Leno’s Law was supposed to allow smog-era cars some relief from emissions inspections. As someone with a carbureted 1985 Jeep J10 that will never pass SMOG and that I now have little choice but to sell, I am feeling the effects of California’s overly-strict SMOG rules, and I should be upset having to give up my beloved truck. But I’m just not. California car culture rules.
Back in May, I wrote this article about my Jeep J10: California’s Smog Rules Are Pushing Me To Sell My Beloved 1985 Jeep J10, And The Improbable ‘Leno’s Law’ Is My Only Hope. Since then, Leno’s Law has died, and my only options to keep my J10 on the road are to 1. Try to scrounge together all the annoying emissions equipment so my engine can run more poorly or 2. Do an engine swap on my 78,000 mile motor.
I have no time or interest in doing either, and so I am going to sell my J10 after 10 years of ownership. This sucks, but I also knew it was going to happen. As I said in my previous story:
Right now, cars before the catalytic converter era are legal to drive in California without any SMOG checks. The idea that California will say “your car actually came with emissions equipment but we no longer care if it works” seems tough to me. But I’m still a proponent of the bill, because I think car culture matters. And also, come on: Who wouldn’t want to see this truck out on the road? Joy, folks — it’s the only emission that matters:
Over the past few months, I’ve come to terms with the fact that my J10 fits into that unfortunate gap between 1975 and fuel injection, and that this ultimately dooms it. But here’s the thing: That doesn’t mean I can’t own another awesome 1980s-era truck! When I went to have my Throttle Body-injected 1989 Chevy K1500 emissions tested, it passed with flying colors.
Ditto with my 1991 Jeep Wrangler YJ:
I’ve never had any issue getting any of my fuel injected cars through emissions, and if I do, I’ll swap some O2 sensors and throw in a new catalytic converter. There are far fewer dials to turn (so to speak) than an older carbureted car. So my pre-1975 cars (my 1966 Mustang, 1958 Willy CJ-3B that’s now sold) and my 1980s and 1990s cars (K1500, Wrangler YJ) have had no issues; it’s just the in-between period just before fuel injection that gets boned.
That’s not to downplay how many great cars there are that fit in that era! There are, and I wish they could catch a break; my J10 would love one. But there are also great updated versions of those very cars/alternatives that came a little later with fuel injection, and between all those and the pre-1975 vehicles, as well as the option that many take to register cars in Montana, the car culture in this state remains excellent. I write this because of headlines like “Jay Leno Tried to Save Car Culture – California Shut Him Down.” I don’t think he tried to “save” car culture, but he definitely tried to help it. Still, even with late 70s and early 80s vehicles on the proverbial sidelines, California Car Culture doesn’t need saving; it’s Arguably the best in the world — right up there with Detroit’s.
How many of those cars are even still out there that would be driven regularly? Probably not that many considering it’s an unloved era of cars and most have long since gone to the scrap yard.
I support emissions rules. I remember when you could eat LAs air with a fork and knife. Even San Jose would get an unhealthy brown sky during periods of no wind. Things are so much better now and we have CARB to thank for that.
However. They go to far with their impact on niche markets. This article is a good example of that. Another is their outright ban for competition OHV vehicles built after 21 on any public land. Because they don’t meet the same emissions standard as road legal vehicles.
What’s confusing is the DMV is still issuing OHV registration for them and the CHP issued a memo stying they would honor it
I think David’s glossing over a lot of the frustrations that you mention here. Especially this kinda hilarious aside:
Like, if the process of registering a car in your own state is so bureaucratically painful you’ll just throw the fees at another state you never visit, then sure, that’s an option, but one generally reserved only for the well-heeled.
Beyond that, there are tons of restrictions on other motorized implements – everything from the OHV rules, 2-vs-4 stroke boat engines, 3-wheeler ATV’s, I could go on – and the way in which CARB mandates things get fixed (namely, with OEM parts) that make even post-fuel-injection era vehicles that were less common somewhat expensive or difficult to repair.
I too can recall an era when the pollution in my home town in California was bad, even worse than LA and Houston. I’m not opposed to emissions mandates – what I am opposed to is the very heavy-handed way in which California has made the bureaucracy more important than the outcome (sadly, an evergreen problem in California lawmaking). Mandate the sniffer test and/or set a mileage-per-year hard limit for anything that doesn’t pass (So if you want to drive your late-70’s Jeep? Neat, but only for up to 5000 miles per year).
I grew up in California, and can remember an era of meaningfully rich and varied car culture that was accessible by anybody – even in my high school parking lot, you’d have students driving ratty Ford Broncos or 4Runners with the hard top left at home, low-riders made such by virtue of having cut the springs. Plenty of rednecks or other ag workers with access to welders and cutting torches and angle grinders who could come up with all kinds of craziness, and cars were cheap enough to work on that slicing-and-dicing wasn’t monumentally expensive in case of a mistake. A lot of California car culture these days seems to be thriving on nostalgia and money rather than creation, which isn’t really sustainable.
I do think that the state’s very worthwhile goal of clean air could be met with less pain for vehicle owners if the testing regime was centered more on passing a sniffer and verifying other equipment that ensures low/no volatile emissions in other situations (e.g. evap system) or long-term compliance. CARB-certified cats, for instance, seem unnecessary if you can pass with a 49-state cat. Being tested every two years means you won’t get away with a crappy cat that only gets you by the first test. Also if certifying engine swaps weren’t as difficult as it apparently is.
Yeah. Instead of pushing for smog check exemption, I think it’s more productive to push for an exemption to the visual check, as long as the car passes the sniffer and gas tank/evap tests.
This I agree with.
I’d totally agree with this. There are plenty of popular 90’s era vehicles who’s emissions equipment are approaching unobtanium status that would fail an OBD2 test (generally for a CEL) but pass a sniffer. I think this kind of misses the forest for the trees in focusing more on the method (emissions equipment) instead of the result (actual emissions).
I think for this to work, you’d also need the roadside sniffers like Denver uses. Otherwise people are just going to put aftermarket stuff on that can pass in one mode then flip a switch to another.
I’d love to see an article comparing and contrasting the car cultures of SoCal and Detroit. There could be a follow up article about how to take part in car culture in other locations around the country or world. An ongoing series could highlight the uniqueness of the car cultures in different cities.
I just moved to the Bay Area two months ago for a job, and brought a car (not my daily) that won’t pass smog as it is. Sucks big time that I have to get that sorted especially because it would have been exempt under Leno’s Law.
Yet this is such a car culture friendly place. So many miles of incredible roads. Awesome cars and coffees. I’ve never lived somewhere where it made so much sense to own a fun car. And being able to enjoy it all year round is mind blowing to me. (My frames of reference are Chicago and Boston, so…) I haven’t seen a raindrop since I moved here.
There are plenty of cars I want that I can’t own (or at least, legally drive on the street) here, but realistically, I’ll take the trade-off for what I get in return. The internet did a good job of making me think I’d hate it here but one weekend with a car buddy was enough to convince me otherwise.
Anyway. Super verbose way to say that I agree with you David.
I dunno if you’re into hiking or cycling, if you are or want to be I highly encourage you to use those trails too.
Hundred percent. Healing a knee injury (not on my clutch leg luckily lol) but trying to get out there soon
I know you’re new here, but we don’t talk about the good stuff where *they* might read it! Remember folks, it’s nothing but crime, EVs, and communism out here in CA, you’d be better off turning back at Vegas or Reno.
I visited CA first in 1971. In 1980 I moved to and still live in Silicon Valley. I remember when a brown fog would hover over the valley. It’s much better now. I appreciate the clean air and don’t begrudge (at least not too much) getting smogged.
Why do you need to plaster your fathead face all over every article?
It’s disgusting.
Stop it.
Must be tough having no friends.
Rude comments restricted to members only.
He co-owns the website. Don’t like it? Go start your own.
Thank you for being normal. Sometimes we gotta take an L for the team.
Been eons since I failed a smog test, IIRC back then there was a dollar limit on what you had to spend on getting it to pass, as along as it was all original equipment. Once you’d spent $xxx dollars, it was considered “good enough” and you could register the car. Too lazy at the moment to dive into the CA DMV website to see if that’s still true, last time I had to deal with that was multiple decades ago.
Be nice to come up with some sensible rules fixes for cars that are 1976 and newer but pre-OBDII. As has been pointed out here many times, the places you can get such a car smog checked in CA are vanishingly small.
I guess compared to Detroit you have way less rust there, much more nice weather to enjoy stuff (vs 6 months ish a year), smoother roads in general. But emissions police, bad traffic more pervasively, quite a bit higher ownership costs, well maybe not car insurance… I suppose just different rotation. Time for a SWOT analysis business school 1998 style?
On average, car insurance in Detroit will be higher than anywhere in California, plus the amount of maintenance and higher labor costs required on rusted out shit. Gas is more expensive in California for sure but it’s a better place for car ownership in most every way.
Is Detroit still higher than CA currently? Our insurance has almost doubled here CA in the last 12 months. It’s now over $500 a month for two EV’s. Both cars are on policies where the annual mileage is listed at 8k or less.
I believe the insurance company is trying to cover the loses from the fires.
Good point, everything insurance-related is absolutely insane now.
SE Michigan is definitely a great car place but there are other reasons for that. The whole area is soaked in car history, and there are so many little museums or meet-ups, shows, events etc
Serious question: other than the love of cars that fall into the gap, what makes the smog rules “overly” strict?
Depends on how you define “other than the love of cars that fall into the gap”.
There is no guarantee of OEM support, especially not after production has ended. On a lot of newer cars when their Catalytic Converters die there is no OEM replacement, and IF you’re lucky enough to be able to get an aftermarket one it’ll last maybe 1/3rd as long as OEM if you’re lucky.
I’m a BEV convert and can afford to convert ICE cars to BEV drivetrains so I’m unaffected by this, but it sucks for the people who have older cars you can’t get emissions parts for.
I guess it’s really the “overly” part I was questioning. I agree it’s strict. “Overly” to me implies stricter than it should be to accomplish its desired goals.
I understand the issue of older cars you can’t get parts for is frustrating to the people who have them.
But in terms of smog as an emissions/air quality measure, is the issue that cars that don’t have the right equipment but also don’t pollute (as much as some cars that pass) still fail? As in, the measurement criteria is wrong?
Or is that there are so few of those cars remaining they aren’t statistically significant so they should just be let through (the criteria should be cumulative not per car)?
Or that if a person (like David) dailies an EV then having a secondary fun car that’s not to standard should be permitted because it adds up to less pollution than one person with only one car that’s a newer ICE (the criteria should be per owner)? If so how would that be enforced, practically speaking?
Put another way, I’m wondering where the bad math is.
Cars from that in between era (1976 to whenever the auto manufacturers straightened things out) sell for a discount in California compared to a 1975 or earlier car. I would even try to avoid those 73-74 cars. I had a 1974 MGB with a smog pump. Of course you install it for smog check but maybe it gets uninstalled in between tests. (That was before it was old enough to not have to smog; I had it from 1980-1989.) There are less ethical ways to pass smog, but I never had to resort to that.
Nice and welcome in more forgiving areas. Just like I hate people who move near a race track and demand they stop, I find it equally annoying to move to a nazi pollution state with an axe for banning stuff, then try to make them stop.
Accept your decision, sell the jeep. Sit with it.
California car culture is great despite the state of California. It has good weather, slower oxidation and some relatively wealthy areas. These alone are enough to keep the culture going.
“1. Try to scrounge together all the annoying emissions equipment so my engine can run more poorly or 2. Do an engine swap on my 78,000 mile motor.”
OR option 3. Convert it to a BEV.
And do that by buying a Tesla Model S parts car and then swap in the Model S powertrain into your truck!
Then you’ll have no problem passing emissions.
Easy Peasy!
Or just buy a ’75 or earlier J10, with a 6.
Won’t work. The rule in the case of an engine swap is the newer of either the engine or or the chassis apply. So he’d still have to meet 1985 rules with a 1975 engine.
(Unless of course you ment to just buy that earlier J10 and sell the ’85.)
Not quite, it’s only legal to install an engine the same year or newer than the vehicle it’s going in. In other words, the engine must be the newer of the two.
1975 engine in 1985 Jeep = verboten.
1985 engine in 1975 Jeep = doable if you have all of the emissions equipment, but basically a moot point since 1975 and older VEHICLES don’t require smog.
Yep, you are right. I stand corrected:
https://ls1tech.com/articles/legal-california-engine-change/2/
That’s what I meant.
I’ve never seen someone convert an old engine to throttle body injection for the sake of emissions, but would something like a holley sniper kit work? I know nothing about them as I haven’t touched a carburated car in over 25 years, but maybe there’s alternative or DIY options less pricey?
Nope, not CARB approved, but there are some other options.
Off topic but related. Is getting pre-fuel injected cars to pass emissions tests a universal problem, or is it constrained more to specific brands, or car styles? i.e. compact cars rarely fail but full size sedans rarely pass, or Totota’s trucks rarely fail but GMC’s rarely pass, i4 good but v8 bad, etc.?
No idea unfortunately. I’m sure the state has that kind of data but I don’t.
Yeah- seems like the J10 truck would benefit from one of these CARB approved TBI kits.
“Who wouldn’t want to see this truck out on the road?”
Ask people stuck in traffic behind you.
“Joy, folks — it’s the only emission that matters”
The climate is fine folks, really! Smog? That’s just the sweet breath of freedom!
“Ask people stuck in traffic behind you.”
Especially those who have asthma.
…and those who drive convertibles
… people on bikes
And pedestrians
I’m with you on this – There are plenty of older cars at Cars and Coffees in Malibu, Rolling Hills, Irvine, etc.
There are even Malaise Daze events in LA next month specifically for cars of the 70s and early 80s – as there have been for years.
https://mmi.clubexpress.com/content.aspx?page_id=4091&club_id=863628&item_id=2678072
Nobody is taking anyone’s classic/vintage cars away.
“Where there’s a will, there’s a way.”
Only if that will includes a trust fund.
I am far from wealthy but still manage to enjoy being a gearhead here just fine. Took me about 5 years of saving to buy the badass stroker V8 I always wanted, but it still passes smog.
Was it from out of state?
Not sure if you’re asking about the car or engine, but no to both. Car has lived in San Diego its entire life, engine was built by a builder in L.A.
I imagine that fact helps it pass smog.
Why would you say that? If anything, I’d expect a CA emissions vehicle to have tighter standards than a 49-state car meaning it’d be harder to pass, but I have no evidence to prove this.
Also literally every moving mechanical part of my car has been replaced or upgraded. Absolutely nothing in the powertrain is stock. It’s putting out nearly 3x the factory horsepower.
Because I’m assuming if neither the engine or the chassis is from out of state you should have all the necessary parts to pass the visual inspection.
CA smog checks only require the car to pass the standards as originally built.
When the smog tech performs the inspection they enter in the state on the emissions sticker under the hood. If they enter CA, the pass/fail standards will be based on a CA emissions vehicle. If they enter another state, the standards will be based on a 49 state vehicle.
Same thing goes for smog equipment. I know a guy with a ’70s Lincoln from PA that he was trying to register in CA and the smog shop failed him for no catalytic converter. In that particular year and engine the 49 state cars didn’t come with a cat. I don’t remember the exact sequence of events but he ultimately took the car to a smog referee and confirmed he was right.
Totally bullshit that he had to go through that effort to prove he was right, but least he was able to the get a ref sticker under the hood confirming no cats are required which will make future smog checks easier.
It’s bullshit but that sounds like a problem with that particular smog shop tech. The fact the smog referee was on his side when he was correct is proof the system works, if less than optimally.
Agreed.
This also works in the opposite direction. I used to have a 2001 Yukon 2500 with the 8.1L engine that was equipped with the CA only air pump that does nothing more than pump fresh air through a check valve into the exhaust manifold. One day the check valve broke so exhaust gasses went the wrong way and burned out the motor and caused a check engine light. As IL’s emissions test is essentially “is the CEL on?” I made thin block off plates to go in place of the gaskets and just disconnected the motor wire and replaced the relay in the assembly which tricked the ecu into thinking it was working. Most surprising thing to me after this was:
HOLY $#!T this makes a huge improvement in emissions with no downside in power. (edit – to be clear it is way better to have it than not, but GM got to save $175 at dealer parts counter prices for what’s essentially an air mattress pump) As it was a massive engine running in a small 2 car garage it made the difference between whether or not you can still breathe in there 45 seconds after you cold start it or not.
My LTD has an air pump that pumps air into the exhaust too, but it’s required for proper operation of the cats. Probably not needed for newer style cats in 2001.
Seems like you should just put the word California in all the article titles to trigger engagement based on the comments.
I totally agree. I won’t deny it’s definitely tough to be a gearhead in CA but not impossible. But to me the payoff is worth it. I’m surrounded by tons of amazing driving roads that I can drive nearly year round, and I regularly see awesome cars at any random cars and coffee events or canyon road meetups which many people will never see in person. I remember going to Cars and Coffee Irvine (RIP) years back and the founder of Vector would regularly drive his prototypes there.
I still see plenty of cars from the “dark ages” between 1976-1996 too. Heck, next month I’m going to 3 car shows in the L.A. area (Radwood, Malaise Daze, Japanese Classic Car Show) 3 weekends in a row which are heavily biased towards cars from that era. My heavily modified 1985 Ford LTD will be in two of those shows.
I do take issue at you being cavalier about just throwing a new cat on a car to get it smogged. Have you actually done that on a CA car? CA requires CARB approved cats and they are stupid expensive. The only CARB legal 4-cat H-pipe assembly that’s legal for my LTD is made by Magnaflow and retails for $2200. I bought a 2004 Toyota Sequoia a couple of years ago for $4500 which started throwing P0420/0430 catalyst codes and legal weld-in cats are $600 each. So if the cats were bad it’d cost $1200 + labor at minimum. That’s about 1/3 the purchase price of my $4500 vehicle! Thankfully I replaced the downstream O2 sensors and the issue never came back.
Just for fun, the CA legal Magnaflow cats for David’s ’91 Wrangler are $480 for a weld-in version or $1166 for bolt-in. I know David is frugal like I am and $500 is more than I’m willing to spend on the parts cannon which may not fix the issue.
I miss the good ole days when you could just buy a generic cat for $40
I had a similar issue with my newer 2001 Bullitt Mustang. Originally a CA car, it went through a few family members and ended up in Louisiana. To “fix” a drivability issue, the mechanic my brother took the car too gutted the cats. Didn’t fix the problem, and eventually the car ended up back with me in San Diego.
At the time in 2019, Magnaflow was the only company that made a 50-state legal cat’d X-pipe and it ran $1250. Expensive, but I was gonna have to do it if I wanted the car to pass the smog check. I lucked out and found on Rock Auto made by a company called Bosal for $825 and listed an CARB EO number. Never hearing of the brand, I did some research and turns out that Bosal was a brand accquired by Magnaflow. The EO number was the same as on the Magnaflow exhaust, so I ordered it.
When the part came in, it was the Magnaflow parts in a Bosal box. All of the documentation that came with the parts was all Magnaflow.
You can still purchase the Magnaflow parts, but they are now $2200!!
You know who can save it? Out-of-state people that want clean California cars. They’ll be happy to take them off you so you don’t have to worry about smug check 😉
Do you have any family back in Michigan that wants your truck? Or anyone out of state?
If you don’t have a buyer in mind in a state that doesn’t do emissions, sell it here:
https://opposite-lock.com/category/19/swappo
California should just bring back the rolling exemption as well as some other exemptions that may or may not have been removed, such as engines under 819 cc
Supposedly, there is a process for collector cars to get a referee exemption, but in practice it’s almost impossible to actually get. One person contacted a senator or something, but even then it took 6 months to actually get the appointment.
Did CRC lobby to shut down the Leno’s Law? They can sell more Guaranteed 2 Pass that way LOL
CRC G2P or Cataclean before the smug check 😛
But none of the these are clean California cars, they just came from Detroit the birthplace of rust.
That reminds me of an old wrenching nightmare that was the ’89 and ’90 Suburban. Your 89 has the new generation body and engine. My 1990 GMC Suburban was still on the old body style, but with the new TBI engine. Some parts were old style, some were new. Online and in-store parts lookup systems were not trustworthy.
I believe that Leno’s Law should have passed, but as a non-Californian I’m not exactly sad that the fourth largest economy economy in the world has been locked out of the market for classic cars. Cheaper for me!
There are so many little edge cases that were left unfulfilled with Leno’s Law – especially as additional restrictive changes were made to it.
For example, if you want to put a modern engine in a car you also need to swap in that engine’s mated transmission. My ’89 MR2 Supercharged engine was on its last legs, and replacements were prohibitive plus finding parts was near impossible. Swapped in a 2GR and ensured it was cleaner running that what we put in – catalytic converters, everything. Also made sure it was quiet, kinda like if Toyota built it with this engine in the first place. Now I have a faster, cleaner, quieter car that I can actually get parts for!
There are no transmission substitutes that work, though. Which means I can’t get my cleaner running car smogged. Leno’s Law, as originally designed, would have allowed this (iirc) and was kinda the catalyst to go this direction. Now, I need to look into registering out of state – probably Washington as my parents live there.
Just don’t ask what the culture will be like after Jan 1, 2035!
By then we’ll all be dead anyway
It’s not like all of the ICE vehicles already on the road would all of a sudden disappear, but you do have a point.
They would if the CA government had its way.
I am part of a group that has actively been championing and monitoring efforts to create classic car smog check exemptions in CA, and while we know the state made the EV sales mandate for NEW cars, there is no evidence I’m aware of that the state is doing anything to change the ability to have an old car on the road. In fact the only upcoming change that I am aware of for older cars is the state trying to DISCONTINUE dyno smog checks on 1996-1999 OBDII cars and go to just a plug in monitor check like all 2000+ cars do.
So you can speculate on California sky is falling doom as much as you want, whereas I will follow the actual facts presented. Maybe you’re right, but as a person who has my finger of the pulse of this topic I see no concrete evidence supporting your narrative at this time.
I don’t necessarily believe that the powers that be will stop at new car sales either, but even if I grant your point, there are still problems.
I buy new cars, and while I don’t live in CA, its politics and policies set the tone for much of the nation, not to mention the automakers product offerings.
If my car is wrecked on January 2, 2035, I don’t have recourse to buy a new one as a replacement. That is a problem, and one that I don’t think is compatible with the idea of having a good car culture.
“I don’t necessarily believe that the powers that be will stop at new car sales either, but even if I grant your point, there are still problems.”
Again, that’s speculation. I’ll never deny that CA sure makes it hard to keep an older car on the road, but I have seen zero actual evidence that there is any talk of tightening restrictions on existing cars. I have a stack of smog check records going back to 2003 on the same car proving the state hasn’t changed standards in the last 22 years. I can’t speak for what happened prior to that.
This has come up several times in the Californians For Classic Car Smog Check Exemptions Facebook group that I moderate and we’ve had to make it very clear that any talk of instituting or revoking the 2035 EV mandate has zero effect on smog checks for current vehicles and they should be treated as completely separate topics because they are.
For the record I completely oppose the 2035 EV mandate, and yes, in 10-20 years from now the landscape could be different because of it. But for now when it comes to the topic of older existing vehicles being allowed to stay on the road, I choose to believe actual hard evidence instead of Chicken Littles speculating the sky is falling.
I granted you that point. I don’t agree with you, but even if you’re 100% right, the mandates would still be wrong, because not everyone wants to buy a new EV (or whatever small percentage of PHEV are allowed).
Let’s just agree that the *current* car culture isn’t being impacted because there is no discussion about taking away anyone’s Malaise Era cars. I definitely have a dog in this fight so I’ve been paying very close attention. 10 years from now may be a different story but nobody knows. Good chance we’ll all be driving Ladas by then anyway.
Have you ever driven a Lada? I have. It was surprisingly fun.
I have not, but I have driven a Yugo and felt similarly.
The Lada was my grandmothers 2101, the Russian version of the Fiat 128. My most memorable experience was when I was driving it back from a long day of auctioneering with my grandmother, her sister my great aunt, my mother and my siblings. The trunk was full of auction junk.
I was on a straight road when I came up too quickly behind a car that had stopped to make a left turn. I don’t recall exactly why that happened but I think it was a combination of fatigue, youthful inexperience and circumstance. I was used to a Fiat X-1/9 back home so I reacted as if I were in that car, slamming on the brakes and swerving. The brakes screeched but the Lada swerved around the stopped car admirably and I never lost control, despite all the weight. The car came to a stop and I looked over at my grandmother, a stern old school Swedish Lutheran expecting to be yelled at. Instead my grandmother, face ashen and shaking like a leaf praised me for my exceptional skill!
I give a lot of.credit to the Lada. Despite being a Russian/Italian economy car riding on 1980s economy tires and carrying a load better suited for a modern American pickup it still performed admirably in a bad situation.
“I have a stack of smog check records going back to 2003 on the same car proving the state hasn’t changed standards in the last 22 years”
Go double check those records. My stack of dyno test smog checks shows the tailpipe limits were lowered in 2010 and again in 2012. The limits NEVER got higher. How is my car supposed to get cleaner when it’s 20 years old vs new…
The day they retire the dyno tests cannot come soon enough
Here you go. https://imgur.com/a/2Rp5sTo
I haven’t compiled the subsequent smog checks in 18, 21, 23, and 25. 2010 is an outlier because the car was incorrectly smogged as an automatic trans (which it originally was, but has been converted to manual). This happened again last weekend.
https://imgur.com/a/2Rp5sTo
I’d genuinely love to see your paperwork to verify what you’re saying. I’m active in Facebook groups about this topic and several people have challenged my claim, but thus far nobody has been able to prove me wrong with the exception of a friend who was able to prove that the standards did get tighter for his ’69 Mustang sometime in the 1990s, but it’s kind of a moot point since his car has now long been smog exempt.
Send me an upload link and I’ll share. Since each model year has different standards it probably varies by model year
I just used imgur. Nothing on mine is info I’m worried about sharing.
By the way, to make sure it’s an apples to apples comparison, compare the car’s VLT Record # on the upper right of the smog check report and make sure it’s the same every time. That’s how I caught that the shop smogged the car as an automatic trans a couple of times over the years. But now I know the passing limits for both manual and auto trans versions of my engine and I passed by a mile either way.
Any update here? Genuinely curious to see what you have.
I’ve owned a few Civics over the years and I had one smog check in the wrong folder. So one of the 2 times I saw a lower limit was because I was comparing two different cars.
However, There was a drop on the limits on my 92 Civic between 2008 and 2012. The VLT number changed, but the VIN, engine, trans, are the same. Interestingly, the first test was when I bought it, and the the record shows California emissions. All Subsequent tests (2012-2024) were Federal emissions (this was a Federal car originally sold in Texas – so federal is correct). The interesting thing is in 2008 CA limits were 138/112,.84/.73,859/798 HC,CO,NO. In 2012 Federal limits were 96/79,.59/.51,859/798. So everything is lower or the same with the later, Federal limits.
To make things even interesting, a couple of years ago I bought a second 1992 Civic (I now own 2). This one is a CA emissions car – and it has identical limits to the Federal limits from 2012-2024. Which is to say that, while the lone test with the higher limit was with CA emissions, I think that is a red herring, since the limits for Federal and CA cars is currently exactly the same. The limits did, in fact decrease between 2008 and 2010.
I checked another car – 1999 Miata. Limits went from 100/130 HC and 1.00/1.00 CO in 2003 to 66/49,.57/.55,487/774 in 2006. Vehicle description is the same, but 1st test was an idle test at two RPMs and second was a dyno test. – so not really the same thing. Also, My Miata has 3 different VLT numbers – each time the owner changed it got a new VLT number.
I also had 1999 Prelude and it’s limits were different (lower) than the Miata (both CA emissions, both tested in 2005). And a 1999 328i BMW (CA emissions), with a 3rd set of limits for MY 1999.
I’ve probably got a bunch more of these records in a drawer, but the ones above are what I have scanned on my computer.
Thank you for taking the time to actually respond. I appreciate it, and I’m happy to discuss this further offline, not to be a dick but genuinely for the sake of knowledge. If I’m wrong and the narrative I’ve been sharing is incorrect, I’ll admit it.
Two things: First, I don’t have access to the VLD ID list. I wish I did, and it would answer a lot of questions. Perhaps I’ll ask my buddy who is a smog tech if he does. Second, I tried to approach this scientifically by minimizing the number of variables, so to be a fair comparison of whether smog check limits have truly changed over time I think it has to be a comparison of the same VLT ID across time. Admittedly I don’t know if IDs change on the same vehicle or not (the Miata seems to be that way), so that is an unknown factor, but on my car where I’ve tracked smogs, the manual trans had the same VLT ID from 2003 – 2023, and the auto trans had the same VLT ID three separate times from 2010 to 2025. I’d say that’s solid enough.
With that out of the way, my responses to your cars:
*First Civic: you identified the reason for the change in limits – CA vs Fed. So not an apples to apples comparison. I had the same thing on my car when being smogged as auto vs manual trans.
*Second Civic: I follow your logic and see what you’re saying but again you’re comparing two different vehicles so it’s not apple to apples unless both vehicles had identical VLT IDs.
*Miata: once again not apples to apples as you acknowledged due to two different types of tests. Dunno about the different VLT IDs.
*On the Prelude and Miata and BMW I’m not sure what your point is. Are you comparing different cars against each other? If so, totally not apples to apples. Every car/powertrain combo has different limits.
Lots of used EV’s will be about, I’m on my 6th new one from leasing all the time.
The 2035 rule doesn’t worry me, because by 2035 I’d be very surprised if ICE cars were even vaguely competitive across most segments.
Fortunately God has a plan for California. JK
California car culture might rock, but the state sure makes it difficult to own anything old (within the CARB limits), expensive (many folks opt to put MT plates on there due to the taxes and registration costs), or fun (many 25-year imports still cannot be registered in CA).
AZ has a pretty great car culture in comparison. There are some pretty epic collections, car shows, and local drives to go on. Anything over 25 years old with collector car insurance is exempt from emissions. Oh, and no rust! Yeah, the heat is oppressive part of the year, but the cost of living makes up for that.
This bill failed because the Democrats refuse to endorse anything from across the aisle. Pretty lame. I guess CA gets what they voted for after all.
TBH California puts deranged sky high fees on taxes and makes everything difficult for everything in every day life. It’s not like they are singling out old cars. Hell even the new cars are over taxed and set upon with fees and regulations. California is singularly responsible for requiring shit on new cars in every state to solve problems the state created and actively makes worse.