Can someone explain an emissions inspection??? (Anchorage: appointed, 2014, purchase)

[Moose Whisperer]

Originally Posted by BadBoysDriveAudi

I was hoping that the program would die out before I had to renew both my vehicles. No such luck. I have one that I have to get tested this month and the other in January. When they mentioned the federal EPA review could take 18 months, I knew I was in trouble. Oh well...

I know what you men. I got hit for one in October, and I,ve got another one due in April that looks like I'll still get gouged for. I'm sure Obama is intentionally dragging his feet to get even with Palin or something. The whole thing is a scam!

[melbern]

Originally Posted by blueflames50

this thread is 2 years old...dead, defunct...so no need to rant on about something that has been dropped for 2 years.

OK, I don't come in here very often, but seriously Blue, you are like the "old thread monitor".

If rousing an old thread was not allowed in City Data, they would lock them or lose them after a certain period of time.

Sometimes even old topics are useful. Just let it go. For crying out loud, this place is painful sometimes.

[blueflames50]

Originally Posted by melbern

OK, I don't come in here very often, but seriously Blue, you are like the "old thread monitor".

If rousing an old thread was not allowed in City Data, they would lock them or lose them after a certain period of time.

Sometimes even old topics are useful. Just let it go. For crying out loud, this place is painful sometimes.

did you read the post?? there are polite ways of questioning and rude ways....new to the forum and with this attitude..what ever I don't find it acceptable...I have no problem with old threads being brought back up...in fact have done it myself...just don't be flip, rude, condescending or any of that crap..it is not welcomed

[Glitch]

Originally Posted by melbern

OK, I don't come in here very often, but seriously Blue, you are like the "old thread monitor".

If rousing an old thread was not allowed in City Data, they would lock them or lose them after a certain period of time.

Sometimes even old topics are useful. Just let it go. For crying out loud, this place is painful sometimes.

You can certainly "rouse" an old thread ... if you want to look like a complete idiot. How stupid do you have to be to respond to a 2.5 year old post?

[melbern]

Originally Posted by Glitch

You can certainly "rouse" an old thread ... if you want to look like a complete idiot. How stupid do you have to be to respond to a 2.5 year old post?

People do searches on topics that they are interested in, sometimes the topics they bring up are old when they do that...and you know, often folks get responses such as "do a search!" when they ask a question. Geesh, can't win on the bloody internets.

Happy holidays, grinchmudgeons.

[melbern]

Originally Posted by blueflames50

did you read the post?? there are polite ways of questioning and rude ways....new to the forum and with this attitude..what ever I don't find it acceptable...I have no problem with old threads being brought back up...in fact have done it myself...just don't be flip, rude, condescending or any of that crap..it is not welcomed

Oh, ok. Got it!

[RayinAK]

we not longer have an IM requirement in the North Star Borough, but after reading what badBoysDriveAudi had to say, I decided to add to it.

In the IM tests we had in Fairbanks, not aftermarket parts the changed the component arrangement or looks in the exhaust, intake, etc. could be used, simply because the IM technician would first do a visual inspection. If he or she saw anything that did not match the automobile manufacturer's components arrangement on the motor, he would not even proceed with the test since he (or she) could only go by the manufacturer's instructions relating to IM testing for the original motor and parts.

Even on a vehicle where the aftermarket parts improved the motor's emissions, the test would fail if any of the parts, from vacuum hoses to fuel canister, was different from the original design. A lot of people in the North tar Borough had improved their vehicles emissions by using more advanced components, so while the tail-pipe portion of the test would pass with flying colors, not so the visual inspection. The only option for these people was to apply for an emission waiver at the Borough, but his also meant that such vehicles could only be driven on the Borough roads from April to September (if I well remember), not during the winter months.

I am glad that we don't have the IM scam taking place anymore in Fairbanks. Good riddance!

[BadBoysDriveAudi]

Originally Posted by melbern

People do searches on topics that they are interested in, sometimes the topics they bring up are old when they do that...and you know, often folks get responses such as "do a search!" when they ask a question. Geesh, can't win on the bloody internets.

Happy holidays, grinchmudgeons.

Exactly.

Blue, I wasn't trying to be rude; I was just directly pointing out a false statement due to fallacy. If a test fails due to non OEM parts of the same spec, then there are some serious ramifications to free enterprise. Dealers would essentially have a monopoly on parts with respect to their make/models.

What sucks is for someone to mod their vehicle (for the better) but then fail a visual. But the reason for that isn't that one didn't use OEM; it's because they didn't adhere to the manufacturer's specs. Those are two distinctly different things.

I apologize right now if I seemed crass on my first post on the forum. That certainly wasn't my intent.

[BadBoysDriveAudi]

Originally Posted by RayinAK

we not longer have an IM requirement in the North Star Borough, but after reading what badBoysDriveAudi had to say, I decided to add to it.

In the IM tests we had in Fairbanks, not aftermarket parts the changed the component arrangement or looks in the exhaust, intake, etc. could be used, simply because the IM technician would first do a visual inspection. If he or she saw anything that did not match the automobile manufacturer's components arrangement on the motor, he would not even proceed with the test since he (or she) could only go by the manufacturer's instructions relating to IM testing for the original motor and parts.

Even on a vehicle where the aftermarket parts improved the motor's emissions, the test would fail if any of the parts, from vacuum hoses to fuel canister, was different from the original design. A lot of people in the North tar Borough had improved their vehicles emissions by using more advanced components, so while the tail-pipe portion of the test would pass with flying colors, not so the visual inspection. The only option for these people was to apply for an emission waiver at the Borough, but his also meant that such vehicles could only be driven on the Borough roads from April to September (if I well remember), not during the winter months.

I am glad that we don't have the IM scam taking place anymore in Fairbanks. Good riddance!

I now understand why Fairbanks is calling the IM a scam. Again, if you mod your ride and it fails only because of a visual, then you question the intent of the program and the competency of the techs. The scenario you outlined just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Hopefully Anchorage can drop the program soon. CO emissions aren't likely to become a problem. The real issue is the level of benzine in the fuel here. But that is about to be reduced due to regulations so that won't be an issue either in the next couple of years. The program has served its purpose and now it needs to be retired.

[blueflames50]

Originally Posted by BadBoysDriveAudi

Exactly.

Blue, I wasn't trying to be rude; I was just directly pointing out a false statement due to fallacy. If a test fails due to non OEM parts of the same spec, then there are some serious ramifications to free enterprise. Dealers would essentially have a monopoly on parts with respect to their make/models.

What sucks is for someone to mod their vehicle (for the better) but then fail a visual. But the reason for that isn't that one didn't use OEM; it's because they didn't adhere to the manufacturer's specs. Those are two distinctly different things.

I apologize right now if I seemed crass on my first post on the forum. That certainly wasn't my intent.

'tis fine and I didn't mean to sound rude...most people know what you posted!.hahaha...the more parts manufactured in China the less apt our vehicles are to pass inspection...an inspections were suppose to end at the end of WWII...if anyone knows the history of that tax!