English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

they are still being driven, and newer cars that have a defective or non-existing catalytic converter will not pass the vehicle emmissions test and cannot be driven. It is even illegal to remove a catalytic converter, but..... These 1960 and early 1970 cars with no catalyic converter are STILL BEING DRIVEN!
How is this so?

2006-10-09 08:38:53 · 11 answers · asked by BadGirlGimpy 3 in Cars & Transportation Maintenance & Repairs

11 answers

in CA cars before 1975 don't have to be smoged :)

2006-10-09 08:40:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

"How is this so?"


Because the majority of these cars from between 1960-70 are either stored or being used minimally as show cars or collectors cars. Now that all of these emission standards are out, what's the point in wasting the time and money to see if these cars from that era (most of which have been scrapped and/or crushed) are passing emissions? There are millions more out there that need to be monitored in the meantime, and even then, if we're talking about pollution, a lot of the rebuilds are brought back to day 1 condition or they're even using newer engines, so chances are, these 30-40 year old cars are in better shape than the newer ones. Don't forget that gasoline is much cleaner today than it was 30-40 years ago too.

Time and money should be spent first on bringing a cleaner diesel fuel to the US, some of which burns cleaner than our current gasoline engines. Then, we need to get cracking on hydrogen because Ethanol is just a band-aid. It costs just as much to make (if not more in some cases), and doesn't really do much more than help the environment 'a little'. It does more damage to the car than it's environmental benefits are worth, i.e. corrosion, oxidation, weakening of seals. On top of that, we're not even doing it right. We're spending tons of money just to make sure that we can't get even cheaper Ethanol from corn grown in Brazil (which is actually cleaner burning).

We're going to be burning oil for a while. We need a lot more tests and breakthroughs before hydrogen is safe enough to use and drive on a daily basis.

2006-10-09 09:06:39 · answer #2 · answered by jdm 6 · 0 0

It can be argued that the amount of concentrated toxins that end up in a catalytic converter go back to the envionment simply by a different route and expend large amounts of energy in production/resources and money that could perhaps been better spent. Engines also lasted longer, were more efficient and had a much smaller dust to dust carbon footprint in totality pre CC days. I believe the standard jeep currently holds the record for lowest total lifetime manufacture to recycling carbon output, the Toyota Prius produces 4 times as much for example.

2006-10-09 08:49:37 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I got a '72. The last smog check I did, I put out >1% of all emissions for CO2 and CO, ect...

The rules basically are that if a car came with certain smog controlling devices, they must be fully operational. Take the cat conv. off, do the mods to make the engine run properly without it, then say it is not the original engine. They will test it and have to go by baseline guidelines for all cars.
Loophole: If they ask you if it's the original engine, and you have actually modified it, it fails, and the mods are illegal. Say it is NOT the original engine, the mods are legal, as long as it passes baseline smog.

2006-10-09 08:45:48 · answer #4 · answered by Mazz 5 · 0 0

It's just how the law is written. They state that a car must be equipped with a cat. if it was manufactured after so and so date. There are also vehicles driving around that were't originally equipped with seat belts. They can't MAKE people with million dollar classic cars that are correct to build date add stuff like seat belts and catalytic converters, and they can't make them stop driving them. Or at least they won't. Too many high ranking, got money out their butt, famous people or politicians can manipulate the ways laws are written, so loop holes are created, and this is just one of them.

2006-10-09 08:43:48 · answer #5 · answered by kevvsworld 3 · 0 0

Well, there are relatively few of them in the fleet, and fewer every day. So their effect on air quality is virtually nil. And many of them are very well taken care of by the proud owners, kept in a good state of tune, and so might even be cleaner than a 'new' car with a faulty 'cat'.

2006-10-09 08:43:44 · answer #6 · answered by Carter S 2 · 0 0

They were legal at the time and as mentioned above are "Grandfathered" in. Same with some houses being built in the 60's may not conform to city code, but, it not have to be updated, unless there is some remodeling and it would need to conform to code.

2006-10-09 08:44:35 · answer #7 · answered by Snaglefritz 7 · 0 0

stable question, yet I`d prefer to renowned why nv4l can not provide all human beings an excellent answer. She is only a bad little female with out pals. i think of your checklist is due. you're very unhappy.

2016-10-19 02:26:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

BECAUSE WHEN THEY PASSED THE LAWS REQUIRING ALL CARS TO HAVE A CATALETIC CONVERTER THEY COULDNT MAKE IT COVER THE CARS ALREADY BUILT AND SOLD...LIKE HOW DO YOU ENFORCE A SEAT BELT LAW IF THE CAR NEVER HAD SEAT BELTS MOST PEOPLE TRY TO KEEP THEIR CARS ORIGINAL...AS IT CAME FROM THE FACTORY.

2006-10-09 08:40:59 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

grandfather clause, they was made before the law was passed

2006-10-09 08:41:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers