Now wait a minute. I know the bozos in Sacrotomato have a bad rep... but
they did pass the law eliminating smog tests on 66 through 73 vehicles (and
that will start indexing in 2003).
I also believe a vehicle should pass on it's tailpipe emmisions not
withstanding what ever it has under the hood, but I don't think the Feds
allow that either.

tim (in San Jose)

>Excellent and sensible concept.  Implementing such a procedure as law would
>require two things.
>
>1.  Intelligence on the part of significant numbers of the CA legislature.
>2.  Intestinal fortitude on the part of significant numbers of the CA
>legislature.
>
>Don't hold your breath.
>
>David Marshall wrote:
>
> > They should make the system like is in southern British Columbia...
> >
> > - Look at vehicle determine year, make and model (88 VW Vanagon)
> > - Look at the chart to see what the vehicle is supposed to do (X% CO and
>Y%
> > NOX at such an RPM on the dynometer).
> > - Check for a catalytic converter - if missing fail.  If present
>continue.
> > - "Drive" vehicle on the dynometer.  Check to see if the CO and NOX are
>at
> > or below the limits on the chart. - If yes then pass, if no then fail.
> >
> > This test makes perfect sense to me... have a polluting pig and make it
> > better - you pass!  Let's also look at it like this.  Compare a 5.8L
>2001
> > Chev Suburban to a 2.0L 2001 VW Golf CL - I think (don't know for sure)
>that
> > it would take 5 Golfs to equal the pollution per 100km that one Suburban
> > produces... If you really want to get down to politics and "fairness"
>why
> > does the Suburban and Golf get looked at the same way if they fail the
> > test... A Golf can fail by quite a bit and still not be at the same
>level as
> > a Suburban.
> >
> > David Marshall

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp