this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
5 points (100.0% liked)
Cars - For Car Enthusiasts
4289 readers
1 users here now
About Community
c/Cars is the largest automotive enthusiast community on Lemmy and the fediverse. We're your central hub for vehicle-related discussion, industry news, reviews, projects, DIY guides, advice, stories, and more.
Rules
- Stay respectful to the community, hold civil discussions, even when others hold opinions that may differ from yours.
- This is not an NSFW community, and any such content will not be tolerated.
- Policy, not politics! Policy discussions revolve around the concept; political discussions revolve around the individual, party, association, etc. We only allow POLICY discussions and political discussions should go to c/politics.
- Must be related to cars, anything that does not have connection to cars will be considered spam/irrelevant and is subject to removal.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hate this. This turns old cars into garage queens by removing their ability to be a primary vehicle. It requires the owner to have a 2nd vehicle, negating any gains. It makes classic cars a luxury for the rich.
If I were to fix it, I’d require primary vehicles over 20 years of age to go through a simple inspection. Check for fuel leaks, tailpipe sniff. And then subsidize emissions repairs up to some limit that’s indexed to inflation.
I’d also subsidize up to a limit motor conversions and swaps that put a clean engine into the vehicle, with subsidies going up for going EFI, hybrid, or full EV.
I have two ancient gas guzzlers one is a work truck. I’d love to do a hybrid conversion on it but it’s impractical and hybrid motor swaps are unheard of. There used to be an electric motor addon company that could turn any engine into a hybrid but they haven’t done anything in the last couple of years. My ideas would strengthen the market for these types of improvements.
Great points!
I mean, the real answer is to just tell California to resume their old smog exemption law for cars more than 30 years old, which they stopped in 2004 (thus making the cutoff year 1974).
As a Californian, like 99% of all cars on the road, even in the "bad smog areas" are less than 10 years old. It would have next to zero effect on anything except that older cars wouldn't be restricted anymore.
I’d agree but the article is stating different. Older cars are the problem.
I’m working off the assumption that 1) the statement is correct and 2) sometimes you have to take action to appease an insignificant problem that others believe to be important.
Doesn't it also exclude vehicles from needing smog if they were built before 1990? That seems like an improvement since AFAIK they require anything built after 1975 to get smogged currently.
I don't see them limiting it to secondary vehicles as such a big deal considering it's already expensive to own a project car and most people aren't going to daily them because they're unreliable no matter how many thousands you drop into them.
It requires special insurance which limits what you can do with the vehicle. In most cases you can’t even tow anything with it for example.
This is a case of a bill with a good goal (reduce smog) but with an oddly specific focus that turns it into a tax on the poor.
There are better ways to accomplish smog reduction for old vehicles but with using carrots instead of sticks.