To Chuck Conrad

[Guest]

I think it is now time to tell you why I am here.<P>For 5 years I have managed the web site <A HREF="http://www.smogrfg.com." TARGET=_blank>http://www.smogrfg.com.</A> It is dedicated to the questions ?What is Smog Check II In California?? and ?What is reformulated gas??<BR>I have learned a lot from it. <P>As a result of a lot of political activity related to Smog Check II in California we got SB42 from Senator Quentin Kopp in 1997. That bill exempted 1966 ? 1973 vehicles from their biennial smog check. The result was that many such vehicle owners went and modified their vehicles ( in many cases spending $10-$20 thousand dollars on engines alone). <P>Then in July 2000 California Air Resources Board came out with their evaluation of Smog Check II. The resulting recommendation was to put 1966-1973 vehicles back in the program and make them available for scrappage.<P>Shortly after that I learned of SB1811 from Senator Johannessen. That would have taken away the rolling exemption. By the rolling exemption I mean that beginning in 2003 SB42 would change to vehicles 30 years and older being exempt. Then starting in 2004 a year would be added each year to the exemption. 1974 vehicles would be exempt in 2004. 1975 vehicles would be exempt in 1975, etc. <P>When I found out that Frank Weeks from Association of California Car Clubs was behind SB1811, I had a talk with him. His reasoning was that the Catalytic Converter came out in 1975. Therefore 1975 and newer vehicles, according to him, should not be exempt from smog check. However the 1974s should. This put Him and ACCC on the same side of the issue as California Air Resources Board. I took this to the car community and they put up a major opposition. <P>Then again in February 2001 SB800 showed up in the California Legislature. Again sponsored by Association of California Car Clubs and written by none other than State Senator Johannessen who SEMA claims is the friend of the hobbyist. I again held conversations with Frank.<P>An internet name search on officers of ACCC reflects many are in Classic Car Club of America.<P>I am really here to say that I resent Association of California Car Clubs ( A member of Classic Car Club Of America) attempting to take apart the SB42 legislation that lets these vehicles run modified.<P>When reading the Classic Car Club of America web site, my feeling was ?I do not object to Classic Car Club of America having a politically correct list of cars for membership.? I do however object to them telling me that my mothers 72 Plymouth is not a classic. That is why I chose to match that kind of snobbery with my comments about what makes a modified (that is my snobbery). I am standing up for modified.<P><BR>I would like to thank you for not taking my posts down when they didn?t fit the politically correct mold. I posted in the general forum to make the point that I take offense at the statement about what is not a "Full Classic". Can you tell me what a Modified Full Classic is?<P>I personally do not have a great deal of interest in the cars you call classic, just as you probably do not have a great deal of interest in the group of cars I call classic (60s). However because I am sticking up for the 60s cars I do take offense at the statement that ?your mothers 72 Plymouth is not a classic?. <P>The one thing that has become clear to me about the car hobby is that there is a strong division in the hobby between modifieds and restored. I run modified and as such have chosen to become the watch dog of anti-old car legislation. It is also obvious in the circles that I frequent that there is not full agreement on ?what is a classic??<P>Again --- as long as my right to call what I want a classic is observed, I don?t object to your calling what you want a classic. I have a problem when the two cross pathes. When ACCC interferes in my smog legislation I also have a problem.<P>I hope this helps clarify things.<P>I would like to ask you a question: In your minutes for approximately September 2000 there was a reference to ?Old Car Recycling?. That reference was never clarified and the reference is not there now. Could you tell me what is meant by ?Old Car Recycling??<P>Thank You -- Len Trimlett ? ltrimlet@pacbell.net<BR>

[Guest]

I love my <B>"CLASSIC"</B>.'74 VW Thing. <P>There, I said it and I'm glad. <P>hvs

[Guest]

Howard,<P><B>YOU</B> are a Classic. <P>Peter

[Idle Swede]

Maybe even a modified classic

[Guest]

How about a Pre Primary, fully recognized, Full Classic, in need of further restoration? ~ HV

[Guest Chuck Conrad]

>>I would like to ask you a question: In your minutes for approximately September 2000 there was a reference to ?Old Car Recycling?. That reference was never clarified and the reference is not there now. Could you tell me what is meant by ?Old Car Recycling??>><P>No problem, the reference was about "recycling" cars in CCCA Judging. We have been trying to figure out how to get cars that have won every CCCA award there is to come back to our judging events. For better or worse, many people feel if there is no chance of winning an award, there is no point in participating in any of our Grand Classics. We are simply trying to increase patrticipation in our events.<P>As a result, we have recently instituted a new class, effective January 2002, where cars that have received a CCCA Senior or Premier award may enter into "Senior Emetitus Judging" where the can once again be recognized for the preservation of the restoration.<P>Until we came up with the term "Senior Emeritus Judging," we refered to this catagory as "recycled" cars, since they were once again entering our judging system. It was nothing more than that, and had absoluely nothing to do with the "crusher".<P>The reason the reference is no longer on the web site, is the CCCA National Board voted to remove the minutes from the site. They were not very popular with our readers, and represented a great deal of work on my behalf to post. In a good month 10 or 15 people would look at them. As the servent of the Board, I obeyed and pushed the delete button.<P>I am quite happy to not have to type the things any more.<P>Now you know.<p>[ 08-25-2001: Message edited by: Chuck Conrad ]