lead based paint, doesn't mean you're allowed to repaint it with lead based paint, or use asbestos insulation. Likewise, just because you bought a vehicle that when new put out an inordinate amount of pollutants, simply because nobody in the country cared about the environment, and the population was about 1/5 what it is now, doesn't mean you should still be allowed to put out pollutants like nobody cares.
Ironically, back then, people also cared more about their community than people necessarily do now, but nobody had a care in the world about what their actions would do to the environment their future children and grandchildren would live in. Today, there's more pressing need to convince people to care about the environment, which ironically means being mindful of how your actions and decisions affect the world around you, though the conservative mindset of "personal freedoms" has somehow engulfed an unfortunately large amount of the populace of the US.
That is so far beyond false it's almost funny. Engine controls on new cars are so good old cars can't even compete. A perfectly running '80s car (of which I have about a dozen currently) that *flies* through smog still emits dozens or hundreds of times more pollutants than even a primitive OBDII car. My Fiero - which runs very way below "average" on the statistical scale - dumps tens of ppm of HC and hundreds of ppm of NOx. My '03 Jaguar with 100k on it emits single-digit numbers across the board. My '07 Solstice emitted 0. Just 0.
I don't think properly running "old cars" are a useful part of the air pollution problem, but suggesting they run as clean as any car made in the last ten years is just flat-out false.
Cali, is setting themselves up for a class action lawsuit that they will not win.. you see they are sneaky and every few years up what the model year emissions for that year is.. forcing vehicles to try to pass emission standards that they were never designed to .. if you know of a shop that saves the data, you'll see that what the emissions standard a 1986 model had to meet to pass.. in 1986, and what it has become as years gave gone by, you can't set standards for vehicles of a model year and then keep moving the goal post after the fact.. That's why so many are failing, and cali will get hammered on it soon..
Yes. BAR periodically adjusts some standards to increase their fairness. As a result, some standards become slightly more stringent than they were previously and some slightly more lenient. California's emissions standards consider the model-year, vehicle make and model, and gross weight of the vehicle. Older cars have less stringent standards than newer ones. No older vehicle is ever held to the same standards as a newer, more technologically advanced vehicle. Allowances are made for normal wear and tear in a vehicle's emissions control system as it ages. Standards are established through a regulatory process and are made available for public comment before they are adopted. The last adjustment occurred in 2001.
I have no idea why so many people around here think they are experts on how California works when so many of them are obviously clueless about it. It's especially baffling when the documentation is published and readily available!
The standard adjustments are based on actual performance - data is analyzed and the median is retargeted based on how cars are actually doing. Yes, the ceiling might drop but that cuts out Xth percentile vehicles that were on the fringe, basically requiring that cars adopt and improved but totally obtainable level of maintenance.
I have owned no less than six cars at a time since 1996 and more often that not have eight or ten. At this moment I have a record three OBDII compliant cars. Usually it's just one. I never have cars fail, ever. It's not even remotely hard to keep cars to "oppressive" California levels of maintenance. Not even a little.
I've never had a problem. Take it in, smog it, done. Not with my Fieros or any of my other cars. That includes engine swaps too. I just don't get why some people have problems. Been smogging for decades. Not a single shop gave me any grief.
I've never had a problem. Take it in, smog it, done. Not with my Fieros or any of my other cars. That includes engine swaps too. I just don't get why some people have problems. Been smogging for decades. Not a single shop gave me any grief.
"Take it in, smog it, done". Ya, maybe in your county but were talking Santa Clara County. Believe me, when the smog guy warns you up front, "it's gonna be an hour to smog this car", then you know it's going to be a bumpy ride. Kit
I have no idea why so many people around here think they are experts on how California works when so many of them are obviously clueless about it. It's especially baffling when the documentation is published and readily available!
The standard adjustments are based on actual performance - data is analyzed and the median is retargeted based on how cars are actually doing. Yes, the ceiling might drop but that cuts out Xth percentile vehicles that were on the fringe, basically requiring that cars adopt and improved but totally obtainable level of maintenance.
I have owned no less than six cars at a time since 1996 and more often that not have eight or ten. At this moment I have a record three OBDII compliant cars. Usually it's just one. I never have cars fail, ever. It's not even remotely hard to keep cars to "oppressive" California levels of maintenance. Not even a little.
You can quote from the BAR, whatever but there are those who swear the min/max numbers for allowable pollutants are brought IN on older cars , not OUT. I need to go through old smog test results to prove this but I believe it to be true. Anyone else here in Ca want to post their smog test results that show this? Thanks , Kit
I'm not sure what possible incentive the BAR would have to lie - it's not like an actual lie would be difficult to disprove.
AFAIK, they (ARB?) have the authority to adjust the cutpoints +/-30% based on real-world results from the 2001 revision. If a bunch of Fieros turn in very low HC numbers they might lower the HC cutpoint by the max of 30%. If they do that and then a bunch of Fieros start failing, they might raise it. I've seen numbers go up and down, but like I said, not in a meaningful way. Cars that run right pass.
You can see that the VLT (vehicle lookup table) was last revised in 2010, so that would be the last time the numbers themselves changed, if they changed, since that's the table the EIS gets information from.
I have nearly 20 years of smog reports from Saab 900s 1985-1993... I've had at least two 900s at a time at any given moment between '96 and now, sometimes as many as six or eight at a time. I have a lot of smog reports. If I get bored I will scan one of the oldest, but since my 1985 SPG passed in 1996 and it passed in 2015, they either haven't changed that much, haven't changed in a meaningful way, or haven't changed at all. The numbers on table (HC 95 CO 0.58 NOx 1136) don't feel like they've changed, well, ever.
Here is some more reading if anyone actually cares:
Well I just had my 2001 Jetta smog tested at the same STAR station I take all my cars to and it was easier than ever. The test only took maybe 10 minutes.
The rules have changed for cars from year 2000 or newer, where the station only performs visual, then make sure there is no smoke, liquid fuel leak, and that the OBDII system is functional. There is no need for dyno or sniff test while the car is running or idling! In fact my car was only started to drive it into the station and to drive it out!
Smogging older cars in Ca. is a more lengthy process. (mandatory visual inspection of hoses, canisters , EGR, evap test, etc) so I know my car is not their favorite. What set him off was that he was having a heck of a time verifying the embossed number on the bottom of the cat. He has to make sure it's Ca. certified. He had a mirror but insisted my car was too low to use it and he didn't have a jack. He then set a big piece of plastic by the side of the car in an attempt to read the number that way. At this point I got in to a conversation with another customer for about 10-15 minutes. Next thing I know him & the owner start really arguing back and forth for a few minutes. Then the owner calls me over and says sorry, my mechanic does not want to work on your car. So I got in my car and left..... 
