• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The Mass. vehicle safety check is sooo damned bogus....

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Our Murano is an '03, first year. And while I've heard the "horror stories" about the first year or so Muranos, we've been lucky, I guess. No problems, including the high pressure ps line, lava. Have yet to see it needing replacing...the hose looks cherry. But I am ordering one from Rock Auto to have on hand because have just heard too many stories about the hose letting go suddenly.

My biggest complaints about the Murano are maintenance related....the crap you have to go through to replace head light bulbs, to get to the rear spark plugs, the belts.

Otherwise, decent power, comfortable seats, outrageous foot room for the passenger, love the HID headlights (first I've had), and the headlight height adjustment (to level the headlights when towing) is a great feature....simple, but much appreciated.
 
NutBucket said:
True. I am glad CA checks those vehicles as well. In the past the exemption law used to 25 years or so. The current cut-off now is 1976 IIRC. They realized if they kept raising it there would be a lot of cars that weren't inspected.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that I'm a saint when it comes to emissions laws. But I am saying that I support vehicle/smog inspection since it helps maintain at least some baseline of properly running vehicles.
Click to expand...

I personally hate the exemption being fixed to 1976, but thats cause I don't want to go through the added smog hassle of getting an older 240Z and swapping a new motor. So I'm pretty much forced to look at something older than a 1976 240Z.

CA is switching to OBDII smog checks for vehicles 2000 and newer.
 
SyndromeOCZ said:
No smog here, It allows you to have diesels that run properly:

http://i33.tinypic.com/r1il5f.jpg[/IMG[/QUOTE]
As far as I know diesels have been smog exempt in CA. Not sure if that's still true. In the 70's apparently people would buy diesel cars and swap in gas engines to avoid smog.
Click to expand...
 
I was thinking about a move to VA in the next few years, but not if emissions test are still done on a roller and sniffer for 15 minutes. OBDII for emissions is the best way and is proven to be accurate. I do not mind, if the state does actual safety checks, as that is good for all on the road and may catch something I might miss myself.
 
NutBucket said:
As far as I know diesels have been smog exempt in CA. Not sure if that's still true. In the 70's apparently people would buy diesel cars and swap in gas engines to avoid smog.
Click to expand...

Alot of places smog the new diesels. For dodge the 2007.5 and newer had all of the emissions on them to make them cleaner than the LA air or whatever. But when they added these systems it caused turbo issues, lower mpg, and less power.
 
What we need now is for cars to have built in OBD II to Bluetooth connectors. It could just send them the results over my phone once a year when I run an app. The tinfoil hat crowd would never allow it though.
 
bruceb said:
I was thinking about a move to VA in the next few years, but not if emissions test are still done on a roller and sniffer for 15 minutes. OBDII for emissions is the best way and is proven to be accurate. I do not mind, if the state does actual safety checks, as that is good for all on the road and may catch something I might miss myself.
Click to expand...


All I can say about that is it's what VA was doing last I was aware. I watched my brother do a few inspections (he's an ASE cert'd mech of about 35 years and one of two state inspectors in his shop....first the rollers/emissions test then up on a lift and check damned near everything under the vehicle--tie rod ends, ball joints, brakes, exhaust, rust, etc.).

Darned inspection takes a while...the computer dictates the speeds the car's "driven" on the rollers, how quickly it has to reach certain speeds, how long it maintains that speed, how quickly it moves to the next speed, and on and on.

Hardest inspection I've ever seen. Of course, my bro's in/around Alexandria/Arlington area, so it may be different further west of the D.C. area, but around the D.C. area, it's strict.
 
But what is the point of the safety inspections? Beyond things like the headlights working, I do not see how it really benefits the general public. Add in the fact that when they do run across something they force you to pay to fix it immediately and it just screws the average person.
 
In MS I walk in the gas station. Hand the guy $5.00 give him my ID, tag #, mileage, make, model. He fills out the sticker walks out the door, scraps off old sticker, and slaps on the new sticker. Never looks a my cracked windshield or anything else. I say good bye to my $5 and the guy.
 
SarcasticDwarf said:
But what is the point of the safety inspections? Beyond things like the headlights working, I do not see how it really benefits the general public. Add in the fact that when they do run across something they force you to pay to fix it immediately and it just screws the average person.
Click to expand...
If you can't see the point of ensuring some minimum level of a car's condition relative to safety you shouldn't own a car.
 
SarcasticDwarf said:
But what is the point of the safety inspections? Beyond things like the headlights working, I do not see how it really benefits the general public. Add in the fact that when they do run across something they force you to pay to fix it immediately and it just screws the average person.
Click to expand...

Because I don't want to be anywhere near someone driving on these brakes:
XlrLp.jpg
 
NutBucket said:
If you can't see the point of ensuring some minimum level of a car's condition relative to safety you shouldn't own a car.
Click to expand...

I can see the point, but how much is too much? Forcing everyone to replace their windshield because there is a stable on inch crack outside the normal viewing area is not a good use of funds. There are a thousand and one relatively minor issues that states force the public to correct at a ridiculously high cost.

Emissions makes more sense, but only on newer vehicles. For example, I have a 72 chevelle that is barely driven. It is required to pass emissions in my state. The ONLY way it passes emissions is to tune the hell out of the car and then change it back afterwards.
 
Last edited:
Those safety inspections don't really do much anyway. A little 'grease palming' to the inspectors ensures a pass in most states that require a garage inspection...
 
True as that may be, if you're already getting an emissions check might as well add in a basic safety inspection. Whether it really accomplishes anything is another story....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top