If CARB has their way, we'll be walking in California.

[rn79870]

Bob... I've spent the last 30-45 minutes reflecting on certain aspects of this thread. One is that you don't listen. You've been told this by more then one person. I don't mean to say that you're wrong, I mean to say you are close minded 100% of the time. You have not entertained one idea or theory that goes against a system that is already in place. A system that none of us are arguing is wholly bad, just aspects of it need to be changed. Yet you have this odd stance behind a paranoid ideal that to change any aspect of this program known as CARB is the same thing as abolishing it all together. When we suggest changing something, you get these horrible flash backs of your youth when your eyes were on fire and everyone in the entire state had to have supplemental O2 just to suvive. What that means is that you completely lack any type of creativity and have no ability to think for yourself. You are perfectly happy resiting the same thing over and over again. Even if those things you're resiting have nothing to do with what we're trying to convey.

Because I don’t adopt your position I’m automatically wrong? Because I am more concerned about parking lot door dings than the Jackoites purchasing go faster exhausts (no offense Jacko). I feel for the poor guy trying to earn a living in the aftermarket industry, but I also feel for the little old lady down the street who suffers when the air isn’t clean.

http://pdphoto.org/PictureDetail.php?pg=5215

You are stubborn to the 10th power man...

Pot, meet Kettle.

I've explained things to a degree that a 16 yr old that has just recieved his license can understand fully and see the benefits of. Yet you can't possibly fathom that any other opinion other then your own could hold anything other then contempt. You keep saying that CARB has to have these certifications because of chinese parts. Are you now an expert on everything imported from China? Is everything imported from China a bad thing? As soon as someone installs a certain part the emissions are going to so severly pollute the world that your eyes may once again burn...or

No, I used Chinese crap as a figure of speech for something that works today, and doesn’t work tomorrow.

perhaps your lungs will immediatly combust. Even though I laid out in no uncertain terms exactly how this could be avoided all the while keeping CARB in the loop to monitor and set the standard for everyone to adhere to. No no...its change therefore its bad right Bob?

Change isn’t bad. However, I did see uncertainty in your terms. You’re focusing on a small issue, not the whole picture.And yes, if you can convince me with clear, unambiguous, convincing evidence, I’ll change my mind. You haven’t done that. Not that you haven’t given a good effort, but…

You are so backwards in your thinking that you don't even realize how Liberal you are. Or have atleast how Liberal you've become do to your narrow mind set.

I thought I’d already established I’m so middle of the road that I take hits from both sides.

I've asked you specificly to entertain a few basic idea's, yet you have not attempted to answer even one with anything that you came up with on your own. Instead you sidestep anything and everything I've said with some link that doesn't even marginally come close to what I was talking about. It's almost like you are mocking me on purpose by acting like you don't understand what I'm saying.

I’m not mocking you, and if I’ve given you that impression I’m apologize. I’m just not persuaded by your argument.

You keep making these references that we're proving your point when in fact we are doing nothing of the sort. I know this to be fact because 4 people have now said basically the same exact thing in different words. Are you doing this just to further debate? Are you really unable to understand the things I've said? Do you really believe that what we're saying is that we should go back to the way things used to be and just have no auto emissions control what-so-ever? Because that's not what we're saying at all.

I assume you’re referring to all the proof that I and a few others have offered that the emission problem has/is being addressed by the standards set by CARB. I see proof of that, studies have proven that. Air is cleaner. That is my point. Whether or not a 18 wheeler pollutes or a pine tree pollutes, the air is cleaner because of the efforts of the EPA and CARB.

We are standing up against a system that needs to be reformed. Not done away with. But I think that concept is to much for you to grasp.

No not at all. What have you done to help reform it?

When will you consider that when more then one person is saying the exact same thing over and over again, you may indeed be backing the wrong horse?

Are you concerned with what’s right, or who’s right?

When more then one person has an idea, perhaps that idea is worth listening to if not examining on a level more the total denial. WD

I totally agree. So because I don’t offer a “me too” response to an issue I have logically defended I’m in denial. Take a good look at the picture at the top of this post. I rest my case.

[WDRacing]

I scored a 27 which put me exactly where I expected to be. A moderate republican. Nothing surprising to me at all altho a number of the questions were crap and did not have any answer that I really approved of.

22...although, the way they score are a little skewed IMO. Since I chose a few things based on Covert Ops...

[justjuiceit4]

His demograhics were wrong.... People who live in trailers and eat Swanson dinners would never justify paying almost twice as much for a hybrid as an econobox. I think I calculated it out, it would take over 15 years to recoup the money spend. Hybrids are about saving money long term not short term and we all know how most Americans are about saving money long term....

Even the average consumer would be discouraged by the higher cost of the hybrid with minimal real world gas mileage increases.

[AZhitman]

Greg, does CARB actually consider CO2 to be a pollutant?

Yes. They do.

However:

December 20, 2007

The automakers achieved a significant victory yesterday when the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) denied a petition to allow, the California Air Resource Board (CARB) to set their own requirement to regulate CO2 emissions from vehicles. The denial of the petition allowing CARB to set their own CO2 requirements (indirectly fuel economy) allows the federal government to now unify fuel economy standards across the country.

From: http://www.propeller.com/views...=true

In other news, a 2002 National Academy of Sciences' report concluded that CAFE-triggered downsizing caused an additional 2000 road deaths per year.

Health and welfare be damned, we're gonna clean up this air!

[AZhitman]

His demograhics were wrong.... People who live in trailers and eat Swanson dinners would never justify paying almost twice as much for a hybrid as an econobox. I think I calculated it out, it would take over 15 years to recoup the money spend. Hybrids are about saving money long term not short term and we all know how most Americans are about saving money long term....

Even the average consumer would be discouraged by the higher cost of the hybrid with minimal real world gas mileage increases.

Right. My point to you is that Csere thinks the HI was a joke. And he'd be right.

[rn79870]

22...although, the way they score are a little skewed IMO. Since I chose a few things based on Covert Ops...

Don't backpedal now Brian, 22 is damn near a liberal...

[AZhitman]

Hey -

Quit picking on the weak and feeble and come debate with the developmentally-disabled!



Brian - 22? Damn, son. I might not be your Daddy after all. There's no Libby in MY genes.

[WDRacing]

I hate Gay people, I hate illegals, I hate stupid people and think that an IQ test should be given and anyone recieving a sub par score being forced to live in CA, I have an uncontrollable urge to burn tree's for no better reason then to see them burn, I think the ER should refuse people with no medical insurance, I think we should build a fence around the border of the entire US and enforce it with snipers, I think we should all own guns, I think we should pull out of the middle east...right after we drop in a few high yield nukes, I think we should ally with China and take over the world.

Yeah...I'm a Liberal

[rn79870]

My point is that CARB should have NO jurisdiction over inconsequential bolt-ons.

Define inconsequetial.

That's the same as lasting.

Ford claims to have the longest-lasting trucks on the road. i.e. the trucks that remain functional for a period of time.

Lasting doesn't mean anything. Many last to this day, you need to look no further than Alabama to see a slew of fords on cinder blocks, lasting away. Functional is the better word.

Again, not my point at all. Re-read what I wrote... People will quit buying an inferior product, WITHOUT government intervention, if it fails to LAST (or "work").

We already bumbed down that road. People don't quit buying inferior products, they quit buying unaffordable products. Proof, WalMart

And yes, some douches buy ENTIRE CARS based on their emissions alone. I sit next to an annoying Insight owner who thinks she's got a free pass to Heaven for that $24K expenditure alone.

Well there you have it. One lady a market makes.

[rn79870]

I hate Gay people, I hate illegals, I hate stupid people and think that an IQ test should be given and anyone recieving a sub par score being forced to live in CA, I have an uncontrollable urge to burn tree's for no better reason then to see them burn, I think the ER should refuse people with no medical insurance, I think we should build a fence around the border of the entire US and enforce it with snipers, I think we should all own guns, I think we should pull out of the middle east...right after we drop in a few high yield nukes, I think we should ally with China and take over the world.

Yeah...I'm a Liberal

Translated: Please don't refer to me as a liberal again.

[WDRacing]

Translated: Please don't refer to me as a liberal again.

You nailed that one brah

[Sentientbydesign]

I hate Gay people, I hate illegals, I hate stupid people and think that an IQ test should be given and anyone recieving a sub par score being forced to live in CA, I have an uncontrollable urge to burn tree's for no better reason then to see them burn, I think the ER should refuse people with no medical insurance, I think we should build a fence around the border of the entire US and enforce it with snipers, I think we should all own guns, I think we should pull out of the middle east...right after we drop in a few high yield nukes, I think we should ally with China and take over the world.

Yeah...I'm a Liberal

Deush bag!

[WDRacing]

Deush bag!

DOH, I forgot you had a thing for semen and tulips

[Jager]

ok another odd voice out that is not the same several people going back and forth.

rn79870 you said define inconsequential, I do believe Az has done so several times. air filters, exhausts that do not change the catalytic converter, headers that allow more air through but do not bypass the cat converter. engines that are California approved for certain vehicles but cannot be swapped into other vehicles. These are items that have ZERO effect on emissions but are controlled/regulated /illegal by CARB.

Virginia has inspection testing and northern virginia has emissions as well due to the insane amount of people living there. This works fine as WD pointed out. I take my car in, its checked over to make sure the safety and emissions systems are functioning, Im not leaking exhaust or gas and the car is structurally sound.

If it passes i get to drive for a year, If it doesnt guess what i gotta make it safe and work. Virginia doesnt care how i do so whether it be chinese parts (which btw some are of better quality then american these days) or whether i go down to a friend and we built the parts ourselves (like my exhaust from the cat back. )

BTW my 1986 car is contributing much less to greenhouse gas since the time it was built then most cars in california today. i get 25-30mpg its automatic and its a car that weighs 2300lbs. and its a freaking chevy nova 4 cylinder 4 door toyota ripoff. explain to me why there are so many damn gas guzzlers in cali in general?

i happen to like virginia its easier to live without government involvement I have relatives in bakersfield CA and while they like it, lets face it i get more for my money here then i ever would there. not only in taxes but in simple things like home costs versus size and land.

If you want to really talk environmental change start by telling all your homeowners association and mansion owners to drop their home sizes down, (ergo less grid usage and cooling/heating loss) and leave more actual land and trees in major urban areas. (proven reports for years have spoken of the benefits to co2 removal and lessened human impact based on planting trees. )

i live in a 100k house which costs over 700k (based on sqrft costs) in middle to southern cali. i grew up with an acre of land and a forest in my back yard in the suburbs of this same city. While i understand cali is one of the biggest economies they also have one of the worst records of conservation in history. and unlike most states liberal or conservative, california stands alone in two aspects. they legislate the most for environmental issues with few good results, and they deal with the most people per sq mile. and before you start california cleaning up the 60-70s was important, your lungs dont burn but what have they done in the past say 10 years thats made such a visible difference to anything but your wallet?

if you decide to skip or just skim most of that here is a question i want everyone here to attempt to answer. Why is is that california is on the GHG bandwagon and has such strict emissions yet any other state or major metropolis of similar size to cali cities is cleaner and has less Bs to go through to deal with passenger automobiles.

I use washington Dc and the "suburbs" of Dc (manassas fairfax various parts of maryland etc) as my example. busy as hell, hours of traffic, and yet trees everywhere and not a damn problem breathing for me up there ever. why do californians in particular believe CARBs overreach needs to be so prevelant in the face of other states doing so much better with so much less red tape.

whether i use carb approved parts on my car isnt gonna change whether i pass VA emissions or cali emissions as my car can pass both AFAIK it just means i pay more to bureaucracy for the right to drive in cali and thats liberal and that to me is BS.

oh btw cars from the 70s and earlier are now exempted from a lot of the CARb regulations mentioned here. My mechanic buddy traded his gas guzzling suburban in on an older truck to drop a bigger engine in it due to NOT having to smog it. that seems to be a failure on CARBS part in general.

[Sentientbydesign]

Jager,

I agree with your last paragraph. I love all of the classic cars, but **** them for being exempt. That is some major bull****. They waste gas, they're heavy, they over pollute.

Let me answer your Cali-GHG question. Everybody loves California...Let me pause while you start pointing at the reply button to laugh... Not withstanding the low IQ citizens who proliferate in ALL states, people love living here. We have the highest population out of all of the states AND the highest population/sq mile. That says something about our state (and I don't mean that we have a bunch of idiots here).

CA is the "leader" in GHG reduction, because it impacts us most. The one thing we're most guilty of is having poor public transportation, mostly in the south parts. A real subway system and safe buses would alleviate a ton of traffic, but some dumbasses (probably car manufacturers) have instilled into our society that everyone needs a car and has to drive.

I think our licensing program should be a hell of a lot more stringent, then less idiots would be driving.

Anyways, the point is that we have more cars on the road, and we pollute more because of it (and industry...etc). As such, we NEED to reduce our impact and other states have followed our lead.

We're not inovative, just in need of a solution.

[rn79870]

ok another odd voice out that is not the same several people going back and forth. rn79870 you said define inconsequential, I do believe Az has done so several times. air filters, exhausts that do not change the catalytic converter, headers that allow more air through but do not bypass the cat converter. engines that are California approved for certain vehicles but cannot be swapped into other vehicles. These are items that have ZERO effect on emissions but are controlled/regulated /illegal by CARB.

You are incorrect. Would you please document your claim that changing engines produces no difference in emissions. CARB thinks otherwise. CARB is charged with insuring that vehicle emissions are within standards. The way they choose to do it is by regulating what can or can not be done to an engine/vehicle. Follow the rules and everything is copasetic.

california stands alone in two aspects. they legislate the most for environmental issues with few good results, and they deal with the most people per sq mile. and before you start california cleaning up the 60-70s was important, your lungs dont burn but what have they done in the past say 10 years thats made such a visible difference to anything but your wallet?

Again, you are incorrect. Perhaps if you read through this thread, all the “good results” would be apparent to you. Read the part about seeing mountains 40 miles away, clean beaches/water and breathing clean air. Read the post on the 4th page about the improvements in the last 30 years. Then rethink your position.

if you decide to skip or just skim most of that here is a question i want everyone here to attempt to answer. Why is is that california is on the GHG bandwagon and has such strict emissions yet any other state or major metropolis of similar size to cali cities is cleaner and has less Bs to go through to deal with passenger automobiles.

For the same reason California has so many electoral votes. It’s large, and many, many people choose to live here. Today it’s 70 degrees, clear cloudless sky, I can see the mountains 40 miles away, and the air has a slight salt smell to it (I’m 5 miles from the ocean). California, and Californians like that, and want to keep it or even improve it.

why do californians in particular believe CARBs overreach needs to be so prevelant in the face of other states doing so much better with so much less red tape. whether i use carb approved parts on my car isnt gonna change whether i pass VA emissions or cali emissions as my car can pass both AFAIK it just means i pay more to bureaucracy for the right to drive in cali and thats liberal and that to me is BS.

Californian/CARB doesn’t give a crap what your state does. Seriously, not even slightly. The EPA does, and possibly a Virginia state agency in charge of regulating the issue does. But CARB doesn’t. However, many states, of which Virginia is one (I believe) that are looking to CARB as an example. If you followed this thread, you’ve seen that 16 other states have joined in California’s suit against the federal government to allow stricter CAFÉ standards.

oh btw cars from the 70s and earlier are now exempted from a lot of the CARb regulations mentioned here. My mechanic buddy traded his gas guzzling suburban in on an older truck to drop a bigger engine in it due to NOT having to smog it. that seems to be a failure on CARBS part in general.

Ironically, you are somewhat correct here. I read where they were proposing legislation that addressed that issue. Right now there is a 90 day freeze on new legislation here in California though, so nothing is happening. However, that issue may be addressed in the future.

[C-Kwik]

air filters, exhausts that do not change the catalytic converter, headers that allow more air through but do not bypass the cat converter.

I agree air filters and exhaust are generally going to have little to no effect on emissions, but I disagree with the headers for two reasons. Primarily, the headers must be able to retain heat such that the catalytic converter light-off time is as short as the factory headers. Not necessarily hard to accomplish as the location of the cat in newer cars are generally close to the engine, but provided there was enough room in an engine bay, a company might try and use a long-tube design to extract more performance, but may negatively impact the light off time. Being that a car emits most of it's "harmful" emissions during thie period, it is of utmost importance to CARB.

Secondly, the O2 sensor is typically integrated into a header. If it is , for whatever reason, placed poorly such that the measured gasses are inaccurate, it may affect how the engine performs (with regard to emissions).

they legislate the most for environmental issues with few good results, and they deal with the most people per sq mile. and before you start california cleaning up the 60-70s was important, your lungs dont burn but what have they done in the past say 10 years thats made such a visible difference to anything but your wallet?

While I don't refute the argument, you should consider what California might be like now if no legislation was passed. I'm just not completely confident that corporations would take as much initiative on their own to clean up the air here. To some extent, politically targetting of industries that tend to have higer emissions did make for some public awareness. To what extent? I have no idea.

if you decide to skip or just skim most of that here is a question i want everyone here to attempt to answer. Why is is that california is on the GHG bandwagon and has such strict emissions yet any other state or major metropolis of similar size to cali cities is cleaner and has less Bs to go through to deal with passenger automobiles.

Who isn't on the Greenhouse Gas bandwagon? Any politician who isn't, will pretty much be dead as a politician right now. Hell, it's become a world issue.

I use washington Dc and the "suburbs" of Dc (manassas fairfax various parts of maryland etc) as my example. busy as hell, hours of traffic, and yet trees everywhere and not a damn problem breathing for me up there ever. why do californians in particular believe CARBs overreach needs to be so prevelant in the face of other states doing so much better with so much less red tape.

California, the Los Angeles Area in particular presents a more difficult challenge. Most of it is a giant valley surrounded by mountains. Hell, even some of the beach areas have high elevation areas near them. Smog pretty much gets trapped here. Not to say, their solutions are perfect, but there is a different concern here than in most other metro areas. Other metro areas may have their own set of challenges.

oh btw cars from the 70s and earlier are now exempted from a lot of the CARb regulations mentioned here. My mechanic buddy traded his gas guzzling suburban in on an older truck to drop a bigger engine in it due to NOT having to smog it. that seems to be a failure on CARBS part in general.

The theory is that older cars are now lesser in number and tend to be driven less. Particularly those that might be considered to be Classic Cars. And those who own them might be likely to take better care of them, such that emissions would be negligible. Almost every year, some yahoo in Legislation here tries to pass a law to eliminate the rolling 30 year smog test exemption rule. To me, it is an easy target with little impact on the results they are trying to obtain. And to my knowledge, it has been shot down everytime it comes up.

[C-Kwik]

I think we should pull out of the middle east...right after we drop in a few high yield nukes

I'm not sure you thought that one through...unless you didn't want to pay to transport all the troops back that is...

IYeah...I'm a Liberal

You're just in denial...

[WDRacing]

I hate you Chano

[C-Kwik]

I hate you Chano

[rn79870]

IYeah...I'm a Liberal

You're just in denial...

You know, I was thinking the same thing. I mean, WD's test clearly showed strong liberal tendencies.

[Jager]

You are incorrect. Would you please document your claim that changing engines produces no difference in emissions. CARB thinks otherwise. CARB is charged with insuring that vehicle emissions are within standards. The way they choose to do it is by regulating what can or can not be done to an engine/vehicle. Follow the rules and everything is copasetic.

well what about the numerous ka/Sr swaps to s13s or s14s? that is not substantially changing emissions. or the l28 6 cylinder to the vg30. Im not allowed to take my s12 and put a ka24de engine which has better emissions then my ca18et, but im allowed to drop in a vg30e engine which is worse gas milage due to it being in the same car. that sort of thing makes zero sense. Thats direct quote from bakersfield PD on what was allowed or not. so if that isnt in your area i apologize. thats the info i got, Im not allowed to put obd2 or any engine that was not available in the cars production in the US. ergo i read that as above.

again on the improvements in the past 40 years sure, i asked about the past 10. and mountains and smog issues have been dropped heavily in the past 10 years to the point that the electrical grid issues have been more prevalent then the smog issues with passenger vehicles. (at least based on whats reported on this coast.)

For the same reason California has so many electoral votes. It’s large, and many, many people choose to live here. Today it’s 70 degrees, clear cloudless sky, I can see the mountains 40 miles away, and the air has a slight salt smell to it (I’m 5 miles from the ocean). California, and Californians like that, and want to keep it or even improve it.

certainly i understand your position. Virginia is 5 hours to the beach and 5 hours to the high mountains a few hours to quiet country towns that have 2 streets and a few hours to the largest naval base on the planet and the traffice that ensures from such as well as NOVA which may as well be one big metropolis. we arent sunny and 70 all the time, but the state is nice. id prefer to keep it that way as well.

lynchburg is actually setup like mexico city tbh as far as weather patterns etc. while we stay a smaller city (sub 200k ppl) it will nto be an issue, but with mountains on 3 sides and the city being extremely hilly we are in sortof a bowl. smog may be an issue down the road. its somethign the city has looked at before.

Californian/CARB doesn’t give a crap what your state does. Seriously, not even slightly. The EPA does, and possibly a Virginia state agency in charge of regulating the issue does. But CARB doesn’t. However, many states, of which Virginia is one (I believe) that are looking to CARB as an example. If you followed this thread, you’ve seen that 16 other states have joined in California’s suit against the federal government to allow stricter CAFÉ standards.

california actually does give a crap. seeing as how Californian senators/representatives live in washington dc and the surrounding area during in session terms, how we do things here is one of the reasons you guys have the gun laws there you do (sorry we scare your elected officials ). other things have carried over as well, cant tell you how the car part has or hasnt exactly but everybody is influenced by the NOVA area in politics, its a fact of life at the state and federal level. diane feinstein was quoted several times about how she wanted a federal level carb board to fix the GHG issue back in the late 90s. idk whether she bothered to try, but cali does try to influence the nation as a whole as much as any other state. and carb is no different. Virginia may be looknig at carb, but ill be damned if they think they are gonna convince the more southern group (which is half the state) to say they cant make their own stuff and it has to be approved. That is one reason why northern virginia has sniffer emissions and the rest of virginia does not, Due to may of the smaller counties and cities demanding that they not have to pay for or deal with sniffer emissions testing when we dont have smog/traffic issues on that scale.

Ironically, you are somewhat correct here. I read where they were proposing legislation that addressed that issue. Right now there is a 90 day freeze on new legislation here in California though, so nothing is happening. However, that issue may be addressed in the future.

Well not that i support beating up on old cars i do find that sad as well, if i cannot put a slightly better milage or more fuel efficient engine in my car due to CARB but I can buy an old beater and run a 454 with carbs and drop smog like its my god given right seems a tad off.

either way please dont take any personal offense at what im saying i enjoy a good debate and points on both sides are well made.

[Jager]

to c quik due to the size of the other one id thought id make a second post, i wasnt saying politicians dont care its that no state is as strict as cali on testing and emissions period. yet there are places much more crowded and similar population density as so cal in general with less red tape and less smog issues.

as it was said above yes geography plays a part and a very large part, but still you dont see NYC or Norfolk/Dc area area doing that and they have the same population density as most Cali cities.

thanks for taking the time to break it down both of you into points and that gives more to chew on.

again i dont disagree with carbs existence, they are trying to fix a problem I just dont get the massive red tape approach when there are other ways that work with less bureaucracy and potential for backroom deals.

[rn79870]

again on the improvements in the past 40 years sure, i asked about the past 10. and mountains and smog issues have been dropped heavily in the past 10 years to the point that the electrical grid issues have been more prevalent then the smog issues with passenger vehicles.

Hardly, smog standards have become tighter in the last 10 years. The emission issues were not put on the back burner, instead the government simply multitask the various issues, including the disastrous handling of the power grid.

Reread audtatious post on page 3, about 11 down, re whether or not there have been improvements in the last 10, or will be in the next 10 years.

Thats direct quote from bakersfield PD on what was allowed or not.

Unfortunitely, they get trumped by the state laws and regulations.

california actually does give a crap. seeing as how Californian senators/representatives live in washington dc and the surrounding area during in session terms,

No my friend. you're thinking federal, I'm talking state. California senators and legislators live in their various districts and serve in Sacramento, not Washington. The "C" in CARB stands for California. The EPA is the federal version of CARB. CARB has no authority beyond the state of California.

Well not that i support beating up on old cars i do find that sad as well, if i cannot put a slightly better milage or more fuel efficient engine in my car due to CARB but I can buy an old beater and run a 454 with carbs and drop smog like its my god given right seems a tad off.

That's not totally accurate. If you are permitted to put different engine in an older car, you must put (in California)a. the same year or newer engine - not an older engine.b. the original emission equipment required for that engine must be in place. c. if you put in a newer engine, you must use the emission equipment that was required on the newer engine, not simply the equipment required on original vehicle.d. the engine must conform to whatever pollution standards were in place at the time it was manufactured.(This assumes the engine swap was legal to begin with, another issue which you recognize in your response)

True, older vehicle emissions basically overlooked and not enforced, but it is the rule. As I said before, there has been legislation discussed directed to fixing the loophole. Because the number of vehicles that would be involved is relatively small, it may not generate much interest, (or it might.)

[AZhitman]

Lasting doesn't mean anything. Many last to this day, you need to look no further than Alabama to see a slew of fords on cinder blocks, lasting away. Functional is the better word.

Wrong again. Read the small print at the bottom of those commercials. They mean actively registered, which in 90% of states means functional.

You're sidestepping the issue anyway - You want CARB to make sure a product lasts / remains functional, and I say let the market handle longevity.

It works, which I'll point out next...

We already bumbed down that road. People don't quit buying inferior products, they quit buying unaffordable products. Proof, WalMart

Makes no sense. The market decides quickly not to support inferior products. Why did the Hyundai sell poorly 20 years ago? Because it was crap. Why does it sell VERY well now? It's improved in quality. Affordability has little to do with it, because adjusting for inflation, a new Hyundai is a pricey proposition compared to those of the late 80's.

[rn79870]

You're sidestepping the issue anyway - You want CARB to make sure a product lasts / remains functional, and I say let the market handle longevity.

It works, which I'll point out next...

Let me save you the time.

Should I buy the PCV valve that works for $7.99 that is approved and lasts, or should I buy the Chinese one for .79 cents that will work long enough to pass inspection?

Should I buy the cat back from (reputable company) for $699 (or whatever price) or should I buy the one from Xjanzaui for $39.95. It's just a pipe, and do i really care if it adversely effects the overall emissions?

AZ we both know how much the market favors emission systems, and how much they wish the darn thing would "fall off". Why not let the fox guard the hen house.

This latest twist sounds like something straight out of the Compassionate Republicans with a Sense of Social Justice Manual. ...

[rn79870]

Makes no sense. The market decides quickly not to support inferior products. Why did the Hyundai sell poorly 20 years ago? Because it was crap. Why does it sell VERY well now? It's improved in quality. Affordability has little to do with it, because adjusting for inflation, a new Hyundai is a pricey proposition compared to those of the late 80's.

Not so AZ. The people who bought the Hyundai did so because it was cheap. I never saw one in Beverly Hills, or Rancho Santa Fe where money is no object. It was a new car, with a warranty and it was inexpensive cheap.

Sure they improved the Hyundai, but they replaced its cheapness with a KIA. People buy the Kia because it is cheap. Wait until the $2500 Tata Nano makes it to the US. Who cares if it runs only 2 years, it's cheap.

Most people buy the cheap most of the time ...proof = WalMart.

AZ, you're distracted right?

[Jager]

just because something is cheap does not imply inferior. as for my mismashing of the cali laws my apologies i do not live there.

still dont see what buying an approval sticker has to do with anything. lets assume its not chinese products but i go and have AZ or my exhaust shop custom make a setup. its fully legal where its made and where i live, but it isnt carb legal . its not an inferior product to a nissan or stillen or w/e exhaust its simply not approved by carb. so why does that always mean im in violation of carb due to the fact that Az is trying to make a living and is a good welder cant do what a company with the money to pony up for a carb sticker is able to do. that seems to be the vibe im getting after reading all 5 pages again.

best example i can give you is carb is equivelennt to the national ballistic fingerprint system. its main goal was to force every gun in america to have a shell casing on file (this was only approved by certain states like california massachusetts etc ) each gun came with a fired shell casing to make it possible to ID a gun or owner more easily from a crime scene. good idea in theory. absolute crap science in real life when everything from the firing pin being changed to simply time or friction makes it impossible to find a match. while carb certainly hasnt gone to that extent at all, it stands that most people who modify cars here on nico also keep their oem gear for smog testing / checks. so they are actively avoiding carb for a reason. sure its illegal, but apparently based on members stories simply putting the stock parts back on temporarily for the ref is good enough. so if carb is a good thing why are so many enthusiasts openly violating it for so many different reasons. While the law is the law most laws that make sense are generally not broken and then openly discussed on the internet its a bit of a bad idea.

again im not saying ditch carb, but i fail to see how carb makes anything better then the virginia inspection law other then the amount of money the state and companies make 99.9% of the time.

fwiw virgina requires a cat converter and no exhaust or fuel leaks etc as part of the standard inspection. meaning there is no more smog out of my car then yours in theory all other variables being the same.

as for kias or hyundas i know alot of people who drive both they arent bad cars or run a few years then they die cars, they have similar warrenties in general to nissan etc. as for the really cheap cars look out for those terrible 240 drivers and the really deadly s12 owners. not only do we have cheap, we have turbos standard :P

[audtatious]

CARB: saving people from themselves

Dude, you have totally won me over. We need to choke the stupid out of those poor fukkers. Hell, if they can't pay extra costs to repair the car with manufaturers-spec parts (read: OEM only) then they should not have a car at all. Allowing these people to put parts on their car that has the potential of increasing performance will simply give them a reason to waste more gas, thus further pollute the air with CO2.

We simply need to mandate black-box governors to limit acceleration and speed capabilities because it's for our own good and that of the environment.

[in2win]

if CA politicians had there way we'd be riding on bikes and living in biodegradable houses.