Originally Posted by
WhiteFwdsm
Harsh? No more like straight forward. Doesn't take a genius to read a news article and be able to interpret it. Even if I had a DSM still I wouldn't be worried. That's one of the first things I do is rip out the emissions out of them and what not. Not to mention the many I ran without a cat. To put it in a broad perspective... this is implying to 2009+ vehicles. We are in 2007... 2009 vehicles start being sold in 2008. The vehicles are suppose to be based on California's emissions standards. So at this point it doesn't concern any DSM owner. Let's say they want to implement it for older vehicles... you know how much trouble it would be just to get all vehicle's under California's emissions standards? Yet alone even if that's not the case but they want to do standard emissions testing how long it would take just to set a base and implement it. Were talking years here, not at the end of the year.
When I first read part of the article I jumped into the same conclusion as everyone else just because of the title of this thread. Which I find misleading if you actually take the time to re-read the article thoroughly like I did.
I think people just need to understand how long it takes just to implement emissions within a state. An article releases and look how many rumors and what not arised without taking the time to analyze it. That's where I'm coming from.
Great points.
I used an example of the first generation Toyota Solara (1MZFE version to be exact). There are differences in the precats between CA-spec and non CA-spec cars. Granted precats are like leg warmers, but still how do you apply CA standards to something that never was in the first place.
The point I see is do we even need to bring up emissions testing again, we had it once and we proved we have clean air. I think they may have gotten less than 1% that didn't pass under the old system, but you can imagine if they stick it to industrial smokestack pollution...which was the problem all along.