Grassroots Motorsports

Subscribe get a full year for only $23.95 Sample Free Test Drive—no strings attached

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 12:15 a.m. procainestart Dork

  Saw this in the LA Times and thought GRMers would be interested:

  LA Times:

  Why 'clunkers' won't take some of the most-polluting cars The classic and antique car lobby pushed for the program to exclude vehicles made before 1984. Consumer and environmental groups went along because they were too busy fighting for fuel efficiency.

  Article snippet:

  The restrictions were pushed by lobbyists for the Specialty Equipment Market Assn., a Diamond Bar group that represents companies that sell parts and services to classic and antique car collectors. The group, as well as classic car enthusiasts, have opposed cash for clunkers because they don't want older vehicles to be destroyed.

  Full article: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-clunkers13-2009aug13,0,6098269.story

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 12:51 a.m. Travis_K HalfDork

  Although I dont really see why they picked 1984 rather than some other year, i dont agree with alot of what the article talks about at all. The article mentioned something about how there are 50 year old cars that people are still driving that should be destroyed, but I dont think that anyone that has kept a car running that long is going to turn it in to buy a new car. Or what about all the engines in the explorers and suburbans that people would buy out of the junkyard and swap into their mustangs and chevelles (and improve the emissions by quite a bit) if they wernt filled with liquid glass.

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 7:14 a.m. 4cylndrfury Dork

  LA Times retarded reporter wrote:

  "If I own a 30-year-old Mustang, the value of my car goes up if others get destroyed," said Chris Edwards, an economist for the libertarian Cato Institute. "It is a typical industry loophole that doesn't protect the little guy, but does protect some special interest group."

  
  what if Im 16 and want to buy my own 30 year old mustang... if theyre all gone, now I have to drop 15k on one rather than buying a bucket for 1500 and repair it myself

  LA Times retarded reporter wrote:

  some guy is trying to sell a brown 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass SS with a broken air conditioner and rusty fenders for $1,200.

  "It's just an old car with 101,000 miles on it," he said.... "It is not a classic."

  bulE36M3, I beg to differ:
  

  ^^^thats what his $1200 could become in the right hands...some morons dont realize what theyve got. Cant see the forest for the trees

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 7:38 a.m. WilD Reader

  I agree that the years are completely arbitrary and pointless. I'd rather a 1980 Oldsmobile be scraspped than a 1986 Corvette. It would have also been good if my father could have turned in his very, very rusty 1978 Ford F150, rather than his much nicer 1997 Ford F150. As it is, he did turn in the '97 (v8, manual) for a new Ranger (I4, manual). Honestly, I thought the years were chosen to limit the potential cash payouts. If people could have traded in their truly awful 70s vehicles, the program would have been REALLY popular.

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 8:20 a.m. GregTivo Reader

  BABE Ralliers would like to thank SEMA for their consideration.

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 8:52 a.m. Rob_Mopar New Reader

  Travis_K wrote:

  Although I dont really see why they picked 1984 rather than some other year

  Simple. 25 years old. In PA a 25 year old car qualifies for antique tags. I suspect other states are similar.
  

  I think that quarter century cuttoff view is the line between driving an old car and driving an antique to most people.

  I didn't read the article. I won't either. I'm irritated enough and at work. Don't need to make my day any worse.

  -Rob

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 8:55 a.m. P71 SuperDork

  25 years = classic in nearly every state, even my RX-7 is eligible. If you think that's odd, my car has been the oldest car at multiple SCCA autocrosses.

  Also, you will never see a bill like this go older than 1980 because VIN's were not standardized.

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 10:20 a.m. rebelgtp Dork

  Hey now lets show a little love for the '80 Olds Cutlass (thanks 4cyl). I agree it is not JUST an old car it has quite a bit of potential. I have one sitting in my drive way that I'm gathering parts for. I am disgusted by this whole program. In fact I have basically resigned myself to never buying a new car again even if I can pay cash for it. I will just keep buying my classics and "clunkers" and rescuing them.

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 10:50 a.m. andrave Reader

  I thought it was 84 because thats when the government started measuring fuel efficiency in modern terms, and they couldn't measure the fuel efficiency of cars older than that, so they'd have no way of knowing if your 82 corolla really got better gas mileage than an 09 suburban.

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 7:46 p.m. alfadriver HalfDork

  Total BS. SEMA is taking credit for timing, that's it.

  1984 is the same time that window stickers first appeared on the windows of the car- hence data used for multiple tests to determine an estimate for city and highway fuel economy. Prior to that, there is no data, therefore, no real data to back the replacement data.

  SEMA had nothing to do with that timing, since they didn't exist in 1984. They are talking up their lobbying so that they can milk you for donations. I guess I should not be surprised....

  Eric

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 8:58 p.m. Rob_Mopar New Reader

  alfadriver wrote:

  Total BS. SEMA is taking credit for timing, that's it.

  1984 is the same time that window stickers first appeared on the windows of the car- hence data used for multiple tests to determine an estimate for city and highway fuel economy. Prior to that, there is no data, therefore, no real data to back the replacement data.

  SEMA had nothing to do with that timing, since they didn't exist in 1984. They are talking up their lobbying so that they can milk you for donations. I guess I should not be surprised....

  Eric

  SEMA's been around since 1963 or so. And as far as I know they don't take donations.

  I'm also pretty sure MPG ratings were added to window stickers in the late '70's. I'm 99% sure the window sticker on the '79 Aspen R/T survivor I saw at Carlisle in July this year had a 13 MPG city rating. Had I known this subject would come up I would have taken a closer look and a picture.

  -Rob

• 

  Aug. 13, 2009 10:01 p.m. DILYSI Dave SuperDork

  alfadriver wrote:

  Total BS. SEMA is taking credit for timing, that's it.

  1984 is the same time that window stickers first appeared on the windows of the car- hence data used for multiple tests to determine an estimate for city and highway fuel economy. Prior to that, there is no data, therefore, no real data to back the replacement data.

  SEMA had nothing to do with that timing, since they didn't exist in 1984. They are talking up their lobbying so that they can milk you for donations. I guess I should not be surprised....

  Eric

  SEMA has been around since long before 1984.

You'll need to log in to post.

• Jump to
• Top
• Grassroots Motorsports
• Off-Topic
• Sprockets
• $200X Classifieds
• Classic Motorsports