new california import law.

[Mattndew76]

I was curious :D

[ggzilla]

Aaaaaand 50+ MPG i would totally rock that.

Back to the future

[q-tip]

Back to the future

Been 35 years and they can't make a damn car with economy like that unless its a hybric

[ggzilla]

Sure they can. The 1988 Civic HF did it too. The reality is that subcompact cars don't sell well unless they are fancied up. So why build what doesn't sell?

[DaBlist]

Yeah, because all EVs look like Prius'

 

 

 

 

And with all Tesla patents being usable by anyone, I bet there will be a smathering of nicer looking ones coming out. Eventually Big Oil will be overtaken by Big Electric. 

And how many Ratsuners can afford a Porsche or Tesla?

[Tristin]

And how many Ratsuners can afford a Porsche or Tesla?

 

Most Ratsuners probably couldnt afford the wheels that were on the Prius. 

 

 

 

 

 

Just showing that there are attractive EV options and they are only going to get better and cheaper. Losing an engine to build is going to suck, but eventually people will just learn to program and swap electrical parts to customize cars. Electric technology is going to be far cheaper in the future. 

[RatVonDude]

Back to the future

was just gonna say these b210, would make perfect electric car candidates. Also I think what naner was trying to say is that all jap imports must go through him first, dude I don't vote so if you have any friends that are having trouble at the box pm me and I'll fill in the right bubble.

my vote is kinda a waste cuz I just fill in my own name.

[john510]

Weeell on the 4th of July 1776 ,, that is weird it's kinda like that firecracker holiday,,, anyways ,, on that date the founding fathers submitted a Declaration of independence and in that document was this.

 

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

 

As the 7th reason we needed to be free of Englands reign .

 

Kinda weird

A guy from one of the states most aggressively passing laws to harass immigrants is complaining of a government taking away rights seems kinda hypocritical to me. Z-Trains over the top response was exactly the one i was expecting so i'm good.

:lol: :lol:

 

I was commenting on the quote i posted nothing else

 

 

(edited 7th)

Written about 238 years ago,different world we live in now.Arizona is not passing laws to harass immigrants ! they are passing laws to try and stop ILLEGAL immigration.There is a difference.

[bananahamuck]

Written about 238 years ago,different world we live in now.Arizona is not passing laws to harass immigrants ! they are passing laws to try and stop ILLEGAL immigration.There is a difference.

 

 

 So you don't believe in the second amendment to the constitution either ?  As,  like you say,   it was written more than 200 years ago..

 

:confused: :confused: .

[ggzilla]

All misinformation. California is not blocking RHD imports. Just a baseless rumour Mattndew76 is spreading.

[datsunaholic]

The California smog check laws used to advance every year.  When the Governator was in office he signed a law locking it at 1976 and newer, which was where the rolling point was at that time.  The law could be changed, but the automotive industry wants to keep it like it is to force more older cars off the roads and purchase of new cars (like folks with 1981 Citations could afford a new car anyway) hence why they don't support the rolling exemption laws.  Washington used to test everything 1968 and newer, but found that 1) there weren't enough cars over 25 years old to make much difference 2) most folks ended up getting repair waivers since the Washington law was if you spent $200 towards emission repairs and it didn't fix it, you got a waiver and 3) the emissions stations were already overcrowded.  Now, Cali doesn't have 2 of those reasons- the repair waiver is a LOT more expensive (if it even exists anymore) and checking is done by private garages, not by State-owned testing stations.

 

 

The basic blocking point to high-efficiency gasoline vehicles is weight and the American desire for power.  Weight is the big issue.  Americans demand power everything, which means bigger electrical systems and bigger engines to drive that.  Power windows, power seats, butt warmers, heated mirrors, air conditioning, power locks, etc.  If you made an economy car without any of those things you could save hundreds of pounds of weight.  Then there's the added creature comforts like 24-way lumbar supports, 1.75 cupholders per seat, a half dozen closeable storage bins, and 30 pounds of excess soundproofing.  All extra weight.  Add in the government-mandated safety features- airbags, side airbags, extra reinforced doors, etc.  Still doesn't matter if you get hit by a semi.  The latest crop of potential 80+ MPG "cars" are simply motorcycles with shells around them and 3 wheels, which would lose head to head with a Nash Cosmopolitan, and safety there is almost nonexistent.  As far as power- if Americans could tolerate a 15-second 0-60 car,  you could have 50+ MPG midsize cars now.  They already get 30+ with 300HP engines.  Dump it down to 150HP and you'd have much better "city" mileage, and that's still sufficient to break the speed limit by 20MPH on just about every highway in the US.  BTW, 14.9 seconds was the rated 0-60 of a 1983 Sentra.  Today you'd be hard pressed to find anything with a 0-60 worse than 10 seconds.  You don't NEED to speed up that freaking fast.  Well,  maybe merging onto the 101 near Hollywood (btdt), but not on most sane freeway onramps.

[john510]

 So you don't believe in the second amendment to the constitution either ?  As,  like you say,   it was written more than 200 years ago..

 

:confused: :confused: .

I was reffering to your comment on harassment,that is all.But since you brought it up,the 2nd amendment was written at a time when those that wrote it could not have imagined the kinds of weaponry they make today.And yes i believe Americans should have the right to bear arms to a certain extent.Im stepping out of this shit now,i dont even remember what the original post was about.

[Mattndew76]

All misinformation. California is not blocking RHD imports. Just a baseless rumour Mattndew76 is spreading.

Yep totally. RHD will be banned throughout the USA because of the laws in Chilé. Also all right wingers and simple conservatives hate anyone with pigmented skin.

 

The left told me so.

[ggzilla]

That makes no sense. Are you trying to be humorous?

[Mattndew76]

I was reffering to your comment on harassment,that is all.But since you brought it up,the 2nd amendment was written at a time when those that wrote it could not have imagined the kinds of weaponry they make today.And yes i believe Americans should have the right to bear arms to a certain extent.Im stepping out of this shit now,i dont even remember what the original post was about.

Don't drink the cool aid bud. Human behavior is exactly the same now as it was 200 years ago. The bullet took the playing field and leveled it so people could live free of one person or group pushing for tyranny. Yet so many wanna act like society and mankind have changed for the better? Ha ha ha utopia....Now go dig up the hyperbole about mass shootings and sob stories. The documents known as the Constitution and Bill of Rights is as applicable now as it was when it was written. Saying it doesn't is an admission of a shallow belief and knowledge of its depth to insure freedom.

 

Its still the same game with new tools and a lot more dumb people. No one wants to know what's going on or seeks to know. Guvments says guns bad so they must be.....

[datzenmike]

Aaaaaand 50+ MPG i would totally rock that.

 

My new '76 got over 50 on long trips.

 

This thread is and getting more and more pointless.

 

This thread is and getting more and more and more political and racist

 

I expect to come home tonight, take it for a walk behind the barn and shoot it in the head.

[RatVonDude]

[HRH]

IBTS

[laotsu]

Eradicate this nascent dullardry!

[datzenmike]

noyse!

[DaBlist]

[hvyd]

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

 

 

 

 

Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775

[Ranman72]

IBTL 

HERE IS SOMETHING MEANINGFUL 

[laotsu]

California uber alles.

 

Jello Biafra~ June 1979

 

[ol' 320]

Dastunholic said on page two:

"The California smog check laws used to advance every year.  When the Governator was in office he signed a law locking it at 1976 and newer, which was where the rolling point was at that time.  The law could be changed, but the automotive industry wants to keep it like it is to force more older cars off the roads and purchase of new cars (like folks with 1981 Citations could afford a new car anyway) hence why they don't support the rolling exemption laws.  Washington used to test everything 1968 and newer, but found that 1) there weren't enough cars over 25 years old to make much difference 2) most folks ended up getting repair waivers since the Washington law was if you spent $200 towards emission repairs and it didn't fix it, you got a waiver and 3) the emissions stations were already overcrowded.  Now, Cali doesn't have 2 of those reasons- the repair waiver is a LOT more expensive (if it even exists anymore) and checking is done by private garages, not by State-owned testing stations."

 

​Actually, I was one of the handful of people invoked in crafting the language and passage of SB42 - the California smog law that created the rolling exemption. Steve Davis, now the CEO of Barrett Jackson Auctions - almost singlehandedly organized a petition drive that resulted in almost 50,000 signatures and a convoy lead by Leno of thousands of enthusiasts who rallied there and met with legislators to urge passage of the is rolling smog exemption.

 

The new car industry is not the force that later scuttled the "rolling" exemption and kept the exemption date locked at pre-76 cars, it was the legislature;s desire to "tax" car owners by making them continue to pay smog fees. There are two rationales in the Capitol for keeping smog requirements on older cars - one is to reduce emissions. The other is to continue raising revenues.

 

Quentin Kopp was given a lot of public credit for championing SB42 by car collectors. He couldn't have given a Cra*p about the smog reduction - this is a guy who represented the Bay Area at the time which didn't even have biennial smog testing in place at the time. What he cared about was getting out of the Capitol without any taint so he could become a judge, so he added support for the rolling exemption while adding the biennial test requirement everywhere except Lake County - which besides being home to a=n inordinate amount of tweaker labs does arguably have there best air quality in the state.