Attention PA Drivers

[Camino LS6]

OK, time to break this down so that a clearer understanding might be had.

If current California standards were adopted here, my objections would be relatively minor. We would only lose a few models or variants of certain models of car as some cars/variants don't meet current standards there. Still wouldn't make me happy, but I'd be less incensed.

However, if the proposed California standards go into effect, our car-buying choices will simply evaporate and having hitched ourselves to this standard we will be stuck with that. If this happens, I'm moving.

A reasonable 50 state standard should be put in place by the Feds and California's ability to set their own standards should end. The issue should either be each state to its own or one ,single federal standard - not some hodge-podge of both.

Note: California's proposed standards would leave us with more expensive, less powerful cars in which I would have no interest and would not buy.

[Hudson]

However, if the proposed California standards go into effect, our car-buying choices will simply evaporate and having hitched ourselves to this standard we will be stuck with that. If this happens, I'm moving.

A reasonable 50 state standard should be put in place by the Feds and California's ability to set their own standards should end. The issue should either be each state to its own or one ,single federal standard - not some hodge-podge of both.

Note: California's proposed standards would leave us with more expensive, less powerful cars in which I would have no interest and would not buy.

Please don't think I'm picking on you (just because I'm chasing you in two different threads currently).

I see your viewpoint on this. But I think you're looking at it wrong. When engineerings were forced to meet emissions and fuel economy regulations of the 1970s, they came up with the crap of the early 1980s. At that time, there were THREE primary automakers in the US. Today, there are atleast six and nobody's far enough ahead to let the ball drop.

Between California, New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, a sizable portion of the US are covered under the same emissions. A huge population that GM, Ford, DCX, and dozens of other car companies cannot afford to overlook them. It's publicity...it's economies of scale...it's making cars. People in Iowa buy performance cars, but many more people in California, New York, and Pennsylvania do.

I'm sure you'll see more and more 50-state cars. I'm sure you'll continue to see more and more powerful cars that you'll want to buy. I'm sure you're overthinking this quite a bit.

[Black and Blue Landscaper]

but for me i look at it through the eyes of someone who most likely will not be buying a new car for some time. if these laws were passed i would have to spend thousands of dollars to have my vehicle pass emissions. yes although it is a one time thing, my pay would not cover that plus all my bills. you must realize i live hand to mouth thats it. so if something like this would happen i would get f'd plus all of the tickets i might get from not having passed emissions

[Camino LS6]

Please don't think I'm picking on you (just because I'm chasing you in two different threads currently).

I see your viewpoint on this. But I think you're looking at it wrong. When engineerings were forced to meet emissions and fuel economy regulations of the 1970s, they came up with the crap of the early 1980s. At that time, there were THREE primary automakers in the US. Today, there are atleast six and nobody's far enough ahead to let the ball drop.

Between California, New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, a sizable portion of the US are covered under the same emissions. A huge population that GM, Ford, DCX, and dozens of other car companies cannot afford to overlook them. It's publicity...it's economies of scale...it's making cars. People in Iowa buy performance cars, but many more people in California, New York, and Pennsylvania do.

I'm sure you'll see more and more 50-state cars. I'm sure you'll continue to see more and more powerful cars that you'll want to buy. I'm sure you're overthinking this quite a bit.

197703[/snapback]

Not at all, we are in agreement at a basic level. I do,however, take issue with the future being dictated by looney California whims and will never accept their standards as my own. The automakers know full well that they need to continue their successful,decades-long, drive to reduce/eliminate harmful emissions and no further prodding by the state of California is required. It's time for politicians to turn their attention to the long-neglected industrial sources of air pollution -nationwide. They need to grow a pair and get the job done. The auto industry isn't the main offender in all of this and it is time to stop making it the scapegoat.

[Hudson]

but for me i look at it through the eyes of someone who most likely will not be buying a new car for some time.  if these laws were passed i would have to spend thousands of dollars to have my vehicle pass emissions.  yes although it is a one time thing, my pay would not cover that plus all my bills.  you must realize i live hand to mouth thats it.  so if something like this would happen i would get f'd plus all of the tickets i might get from not having passed emissions

Again, you've missed my earlier posts. The change is for higher emissions levels for NEW cars. Where would these thousands of dollars come into play if the laws concerning your car aren't changed?

On top of that, there's possibility of ELIMINATING emissions testing altogether. Which would save you, at minimum, the cost of your annual emissions inspection.