smog Ferraris annually if they are more than 15 yrs old?!

This is not good fellow enthusiast not good at all.

 

The last time I checked, Model A's were older than 1976. AB616 only requires annual smog for vehicles older than 15 years, but built after 1975. 1975 and older are still exempt.

-steve

 

Cats aren't that expensive if you stay away from dealers. I paid $300 for a cat for my 308 from Miller Catalyzers in Hayward. Even Hyperflow cats are around $700. These can be found from at least one of the Fchat sponsers.

Miller should be able to get a cat for any Ferrari that originally came with one. Not sure about the grey market imports, like 512BBi's, though. The one I got matched right up without any fiddling, and did the job.

http://www.millercat.com/

Cats have to be replaced whether your car is annually inspected or bi-annually inspected. This would not increase the frequency of cat replacement.

I agree, though. AB 616 would double the hassle factor.

-steve

 

here's the lastest new on this from SEMA
http://echo.bluehornet.com/hostedemail/email.htm?h=e0d9ff208fe3d721fa9b04cd641d4538&CID=1083338533&ch=7EA9BDE48A22C89ED7240EEB0BB13BF8

 

GOOD news!

 

+1

 

Glad it died. Cars 15 years old and older represent less than 1% of the cars driven in this state at any given time. So if pollution is the concern, it doesn't seem to be that much of a concern if that is the case. The forrest fires each year seem to wipe out the air quality moreso, anybody see the air today in Sac? So that only leaves only one issue... where in the *explanitive* do these politicians get off reaching in our pocketbooks?

 

Gabe, they're always reaching into our pocketbooks because they can't afford it themselves. You don't see a politician driving a lambo, ferrari or an exotic do you? It's always a government car like a town car. Damn ba$tards. LOL

 

Just a few days ago, there was an article in the Mercury News about the head of VTA sometimes staying at a hotel in San Jose - at the taxpayers' expense - rather then drive to his home in San Francisco. The article mentioned his salary (I forget the exact amount, but over $200K/yr) and his $9,000.00 per month car allowance. Obviously intended to cover the cost of a chauffer too, but that seems like a lot to me for transportation expenses for a public official. The real irony is that he's basically the CEO of the Santa Clara County buses!

 

It doesn't explicitly say $9k per month - that could be total for the year. (9000 / 12 = $750) That sounds more reasonable for a car payment allowance. Nonetheless, the story is still pretty outrageous. Thanks for bringing this up - it makes me want to write a letter. To whom, I don't know, but that just doen't seem right!

Here's the original article:

http://origin.siliconvalley.com/traffic/ci_6738260

 

Not to mention Willie Brown driving his TR around town when he was in office.

Steve