Yes, this really is crazy, but most legislation has some rational thinking
behind it even if it leads to crazy results (like this one).

So, why would they not just require you at least match emission standards
for the vehicle (meaning the body of the vehicle I suppose).  The only
reasons I can come up with are:

- Car manufacturers want to sell more cars.

- (I can't quite get this one phrased right) a fear that people will
obtain "new" cars that easily meet old emmission standards by putting new
engines in old cars - cars that many people might think should be
discarded.

It makes me wonder about the people importing new mexican beetles to the
US.  There is (or was) a company who would sell you a brand new old style
beetle from mexico, but the problem is that this car doesn't meet the US's
collision ratings (and other ratings).  I think this is part of the
problem of importing a vanagon from South africa?  Anyway, the way the
beetle guys get around it is you drive to mexico in your 1975 Bug (a US
car).  Once there, a new mexican beetle is purchased and parts are
exchanged and a few days later you drive back to the US with a completely
new car put on the chasis of your old beetle (does this sound right to
those of you who have looked into it?)

I suppose that these cars would not pass the CARB test.

blake

> Wow, what a mess, I had no idea.  Doesn't it make more sense to measure what
> comes out of the exhaust?  I would bet that converting a vanagon to electric
> 'zero emission' wouldn't jibe either -- non original engine.  I do know that
> Peter at Tiico has been fighting this stuff for a while, just never knew what
> it was.  I, like everyone else, want clean air.  This just sounds ridiculous.
>  Some day, we'll use hydrogen.....then comes the subaru hydrogen fuel-cell
> swap, Lilley oxygen upgrades, etc.....
>
> Thanks to all who responded.  Especially Scot and Sean who kept it under the
> prescribed "150 words or less".
>
> Bill Marshall
> 85 GL Tiico with low emissions
> Phoenix AZ
>