AZ EPA approved March 1 no emissions for Vintage (1 Viewer)

[Roadnoiz40]

EPA approves exemptions for classic car emission testing
09:05 AM MST on Friday, December 22, 2006
Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) -- Collectable cars and trucks can soon skip emissions testing in Maricopa and Pima Counties.


The Environmental Protection Agency approved Arizona legislation that will allow vehicles 15 years or older to skip emissions for registration. However, the cars must be true show cars or hobbyist items that carry collector-car insurance, which limits annual mileage and restricts use.


The EPA agreed with findings by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality that such vehicles have a "negligible impact" on air quality in the Phoenix and Tucson areas.


"We've been saying all along that we're not part of the problem, that collector cars produce insignificant emissions," said Bill Gilmore, a longtime auto hobbyist and legislative lobbyist for collector-car groups. "If we're not part of the problem, we shouldn't be part of the solution."


The EPA action also approved exempting motorcycles in the Tucson area from emissions testing.


About 7,000 vehicles statewide meet the stipulations for exemption and about 6,200 motorcycles meet them in Pima County.


The state Legislature passed the exemptions bill in April 2005. It was then signed by Gov. Janet Napolitano and submitted to the EPA for hearings and study.


The state exemptions are expected to take effect about March 1.


Information from: The Arizona Republic, http://www.azcentral.com

 

[Cdaniel]

Bout dam time! Too bad we still can't get with the program and have a rolling 20 or 25 year exemption regardless of insurance, like a lot of other states.

 

[Blues Dawg]

Bout dam time! Too bad we still can't get with the program and have a rolling 20 or 25 year exemption regardless of insurance, like a lot of other states.

I'm with ya on that - most of the 60's and the 40's are still DD capable and don't need the restricted insurance - but it is good news for my 'Vette!

 

[-Spike-]

I don't understand the push for the 20 year exemption. Seems like these are the very vehicles that would be most likely to be polluting, and need to be policed. Someone please explain this to me.

-Spike

 

[Cdaniel]

I don't understand the push for the 20 year exemption. Seems like these are the very vehicles that would be most likely to be polluting, and need to be policed. Someone please explain this to me.

-Spike

Think percentages. How many cars do you see on the road that are more than 20 years old? More than 15 or 10 even? It's obvious that testing the minute percentage of older cars in the driving fleet does little to improve air quality. It certainly helps to line the pockets of the testers though. Now more than ever they want that older car buck because the newest vehicles are not even tested for the 1st 5 years.

Even the peoples republic of Kalifornication has a rolling year limit on emissions testing.

 

[-Spike-]

Your argument makes no sense. If there's so few cars older than 20 years, they're not making any money on them. And the reason you see so few of those cars is partly due to the fact that they can't pass emmisions, and it's too expensive to fix them. Take that away and there will be quite a few more on the roads.

Just because California does something stupid is no reason for Arizona to do it. I'm looking for a sound environmental or compelling financial reason to exempt the highest polluting cars. Got one?

-Spike

 

[LandCruiserPhil]

However, the cars must be true show cars or hobbyist items that carry collector-car insurance, which limits annual mileage and restricts use.

How is this regulated? What is a true show car or hobbyist item?
This could be good news for some of us with conversion.

 

[Cdaniel]

Your argument makes no sense. If there's so few cars older than 20 years, they're not making any money on them. And the reason you see so few of those cars is partly due to the fact that they can't pass emmisions, and it's too expensive to fix them. Take that away and there will be quite a few more on the roads.

Just because California does something stupid is no reason for Arizona to do it. I'm looking for a sound environmental or compelling financial reason to exempt the highest polluting cars. Got one?

-Spike

I have no data or statistics, just an opinion from a common sense veiwpoint. If my opinion isn't compelling to you. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[-Spike-]

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Roger that, I'm not looking for an argument necessarily, but I've heard the call for the 20 year rolling exeption before and I'm wondering why people think it's a good idea- or if they just don't want to drag their old car through the line every year. I know my old '81 Chevy Step Van would never have gotten a tune-up if I hadn't had to run it through emmissions. It failed every year, and I tuned it every year, and then it passed. Without the requirement and left to my own devices, I'd have been puking out crap nonstop, as the truck ran fine.

I'm by no means a rabid 'greenie', but I still believe there ought to be some restrictions on how much junk we toss up in the air. Just my opinion.

-Spike

 

[Cdaniel]

However, the cars must be true show cars or hobbyist items that carry collector-car insurance, which limits annual mileage and restricts use.

How is this regulated? What is a true show car or hobbyist item?
This could be good news for some of us with conversion.

It's regulated only by your ability to convince an insurance company to insure your vehicle as a collectible. Difficult for a trail rig.

 

[Cdaniel]

Roger that, I'm not looking for an argument necessarily, but I've heard the call for the 20 year rolling exeption before and I'm wondering why people think it's a good idea- or if they just don't want to drag their old car through the line every year. I know my old '81 Chevy Step Van would never have gotten a tune-up if I hadn't had to run it through emmissions. It failed every year, and I tuned it every year, and then it passed. Without the requirement and left to my own devices, I'd have been puking out crap nonstop, as the truck ran fine.

I'm by no means a rabid 'greenie', but I still believe there ought to be some restrictions on how much junk we toss up in the air. Just my opinion.

-Spike

Well I still fail to see the environmental benefit of me being forced to pay for the privilege of having some test station bozo manhandle my vehicle every year. Particularly my Trail rig and Motorhome. Both are parked 99% of the time. And when they do start and run, it's not rush hour and they are promptly driven out of the city. Not local polluters by any means.

They've brought vehicle emissions down exponentially. A fact I do know is that there is now less pollution while more cars are on the road. I think we've pretty much tapped out the potential for lower emissions on road going internal combustion engines burning gas.

The EPA, well intentioned but still a government (political) bureaucracy. If they really wanted to make more improvements, leave the average Joe and his car alone and start looking more seriously at other contributors. Of course political pressure keeps that from happening

How about idling jets in the middle of a sprawling urban sea?
Stop pandering alternative fuels?
Factories buying emission "credits"

 

[RHINO]

the benefit of having even older cars held to some form of emission standard is that every bit helps, there may not be many on the road, but they may as well be held to the standards of theyre day.

we have not come anywhere close to clen burning internal combustion engines yet, much room for improvement in the future.

and i like the last part cliff said, its a fact that cars only contribute to a relativiely small amount of global air pollution.

 

[Roadnoiz40]

Here is why I will smile March 1st.
My issue is the damage caused by the people performing the test on the rollers.
Gordon-Darby's policy mandates the employees run the vehicles on the rollers.
Example 1) Last year the "operator" at the station left the parking brake engaged in the FJ40 during the roller test.
Smoke billowed out from the underside. That mistake cost Gordon-Darby in excess of $800 for repairs/parts
to the parking brake drum and associated parts. The parking brake on an FJ40 is mounted on the drive shaft.
There is a red light that says "brake" when the parking brake is engaged.
Example 2) The previous year the "operator" was testing on the rollers and downshifted the FJ from 3rd gear
missed 2nd gear and caught reverse! Backup lights came on metallic grinding filled the testing center.
Both times I filled out complaint paperwork and followed up.
Keep in mind this vehicle gets driven less than 500 miles per year has the antique insurance. Most damage occurs at the Gordon-Darby
testing facility by their hired operators (usually no older than 22 years of age) that are less than capable operating older vehicles.

 

[Blues Dawg]

It's regulated only by your ability to convince an insurance company to insure your vehicle as a collectible. Difficult for a trail rig.

This is my point earlier - the insurance restrictions for collector cars would be hard to apply (legally anyway) to most of our rigs. It is perfect for my corvette that sees 1000 - 1200 miles a year - and currently has expired tags 'cuz I was too lazy to try and smog the beast in July.

 

[FJ40LVR]

Keep in mind this vehicle gets driven less than 500 miles per year has the antique insurance.
.

Do you have to submit pictures / proof of "antique status" to get said type of insurance? Is there many hoops / restrictions involoved?

 

[Saddletramp]

Doesn't Grundy's Insurance have no milage limitations but is classified as collector car insurance?

 

[Cdaniel]

Do you have to submit pictures / proof of "antique status" to get said type of insurance? Is there many hoops / restrictions involoved?

Requirements vary depending on the company. I've had that insurance in the past on a British sportscar and even my FJ40 for a time. Common requirements are:

Proof of other vehicles for all family drivers to use for daily drivers.
Proof of a garage where the insured vehicle is kept.
Pictures and/or an appraisal of the vehicle.
Mileage limits.
Claims subject to conditions of the accident. (i.e. if you get wrecked while driving it to work, your claim may be denied) When my 40 was insured I would have no claim if wrecked off road.

 

[Relix]

Seems like discrimination to me...If your car is 15 years old or older your exempt if blah blah blah blah BS! What would be considered a collectors car from 1991 or 1992? The only one i can think of would be the Corvette ZR1, & maybe some Exotics..

 

[rt]

Doesn't Grundy's Insurance have no milage limitations but is classified as collector car insurance?

My last information on Grundy (that is me talking to them about covering an FJ40) is they do not extend their insurance to 4 wheel drive vehicles. Neither would American Collector car insurance. Nor Hagerty. But that was 2001.

 

[inkpot]

Howdy! Re-read the limitations listed in the first post. To be exempt, the vehicle only gets to be driven 100 miles per month. You have to get the insureance first, before you can get the collector plates from the state. The regulation makes the insurance agent the watchdog. If he gets caught cheating for his customer, then he can loose his license. Not worth it.

Relix, hit a couple of car shows, and you will find a lot of sweet rides were made between 92 and 67, the current cutoff date, which applies to all vehicles made in 66 or before, regardless of miles driven.

I wish ADOT would tell us how many vehicles over 20 years old are registered. I would bet it is only a fraction of 1% of the total. John