Jay Leno’s star power wasn’t enough to persuade a California legislative committee to pass a measure to allow owners of classic cars like him to be exempted from the state’s rigorous smog-check requirements.

The Assembly Appropriations Committee on Friday blocked Bakersfield Republican Sen. Shannon Grove’s Senate Bill 712 from advancing for a full vote. Leno had testified in support of the measure in Sacramento earlier this year.

  • TimeNaan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    3 days ago

    Classic cars are rare and they wouldn’t really add any measurable pollution to the environment. Making them adhere to modern regulations makes no sense imo.

    • judgyweevil@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      3 days ago

      If you have money for a rare classic car you have money for a smog-check. Let’s not give exemptions to rich people again

      • neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s not about the cost of a smog test.

        It’s that classic cars will never pass a modern smog test. They are wildly inefficient, and those inefficiencies manifest in a bunch of wasted gas and bad exhaust.

        I think they should probably get a smog tax, like someone else suggested somewhere.

      • psx_crab@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s likely gonna fail because old car design usually doesn’t account for any of that. Carburetor, lack of catalytic converter, lack of exhaust gas recirculation system, so on and so forth, all those gonna add to the emission and if the strictness is of today standard, it’s gonna fail.

        Maybe give them a smog tax based on the emission would make much more sense.

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’m just curious did anyone actually read the article.

          They have to pass the emission standard for the year of production. It means as long as your vehicle is on relatively good repair you’ll probably pass, you’re not likely to pass if you’ve made modifications which is what they’re upset about.

        • dentoid@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Does it have to? You could probably get by with some tuning, or if that doesnt work refitting some injectors maby? ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯ Also how many classic cars are still running on their original engine?

          • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            3 days ago

            Most of them? These are not custom hot rods, they’re restored stock cars. A careful and attentive restorer is going to try to match every detail to the day the car first rolled off the production line. This means keeping (and rebuilding) the original engine, not installing a modern emission-controlled engine in its place.

          • psx_crab@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            3 days ago

            The aim of keeping classic car is to keep it as pristine and as close to the original as possible, modding in that way kinda defeat the purpose of most collector.

      • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        3 days ago

        Or you just still own your old car because it runs. Its not a rich people thing just because the guy in the article is rich. When I stumble upon classic car shows, the vibe is “long term project cars” and not “affluent collectors”.

        My father in law maintains a Triumph Race car with the machine shop in his garage. It’ll never legitimately pass smog, but its also driven once or twice a month and he’s owned it for like 50+ years.

      • Philote@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        If you don’t have money for a new car and only have an old beater, let’s not punish them with added cost to exist in this fuck the poor country. It goes both ways.

    • resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      They’re already grandfathered-in in that they only have to pass the regulations when they went on sale.

      They should count themselves lucky they don’t have to pass current regulations.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 days ago

    I would be fine with this is they paid double what it would cost to mitigate their pollution assuming they are driven all the time. So no matter what it is treated like its running like a cab. There are so few the income from it would likely be worth it.

  • ambitious_bones@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    3 days ago

    With a modern car, it’s “plug in, get your money – boom – get out. It’s very quick to get a smog check with a modern car,” Leno said. “It’s not impossible in an older car, but it’s tricky. It takes time and often causes charges four, five, six times more than a regular car.” Leno said classic car owners struggle to even find a shop with the equipment needed to test them.

    So it is not even about not getting what they want, it is about being slightly inconvenienced.

    • slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      3 days ago

      Wait what is ge talking about? You put the sensor in the exhaust and let it rund and then it tells you that your piece of shit car was build in a time where people believed that cigarettes are healthy

      • CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 days ago

        Guys, don’t mouth off unless you know what you’re talking about.

        You sometimes need to drive hundreds of miles to get the ECU to get into it’s long-term running state and they’ll pass you.

          • CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            I’m sure you don’t actually know what the fuck you’re talking about.

            1999’s are 25 years old and fall under this shit.

      • DampCanary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        Sorry for my european ignorance,
        but isn’t eco test mandatory part of yearly vehicle inspection?

        • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          3 days ago

          US states generally (possibly all) don’t do vehicle safety inspections. There are periodic smog tests and that’s about it. Detection of unfitness to be on the road is entirely reactive, based on a system of police-issued “fix it” tickets. That can range from correcting a burned-out tail light to doing something about the rusty muffler dragging on the ground.

          • azimir@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 days ago

            My old city in the US didn’t even have exhaust checks. Anyone could drive anything without oversight.

        • Derpenheim@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          3 days ago

          No, you live in a sensible place that at least pretends to care about the environment. America is a shit hole that has nothing sensible about it.

          • DampCanary@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            I’d say EU rules and cash grab opportunity is behind it here (in yearly registration extension price there are eco taxes included, but coutry doesn’t guarantee that it will go thowards the eco projects. All that money ends up in general pot)

        • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          Early on in a car’s life its isn’t yearly, but at one point in my last car’s 20 year life it became yearly and never went back. I think its age related.

          • DampCanary@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            That make sense, I’m just used to ours way that I didn’t question other possibilites.

            E.g. here brand new cars get their first registration (for a duration of 1 year) and after few hundred kilometers they have they 0th car service at authorised service station. Then on yearly basis cars need to go for car service (practice is: one year small, then next year large servicing) then vehicle inspection at inspection station where, if car passes minimal safety standards, you extend registration for another year.

  • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 days ago

    He’d get a lot more sympathy if he were funny, and if he weren’t such an obsequious toad.

  • CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Yeah this just causes those cars to be registered out of state without any regulation at all and the registration revenue goes elsewhere.

  • CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Nerds annoying the population into fascism.

    You all just can’t help yourselves 🤣. You would literally want a dictator vs .005% of the cars being less than optimal.