. Will get chet, brian, brad and few other so cal'rs and meet up at my pad at the river. Will get the mentor Springerpop and Heck, Y2 you invited too..beers on Sousweiser
Cali smog question
Lead Driver
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,793
Likes: 50
Unfortunately, i dont even think it was an incompetent situation. Maybe a lackbof understanding however,..kid does wrong and you say, "don't do that again"..he/she gunna test the water. You blister their behind, theyll think twice...i was raised by the golden belt..it worked
lol
lol
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 27,350
Likes: 5,945
From: Lake Hartwell, GA
Ignorance is no excuse for disobeying laws, unless you are a law maker... Then everything is OK and just do as you please...
I have zero, absolutely zero desire to visit anywhere in CA except for the northern part of the state. I will keep my truck, guns and many other things just the way I like them thank you very much.
For the FTE'rs I have grown to know and made friends with, I would gladly buy you are beer in the north of CA or just on the other side of the border of any of the surrounding states.
Cheers...
I have zero, absolutely zero desire to visit anywhere in CA except for the northern part of the state. I will keep my truck, guns and many other things just the way I like them thank you very much.
For the FTE'rs I have grown to know and made friends with, I would gladly buy you are beer in the north of CA or just on the other side of the border of any of the surrounding states.
Cheers...
Lead Driver
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,092
Likes: 145
From: San Diego, CA
Except for the injectors I have talked with my shop about any modification for the engine. They told me that the Turbomaster was okay by their standards but obviously that has changed. The inspection specifically says air and vacuum lines cannot be altered so, yes, I was in violation. The problem with the spirit of the law is that the definition changes. I accept that and fixed it. Not cheap but could have been worse.
What bothered me is that he was revving it like a Corvette. The inspection specifically says 2-3K RPM. He was easily hitting 3K+ on every stab until it stalled. He could have easily let up before redline. I wasn't looking for special treatment or leniency, but I was expecting that he would respect my vehicle.
He knew that Banks had CARB O.E. certs for their stuff but couldn't access the database on his computer. If I didn't have a hard copy to give him I wouldn't have passed.
Am I upset about the fail? No. Frustrated yes, but not upset. Am I upset about them getting on it so hard that the truck stops running? You bet.
Hotshot
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 10,590
Likes: 382
From: Texas
Brian 42... Several times you mentioned that a previous smog check about 2 1/2 years ago was easier to pass than the most recent smog inspection you just endured (and initially failed). You may have attributed the change to the shop you were using... new tech, or same tech with a different attitude, something to that effect.
However, it may be helpful to understand that California changed the smog inspection rules effective March 9, 2015.
There can sometimes be an educational latency between bureaucratic rule changes and the actual implementation of said changes by the shops conducting the inspections. Just ask Mohammad Farajii, who passed a 1999 F-250 7.3L diesel using the BAR-97 Emission Inspection System, which was perfectly acceptable to do when diesel engines 1998 and newer that are under 14K GVWR first became required to be tested biennially back in 2010. But the rules changed in 2015, enforcing the inspection procedures published in 2013, that require that inspectors utilize the BAR-OIS (Onboard Diagnostics Inspection System) to test 1998 and newer model year diesels. This in and of itself can be confusing to techs, since the first line in the regulation requiring the BAR-OIS method states that it is applicable to 2000 and newer gasoline powered vehicles, and the vehicle that Mohammad was cited for was a 1999 diesel that actually doesn't have the full implementation of the OBDII diagnostics system anyway.
Yet, regulation clearly states that 1998 and newer diesels are now subject to BAR-OIS, and what is more interesting about Mohammad's citation, issued in 2015, is that two years later, a judge upheld the prosecution's assertion that ignorance or misunderstanding, or even the lack of effective communication by the CARB about the regulations, or the absence of "perfect" procedural authority by the CARB as an agencey to alter regulations beyond what was originally established in the legislative intent.... is no excuse for non-compliance with the changes. That was a precedent setting court decision made in 2017. This effectively should make every smog tech vary wary of disciplinary actions against their license.
Indeed, some 30 enforcement actions per month are levied against smog tech license holders up and down California, and the bulk of the disciplinary actions happen to be in the So Cal area for whatever reason. With this in mind, should the blame really be placed on the smog shop? Consider the threats hanging over their heads with every customer who pulls a vehicle into their shop. They are just one mistake away from being charged with a violation of the Health and Safety Code, that is uneraseable from their record. I wouldn't want my name to be Mohammad Farajii, or the 30 new names per month that are added to the public records for being responsible for causing environmental damage... just because some customer drifts in with a modded rig and they miss inspect it.
Sometimes, it helps to look at situations from the other person's point of view.
However, it may be helpful to understand that California changed the smog inspection rules effective March 9, 2015.
There can sometimes be an educational latency between bureaucratic rule changes and the actual implementation of said changes by the shops conducting the inspections. Just ask Mohammad Farajii, who passed a 1999 F-250 7.3L diesel using the BAR-97 Emission Inspection System, which was perfectly acceptable to do when diesel engines 1998 and newer that are under 14K GVWR first became required to be tested biennially back in 2010. But the rules changed in 2015, enforcing the inspection procedures published in 2013, that require that inspectors utilize the BAR-OIS (Onboard Diagnostics Inspection System) to test 1998 and newer model year diesels. This in and of itself can be confusing to techs, since the first line in the regulation requiring the BAR-OIS method states that it is applicable to 2000 and newer gasoline powered vehicles, and the vehicle that Mohammad was cited for was a 1999 diesel that actually doesn't have the full implementation of the OBDII diagnostics system anyway.
Yet, regulation clearly states that 1998 and newer diesels are now subject to BAR-OIS, and what is more interesting about Mohammad's citation, issued in 2015, is that two years later, a judge upheld the prosecution's assertion that ignorance or misunderstanding, or even the lack of effective communication by the CARB about the regulations, or the absence of "perfect" procedural authority by the CARB as an agencey to alter regulations beyond what was originally established in the legislative intent.... is no excuse for non-compliance with the changes. That was a precedent setting court decision made in 2017. This effectively should make every smog tech vary wary of disciplinary actions against their license.
Indeed, some 30 enforcement actions per month are levied against smog tech license holders up and down California, and the bulk of the disciplinary actions happen to be in the So Cal area for whatever reason. With this in mind, should the blame really be placed on the smog shop? Consider the threats hanging over their heads with every customer who pulls a vehicle into their shop. They are just one mistake away from being charged with a violation of the Health and Safety Code, that is uneraseable from their record. I wouldn't want my name to be Mohammad Farajii, or the 30 new names per month that are added to the public records for being responsible for causing environmental damage... just because some customer drifts in with a modded rig and they miss inspect it.
Sometimes, it helps to look at situations from the other person's point of view.
Super Moderator
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 29,380
Likes: 118
From: Central Coast of CA
You gotta be kidding me right now. There's no other point of view other than some "miseducated" moron over-revving his truck at Brian's expense. There is no "seeing through another's eyes" here. There is common sense though, which is sorely lacking on this entire subject.
Y2 didn't comment on the yahoo stomping the pedal and over revving the engine to the point of stalling, I didn't see him making a direct reference to him at all. The way I read it, Y2 took the opportunity presented by Brian stating that "it seemed like it was easier to pass in earlier years, rather than recently", to explain why Brian's probably experiencing that fact, by giving us easily verifiable information where he shows the manner in which the test that is administered has gotten more difficult.
That's how I read it.
Even if I'm wrong, I know there's no way Y2 was condoning the over rev.
Stewart
Laughing Gas
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 868
Likes: 1
From: SoCal
I’m in, just say when and I can host a few bodies at my place in Topock! Sous can pick up Akcooper on the way.
Super Moderator
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 13,290
Likes: 6,063
Stewart nailed it.
And Brian 42 got it.
I made no mention of the tech revving Brian's engine, because I was saving comment on that for an entirely different post, as that is a separate subtopic entirely, worthy of a look at how a snap test ought to be done.
My post above was only to address the idea of having 16 more months to find a new smog shop. Is that a good idea?
Is the problem at the original shop due to a new tech? Or due to new procedures?
Is the smog tech acting out of a self important sense of fifedom? Or out of a self preservational sense of fear?
Is it a good idea to be a new customer at a new smog shop and be perceived as an undercover enforcement officer of the CARB? Or remain a regular customer at the same smog shop, because the grass might not be any greener elsewhere, given the rabidness of enforcement applied to all shops, as evidenced by the state's monthly report of disciplinary actions taken against smog tech licensees statewide?
These questions don't just apply to Brian42's decision about his next smog appointment. They apply to all of us who are subject to the same requirements, and have to make the same decision.
Be a regular? Or be that potentially unknown harbinger of a headache?
That was intent of my post... nothing to do with over revving, and everything to do with common sense and pragmatic thinking. We clearly cannot control the government, nor how we are governed. But at least we can govern ourselves in the choices we make, and the idea of sharing information on a forum like this has the potential to help us leverage our experiences in common into a better sense of how to navigate the choices.
And Brian 42 got it.
I made no mention of the tech revving Brian's engine, because I was saving comment on that for an entirely different post, as that is a separate subtopic entirely, worthy of a look at how a snap test ought to be done.
My post above was only to address the idea of having 16 more months to find a new smog shop. Is that a good idea?
Is the problem at the original shop due to a new tech? Or due to new procedures?
Is the smog tech acting out of a self important sense of fifedom? Or out of a self preservational sense of fear?
Is it a good idea to be a new customer at a new smog shop and be perceived as an undercover enforcement officer of the CARB? Or remain a regular customer at the same smog shop, because the grass might not be any greener elsewhere, given the rabidness of enforcement applied to all shops, as evidenced by the state's monthly report of disciplinary actions taken against smog tech licensees statewide?
These questions don't just apply to Brian42's decision about his next smog appointment. They apply to all of us who are subject to the same requirements, and have to make the same decision.
Be a regular? Or be that potentially unknown harbinger of a headache?
That was intent of my post... nothing to do with over revving, and everything to do with common sense and pragmatic thinking. We clearly cannot control the government, nor how we are governed. But at least we can govern ourselves in the choices we make, and the idea of sharing information on a forum like this has the potential to help us leverage our experiences in common into a better sense of how to navigate the choices.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
Super Moderator
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 13,290
Likes: 6,063
From the very inception of the diesel smog testing program, the Visible Smoke test at elevated RPM was always to be, and still remains, a SNAP elevated rpm test, patterned after the PSIP (Periodic Smoke Inspection Program for heavier duty diesels that had already been in place for a decade prior), not a sustained elevated rpm test. Since I think Brian42 hails from the San Diego area, I picked a power point presentation coauthored by the BAR and the CARB on January 9, 2009, that was presented in San Diego on January 20, 2009. Here are the two relevant slides from that presentation of the proposed diesel smog check program:
Moving beyond what was initially proposed into what was eventually implemented, we have the same language "push the accelerator pedal quickly... then immediately release the accelerator pedal" carried forward unchanged in the third and final revision of the first Smog Inspection Procedure Manual that covered diesel vehicles, as published by the CARB and BAR in August 2009:
Even in 2013, when the BAR and the CARB revised the Smog Inspection Procedures Manual, we find that the language describing the BAR Snap Test remains the same, unaltered from the originally proposed procedures:
Therefore, the Visible Smoke Inspection Snap Test, as originally proposed, as presented in San Diego, as written in the initial Smog Inspection Procedure Manual, and as revised in the most recent Smog Inspection Procedure Manual that is in current effect, all remain consistent and unchanged. As such, there does not appear to be any reason or excuse for a smog tech in San Diego, or any where else in the state, to deviate from the snap test procedure as outlined.
In fact, the state specifically prohibits smog tech inspectors from sustaining an elevation of the rpm, or increasing the engine load, during the 3 minute idle period, and during the tailpipe emission inspection period. The state interprets sustained high idle during testing as an unlawful means to artificially "super heat" the catalyst (if equipped), and as such prohibits such actions.
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,753
Likes: 34
From: Los Angeles, Ca.
Never knew a snap test is required for gas motors. I've spent lots of time in smog shops and never seen one performed even by the most stringent inspectors. My usual guy is pretty laxed with visuals, especially stuff I bring in. HIs helper on the other hand appears to be trying his best to fail everything that comes in. He failed one of mine for a possible hose leak because it had surface cracks. Despite pulling it off three times and not being able to prove it did have any cracks through the hose, he suspected that it could be leaking and failed it. I watched him fail another car because he couldn't see the timing marks, a car with non-adjustable timing. Now when I go if Mr. picky is there I keep driving.
My smog guy said they are basically graded on a points system. They loose points for doing inspections too fast, passing too many cars, passing cars with unset monitors, ect. Stuff that's perfectly legal, but they loose points anyway. If their points go too low they can loose Star certification and possibly become targeted for under cover cars that try to catch them missing stuff during the inspection. Once in a while he'll fail one of my cars on some visual thing just to bump his points, then have me come back later and pass it "after being repaired", he always asks if it's ok with me first.
A handy trick I learned from him for cars with high NOX, pour a cup of water into the oil. Many Hondas are notorious for high NOX even when everything seems to be fine. The water vapors being sucked through the PCV cool the combustion chamber enough to lower NOX emissions. Some 5.0 Mustangs are notorious for high NOX, my '95 Cobra was one of those. He'd pull the SPOUT connector which retards the timing, but the water trick would probably work too.
As for the Apple vs. others conversation, I went to Apple around 2002 and won't go back. They're not perfect, but so much better in so many ways. I ran my first MacBook for about 12 years and it still works. I only upgraded because it could no longer support the latest operating systems which made it not able to do some things I wanted. In the many years of iPhone and Mac use I've had to reboot so few times that when something does get goofy I forget that that's the first thing one should try when a computer gets wonky. I'm technotarded, my brother and his chick are computer geniuses, Apple stuff works for both of us. It does bug me that they don't allow some stuff, but in doing so they probably save me from myself.
My smog guy said they are basically graded on a points system. They loose points for doing inspections too fast, passing too many cars, passing cars with unset monitors, ect. Stuff that's perfectly legal, but they loose points anyway. If their points go too low they can loose Star certification and possibly become targeted for under cover cars that try to catch them missing stuff during the inspection. Once in a while he'll fail one of my cars on some visual thing just to bump his points, then have me come back later and pass it "after being repaired", he always asks if it's ok with me first.
A handy trick I learned from him for cars with high NOX, pour a cup of water into the oil. Many Hondas are notorious for high NOX even when everything seems to be fine. The water vapors being sucked through the PCV cool the combustion chamber enough to lower NOX emissions. Some 5.0 Mustangs are notorious for high NOX, my '95 Cobra was one of those. He'd pull the SPOUT connector which retards the timing, but the water trick would probably work too.
As for the Apple vs. others conversation, I went to Apple around 2002 and won't go back. They're not perfect, but so much better in so many ways. I ran my first MacBook for about 12 years and it still works. I only upgraded because it could no longer support the latest operating systems which made it not able to do some things I wanted. In the many years of iPhone and Mac use I've had to reboot so few times that when something does get goofy I forget that that's the first thing one should try when a computer gets wonky. I'm technotarded, my brother and his chick are computer geniuses, Apple stuff works for both of us. It does bug me that they don't allow some stuff, but in doing so they probably save me from myself.
Lead Driver
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,092
Likes: 145
From: San Diego, CA
My post above was only to address the idea of having 16 more months to find a new smog shop. Is that a good idea?
Is the problem at the original shop due to a new tech? Or due to new procedures?
Is the smog tech acting out of a self important sense of fifedom? Or out of a self preservational sense of fear?
Is the problem at the original shop due to a new tech? Or due to new procedures?
Is the smog tech acting out of a self important sense of fifedom? Or out of a self preservational sense of fear?
I don’t think he was malicious but he was not gentle. I know many other diesels redline higher than ours (my dad’s D-Max is around 4800 RPM IIRC) so I don’t know if that played into it.
His visual inspection was about 15 minutes (truck idling the whole time) and then he did the Snap Test. I didn’t count them but he probably did it at least 10 times before the truck stalled.
I’m sure he probably didn’t want to get himself or the shop in trouble.
I only mentioned switching shops as the guy that normally does mine is one of the owners. If he has retired from doing the testing and I’m left with a bunch of guys that think everything redlines at 6K RPM then I will go elsewhere. It’s not about the test itself as much as what they put the truck through during the test.
From the very inception of the diesel smog testing program, the Visible Smoke test at elevated RPM was always to be, and still remains, a SNAP elevated rpm test, patterned after the PSIP (Periodic Smoke Inspection Program for heavier duty diesels that had already been in place for a decade prior).
Hotshot
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 10,590
Likes: 382
From: Texas
Hang on a second guys, I think maybe ya mighta misread the post?
Y2 didn't comment on the yahoo stomping the pedal and over revving the engine to the point of stalling, I didn't see him making a direct reference to him at all. The way I read it, Y2 took the opportunity presented by Brian stating that "it seemed like it was easier to pass in earlier years, rather than recently", to explain why Brian's probably experiencing that fact, by giving us easily verifiable information where he shows the manner in which the test that is administered has gotten more difficult.
That's how I read it.
Even if I'm wrong, I know there's no way Y2 was condoning the over rev.
Stewart
Y2 didn't comment on the yahoo stomping the pedal and over revving the engine to the point of stalling, I didn't see him making a direct reference to him at all. The way I read it, Y2 took the opportunity presented by Brian stating that "it seemed like it was easier to pass in earlier years, rather than recently", to explain why Brian's probably experiencing that fact, by giving us easily verifiable information where he shows the manner in which the test that is administered has gotten more difficult.
That's how I read it.
Even if I'm wrong, I know there's no way Y2 was condoning the over rev.
Stewart
Stewart nailed it.
And Brian 42 got it.
I made no mention of the tech revving Brian's engine, because I was saving comment on that for an entirely different post, as that is a separate subtopic entirely, worthy of a look at how a snap test ought to be done.
My post above was only to address the idea of having 16 more months to find a new smog shop. Is that a good idea?
Is the problem at the original shop due to a new tech? Or due to new procedures?
Is the smog tech acting out of a self important sense of fifedom? Or out of a self preservational sense of fear?
Is it a good idea to be a new customer at a new smog shop and be perceived as an undercover enforcement officer of the CARB? Or remain a regular customer at the same smog shop, because the grass might not be any greener elsewhere, given the rabidness of enforcement applied to all shops, as evidenced by the state's monthly report of disciplinary actions taken against smog tech licensees statewide?
These questions don't just apply to Brian42's decision about his next smog appointment. They apply to all of us who are subject to the same requirements, and have to make the same decision.
Be a regular? Or be that potentially unknown harbinger of a headache?
That was intent of my post... nothing to do with over revving, and everything to do with common sense and pragmatic thinking. We clearly cannot control the government, nor how we are governed. But at least we can govern ourselves in the choices we make, and the idea of sharing information on a forum like this has the potential to help us leverage our experiences in common into a better sense of how to navigate the choices.
And Brian 42 got it.
I made no mention of the tech revving Brian's engine, because I was saving comment on that for an entirely different post, as that is a separate subtopic entirely, worthy of a look at how a snap test ought to be done.
My post above was only to address the idea of having 16 more months to find a new smog shop. Is that a good idea?
Is the problem at the original shop due to a new tech? Or due to new procedures?
Is the smog tech acting out of a self important sense of fifedom? Or out of a self preservational sense of fear?
Is it a good idea to be a new customer at a new smog shop and be perceived as an undercover enforcement officer of the CARB? Or remain a regular customer at the same smog shop, because the grass might not be any greener elsewhere, given the rabidness of enforcement applied to all shops, as evidenced by the state's monthly report of disciplinary actions taken against smog tech licensees statewide?
These questions don't just apply to Brian42's decision about his next smog appointment. They apply to all of us who are subject to the same requirements, and have to make the same decision.
Be a regular? Or be that potentially unknown harbinger of a headache?
That was intent of my post... nothing to do with over revving, and everything to do with common sense and pragmatic thinking. We clearly cannot control the government, nor how we are governed. But at least we can govern ourselves in the choices we make, and the idea of sharing information on a forum like this has the potential to help us leverage our experiences in common into a better sense of how to navigate the choices.
Now that I am done ranting, apologies Y2K for coming on strong. This issue has pizzed me off for years when ULSD and EGR systems started this cancerous way of thinking, so......it gets me going. I misunderstood where you were coming from. Thanks for the insightful posts. You are right....we cannot do much about government, but we can govern ourselves. That's all we can do.
