

| Subject: | Re: Calif 2008 emissions fuel tank pressure testing? |
| From: | Donna Skarloken |
| Date: | Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:04:24 -0800 |
I was just going to say that really what this is about is getting rid of older vehicles. And it's working - I have really thought about just giving up on my van since it is a hobby anyway. Smogging is a hassle and we're always stressed about it. My commute car is diesel so I'm not hassled with smog (yet) but frankly I get tired of the whole game. I feel like my entire life is regulated by what the government wants from me and my family, not what I want. My husband doesn't want to move, and I don't blame him, but at the same time if it were left up to me I think I would seriously consider leaving California. Of course, that doesn't get us away from the federal govt. unless we just leave the country. Frankly that option seems attractive too. I can tell you why my cars have such high mileage - I can't afford nor want to buy a new car. I have no interest in doing so. And there are whole lot of people who make much less money than I do that have to make do with their high mileage cars too, plus cars last longer anyway. Donna On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Jim Akiba <syncrolist@bostig.com> wrote: > This is one of the regulations that is being introduced to help force > fleet overturn in CA. It has very little if anything to do with > controlling emissions directly, but it must appear so. The idea is to > make it expensive and difficult to maintain an older vehicle in CA. > Japan and Germany both do this already, and it is going to proceed > with more intensity in CA unless something changes. > CA needs to force old vehicles off the road for multiple reasons, and > it does make sense in the context of their goals and resources. The > CARB had figures of 17% of CA registered vehicles being over 150K > miles in 1995. The number then jumps to an astounding 41% over 150K > miles in 2000... more than double in less than 5 years. It is easy to > see the panic that this trend would cause them, since older vehicle do > pollute more than newer vehicles even if one was simply comparing two > identical vehicles one new, one over 150K. > > As a secondary problem, or potential benefit is that as CA forces > overturn, some of those will purchase new vehicles.. which is > essential in order to appease the OEMs which will otherwise launch > further efforts and lobby to stifle CARB anti-pollution regulation. If > CA is going to demand really strict pollution limits and durability > requirements, they must also sell cars for the OEMs to offset the > burden of compliance. > > In the end it does makes sense to do this, but it is the particular > way they are going about it that might be a problem, and unfortunately > guys like us that love our older vehicles will be caught in the tide > regardless of our individual efforts or intent. This is exactly the > condition that prevents us from selling conversion into CA.. why would > they extend any extra effort to exempt a small set of vehicles if they > don't have to? Which is why they don't anymore. Much has changed in > their understanding of the urgency of their situation, which is why > the OBDI engine conversion can still get a CARB EO since the exemption > potential was established a while ago.. and it's also why on last > check there is not a single legal OBDII CARB EO'd(exempted) engine > conversion of any kind for any vehicle in CA. > > Keep an eye out, as the trend should continue over the next few years. > Luckily this isn't a real show stopper for CA vanagon owners.. but > that isn't to say there won't come a time when it'll make more sense > to either leave CA or sell your van. I think they will continue to > ramp this kind of legislation up to the limits of the current > political situation. If it turns out that too many people protest > their attempts and make it dangerous for politicians to support, they > will be scaled back in pace, but they are very unlikely to stop what > has already started. > > Jim Akiba > > On 3/3/08, John Bange <jbange@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > So, California Vanagon owners: anyone here on the list had any > experience > > > getting smogged in 2008? They pump your fuel tank up and did you pass > or > > > fail miserably (as I expect my '84 will)? > > > > > > > > > I had mine smogged last month, and yes indeed, that was officially part > of > > the test. Thing is, the whole scheme is ludicrous and generally a waste > of > > time, according to the guy who ran the test only station I was at. It's > > simply pointless feel-good regulation burdening the test shop owners > with > > another mandatory equipment purchase and returning little in the way > of > > results. The trouble is that whoever made up the new regs was a > suit-wearing > > bureaucratic drone and not an automotive engineer. The intent was to > extend > > the integrated evap system test for OBD-II vehicles to non-OBD > vehicles. The > > "test" is easy on an OBD-II system as the ECU monitors the evap system > > automatically and stores an error code if there's a problem. The test > > station need only check for error codes and do a quick seal check on > the gas > > cap. Gas caps are largely standardized now, so fitting it to the > pressure > > tester is no trouble. > > > > Enter the asinine evap test for pre-OBD2 vehicles. This consists of an > > expensive system to pressurize (or maybe evacuate?) the fuel tank vent > > system through the fuel filler hole, keep it at pressure(vacuum?) for > 15 > > minutes or so, and rate it based on how much leakage there is. The > problem? > > Prior to OBD2, manufacturers made gas caps and filler pipe openings > just any > > old way they felt like. The expensive pressure system has a half dozen > > adapters to fit some of the more common makes of cars, but according to > the > > guy at the test place, more than half of the pre-OBD cars he sees > cannot be > > hooked up to the system for lack of a suitable adapter, and the sheer > > variety makes it unlikely that any such adapters will be made. The > "rubber > > stopper with locking lugs" cap on my 90 Vanagon is one of those. > > Subsequently, the test guy just put "NA" in the box that asked for the > test > > results and sent me on my way, as per CARB instructions. Maybe the 84 > > filler/cap system is different and WILL fit the machine, but I very > much > > doubt it. Worst case scenario, you could replace your old filler neck > with a > > late model one, and never have to take the test. I'd be surprised if > they > > had an adapter that fit though. > > > > > > -- > > John Bange > > '90 Vanagon - "Geldsauger" > > >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »