|
|
On Friday, September 29, 2023, 5:03 AM, Henry Schleimer <henry.schleimer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Guys
I agree that this topic has degenerated to the level of “generate a lot of emotion that is unnecessary.”
I see that CARB has brought this upon themselves by not explaining why they were conducting the survey in the first place. Why don’t Steve and Bob put your heads together and write a letter to CARB explaining the concerns of the 300 Club and ask for a clear explanation? They can’t ignore a written request for transparency - can they?
Meanwhile here in Australia “we” have elected socialist governments at state and federal level hell bent on tearing down coal fired power stations and replacing them with wind turbines in bulldozed pristine forests and off shore whale migration routes while connecting solar factories to an additional 28 000 kms of transmission lines through farmer’s properties. Because they won’t consider nasty nuclear energy for base load power either, we will be reading books by candlelight to amuse ourselves at night. All while China is building two coal fired power stations each week so they can churn out those electric cars you will be buying. Cui bono?
Henry
From: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Friday, 29 September 2023 5:40 PM
To: Bob Jasinski
Cc: John Nowosacki; Nick Taylor; Chrysler 300 Club International
Subject: Re: {Chrysler 300} Bad news
Bob, in our current society, there is a lot of hate going around in this country in general towards government - some folks seem to genuinely "hate" Republicans and some "hate" Democrats relative to their efforts going forward and there is plenty of animosity to go around, the extent of which I have never seen before in my 76 years on this planet. Some folks just seem to detest (if you prefer) government regulations in general and others try to understand the intent of regulations such as those being implemented to deal with what scientists call global warming, which is the heart of why California government is trying to limit ever increasing amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that acts like a warming blanket (a molecule of CO2 in the upper atmosphere takes approximately 100 years before it dissociates into oxygen and carbon) . When setting smog limiting standards for automobiles, the Air Resources Board embarked on a program to limit emissions of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides that react in sunlight to produce so-called "smog" in the atmosphere. Many folks "hated" those regulations as well because in the early stages of implementation there were problems with driveability and performance that were serious but with continued development those efforts succeeded and eliminated our serious pollution events. So it is again with the so-called "climate change" measures that are being implemented to deal with excessive temperatures both hot and cold going forward. Vehicles that consume gasoline and other carbon based fuels will increase atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide according to scientists and if we do not do our best to curb such pollution then the future looks bleak for this planet according to those who have spent their lives as atmospheric scientists.
Thus California via the Air Resources Board is spearheading efforts to curb CO2 emissions through use of renewable energy and once again this State is moving ahead of most other states in making this happen because the effects of climate change show up in this State more vividly than in other states with more extremes in temperatures here. Yes, at this point I believe by 2035 our state will no longer permit the sale of NEW vehicles that run on carbon based fuels - vehicles that are already on the road can still be used and they can still be sold/traded as used vehicles (to address John's concerns). New Vehicle manufacturers already see what the future will bring and nearly all of them have already decided that before 2035 they will no longer produce such vehicles anyway because EVs have a lot of advantages over current gasoline/diesel vehicles such as reduced maintenance, less expensive to refuel,less expensive to build and many more. Battery life and recharging times are rapidly improving at this moment and such advances as solid state batteries will substantially reduce the cost and improve the performance of vehicles going forward and they will likely last the life of the vehicle. These battery improvements are happening rapidly based on claims by such companies as Toyota, Tesla and most others as well.
Above it was suggested that Jay Leno is important to older vehicle owners such as the Chrysler 300 owners in our club to allow our cars to be operated going forward and a reduced need to get them off the road. During the unveil of the future Dodge Chargers and Challengers that will also be going all-electric, he made the comment that he embraced the future battery electric vehicles that will likely be the norm (some might be fuel cells, etc) because with each new such vehicle being introduced, their elimination of carbon emissions reduces the need to get the older classic vehicles off the road and that should give classic vehicles owners a sigh of relief going forward - and I share his view.
I was not implying that our Club members show "hate" towards one another or folks in general or anything like that (in fact, based on attendance at a couple of our many car shows/events around the country each year, this group of individuals are among the nicest people I have ever met) but many folks in this country do seem to detest (if you prefer) any new government regulations being developed to make our older cars less of a problem in society going forward. Rather, I share the view of Jay Leno that the introduction of advanced new cars actually helps preserve our ability to keep driving our older vehicles rather than them becoming "garage queens".
In closing, I will just add that I would estimate that perhaps 20% of Air Resources Board employees are old car enthusiasts and share our hobby (I mentioned once before that their former Executive Officer (recently retired) owns a 1969 Plymouth Road Runner, for example). These "puff pieces" of "news" such as the one here from the "Daily Caller" just serve to enhance their readership and can be very misleading but do generate a lot of emotion that is unnecessary.
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 11:29 AM Bob Jasinski <rpjasin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Steve,
With all due respect, your use of the word “hate” about members of this Club sharing concerns of government intrusion is misplaced and inaccurate. The article I posted is a warning to Club members that our right to pursuit of happiness is being seriously threatened. We are all car people here. Yes, the future holds promise for new technologies, electric cars etc., but that is not the reason we are in this club and on this forum. From our Constitution:
“The Club exists to collect and publish information on these vehicles, to encourage enjoyment of these vehicles, and to hold meetings and events to further benefit these vehicles.”
I live in California and I deal with the challenges of one sided politics here. Vicki and I have deep roots that are not easily severed so as to provide an easy exit from the state. Where there is smoke, there is fire. Like the canary in the coalmine, or the frog in the hot water feeling the heat before it kills him, this forum provides a means of sharing with fellow members that our enjoyment of these vehicles is being seriously threatened. What happens in California has a way of traveling eastward, good and bad.
I very much appreciate your input and contacts you have with CARB members. Sharing information gleaned from your phone conversations with CARB members is appreciated, but I live by the adage “trust but verify”. If you choose to call that “hate speech” that is your right. It does not however, alleviate my concerns, or verify my trust that the ability to use, operate and enjoy the use of my 300G as more than a static display is not threatened.
300LY,
Bob Jasinski
Danville, CA
Bob Jasinski
331 La Questa Dr.
Danville, CA 94526
925-831-9727 home
925-366-0035 cell
From: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of rob bohuslav
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 11:04 AM
To: Steve <saforwardlook@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: John Nowosacki <jsnowosacki@xxxxxxxxx>; Nick Taylor <nicksgaragesd@xxxxxxxxx>; Bob Jasinski <rpjasin@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Chrysler 300 Club International <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: {Chrysler 300} Bad news
"I strongly doubt that any specific vehicle technology will be banned in the market,....."
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 2:33 AM Steve <saforwardlook@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To my knowledge John, the performance vehicles you have highlighted have not been outlawed. Yes, the California ARB is promoting a movement to more climate friendly vehicles through the use of renewable fuels such as electric vehicles with a goal of electricity production from wide scale use of mostly renewable energy in the future. Renewable energy mostly means reliance on increased solar and windmill based technologies with other such means being available in the more distant future more than likely such as fuel cells powered by hydrogen that many manufacturers are pursuing for the more distant future. Gasoline vehicles didn't replace the horse and buggy all at once either - it took time.
Also the performance vehicles you highlight will be eclipsed in the not too distant future because incredible performance is much more easily achieved by EVs with one or more electric motors that deliver performance that is unbelievable if you have ever experienced it such as in the Tesla model S Plaids. New battery technologies are being worked on at present such as solid state ones that will be much cheaper, durable and more quickly charged as technology improves. I strongly doubt that any specific vehicle technology will be banned in the market, rather improvement in propulsion sources will over time obsolete them instead as happened at the last turn of the century.
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 6:22 PM John Nowosacki <jsnowosacki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 7:02 PM Steve <saforwardlook@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thanks Nick for your balanced reply - I did just get off the phone with my contacts at the Air Resources Board and the purpose of the study remains the same - to get a better idea of the contribution of older cars to the overall air quality in this state and to possibly take more of the older vehicles out of our Smog Check program as the State has done in the past. Many Smog Check stations in the state are also getting out of the dynamometer emission testing business and will now only test cars with OBD II systems that are model year 2000 and later and are all equipped with OBD II. All cars built before 2000 model year with or without OBDII still have to pass a dynamometer test, and those owners are now having a harder time to even find a station that will do the testing. Those stations don't want the hassle of keeping their dynamometers well maintained and the emission measurement equipment also maintained which means using calibration gasses that are up to date and their emission analyzers also well maintained. They make much more money on 2000 and newer vehicles where all they need is to check the OBD II system for faults and if there are none, they pass and make a $50 or higher profit in just a couple of minutes with no dynamometer emission related use at all in their shops anymore.
The other input I received from the person I talked with that is higher up in the organization is that decisions to implement "No Drive" zones are typically made by cities themselves, not the Air Resources Board and that many times even those decisions might well be targeted at reducing traffic congestion in those zones - for example, the city of Santa Monica was considering such a restriction to reduce the traffic congestion there when beach goers and diners at restaurants on the ocean piers are big draws to that city but such a restriction was never implemented.
Yes, the ARB was the leader in implementing ever increasing improvements in tailpipe emissions from new cars and was able to take that lead because under President Reagan, there was a carve out in vehicle emissions for newer vehicles in California to adopt stricter emission standards than the other states because of their much more polluted cities than the rest of the nation - usually the Federal EPA adopted California tailpipe emissions standards about 4 years after California led the way. The air in California has been very clean such that complaints about smog are virtually non-existent for years now. The ARB technical staff was comprised of top notch engineers that came from the top colleges in the nation and also with ex-auto industry engineers as well. The technology present on today's most modern vehicles has their fingerprints all over them.
What is it about the Dodge Charger and Challenger Hellcats, for example, that you find so terrible wherein the precise fuel control, good efficiency (in terms of miles per gallon) for the power they put out don't you like??? And given these relatively sophisticated technologies now in use that perform so well also are very clean in terms of tailpipe emissions and relatively easy to diagnose with the help of OBDII and standardized vehicle connectors that help technicians to diagnose any problems within those vehicles. OBD II was invented by the ARB alone with no input from EPA and that was not an easy job since the auto industry fought like Hell to not allow it to be implemented but ultimately lost. The auto industry hated that regulation because in order to keep the check engine lights off and not turn customers away, they had to make more durable cars and that cost them some money. But now we have many vehicles that can go 200K miles before being retired and not 100K as was the norm. What is so evil about that?
I find all this hate misplaced towards that agency since their leadership and grasp of engineering technology and staff that used the same modeling sources that the auto industry sources used themselves to develop precise models of engineering improvements before developing and implementing them and setting new vehicle requirements for both emissions and powertrain efficiency and performance.that owners would appreciate as well.
Personally, it seems folks these days find it easy to hate rather than rationalize and study the real facts before making their minds up about matters based on misleading or false information that seems to be thrown at us non stop these days.
Steve Albu
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 12:08 PM Nick Taylor <nicksgaragesd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Don't panic!
CARB does these studies from time to time and each time they find that collector cars contribute so little to pollution in the state that no action is necessary. This is totally separate from having emission free zones in cities.
They are actually planning to roll back the biennial emissions testing for older vehicles. Currently vehicles that are 1975 and older are not subject to the smog testing. That will change to a newer year. At one point it was supposed to automatically change each year.
The difference this year with the CARB study is that social media has turned this into a freak out session through the classic car community, encouraging owners not to respond to the study. They know how many classic cars are registered in the state, if you don't tell them how many miles you drive them, they can, and will, assume that you are driving them more than you are.
Nick
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 8:12 AM Bob Jasinski <rpjasin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/01dc01d9f155%240336af90%2409a40eb0%24%40comcast.net.--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CA%2BjApFNG2G6sjnpzohhhtFezkcpKt3wKwe0z_mTH53Q8sKU9Nw%40mail.gmail.com.--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CAMrBHo%2Bt3DOzR1x%3DjDMjfvuBYw7e9r11PTwybTNffyBbf9qEFw%40mail.gmail.com.
--
While I agree with all the great things you said about OBDII and the technology in the modern Gen III Hemi equipped modern cars that make clean power with good mileage and little polution, it still didn't stop the bureaucrats from outlawing these wonderful ICE products.
--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CAMrBHoJ9A81N5LBEzFoaU-RQKxmKN7z4PxyoSyxiO0Surc2BoA%40mail.gmail.com.--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CAGQfsuHFA3eBx-0RjryTtKzFAnByimGhT_0t46mzaeV-hvZVCA%40mail.gmail.com.--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CAMrBHoLrqcjQOkidGXXX%2Bnc2hSNukbhOY%3D3YMvOUv3ZFUDAHvw%40mail.gmail.com.--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/651692fa.050a0220.b2003.0445SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN%40gmr-mx.google.com.
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network
Archive Sitemap