gbvette62

That varies from state to state, and I don't know anything about our friends to the north.

In Jersey, a car must be 25 years old. You pay a one time fee of $25.00 (unless it's gone up) and you receive "Historic" tags for your car. There is NO inspection of the car ever, and no annual renewal fees. The tags are supposed to be for limited use, I beleive the state wording used is "for exibition and educational use only". If the police feel you are using it for some other purpose, they can ticket you, but it is pretty rare. In NJ now, you can actually get permission to use period correct tags in place of Historics. This isn't a big deal for most Corvettes since the state stopped issuing dated, annual tags around 1953 or 54, but pretty cool if you have a Model T or Model A Ford.

As far as emission regulations, the first piece of equipment was the PCV valve, which saw limited use in 62, and was implemented nation wide in 63. In 65, CARB (the Calif. Air Resorces Board) first started requiring emission equipment in CA. The Federal regs went into effect in 68. CA regs were always a little stricter than the Federal regs, though the Fed has always followed CA by adopting their regs within a year or 2 of CA issuing them. In 71 GM (Ford & Chrysler waited till 72) reduced the compression ratio of all engines, in preparation for the introduction of unleaded fuel in 1974. Unleaded fuel was going to be needed to prevent damaging catalytic convertors, which were put into use in 1975. The cats did allow the car makers to eliminate some of the external emission equipment found on engines, such as A.I.R. pumps, but by 1980, ever increasing regulations required most of this equipment to be added again. The regs just keep getting stricter, as the greenies keep trying to get us to give up our cars.

I'm not sure about Canada's actual regulations, but generally buy the 70's, their cars were usually equiped the same as the US's. This may not have always been by Canadian law, but sometimes I think was a result of it being easier and cheaper to equipe Canadian cars the same as US ones. This is why GM started installing day time running lights on all their cars. Canadian law required DRL's and GM felt it was just cheaper to install them on all their car lines.

Motorheads 1980 would have originally had an A.I.R. system (consisting of pump, hoses, valves, manifold pipe assemblies, etc....), a PCV valve and hoses, EFE (early fuel evaporation) system as part of the exhaust heat risor and a thermal switch in the intake, an EGR system, a THERMAC control in the air cleaner for a constant air temp, an idle speed solenoid on the carb if he has AC and an automatic and some 80's also used a trans controlled spark (TCS) system with a thermal switch in the water outlet. Oh, and a catalytic converter.

I find it hard to believe that a cop, standing on the side of the road, would be familiar with Corvettes enough that he could look under the hood of an 80 and know what from that list was there and what was missing!

MotorHead

Like I said they cop knows nothing, he was telling another cop how you check to see if the mufflers have been changed and he pointed to tips and showed her the aftermarket stamp on them.

I told them those were just the tips, he had no idea what mufflers I was running painted black in the dark. What really made me mad was the dummy female cop that told me it was against the law to put mufflers on to make the car louder. I told her those mufflers on there were to make it quieter the motor was near 700HP. She didn't say anything back.

He called the ministry of environment and they sent 2 cars out to check. The guy knew his stuff and what was missing. Or at least most of it. The fine covers everything, whether you are missing 1,2 or every pollution device it doesn't matter.

As for historic plates I can them up here this year, but everything would have to be stock, they check it before you get the plates.

MotorHead

I am thinking about getting an older car maybe not even a Vette maybe an older Chevy II or something and putting in a 1200 HP big block with a blower, quiet mufflers with electric cutouts. Everything legal and then just laugh at them

Avette4me

Here's my no smog vehicle motorhead. Really old stuff can be as fun as the vette...



350 bored .030 over (out of my ’80 corvette), flat top pistons, 64 cc double hump heads (194 intake, 160 ex), full roller rockers, comp 286 magnum cam, holley 650, Edlebrock RPM Air Gap intake and it's all legal everywhere (well, most everywhere)

Brooklinite

You sure? I have historics, nobody checked my car.

Sorry to hear about your run-in.

Brooklinite

What's a stock-appearing-non-functional AIR setup for a SBC worth?

enkeivette

Motorhead, buy a 67 frame and title then drop your body and motor on it.

VetteHalen

Nice.
When I bought my 80' a few months ago I was surprised when the DMV told me I needed to smog it, even though the tags were current. I got it smog'd and it passed (on the 2nd try) after I had a Vette shop do work on it. Guess I should be do for a smog in two years, no?

FB007

Isn't interpetation wonderfull? Breaking federal law is okay, but a restamped block is fraud.

FB007

Try that sometime, and tell us how that went for you.

toddalin

How do you figure breaking federal law is OK?? Someone is just trying to "get away with it" just as they do on restamps.

cardo0

I have a "stock '80 vette" spreadbore aluminum intake (stock cross hatch markings) that needs restoration. It is covered with paint but it has the EGR mount and holes.
I also have a good core 800cfm late '70's Qjet with the hot air choke that can be converted to electric - this too needs rebuild.
And for $200 i would like to see them go to good cause.

If the smog mounties will allow dual cats on the exh u may give this a thought.

Good luck Motorguy,
cardo0

Rich's'78

Technically we can't remove / alter any pollution control device. But a stock-appearing original block with headers and dual exhaust going to dual high flow converters will get saftied here.
Note I said stock-appearing. If you smash up your car and the claim is $20k, the insurance company will pay it. But if you have an accident where someone has large medical bills and claims for lost income, pleasure of life, etc. they will take a closer look at your car. You have a contract with your insurer and if you read the details, as far as they are concerned it is a stock 'whatever'. If they can show it is not stock, then by default you have misslead them and your coverage is void. They 'win' because you 'lied' about what they were covering.
My neighbour's kid boughht a Honda with an Acura engine in it. He told the truth and hasn't been able to get insurance in 3 years so it sits in his driveway since he doesn't have the money to put a Honda engine in it. Good news is he doesn't drive it so he doesn't have to worry about crippling someone and end up eating dog food for the rest of his life.

MotorHead

The smog guy said I could run dual cats. It's all the other stuff that is going to be impossible to hook up to a more or less racing motor. I will hook some stuff up and maybe keep list of the bills to show them I am trying to get up to par if i get pulled over again.

The thing is, they do this blitz ever year in the early spring for a week or so. I am well aware of it and don't even drive my Vette at night during this tme. After the summer hits they go about there normal activities.

This year the spring was so lousy and cold they didn't do the blitz ( mostly trying to get the ricers with the fart cans off the road ) until the beginning of summer and caught me off guard. It was around midnight and I am usually never on the road at that time with the Vette

gdh

nope, I have these plates and no one checked my little sb unless this is new in the last few years.

FB007

That was my point.

vettebuyer6369

Seeing how you posted this comment using my photo, how am I breaking federal law?

My 1969 has no federal smog requirements whatsoever.

I added the complete smog system as a cosmetic component to a restoration thats aimed at stock appearance. Its disabled because I dont want the noisy pulley and leaky manifold air tubes.

Enlighten me on how I'm breaking federal law.

vettebuyer6369

A nice correct one, over a grand depending on the application.

zwede

Not getting into the other aspects of the argument, but just as an FYI, all 1968 and later passenger cars are part of the federal clean air act. At the minimum you need to have a PCV system. Depending on model you may be required to have a few other items. In '69 that would not have been much.

FB007

Correct:
standards and deadlines
The government has found it difficult to deal with this issue, and it has encountered confusion in trying to control mobile emissions on the state level. If each state were allowed to set its won standards, then automobile industries would need to meet fifty different sets of standards. Also, automobiles, trains, and airplanes travel freely from state to state; therefore, there would not be any efficient way to enforce these different standards. Washington, therefore, has decided to deal with this issue at a federal level. The following is a series of events outlining the standards and deadlines for mobile emissions.

1959
California sets the first tailpipe emission standards.

1964
Senate Public Works Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, during hearings, realized the inadequacy of the amount of attention they have focused on automobile emissions.

1965
Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act (amendments of the Clean Air Act) set the first federal emission standards beginning with the 1968 models (which were the same standards California had set for their 1966 models. These standards were reductions from the 1963 emissions: 72% reduction for hydrocarbons (HC), 56% reduction for carbon monoxide (CO), and 100% reduction for crankcase hydrocarbons.

1968, 1969
Tests showed that more than half of the cars for these model years failed to meet the emission standards.

1969-1971
State legislatures, such as California, New Jersey, and Illinois, pass laws enforcing the cleanup of aircraft engine emissions.

1970
The new Clean Air Act amendments limited HC and CO emissions 90% from what they emitted in 1970 to be effective by the 1975 models. They also limited nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions 90% from what they emitted in 1971 to go into effect by the 1976 model year. In order to enforce these standards, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was required to perform compliance tests, enforce performance warranties from manufacturers, and impose a $10,000 per vehicle fine for those that violated the standards.
The Department of Transportation and the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare met with major airlines and agreed on installing smoke reduction devices on aircraft engines to control pollution which was to be "substantially completed" by the close of 1972.

1973
EPA granted a one year extension for HC (now 1976), CO (now 1976), and NOx (now 1977) standards to be met.

1974
EPA granted another one year extension for HC (now 1977), CO (now 1977), and NOx (now 1978) standards to allow motor vehicle manufacturers more time to improve fuel economy.

1975
EPA granted another one year extension for HC and CO emissions which set the deadline at 1978 for both compounds.

1977
The Clean Air Act was amended granting another extension on the deadline for HC (now 1980), CO (now 1980) emissions to meet their standards. The NOx standard was increased from .4 grams per mile (g/mi.) to 1.0 g/mi., and the deadline was extended to 1981 or later.
EPA also set standards for lead, allowing refiners to add, at the most, .8 grams of lead per gallon of gasoline (g/gal). Small refiners, as the exception, could add up to 2.65 g/gal until October 1, 1982, when they needed to comply with the .8 g/gal standard.

1980
EPA lowered the lead standard to .5 g/gal.
EPA set standards to limit diesel particulate emissions for the 1982-1984 model years.
EPA also required a 90% reduction in CO emissions for heavy-duty trucks to be effective for the 1984 model year.

1981
National Commission on Air Quality decided that deadlines for emission standards needed to be extended and that these standards needed to be lowered. The deadlines have since been extended well into the 1990s.
EPA proposed diesel particles standards for heavy-duty trucks hoping they would be finalized in 1982 (these standards were never resolved).

1982
EPA allowed the October 1, 1982 deadline for small refiners to be extended indefinitely.
EPA also delayed the deadlines for diesel particulates until the 1987 model year.
EPA granted a one year extension on CO reduction for heavy-duty trucks.

1990
The Clean Air Act was again amended, and these amendments sought to limit tailpipe emissions and develop clean fueled vehicles. EPA called for a 40% HC reduction and a 60% NOx reduction by the turn of the century. These new controls were required to remain effective for 10 years or 100,000 miles.

1994
EPA was required to set emission standards for benzene and formaldehyde.

1995
EPA was required to introduce standards for new locomotives and their engines.
A 50% particulate matter reduction was mandatory for urban transit buses.

In order to achieve these standards, automobile manufacturers as well as individual scientists introduced a number of possible solutions. The first attempt to clean tailpipe emissions was an afterburner which would complete the burning of CO and HC, but tests proved that it ultimately led to more NOx emissions. Other changes which suggested to improve existing engines included exhaust gas recirculation and air pumps; however, scientists believed that a new engine needed to be created. The device which has made the most improvement so far has been the catalytic converter. This device transforms harmful pollutants into benign compounds, and it requires unleaded gasoline which will decrease the atmospheric lead concentration. Electric automobiles were introduced as a solution; however, the batteries need frequent recharging of power which would come from the power companies, in turn, creating more stationary source emissions. Experts now believe that the best way to reduce harmful emissions is to use clean fuels, such as natural gas, or oxygenated fuels based on methanol and ethanol. The easiest way, however, to keep this problem under control now is to require periodic emission inspections and simply to promote carpools to reduce the amount of pollutants.

Cars were not the only concern of environmentalists; engine exhaust from airplanes was also a substantial mobile source for pollution. Airplane engines emitted hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxides just as automobiles did. Also, aircraft emissions of particulate matter were incredible--in Los Angeles, these daily emission levels were equal to that of one million cars. Finally, in the Air Quality Act of 1967, Congress ordered the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to conduct research on aircraft emissions and control began in the early 1970s. (what has happened since then?)


What does this mean?
1)Federal emmsions requirements started in 1968
2)Calif. was earlier
3)Even though states may not enforce it, it is still illegal to remove or alter equipment installed on or before 1968 model year.

So, my statement still stands. I find it amusing that someone who calls a restamp fraud condones "faking" compliance with federal law.