MarkZ28 wrote:
I grew up in Iowa and now live in Alabama, no stupid tests in either state. Iowa used to have a safety type inspections up intil the mid 80's but they dropped it because it cost the state more than it brought in.
it's funny how "safety" only matters when it's profitable..
MN tried the tailpipe emissions check in the Twin Cities area for a few years in the mid 90's.. it went away because it was costing the state and counties more money to do the tests than it was bringing in. i think a lot of people were registering their vehicles in neighboring counties that didn't have the checks to avoid the hassle and expense.. i guess you can put a price tag on clean air, too..
In my mind, the perfect inspection would be tailpipe, brakes and steering. Toss in a fire hazards check just as a 'the more you know.'
All this obd2 plug in, no engine swapping nonsense is unforgivable.
Technically I can't install a standalone ecu on an obd2 car in my state, no matter if the thing pollutes less or the same.
njansenv wrote:
Keith wrote:
My Mini was run out of Ontario because it was dirty. Too many parts per million. Very few millions of parts, but still. On a little sunny day car that gets 40 mpg. Sigh.
Wait, really? What year is the Mini? We don't E-test '87 and older car cars in Ontario....
While it's a pain, I appreciate the compromise of the Ontario system: all that matters is the sniffer (I've passed with OBDII removed to fit Megasquirt). Pre-88 ("classic") cars are exempt due to presumed low usage and the low proportion of road worthy cars that old in the rust belt.
You don't test '87 and older cars anymore 
At the time, 1986 cars were still being tested.
Travis_K wrote:
The reason the california emissions is so stupid is say you have a 1978 camaro, which came stock with a 2bbl carbed 305, and is fairly dirty compared to a new car. If you swap in a new 6.0 lsx out of a truck, keeping the cats and tuning it to run far cleaner than the stock engine would have, and far exceeding the requirements for the car, it is illegal. The only way to legally register it would be to put the stock engine back in and increase the emissions back to where they were originally. IMO CA emissions testing will always be stupid until they first check for codes and test the emissions, then only do a visual inspection if the car doesnt pass.
nope.. wrong. you CAN stick a newer engine in an older car.. but then it has to conform to the emissions from the newer engine.
What is stupid is the OE angle. the BMW 6series, for instance.. used a close to the head "thermal reactor" that did a terrible job of cleaning up emissions and generally cracked the I6's head due to excess heat.
You cannot put a more efficent catalyst exhaust on it.. you have to stick with the inefficent stock reactors,
mad_machine wrote:
nope.. wrong. you CAN stick a newer engine in an older car.. but then it has to conform to the emissions from the newer engine.
Yes you can, but its not that simple. For example, the proposed miata swap. Say it was completed and all emissions were the same as the donor vehicle. But it had headers made to fit the miata chassis, so it would be illegal to register in california. Diesel swaps are easier actually, then if its an older car/engine you dont have to ever get it smogged again.
