Emissions Testing...Who has to do them?

[RageRover]

This might turn into a poll, but I'm not going to jump to that yet.

Anyways, I live in Michigan and it is not mandatory to do an emissions test. Neither here in Ohio where I'm currently posting from.

Now I know that people in Pennsylvania have it bad regarding exhaust setups, front bumper height with lifts, etc. And they have serious emission testing, that if you have an exhaust leak, you failed the emissions test and have to pay a fee.

Who else has to do that? Personally I think it's outrageous . But what do you guys think?

[RageRover]

Screw it i'll just add the poll now since i gotta log off my college computer for the night.

[Muddy Oval]

I don't think it's outrageous to expect people to keep their vehicle in proper operating condition. I expect it. I don't want some shitbox closing in on my family in the opposing lane, just feet from a head-on collision, when they have a poorly maintained pile. Safety inspections and emissions inspections should be mandatory everywhere. Most are very realistic about the condition of older vehicles and are more lenient as they age- but within reason.

[edthediscoman]

I agree with safety inspections. Just went through smog here in cali, and it failed the first time, turns out my timing was waaaaay off to compensate for no mechanical advance. So, they check the timing, failed on that (it has to be within spec). So, reset timing, it passes, then home to advance it back to 19 BTDC. Although there is no safety inspection, talk to the english guys about theirs...its a bitch.
Ed

[Ryan Roundy]

I live in a valley surrounded by mountains. It seems to trap all the crap in. Emissions is required every year here, and I'm glad it is. Granted, I think you can get an engine running just as clean without all the emissions controle devices, but I am glad they have limits on how much pollution a car can put out.

[Bene]

depends on where you live. if one lives in a small town in the woods, would a few extra gallons of CO2 really make a difference?

safty inspections are probably, but i could see it beinga huge pain in the ass. wasnt it the UK's whoreish safty regulations that signed the Defenders death warrant?

[Adam in NYC USA]

Originally Posted by Bene

depends on where you live. if one lives in a small town in the woods, would a few extra gallons of CO2 really make a difference?

Actually for a tank of gas, you looking at 10 pounds of carbon monoxide emitted by your ride. CO sinks so you figure it out. Do you really want that sitting next to you all day long. Pick up something that wieghs 10 lbs. It is that much.

As an EMT, it is a fact of life. Since I guess you are a civilian, you don't think about it.

Think about that headache everytime you cook on a real cold day with the windows closed and the old oven running. That's CO poisoning on the onset.

In a part of Africa, they have a city sitting on top of a active volcano. There are dips in the terrain that they tell the kids to avoid. Occcasionally there is a tremor and the kids take a shortcut thru the dips. They full of CO. Goes thru the skin and it is like 900% bonds stronger than carbon dioxide (co2) with the oxyhemoglobin in the blood that carries the oxygen.

What you got? Dead kid.

We have the same problem here in the city with methane. That is why underground workers got the fans blowing into the manholes. It is also very hot down there.

Know thy enemy dudes. You live longer and wiser and also ended up with the pretty babes when the dumb ones kick the bucket. Dont mind if the ladies are a little older and wiser. Everybody wants some; you just have to figger out what that is.

Learned it from a cool dude from Phillie. Ben. Ben Franklin. He would've had a Defender.

Adam

BTW, here is an article in the New York Times about carbon monoxide, it still has lingering effects after the inital poisoning: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/31/health/31emer.html

[Badger1]

Louisville did away with emissions testing a little better than a year ago, and I couldn't be happier! My major issue wasn't that any of my vehicles would or wouldn't pass, because they are always maintained and in tip top shape. My issue was that all the inspection sites were owned by a private company........owned by one man, not by the state or local government! So therefore all the fees for testing($25 a pop) went in this guys pocket, not back into the state coffer! Shady. Glad they did away with it!

[RageRover]

I guess I have a changed opinion about testing, but yeah I agree that any person that owns a vehicle should have to maintain it, otherwise they don't have any reason to be behind the wheel of that car. What gets me is the strictness of it all. I would want it to be mandatory only if the car has been reported as emissions unworthy or something like that. Other wise the owner should voluntarily have the vehicle checked on their judgement, if they have knowledge of the vehicle.

[drg]

Where I live, my '95 has to go through emissions testing at DEQ stations every 2 years. They put a probe up your tailpipe (undignified!) and sniff your... um... output.

I wouldn't mind that at all. In fact, I am definitely for emissions testing and requiring increasingly clean engines. Despite fears, it has not resulted in the quality of engines going down... in fact we enjoy more powerful engines today than we did during the muscle-car days, and with tiny fractions of the pollution. Necessity is the mother of invention.

What bothers me to no end is that in addition to having to meet the standards, you are STILL not allowed to change anything related to emissions.

I think that if I can figure out how to make my car run clean without a catalytic converter, or with an aftermarket high-flow converter, I should be able to do it. Sadly, in many states including my own, it is theoretically illegal to make ANY change to any part of your engine unless a company has paid to have the modification certified by the DEQ as an officially-acceptable modification to your car.

[RageRover]

I'm for High-Flow Cats. as well. If I really wanted to see how efficient my motor was, I would go and pay the small fee to see what's happening with my motor. But like I said, I'm not a big fan of the testing as a mandatory requirement.

[WCURoverD90]

I voted no because i like high-flows cats, cut off exhausts, straight pipes and anything else they say we can't have.....

[roverX]

Well...here in Kalifornia we have to do emissions testing every 2 years, along with a quasi-safety inspection. I say quasi b/c they passed my rig with a Cherry bomb and the exhaust ending before the rear axle.

[Bene]

i think, in CA, if you pass you pass. regardless of modifications. not quite sure though, (i havn't gone through that whole process, i think i have to this summer. yay). it would only make sense. but since when did our government start making sense?

[RageRover]

Originally Posted by WCURoverD90

I voted no because i like high-flows cats, cut off exhausts, straight pipes and anything else they say we can't have.....

Amen to that, man!

Hey RoverX, do you actually have a Glasspack Cherrybomb on your Rover? What Rover do you got? And how did you do it if you did it? I know I'm being a nosey SOB but I wanna do something to my Rover emissions "legal". I dunno.