FAILED!!! at the BAR (Califonia Smog test)

[Ron R.]

I'm just starting to get over my anger, and resigned to finding a solution.

So for those of you in California, this may be of interest. For the rest of you, be thankful you don't live here.

So I went in for my inspection this am...essentially a visual only, since there are no sniffer tests that have to be passed if you are going with the SB-100 proces.

I've done this before, with my former Kirkham Cobra, and all went as expected. As a refreasher, the generous State of Kalifornia allows 500 cars (kit cars, hot rods) to gain relative smog exemption on a yearly basis. You can go one of two routes...smog based on engine, smog based on chassis...most go with chassis, and the state says that you can go with the year "1960".....IF IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR. If it does, you go by that year. Now, in practice, nearly everyone I have ever heard of gets their car "smogged" as a 1960...because of the very liberal smog rules (now you need a PCV, regardless of year).

So, when the BAR official asks weather I'd like to go by the block (1969), or the chassis...I say "chassis." And off he goes to consult with John Baltazar, the regional BAR Manager.

Half an hour later, he returns, and says "You're not going to like this"...since your car is a 1966, you need an air injection system (in addition to the PCV system that I had fabbed for the webers I'm running). He points out that my MSO CLEARLY STATES THAT THE CAR IS A 1966, and thus, must have air injection. To make me feel better, he says that if the MSO said 1965, I wouldn't need the air injection. He then goes on to tell me that they once had an owner send their car back to the factory because it couldn't be smogged.

He further pointed out, that I probably had to have a four barrel carb, but couldn't tell me which one when I asked.

Despite my protestations, there was clearly no point in debating with this underling...who kept calling my car a GT240.... If I'm going to have any hope, it will be with the regional manager. Despite placing several calls, I've been unable to get through to him...he's probably been furloughed...

Having read the law, I can't deny that it could be interpreted the way it was...except, that there was no 1966 Ford GT sold to the public as a passenger car, so I'm not sure how they could say that it looks like one, and have some basis to tell me what it came with.

The local guy, possibly at the behest of the regional manager, said that if I could show that the GTs came with webers, I may be able to keep those...we shall see. I have the SAAC registry, with nice diagrams of the car, including webers without PCVs and air injection.

Any suggestions? Can I go to another far away BAR and over-rule the local regional guy....I'm willing to trailer the car quite a ways to get over this headache.

:thumbsdown:

 

[Robert S.]

I'm pretty new at all of this, so I think you're ahead of me somewhat. I can only suggest what I might do. First on my list would be to call Lance at Superformance: 949 900 1960. He would be interested in the problem, because I have not heard of this twist from Lance or from any others for the past seven months of reading everything, and asking questions of anyone who would listen. Lance has an acquaintance named Bob Caser who specializes in this process. I do know from my study of this, that location is everything, and people have reported problems at certain DMV and BAR locations, while the similar circumstances were handled easily at other locations.

Wish you luck, and keep us informed. Thanks, Robert

 

[Mike]

Ron,
It has been a few years since I did my MkIII but it was a royal pain. I left you a message the other day as I am about 6 months away from where you are today. I have also met the guy Robert is referring to at Hillbank. For a fee, I am told he will walk the car right through the whole process. Do you know if fuel injection would face the same issue?
I know you have been busy and as I stated on my message, I am in the area this week and would to see your car and listen to any input you have gathered during the build process.
Mike Murphy
GT40 #2307

 

[Ron R.]

Guys,

I'll call Lance in the am.

I'd like to hear from the BAR official, but I really don't have much hope.

Obviously, the is a lot of leeway in the interpretation of the regs, so your experience may differ.

Mike, I'm sure, per this official, that fuel injection would not pass. But again, it depends on who does the inspection.

 

[Jim Craik]

Ron,

What a horrible story.

As you know our cars were made and shipped together. I don't know if the law has changed, but I regestered mine in Dec 2008. I ran into none of those problems.

Ron, I have found all the data from when I registered 2264.

My certificate from Superpformance LLC component vehicle shows:

Model year: 1966 replica

I did my DMV smog referee at Evergreen Valley College in San Jose.

As I recall the engine type, carb or injection and the motor being brand new did not come up. They only seemed interested in confirming that SPF did not do the install.

Once I convinced them that I paid someone else to put in the motor, things went quickly.

Assuming that the laws have not changed it could be that your smog folks got this wrong.

Ron, Lance may be you best bet, but I will send you a PM with my phone# let me know if any of my info or data could help.

Good Luck!

 

[Larry L.]

since your car is a 1966, you need an air injection system (in addition to the PCV system that I had fabbed for the webers I'm running). He points out that my MSO CLEARLY STATES THAT THE CAR IS A 1966, and thus, must have air injection. To make me feel better, he says that if the MSO said 1965, I wouldn't need the air injection.

:thumbsdown:

Huh???! I seem to remember air pumps were 1st required in 1968??? (My '68 427/435 'Vette's engine had one.) What's this 1965 stuff? I don't recall seeing a 'pump on ANY '66 or '67 car...let alone a '65 (and I'm old enough to remember...so, maybe that's the problem!).

Here's a link to photos of several stock '67 Vettes for sale that clearly show NO air pump/manifold tubes on their engines...the last photo shows a '67 RPO L-88:

Classic Corvette for Sale • 1967 • 1006D

 

[Randy V]

California has always been a leader in pollution controls. I got a 57 Chevy with a 283 from California that had a PCV system while all the other states cars got road draft tubes.

You may want to consider a cheap single 4 bbl intake manifold and carb in order to get you through the first inspection process. For the AIR Injection system to the exhaust - I would think that one could plumb the air pump's supply to a port just aft from the collectors and before the mufflers. No it won't work the same as injecting the air into the exhaust primaries up at the ports, but they may not be aware of that and are only looking for the pump and lines.

Pity that CA is such a PITB with cars like these....

 

[Seymour Snerd]

I was a little irritated with Superformance with several aspects of how they filled out the MSO, but the worst was calling the car a '66. They could have called it a 63, 4 or 5 and saved everyone in CA from having to put on a PCV system, and now air injection.

So, maybe we need to request that SPF reissue the MSOs for the California cars not yet registered. After all, it's just a piece of paper and everyone knows pieces of paper sometimes have mistakes made on them.

And my research does show that '66 Mustangs may have had air pumps. Although did the '66 Shelby Mustangs in CA have them? It might be sufficient to demonstrate that there was at least one SBF-engined car in CA in '66 without air inection. For that the relevant pages from a parts book of the era would suffice.

It might also be sufficient simply to go to a different station where you know an SPF GT40 was processed successfully. This is another thing SPF should be able to tell you. I know Voss in OC has done a lot of them, so there is a way....

PS: the other silliness in the MSO was:

Make: "SuperformanceGT40" (that's right, no spaces)
Model: "Replica of a 1966 Vintage sports car"

 

[Randy V]

You guys may want to check out a couple of links here on the subject

http://www.epa.gov/oms/consumer/12-miles.pdf

Key Events in the History or Air Quality in California

1963 Positive Crankscase Ventilation requirement of 1961 went into effect on domestic passenger vehicles for sale in California.
1966 Auto tailpipe emission standards for HC and CO were adopted by the California Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. First of their kind in the nation.

 

[Ron R.]

First, I may try going to a different BAR, but with the "fail" already attached to the vehicle, I'm not sure that will fly.

I thought about buying a cheap intake and carb, but the inspector couldn't tell me what carb I'd need....of course, since they were obviously making it up as they went, and there are no record of gt40s in their system, I don't know what I'd buy. Then theres the air injector system... I think I'd have to find an electric injection pump, cause it ain't gonna fit in my serpentine system. Any other ideas?

 

[Rich E.]

Ron,

Gimme a couple days. I got mine "smogged" down in Modesto. I should have some free time on Friday and I'll see if I can bend his ear on what you'll need to do to get it through.

Rich.

 

[Ron R.]

Rich,

That would be great.

I'll keep in touch.

Ron

 

[Richard]

I think I have some good news for you. This is where it's good to have a few old farts around who haven't forgotten everything (yet).

In 1966 Ford 289 HiPo's and 427's cars were exempt form having smog pumps in the state of California. I know this because I had a 66 HiPo Mustang my brother bought new in California. Around 1970 I had to take the car in to be inspected. It failed because the person that filled out the original paperwork at the dealership had put the wrong smog code on the title. I think they had typed a 1 instead of a 0.

After much research I took the car and all my paperwork showing it indeed should be exempt to the local CHP. The officer looked at my paperwork and then looked to see if the heads had places to screw in the air injector tubes. In 1966 the HiPo heads were not not set up for smog. After 1966 all HiPo heads, on cars and replacements came set up for smog tubes.

Luckily for me the new for 1969 351W engine I had just installed didn't have the holes for the tubes either. I think there was a place in the end of the head and they had an internal passage to each exhaust port but of course I had plugged all those and they didn't show from the outside.

In the end I came away with a new title with the correct smog code on it and it passed inspection.

Good luck.

 

[Seymour Snerd]

This is where it's good to have a few old farts around who haven't forgotten everything (yet). .

Richard, you're my hero (again)!

What do you think would be the easiest-to-obtain "from the era" documentation that one could show to a BAR official to illustrate the point?

Ron --

Regarding the weber carb issue, if you could show that at least one GT40 Mk I was registered or was registerable in CA in the day, then a page from the FAV parts book should suffice, eg

 

[Howard Jones]

Get SPF to give you a new MSO with 1965 on it and then go back to the guy who knows you and tell him the first one was a mistake. IF there is a record of the first attempt in the system he will be able to deal with it. If there isn't he pretty much has told you to get a new MSO.

If you try to put a smog pump on the car it will have to be the exact 1966 parts and configuration as the motor in question, IMHO don't attempt this, just do it over with a new MSO.

My GTD was a "1965" and thus needed NO air polution equipment at all. That's why I was told by many people to establish that I was replicating the 1965 version of a GT40. The Cobra guys all know this in California and do the same.

 

[Ron R.]

Alan,

I'll have a hard time proving that a car was actually registered here, but I can show that the cars were supplied with webers...vie the parts diagram from JWE that is in the SAAC Registry.

I'd really rather get away from the "you have to register it as a 1966" line of thinking, because that will just make things harder for everyone else. It may be what I have to do, but since these weren't sold as road cars in 1966, the bar would be just making up the rules as they went...sort of as they are now.

 

[Rick Muck- Mark IV]

Get SPF to give you a new MSO with 1965 on it and then go back to the guy who knows you and tell him the first one was a mistake. IF there is a record of the first attempt in the system he will be able to deal with it. If there isn't he pretty much has told you to get a new MSO.

Sorry, but that is not legal. An MSO may only be reissued to replace a damaged/lost unit. If they didn't like the "1966" they are going to question how the MSO became a "1965" and bad things will ensue.................

 

[Ron R.]

Howard,

I dont think I can get a new MSO...the car has been given a vin etc. It is well documented by the state.

Since there was no production model Gt40, there are no Ford factory specifications for the BAR to base anything on. This is comLicated by the fact that the MSO says 1966 right on it.

I agree that the car should not be smogged as a 1966, as it does not resemble any 1966 production car. The state should then default to the 1960 registration requirements, as per the regulations.

 

[Seymour Snerd]

An MSO may only be reissued to replace a damaged/lost unit.

Can you point us to the legal code that covers this?

 

[Seymour Snerd]

FWIW some interesting history of thermactor requirements in CA:

[DeTomaso]   California engine swap exemption question