I was reading the Line Chaser I got yesterday from the MSRA club and they are talking about a bill before the State Legislature to adapt the Calif emissions standard here in MN. It wont hurt most of us old guys but some of the folks here might have some issues. Just thought it might be something you guys should know about. 20yr and older cars would be fine still. It didnt say anything about testing stations again thou. Just might give the cops a reason to ticket you if they cant get you for something else and see you tailpipe has been changed. I was trying to find the article online but no luck and it's to much for me to type with 2 fingers. lol
That would really suck. Glad my car is still stock. They cannot do this to us can they? I thought MN was better then cali.
I am sure there will be a grandfather clause written into the law, 99.9% of the cars on the roads in MN will NEVER pass cal emissions. This is because Cal requires a different emissions package on many cars. I would assume this would only cover cars that are recently purchased, or new cars only. The US government is already fighting Cal for their exceeding the federal regulations. Any further information would be GREAT!
Wakaba has an excellent point. Cars sold in CA usually have completely different emission systems than cars sold everywhere else. I don't think it will happen.
From what I've read on this subject thus far, it seems to be more of a regulation on new cars sold in the state. There was no talk of emissions testing (thank god, SMOG checks were such a racket).
I suspect like a non-CARB car imported to CA, they have to pass SMOG for that model car with that emissions equipment. However, I would suspect there would be some grandfathering in of non-aftermarket parts put on before the law passes (but make sure). Write your legislature. CARB is not quite as bad as people think when it comes to CA. It can be thanked for some of the cleanup of the air in CA. However, it is designed for the unique geography of california. In particular, nearly every large to medium sized city in CA has mountains downwind from it. These ranges trap in pollutants and magnify their effects. CARB insitutes extremely strict restrictions because of this challenging geography. This does not translate to Minnesota. CARB can be argued as a neccesary intrusion because of CA's unique geography. As far as I know, MN doesn't have 10 million people living in a valley. This means that CARB is basically irrelivant in MN in terms of purpose. I would note and not to legislators in letters that CA exempts non-urban counties from SMOG checks because they ahve no purpose there. CARB is designed to combat extreme localized pollution. We do not have this. Should there be tighter emissions restrictions? Maybe, but outside of CA, thats a job for the EPA. CARB is run by the state of California for the state of California and will not (and should not) take the needs of Minnesota to heart. This is a bad law that is the product of lazy legislators who want to be able they are cleaning up the environment. They either don't understand or don't care that what makes CARB acceptable for CA makes it retarded in MN. Make them understand or care. Write a letter (letters get sent on paper with a stamp, email is not a letter) and tell your legislators that this is a bad law for MN. On the other hand, you keep cutting your cats off and you're asking for this. What the hell do you think they're targeting? High flows are shockingly cheap and do so much.
I'd like to see it too. Really it could be anything. If it just requires CA cars be sold here new, it basically means nothing (but, IMHO, still a bad law because CARB is beholden only to the people of CA not those of MN)
Yes, high flow cats are usually cheaper than oem replacements. Unfortunately they are usually 2-3x the price of catless pipes. That said, I have both and currently run a high flow cat. also interested in further reading.
Don't forget, Tpaw is a damn tree hugger, so he will do whatever he thinks will be the greenest thing to do. Just like he will persoanlly void THOUSANDS of car warranties in 2012. Thanks Tpaw, I will be sure to send you the bill to fix my car. Russ
Ethanol is bad for the environment. It just happens that ADM and Cargill own the government here and its easier to say "its green!" than "we want to give big ag companies more money!" Seriously, the big ag lobbies of ADM and cargill are among the worst things happening to this country and no one even ****ing realizes it. No one with even a shread of sense thinks corn based ethanol is a green solution.
I just want to sue Tpaw and the state when the 20% ethanol goes into effect and Subaru viods the warranty. That will be SWEET. The nasioc guys e-mails subaru last year when it was signed into law, and SOA replied with that currently none of their cars would be covered under warranty because they are not designed to run 20% ethanol. I am guessing that Subaru is not the only car company that will make that statement either. Russ
Holy crap, Is our state willing to F us over that bad? Or do they not realize what would happen? Isn't it only domestics that can do flex-fuel? BS if you ask me.
My notes from May 2006 states: These are the states that have adopted California emission standards: Massachusetts Main New York Vermont May join: Washington New Jersey I guess we can add Minnesota to the list.
house https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H0863.0.html&session=ls85 house status https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us...atus_detail.php?b=House&f=HF0863&ssn=0&y=2007 senate https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/bldbill.php?bill=S0481.0.html&session=ls85 senate status https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us...tus_detail.php?b=Senate&f=SF0481&ssn=0&y=2007
Do you even have to ask? Massachusetts = A greasy, east coast version of CA...plus, any STATE that calls itself a COMMONWEALTH is full of pompous and fail Maine = Seriously? MAINE? They have maybe 10 square miles of inhabited land, otherwise it is trees. They could have cars that dump raw gasoline out the tailpipe and still not have an environmental issue NewYork = See Massachusetts, minus the commonwealth part. They have tons of business and money, and with money comes pompousness, and with that comes self absorbed, self rightous asswipes. Vermont = Another useless New England wasteland state. What has come out of vermont? Anything? Washington = Again, if it isn't trees it is self righteousness...but it is west coast style. And the Grunge movement left a dark cloud of drearyness over the whole state...that is why it rains all the time, because Kurt Cobain blew his brains out New Jersey = This is quite possibly the butthole of the United States. I've never seen a picture of New Jersey that I wouldn't consider to be an eyesore. They need to do more than just adopt cleaner emisssions for new cars, maybe get your residents to give a damn about how the place looks and clean up the trash. And now we are going to add Minnesota. Again, why bother with all this emissions crap here? Ears of corn outnumber humans in this state 1,000,000 to 1. Which is why we pander to farmers by selling corn gas as "green fuel." We have two large cities here, Duluth being kinda big. Otherwise, what else is there....Fargo isn't yours, sorry. And Rochester is just Mayo City USA. Otherwise, there isn't a damn thing here. 99.9% of your landscape probably doesn't have a measureable pollution problem.
Cool. so if I wanna go back to new england, I might as well go back to the real armpit of NE which is RI.
I love how it states global warming in the bill? Isn't that bull**** enough? I mean global warming has really never been proved... i sure as hell don't believe it! I guess i will never own a car newer then 2010 if this law is passed.
Start snapping up Subaru turbo shortblocks. You'll need them to keep your car on the road past 2020 when they outlaw gasoline altogether.
I disagree on global warming. However, global warming has no place in a CARB regulation. CARB is allowed its stricter regs because of california's unique human and physical geography. Global warming is not a localized issue. Should be done at the federal level. CARB should be for "smog" forming pollutants only. I've never seen smog here.
So we need to star whoring engines and gas? EHEH Club donations to buy as many shortblocks as possible. =D I just read threw this thing for whatever reason. As far as i can gather about this is the whole push for the vehicles is there public push for this Bill or whatever. But reading through they are also changing several other pollution codes that you may or may not agree w/, which are thrown in behind the scene. WOW government sucks!
Lets not get into a fight about global warming. All i want to point out is its a matter of opinion and how you look at the data provided. Which is no way makes it a fact to push a law on. Thats my point!
if you ever want to lol and wtf a bunch read through all the bills that are introduced in the house and senate.
That was a boring enough read itself ... Not being good at grammer at all for some reason i thought it was written all wrong. My teacher i had in college would have given that a F----
I think we can agree that global warming should have nothing to do with a state pollution law I like it. Creates loop holes and therefore the need for lawyers.
Thats all i was saying! We should get a subaru rally to go to the front of the capital building and park our cars on there steps
