deckofficer
Banned
On the HAMB forum, there is a lot of chatter about California's Prop 23. Most everyone states that AB 32 that passed a couple years ago would give CARB (Californis Air Resource Board) too much power that MIGHT allow the passing of laws that would be contrary to our hobby of hot rods. Prop 23, which is funded by 2 major Texas oil companies would postpone the enactment of AB 32 and appears that the hot rod community is in favor of a YES vote on Prop 23. Problem is for me that I can't find in AB 32 any language that would effect hot rods. Could someone who has been sucessful in finding the truth that it would effect us, could you please post a link? I accept that my Track-T probably pollutes 50 times more than a 2007 Mustang and feel bad about that. I only drive the T about 5000 miles a year, and at 50X more of tailpipe emissions, would be equal to about 250,000 miles in the Mustang. If I could clean up my act to about 5 times the rate of the Mustang, with just the change to EFI, sensors and a catalytic converter, I guess that would be OK. Until someone can show me the light, I plan on voting NO on Prop 23. I was upset in the beginning back in the late 60's that California forced unleaded gas on us that in turn ended high performance from Detroit and lowered compression ratios to tolerate the new fuel. As we all know, engines are much more powerful now and clean. In the SoCal area, our air went from brown smog to beautiful blue sky in less than 10 years of unleaded gas.
Bob
Bob
