PDA

View Full Version : Pop your hood


hdriven
06-23-2009, 5:55 PM
Hi there guys, If you get pulled over in a "sporty" "Japanese" "raced" out car and the officer asks you to pop the hood do you have to do it? I thought that they needed some sort of probable cause to search and looking under the hood is a form of searching. So, do I have to open my hood?

P.S. I drive an old 1978 BMW that looks "nice," would a cop ask me to pop my hood or would I be more of a target in a Honda?

Ron-Solo
06-23-2009, 6:29 PM
Hi there guys, If you get pulled over in a "sporty" "Japanese" "raced" out car and the officer asks you to pop the hood do you have to do it? I thought that they needed some sort of probable cause to search and looking under the hood is a form of searching. So, do I have to open my hood?

P.S. I drive an old 1978 BMW that looks "nice," would a cop ask me to pop my hood or would I be more of a target in a Honda?

There are sections in the vehicle code that give a lot of leeway when inspecting a vehicle to ensure it complies with the vehicle code.

Pretty much if the engine doesn't sound stock (and we all know the car makers do everything they can to make them quiet) that can lead you to believe the engine may be modified outside of the emissions requirements and you're fair game. Most high performance equipment comes with a little disclaimer is very small print that say it is not legal for highway use in California. There is no prohibition against selling it, because he may be a "Show Car" or a real "race car", both of which should be trailered to the show or race.

Keep your car stock and you'll have no problems. If he tells you to pop the hood and you don't, you run the risk of an obstruction charge, having your car towed, a lot of citations for every C/S mechanical violation he can find rather than just one, or possibly a warning.

97F1504RAD
06-23-2009, 6:41 PM
Yes you are required to open your hood for inspection and if you refuse they will impound your vehicle. Is it likely to happen to you in the BMW? NO probably not unless you have it looking like a F&F car. Same applies to the Honda.

odysseus
06-23-2009, 6:48 PM
Basically this stuff got heated up when the "fast and furious" crowd got heated up and street racing started getting more organized and public with a gangsta look. Essentially you can be hassled for a "safety" check or "compliance" check for smog if they want to. It's legal for them to request it, and denial will get you impounded. Its "the game" and both sides play it.

It got so bad I heard of people just with GReddy stickers on stock camry's were getting heated up and inspected. I am sure it still goes on, but I have heard less of it lately, perhaps because I am not really in the street scene anymore. However they can infraction you for a cold air intake if they want to. Even I have heard of people getting a ticket when the CAI has a CARB sticker on it.
.

goathead
06-23-2009, 7:09 PM
Hi there guys, If you get pulled over in a "sporty" "Japanese" "raced" out car and the officer asks you to pop the hood do you have to do it? I thought that they needed some sort of probable cause to search and looking under the hood is a form of searching. So, do I have to open my hood?

P.S. I drive an old 1978 BMW that looks "nice," would a cop ask me to pop my hood or would I be more of a target in a Honda?

thats right up the CHP's alley

Fire in the Hole
06-23-2009, 7:21 PM
Vehicle Equipment Inspections


2804 V.C.: Any member of the California Highway Patrol upon reasonable belief that any vehicle is being operated in violation of any provisions of this code or is in such unsafe condition as to endanger any person, may require the driver of the vehicle to stop and submit to an inspection of the vehicle, and its equipment, license plates, and registration card.




2806 V.C.: Any regularly employed and salaried police officer or deputy sheriff, or any reserve police officer or reserve deputy sheriff listed in Section 830.6 of the Penal Code, having reasonable cause to believe that any vehicle or combination of vehicles is not equipped as required by this code or is in any unsafe condition as to endanger any person, may require the driver to stop and submit the vehicle or combination of vehicles to an inspection and those tests as may be appropriate to determine the safety to persons and compliance with the code.

Amended Sec. 5, Ch. 292, Stats. 2003. Effective January 1, 2004

bohoki
06-23-2009, 9:17 PM
what if instead of hood pins you used little luggage locks and dont know the combo?

Fire in the Hole
06-23-2009, 9:21 PM
what if instead of hood pins you used little luggage locks and dont know the combo?

Very insightfull. I'm sure that would work well. Or as my old philosophy professor use to answer what if questions, "I don't know. What if a bull frog had wings, would it still bump it's *** jumping from lilly pad to lilly pad?"

tyrist
06-23-2009, 9:40 PM
Yup you have to pop the hood. We can also inspect certain equipment items inside of the passenger compartment as well. Test the brakes, hi beams and alike.

Ron-Solo
06-23-2009, 10:10 PM
what if instead of hood pins you used little luggage locks and dont know the combo?

Hmmmm.............Let's see.........bolt cutters.......tow truck......take you to jail for obstructing.......shine it on........what kind of mood am I in today........

Ron-Solo
06-23-2009, 10:11 PM
Vehicle Equipment Inspections


2804 V.C.: Any member of the California Highway Patrol upon reasonable belief that any vehicle is being operated in violation of any provisions of this code or is in such unsafe condition as to endanger any person, may require the driver of the vehicle to stop and submit to an inspection of the vehicle, and its equipment, license plates, and registration card.




2806 V.C.: Any regularly employed and salaried police officer or deputy sheriff, or any reserve police officer or reserve deputy sheriff listed in Section 830.6 of the Penal Code, having reasonable cause to believe that any vehicle or combination of vehicles is not equipped as required by this code or is in any unsafe condition as to endanger any person, may require the driver to stop and submit the vehicle or combination of vehicles to an inspection and those tests as may be appropriate to determine the safety to persons and compliance with the code.

Amended Sec. 5, Ch. 292, Stats. 2003. Effective January 1, 2004


Thanks Fire, I was having a brain fade and couldn't remember the sections.

Fire in the Hole
06-23-2009, 10:38 PM
Thanks Fire, I was having a brain fade and couldn't remember the sections.


The cobwebs of my mind.

tyrist
06-23-2009, 10:45 PM
Just so everyone reading this realizes you really have to be horrible for us to go to all this trouble. I have only used the citation continuation sheet once. The guy talked himself into getting the hook up.

SVT-40
06-23-2009, 11:42 PM
what if instead of hood pins you used little luggage locks and dont know the combo?

That's one of the many reasons ALL our units had a nice big pair of bolt cutters in each trunk. Never had to use them on hood locks though. But I imagine they would cut them like a hot knife through butter:43:.

bohoki
06-23-2009, 11:52 PM
That's one of the many reasons ALL our units had a nice big pair of bolt cutters in each trunk. Never had to use them on hood locks though. But I imagine they would cut them like a hot knife through butter:43:.

sounds like destruction of property without a warrant

hmm i guess there is no more 4th amendment if they are allowed to enter your car to check for lights and signals and happen to find something else after smelling something

nyokKFIecIo

so all the angry officer had to do was say give me the keys i need to check your high beams you turn them on buy opening this ashtray right? oops

MILLITIAof1
06-24-2009, 4:41 AM
This is why I love my 60's cars(no emissions), but the 20+ sound violations I have gotten kinda suck... Like the old sayin says, if its too loud your too old:D

SVT-40
06-24-2009, 12:24 PM
sounds like destruction of property without a warrant

hmm i guess there is no more 4th amendment if they are allowed to enter your car to check for lights and signals and happen to find something else after smelling something


Not so. Remember the 4th amendment guards against UNREASONABLE searches and seizures. Not ALL searches or inspections. So if you don't want to be the possible subject of ANY search or inspection regarding a vehicle.....

Easy solution. Don't own one.

If you do though you must abide by the law and have your vehicle equipped per the vehicle code.

If you alter your vehicle so it is not in compliance with the law then you are inviting an inspection. If you have anything else in your car which could lead officer to believe there is contraband or illegal items there, It is you who are allowing the search by your actions.

In other words take responsibility for your actions, and what fines or issues come from these actions. Don't pass the blame to LEO's as "violating your 4th amendment rights"



There is no requirement to obtain a warrant, to as you said " destroy " property. If during a legal stop the subject you are checking impedes your legal efforts to inspect or search. You can use reasonable force to overcome or negate his resistance.

Or for officers safety.

As in you stop someone and they tell you they have needles in their pockets. You would not let them reach into their pocket, and you certainly would not reach in also. Using scissors to cut the pocket open is considered very reasonable.

Remember officers are only reacting to the behavior of the subjects they stop.

In the case of the hood pin locks. If the officer believed the driver was lying about the lock combination it could be reasonable to remove them (cut them) AFTER giving the driver ample opportunity to remove them themselves.

If the same car was stopped and the driver was a middle aged woman who told the officer the car was her sons car, then the officer could reasonably assume the woman would not have the combo, and thus would not have reason to cut the locks.

Lyte-
06-24-2009, 12:52 PM
Basically this stuff got heated up when the "fast and furious" crowd got heated up and street racing started getting more organized and public with a gangsta look. Essentially you can be hassled for a "safety" check or "compliance" check for smog if they want to. It's legal for them to request it, and denial will get you impounded. Its "the game" and both sides play it.

It got so bad I heard of people just with GReddy stickers on stock camry's were getting heated up and inspected. I am sure it still goes on, but I have heard less of it lately, perhaps because I am not really in the street scene anymore. However they can infraction you for a cold air intake if they want to. Even I have heard of people getting a ticket when the CAI has a CARB sticker on it.
.

I recieved a smog ref ticket a couple years back in my honda.

I had all CARB legal items on my car with the appropriate numbers and information with me in the car.

I had to pay for the smog ref to inspect my car and I went to court, All charges were dismissed and I filed an complaint against the officer as I felt he only gave me the ticket because I was black. I suppied the officer with the appropriate paperwork at the time I was pulled over and he still choose to give me the ticket.

Lyte-
06-24-2009, 12:56 PM
That's one of the many reasons ALL our units had a nice big pair of bolt cutters in each trunk. Never had to use them on hood locks though. But I imagine they would cut them like a hot knife through butter:43:.

And if you looked under the hood and find no equipment violations what would be my recourse seeing that you just imobilized my car for no reason???

I was stopped once in my boyfriend car which had hood locks because of theives and I did not have the keys to the hood. I explained that to the officer and let him search my keys. He said he could cut the locks I then asked him how would I get home with out being able to secure the hood because he removed what was securing it, he opted not to cut the locks.

Ron-Solo
06-24-2009, 12:57 PM
I recieved a smog ref ticket a couple years back in my honda.

I had all CARB legal items on my car with the appropriate numbers and information with me in the car.

I had to pay for the smog ref to inspect my car and I went to court, All charges were dismissed and I filed an complaint against the officer as I felt he only gave me the ticket because I was black. I suppied the officer with the appropriate paperwork at the time I was pulled over and he still choose to give me the ticket.

This forum is for non-law enforcement to ask questions, not relate their personal horror stories that are not appropriate for this forum. If you have a question, please ask it in a civil manner and we will be happy to try and give you accurate information related to your question. Please review the sticky on the rules for his forum. Thanks.

Ron-Solo
06-24-2009, 1:01 PM
And if you looked under the hood and find no equipment violations what would be my recourse seeing that you just imobilized my car for no reason???

I was stopped once in my boyfriend car which had hood locks because of theives and I did not have the keys to the hood. I explained that to the officer and let him search my keys. He said he could cut the locks I then asked him how would I get home with out being able to secure the hood because he removed what was securing it, he opted not to cut the locks.

Lyte,

To answer your question, previous posts have indicated what they legally "could" do, not necessarily what they "would" do when faced with someone who refused to comply with a lawful request. Most officers try to apply common sense to the equation.

Lyte-
06-24-2009, 1:01 PM
Okay officer

Kestryll
06-24-2009, 1:01 PM
This forum is for non-law enforcement to ask questions, not relate their personal horror stories that are not appropriate for this forum. If you have a question, please ask it in a civil manner and we will be happy to try and give you accurate information related to your question. Please review the sticky on the rules for his forum. Thanks.
You're taking too narrow a view of the rules.
There is nothing wrong with her post, it is even in keeping with the topic of the thread given that it is a reply to a post addressing the issue.

bohoki
06-24-2009, 1:01 PM
If the same car was stopped and the driver was a middle aged woman who told the officer the car was her sons car, then the officer could reasonably assume the woman would not have the combo, and thus would not have reason to cut the locks.


what? if the officer thinks their are illegal engine modifications and believes the person doesn't have the combo they wont cut it off but if they think they know the combination they will cut them off

is that what you just said?

wow

Lyte-
06-24-2009, 1:03 PM
Lyte,

To answer your question, previous posts have indicated what they legally "could" do, not necessarily what they "would" do when faced with someone who refused to comply with a lawful request. Most officers try to apply common sense to the equation.

I understand that as the officer opted not to do so...

But there may be a time that an officer chooses to cut the hood locks and he will find nothing illegal under the hood.

What would be my recourse at that time as the car would be rendered in operateable as I would no longer be able to secure the hood

Kestryll
06-24-2009, 1:09 PM
In the case of the hood pin locks. If the officer believed the driver was lying about the lock combination it could be reasonable to remove them (cut them) AFTER giving the driver ample opportunity to remove them themselves.

If the same car was stopped and the driver was a middle aged woman who told the officer the car was her sons car, then the officer could reasonably assume the woman would not have the combo, and thus would not have reason to cut the locks.

This sounds a bit dicey, so profiling by gender and age is cool but race is not?

While I understand officer discretion this sounds a bit too subjective to me.
Whether or not you destroy my property under color of authority depends on my age, gender and if you think I'm lying?

I suspect there is more to this then was initially typed.

Ron-Solo
06-24-2009, 1:14 PM
I understand that as the officer opted not to do so...

But there may be a time that an officer chooses to cut the hood locks and he will find nothing illegal under the hood.

What would be my recourse at that time as the car would be rendered in operateable as I would no longer be able to secure the hood

I wish I could give you a hard and fast answer to that, but there really isn't one. If it were me, I'd assist in securing the hood so it was safe to drive. I always carry things like small lengths of wire, zip ties, etc in my patrol bag along with a few basic tools (screwdrives, pliers, crescent wrench, etc) that may come in handy during the shift for a variety of reasons. I've had to cut locks off gates during suspect searches and wanted to leave it somewhat secured when done. Not perfect solution, but it helps.

Lyte-
06-24-2009, 1:19 PM
It does but he brings me to another question.

What if the officer who for example cut the locks and refuses to secure it and left??

I am not trying to be difficult just wondering.

1911su16b870
06-24-2009, 1:29 PM
I do not believe an officer would be allowed to cut the hood locks of a pulled over vehicle with out a warrant.

But I could see the officer arresting the driver for PC148 for impeding a VC 2804/2806 inspection, which would result in the car being impounded until a warrant was issued...

Ron-Solo
06-24-2009, 1:30 PM
It does but he brings me to another question.

What if the officer who for example cut the locks and refuses to secure it and left??

I am not trying to be difficult just wondering.

In my opinion, you would have a valid personnel complaint against the officer and could possibly file a civil claim to re-imburse you for the costs associated with getting your car operational. While you can file a claim, it doesn't mean you would automatically collect. There are a lot of variables that come into play.

To avoid such a situation, my personal recommendation is to make sure there is always a set of keys in the car, even if you really don't want them looking. If they have PC, and want to look bad enough, they can cut the locks. Also, should you develop mechanical problems on the road somewhere, you're going to need access for the auto club or whatever tow or friend comes to assist.

Ron

Lyte-
06-24-2009, 1:38 PM
True, But I do have a auto club membership so its a non issue for me in most cases. It would be very frustrating and a complete waste of my time to wait either for someone to bring me something to secure my hood or wait for a tow truck so I would more then likely file a complaint. It would not warrant a law suit as replacement locks would not cost much money.


How ever the type of locks that were on the hood of the car were not standard locks they were more like the lock that is built into fridges (so its not like I can just go have someone cut an extra key for those) so by trying to cut these off the officer would have also damaged the expensive carbon fiber hood. That would have been worth suing for as the replacement cost of that is much higher.

Thank you for answer my question, and I would like to add that for the most part police officers here in OC have been very professional and I have had few bad experiences.

97F1504RAD
06-24-2009, 1:43 PM
The law is flawed in that it give the officer the ability to pick on cars simply because he thinks it might be modified. Regardless. There have been cases where LEO have pulled cars over strictly because they had some sticker on the car of a performace product or simply for having a body kit on the car.. This is no different than a LEO pulling someone over for having a NRA sticker on the car and wanting to search for gun.

AJAX22
06-24-2009, 2:20 PM
How does this apply to Pre 1976 vehicles which are not subject to emission regulation?

are there any age/type restrictions on what the officer can inspect?

what if the car is a special construction? or registered in another state? Can they still inspect it?

SVT-40
06-24-2009, 2:23 PM
And if you looked under the hood and find no equipment violations what would be my recourse seeing that you just imobilized my car for no reason???

I was stopped once in my boyfriend car which had hood locks because of theives and I did not have the keys to the hood. I explained that to the officer and let him search my keys. He said he could cut the locks I then asked him how would I get home with out being able to secure the hood because he removed what was securing it, he opted not to cut the locks.

The officer in the above scenario acted in a reasonable manner and made a good decision. To me The point to the smog equipment laws was for the owner of the vehicle to be responsible. Not someone who maybe due to unknown circumstance be driving it at the time.

Please guys All these scenarios are hypothetical. Originally I intended the cutting the hinge pin lock comment as a joke, Really lighten up a little.:TFH: But never say never to ANY situation.

I can think of an easy solution to replacing hinge pin locks.

Flex cuffs. They would allow the legal operation of the vehicle.

As for your recourse. Well if you knew the vehicle was legally equipped and still refused to open the locks, I would say it is on your dime.

But you would have the option to file a claim with the department.

SVT-40
06-24-2009, 2:28 PM
what? if the officer thinks their are illegal engine modifications and believes the person doesn't have the combo they wont cut it off but if they think they know the combination they will cut them off

is that what you just said?

wow

It's called discretion. The point of the smog laws as far as I'm concerned if for the owner to be responsible.

Not the owners mother. That's the reason for different treatment.

Common sense should and usually does play some roll in making decisions.

SVT-40
06-24-2009, 2:37 PM
How does this apply to Pre 1976 vehicles which are not subject to emission regulation?

are there any age/type restrictions on what the officer can inspect?

what if the car is a special construction? or registered in another state? Can they still inspect it?

As I remember any owner of "pre smog" vehicle is pretty much free to do as they wish emissions wise. I'm not sure if the cut off is 1976 though.

As for the second question, I don't understand the "age" part of the question.

As far as what he can inspect. Well pretty much all of the equipment related to lights, safety equipment and smog.

Special constructions will have a "year" assigned to them, and would have to comply with the smog rules you that aged vehicle. There would probably be exceptions for some equipment also.


The other state thing is tricky. Usually most don't ( I didn't) cite out of staters for equipment type violations. Now if the driver lived in Calif and had his vehicle registered out of state there was a specific section to use in that circumstance.

MILLITIAof1
06-24-2009, 2:43 PM
The officer in the above scenario acted in a reasonable manner and made a good decision. To me The point to the smog equipment laws was for the owner of the vehicle to be responsible. Not someone who maybe due to unknown circumstance be driving it at the time.

Please guys All these scenarios are hypothetical. Originally I intended the cutting the hinge pin lock comment as a joke, Really lighten up a little.:TFH: But never say never to ANY situation.

I can think of an easy solution to replacing hinge pin locks.

Flex cuffs. They would allow the legal operation of the vehicle.

As for your recourse. Well if you knew the vehicle was legally equipped and still refused to open the locks, I would say it is on your dime.

But you would have the option to file a claim with the department.

Some people like their privacy and not having their personal vehicle touched because of some bs reason.

I dont care if your a cop, fbi, or the gd president.. you dont touch my chick or my car.

SVT-40
06-24-2009, 2:47 PM
This sounds a bit dicey, so profiling by gender and age is cool but race is not?

While I understand officer discretion this sounds a bit too subjective to me.
Whether or not you destroy my property under color of authority depends on my age, gender and if you think I'm lying?

I suspect there is more to this then was initially typed.

I answered most of your questions in my above replies.

The only other thing I can add is a question.

Do you reasonably believe the owner of a vehicle would go to the trouble and expense to install locking hood pins on his vehicle and not have the ability to open said pins?

I really doubt it.

Remember decisions made by LEO's are made based on the TOTALITY of the circumstances and facts of that particular incident.

It's very difficult to make up a "perfect scenario" where there is only one correct answer or course of action. There are usually many different right answers.

As for your use of the term "profiling". Well that just doesn't ring true. I used the scenario about the middle aged woman to make a point and show how two distinctly different drivers of the same vehicle "could" be treated differently. According to the law the violation did occur. But using common sense and discretion will sometimes lead to different outcomes.

I really hope you don't desire a world where the law is only black and white? and there is no discretion?

If that's the case everyone going one MPH over the limit would be cited. Every "rolling" stop would be cited. People with a little itty bit of marijuana would be cited. and so on.

Not the world I would like to live in.

SVT-40
06-24-2009, 2:54 PM
Some people like their privacy and not having their personal vehicle touched because of some bs reason.

I dont care if your a cop, fbi, or the gd president.. you dont touch my chick or my car.

I'm not being contrary, but if you drive on the highway and either drive or equip your vehicle in an illegal way.

It's not the Cops fault.

It's your actions that you get pulled over and cited.

As for your "chick" ..... well never mind.... ;) Only kidding.

CaliTheKid
06-24-2009, 3:15 PM
SVT-40-- Really well crafted responses. You write some good paper.

AJAX22
06-24-2009, 3:40 PM
As I remember any owner of "pre smog" vehicle is pretty much free to do as they wish emissions wise. I'm not sure if the cut off is 1976 though.

As for the second question, I don't understand the "age" part of the question.

As far as what he can inspect. Well pretty much all of the equipment related to lights, safety equipment and smog.

Special constructions will have a "year" assigned to them, and would have to comply with the smog rules you that aged vehicle. There would probably be exceptions for some equipment also.


The other state thing is tricky. Usually most don't ( I didn't) cite out of staters for equipment type violations. Now if the driver lived in Calif and had his vehicle registered out of state there was a specific section to use in that circumstance.

The cut off is definitely 1976... I bought my 1977 pickup truck with the understanding that I would not have to smog it the next year.... and then Arnold eliminated the rolling exemption... so now I have a 1 year shy vehicle for the rest of time.

As far as age, It was my understanding that a car only had to comply with the rules at the time it was constructed/titled... i.e. a 32 ford only has to comply with the 1932 safety/lighting/smog/mirror requirements, etc. a 1962 dart does not have to have seatbelts and can run multiple headlights etc.

What I was wondering was if there was a specific exemption in CA which waved basicly everything if the vehicle was older than a specific date.

It was my understanding as well that under a certain GVW at one time roadsters were also able to be registered as motorcycles and were able to be exempted from ALL regulation.

I don't mean to ask a bunch of pesky questions, but I really really really don't like people telling me what I can do with my vehicle and would like to avoid being in that situation..

odysseus
06-24-2009, 3:46 PM
As far as age, It was my understanding that a car only had to comply with the rules at the time it was constructed/titled... i.e. a 32 ford only has to comply with the 1932 safety/lighting/smog/mirror requirements, etc. a 1962 dart does not have to have seatbelts and can run multiple headlights etc.

Just as a side note to this conversation, the California Air Resources Board is actively attempting to screw with this exemption. It comes up from time to time leaking out of their offices. They are toying with the idea of pushing smog requirements on pre 1976 cars.

I could see a situation with the insanity of CARB that only vehicles registered as "historic" vehicles be allowed to continue, with again massively controlled low annual mileage restrictions.

This is their power hungry path, as with other things they do, which has no basis in reality and science.
.

SVT-40
06-24-2009, 3:54 PM
The cut off is definitely 1976... I bought my 1977 pickup truck with the understanding that I would not have to smog it the next year.... and then Arnold eliminated the rolling exemption... so now I have a 1 year shy vehicle for the rest of time.

As far as age, It was my understanding that a car only had to comply with the rules at the time it was constructed/titled... i.e. a 32 ford only has to comply with the 1932 safety/lighting/smog/mirror requirements, etc. a 1962 dart does not have to have seatbelts and can run multiple headlights etc.

What I was wondering was if there was a specific exemption in CA which waved basicly everything if the vehicle was older than a specific date.

It was my understanding as well that under a certain GVW at one time roadsters were also able to be registered as motorcycles and were able to be exempted from ALL regulation.

I don't mean to ask a bunch of pesky questions, but I really really really don't like people telling me what I can do with my vehicle and would like to avoid being in that situation..

Hey, these are not pesky questions. That's why this forum is here.

I don't have a copy of a Calif Vehicle Code handy, But there are many exemptions base on year and weight.

Probably you best place to get the absolutely correct answers is buy yourself a copy of the Vehicle code. They are pretty cheap. and make good bathroom reading.They are available at all DMV offices.

To bad about your 77 P/U. That was a cheap shot by the Gov.

Fire in the Hole
06-24-2009, 5:03 PM
Maybe I can answer one of your questions. You are correct about equipment of vehicles being allowed on all CA roads, in the way they rolled off the assembly line. Except for child seats of course. If you have a model A Ford, and little kids... But then that is not a permanate attachment. If you own a Desoto or a Studebaker, without back-up lamps, horn, or safety belts, etc. then you do not have to retro-fit them.

I can't answer your roadster question. The DMV would be the place to take that one for registration questions.

Rule .308
06-24-2009, 6:02 PM
No vehicles are smog exempt, they must all retain the emissions equipment and original configuration that they rolled off the assembly line with, no exceptions. Just because the pre '75 cars are exempt from inspections it does not mean you have free rein to stuff what ever you want under the hood. Just like back in the day when they made 8500 GVW vehicles exempt, i.e. motorhomes, everybody ripped off the smog crap and stuffed performance cams and manifolds in their R.V.s. Well, that boomeranged and bit them in the butt fast, they changed the law a few years later and made them all subject to emissions testing and and all of these fools got caught flat footed with modified engines. Anybody know what the cost limit is for missing, modified, or disconnected emissions equipment? I'm sure you can guess that there is no limit. Just because you are not subject to smog inspections does not mean that you can modify your car.

97F1504RAD
06-24-2009, 7:13 PM
The officer in the above scenario acted in a reasonable manner and made a good decision. To me The point to the smog equipment laws was for the owner of the vehicle to be responsible. Not someone who maybe due to unknown circumstance be driving it at the time.

Please guys All these scenarios are hypothetical. Originally I intended the cutting the hinge pin lock comment as a joke, Really lighten up a little.:TFH: But never say never to ANY situation.

I can think of an easy solution to replacing hinge pin locks.

Flex cuffs. They would allow the legal operation of the vehicle.

As for your recourse. Well if you knew the vehicle was legally equipped and still refused to open the locks, I would say it is on your dime.

But you would have the option to file a claim with the department.

The point of the Smog Laws is not for a car owner to be responsible they are a load of crud to be perfectly honest and they do nothing to help curb pollution. It is simply more bureaucratic BS, that is making a friend of some political official money. There are only two companies that even make and sell smog equipment. The entire smog program is a joke and should be abolished and we should go by the feds guidelines.

I know of cars that have the smog equipment removed or modified and the cars run cleaner than they did with the factory stuff. That is how stupid the smog check program is. You can install a high flow aftermarket cat converter and still have the exact same reading yet it flows more and it can be illegal. Simply ridiculous.

This whole things put police officers in a spot they should not even be in to begin with. You should be doing other thing with your time while working like focusing on violent criminals not if some 45 year old guy has modified his car to have it sounds and run better than it does in factory trim.

And I am not saying that you should not crack down on street racing because I fully support that. I do not condone or would I ever condone street racing.

Scratch705
06-24-2009, 7:21 PM
No vehicles are smog exempt, they must all retain the emissions equipment and original configuration that they rolled off the assembly line with, no exceptions. Just because the pre '75 cars are exempt from inspections it does not mean you have free rein to stuff what ever you want under the hood. Just like back in the day when they made 8500 GVW vehicles exempt, i.e. motorhomes, everybody ripped off the smog crap and stuffed performance cams and manifolds in their R.V.s. Well, that boomeranged and bit them in the butt fast, they changed the law a few years later and made them all subject to emissions testing and and all of these fools got caught flat footed with modified engines. Anybody know what the cost limit is for missing, modified, or disconnected emissions equipment? I'm sure you can guess that there is no limit. Just because you are not subject to smog inspections does not mean that you can modify your car.

tell that to my neighbor then, he has a 71 toyota pickup running straight pipes. no cats, and the DMV still sends him his registration every year w/ no requirement to show smog testing papers.

Ron-Solo
06-24-2009, 9:12 PM
The point of the Smog Laws is not for a car owner to be responsible they are a load of crud to be perfectly honest and they do nothing to help curb pollution. It is simply more bureaucratic BS, that is making a friend of some political official money. There are only two companies that even make and sell smog equipment. The entire smog program is a joke and should be abolished and we should go by the feds guidelines.


While I agree that the smog laws are a royal pain in the rear, I have to disagree with you that they do nothing to help polution. Having lived in the greater LA area all my life, I believe it is better that it was 25 years ago, when we had 'smog alerts' on a daily basis in the summer time.

97F1504RAD
06-25-2009, 7:53 AM
While I agree that the smog laws are a royal pain in the rear, I have to disagree with you that they do nothing to help polution. Having lived in the greater LA area all my life, I believe it is better that it was 25 years ago, when we had 'smog alerts' on a daily basis in the summer time.

Yeah but the cars nowadays run so clean that you really would have a hard time killing yourself in the garage with the car running. The problem is not the cars, it is the Factories and various other things. The cars really are a very small percentage of the problem.

Fantasma
06-25-2009, 11:40 PM
That is why you drive sleepers, no need to advertise how fast your car is.

colddeadhands
06-26-2009, 12:07 AM
register your vehicle in trinity county. There is no smog.

A good friend of mine back in Livermore drag races legally at drag strips, but a couple of his cars are registered on the street. I've been in one of his cars with him a couple of times when he was asked to pop the hood, usually the cops are just looking for nitrous. his cars are heavily modified, roll cages, tubs, fuel cell, etc. He has his fare share of speed tickets but has never been citied for modifications. His cars are all 64-67 GM.

Fire in the Hole
06-27-2009, 8:09 AM
register your vehicle in trinity county. There is no smog.

A good friend of mine back in Livermore drag races legally at drag strips, but a couple of his cars are registered on the street. I've been in one of his cars with him a couple of times when he was asked to pop the hood, usually the cops are just looking for nitrous. his cars are heavily modified, roll cages, tubs, fuel cell, etc. He has his fare share of speed tickets but has never been citied for modifications. His cars are all 64-67 GM.
FROM CA BAR:
Counties that require smog tests:

Alameda
Butte
Colusa
Contra Costa
Fresno
Glenn
Kern
Kings
Los Angeles
Madera
Marin
Merced
Monterey
Napa
Nevada
Orange
Sacramento
San Benito
San Francisco
San Joaquin
San Luis Obispo
San Mateo
Santa Barbara
Santa Clara
Santa Cruz
Shasta
Solano
Stanislaus
Sutter
Tehama
Tulare
Ventura
Yolo
Yuba
Note: Six counties not mentioned above require smog certifications only within certain Zip codes. These include: El Dorado, Placer, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Sonoma.

CARS SIX YEARS AND NEWER

If your vehicle is six years old or newer, you will be charged an annual smog abatement fee when you register your vehicle, rather than being required to provide smog certification.

Exceptions:
The six-year-or-newer rule doesn't apply to nonresident and custom-built cars made since 1976. Those vehicles require smog certification. If you have a custom or specially constructed car, however, you might need a different type of smog certification.

Title Transfer and Smog Requirements:

When you sell a vehicle that is four or fewer model years old, a smog certificate will not be required in order to transfer the title. The buyer will pay a smog transfer fee of $8. If the vehicle sold is more than four model years old, the seller must provide evidence of a current smog certification except in any of the following situations:

The vehicle transfer occurs between a spouse, sibling, child, parent, grandparent, or grandchild.The vehicle was registered and biennial smog certification was submitted to the DMV within 90 days before the date the title transfer took place. A vehicle inspection report may be required for proof of certification.
Required Smog Inspections
The California DMV will mail you a registration renewal notice telling you whether you are required to get your vehicle smogged; it will also tell you if your vehicle requires a smog check at a test-only station. Exceptions include:

Vehicles made in 1975 or priorDiesel-powered vehiclesElectric vehiclesNatural gas powered vehicles weighing more than 14,000 poundsHybridsMotorcyclesTrailersAlso, if your vehicle is six or less model years old, you are not required to obtain smog certification as long as you pay the annual $24 smog abatement fee.

If your vehicle DOES NOT fall under one of the above categories AND you live in one of the following counties, you must take the vehicle for a smog inspection every other renewal period:


FROM THE DMV WEBSITE:

Currently, smog inspections are required for all vehicles except diesel powered vehicles, electric, natural gas powered vehicles over 14,000 lbs, hybrids, motorcycles, trailers, or vehicles 1975 and older.

Vehicles registered in areas subject to the biennial smog certification program are required to submit evidence of a smog certification every other renewal period. Owners of vehicles six or less model years old will pay an annual smog abatement fee for the first six registration years instead of being required to provide a biennial smog certification. The registration renewal notice mailed to you by the department will indicate if a smog certification is required. If a smog certification is required and you have not had a smog inspection, you may still pay your registration fees to avoid any late fees. However, you will not receive your new registration or year sticker until the smog information has been received by DMV.

NOTE: Upon initial registration, nonresident and specially constructed vehicles 1976 and newer require smog certification. The six or less model years old rule does not apply to these vehicles.

When you transfer a vehicle that is four or less model years old a smog certification is not required. (Determine the oldest-qualifying year model by subtracting three from the current year.) A smog transfer fee will be collected from the new owner. When a vehicle is more than four model years old, a seller must provide evidence of a current smog certification except when one of the following occurs:

The transfer occurs between a spouse, domestic partner, sibling, child, parent, grandparent, or grandchild.

A biennial smog certification was submitted to DMV within 90 days prior to the vehicle transfer date (a vehicle inspection report may be required for proof of certification).
Smog certifications are good for 90 days from the date of issuance.

Q: Does my vehicle qualify for a smog exemption?
A: Smog inspections are required unless your vehicle is:

Hybrid
1975 year model or older
Diesel powered
Electric
Natural gas powered and has a Gross Vehicle Weight rating of 14,001 lbs. or more.
Motorcycle
Trailer

Q: When a car is sold, who is responsible for the inspection?
A: The seller is required to provide the buyer with a valid smog inspection certification at the time of the sale or transfer. Smog certifications are good for 90 days from the date of issuance. The inspection is not required on a transfer if a biennial smog certification was submitted to DMV within 90 days prior to the vehicle transfer date (a vehicle inspection report may be required for proof of certification).

Note: Smog certifications are not required for transfers that occur for any motor vehicle that is four or less model years old. (Determine the oldest-qualifying year model by subtracting three from the current year.) A smog transfer fee will be collected from the new owner.

Q: What if my car fails the inspection?
A: DMV cannot provide technical information or advice in this area. We recommend that you call the Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR) toll free number at 800-952-5210. You may be eligible to participate in the Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program (also known as the old vehicle buy back program).

Q: Which counties require a smog inspection for the registration renewal?
A: Counties that Require a Smog Inspection for Vehicle Registration Renewal: Alameda, Butte, Colusa, Contra Costa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Los Angeles, Madera, Marin, Merced, Monterey, Napa, Nevada, Orange, Sacramento, San Benito, San Francisco, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Shasta, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter Tehama, Tulare, Ventura, Yolo, and Yuba.

There are six counties that require smog certifications within certain Zip Codes only. These counties are:

El Dorado, Placer, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Sonoma.

Q: My car is new. Am I still required to get the biennial smog inspection?
A: Vehicles registered in areas subject to the biennial smog certification program are required to submit evidence of a smog certification every other renewal period. Starting January 1, 2005, owners of vehicles six or less model years old will pay an annual smog abatement fee for the first six registration years instead of being required to provide a biennial smog certification. The registration renewal notice mailed to you by the department will indicate if a smog certification is required. If a smog certification is required and you have not had a smog inspection, you may still pay your registration fees to avoid any late fees. However, you will not receive your new registration or year sticker until the smog information has been received by DMV.

NOTE: Upon initial registration, nonresident and specially constructed vehicles 1976 and newer require smog certification. The six or less model years old rule does not apply to these vehicles

Counties that require biennial smog inspections are listed above.

Q: A family member gave me a car. Is a smog inspection required?
A: If you acquire a vehicle that is currently registered in California from a spouse, domestic partner, sibling, child, parent, grandparent, or grandchild, you are entitled to an exemption from the smog inspection. Other family members or relations are not exempt and are required to obtain a smog inspection certification.

For more information read "Transfer a Vehicle Between Family Members."

97F1504RAD
06-27-2009, 8:47 AM
register your vehicle in trinity county. There is no smog.

A good friend of mine back in Livermore drag races legally at drag strips, but a couple of his cars are registered on the street. I've been in one of his cars with him a couple of times when he was asked to pop the hood, usually the cops are just looking for nitrous. his cars are heavily modified, roll cages, tubs, fuel cell, etc. He has his fare share of speed tickets but has never been citied for modifications. His cars are all 64-67 GM.

Just because you are not required to smog your vehicle in that county does not mean you are still allowed to modify the smog equipment and you can still be asked to pop your hood for an inspection.

garandguy10
06-27-2009, 9:11 AM
1962 was the year that emission control standards were required in the state of California for passenger vehicles sold in the state that year. it is illegal under state law and federal law to remove or modify emission control equipment. some exceptions are made in California state law when emission control equipment is no longer available or for state certified equipment. 1968 is when federal law required emission control standards on passenger cars. street registered vehicles can not have illegal modifications even if they are exempt from biannual state smog inspection.

retired
06-28-2009, 12:10 AM
Fire in the Hole, is there is a place on the DMV website or elsewhere to determine which zip codes in Riverside County are exempt. I know I'm dreaming, but it would be nice to know if mine is.

Fire in the Hole
06-28-2009, 6:11 AM
Fire in the Hole, is there is a place on the DMV website or elsewhere to determine which zip codes in Riverside County are exempt. I know I'm dreaming, but it would be nice to know if mine is.

http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/Applications/Ziparea/ZipLookup.aspx

retired
06-28-2009, 12:22 PM
Darn. I'm in a "Partially Enhanced" area, which means I don't have to go to a "Test Only" location; I can go to a regular garage that does smog testing and not pay as much at least.

97F1504RAD
06-28-2009, 12:57 PM
Darn. I'm in a "Partially Enhanced" area, which means I don't have to go to a "Test Only" location; I can go to a regular garage that does smog testing and not pay as much at least.

You could still be required to go to a Test Only. If your make and model of car has a High Emission Profile then you most likley will get tagged as a test only. Doubtful but possible

Question: Why am I being sent to a Test-Only or Gold Shield station? My car has never failed Smog Check.

Answer: Your car was most likely selected by the High Emitter Profile. This means that even though it may never have failed before, it has been identified through a computer-based selection process as a vehicle which is more likely than others to be emitting unhealthy levels of harmful pollutants. Another possibility is that it was selected via a 2 % random selection for program evaluation purposes. In either case, your vehicle has been designated as a Directed Vehicle.

http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/80_BARResources/02_SmogCheck/TestOnly_Directed_Vehicles.html

retired
06-28-2009, 9:26 PM
Oops, I guess I should have gone to the next page.:D I actually saw that page, but didn't read it and returned to the one that explained what a partially enhanced area was.

Thanks for the update and knowing my luck, I'll be expecting to get one of those. Probably this year as a matter of fact since I'm due for a smog.:(

97F1504RAD
06-29-2009, 7:35 AM
Oops, I guess I should have gone to the next page.:D I actually saw that page, but didn't read it and returned to the one that explained what a partially enhanced area was.

Thanks for the update and knowing my luck, I'll be expecting to get one of those. Probably this year as a matter of fact since I'm due for a smog.:(

What kind of car do you have? Year make model?

retired
06-29-2009, 10:54 AM
I have a 2006 Honda Pilot and Toyota Tundra Limited. The registrations are within a month of each other, so this year it will be a lot of $$$ for us due to the jump in fees and probably smog.

97F1504RAD
06-29-2009, 3:24 PM
I have a 2006 Honda Pilot and Toyota Tundra Limited. The registrations are within a month of each other, so this year it will be a lot of $$$ for us due to the jump in fees and probably smog.

If they are both 2006 you are not due for smog for a few more years. However you do get to pay a Smog Abatement fee on your registration. And i doubt that when the time comes those two cars will get tagged as Test Only

retired
06-29-2009, 6:23 PM
That's good to know. Thanks for the info.

1mean76
07-03-2009, 4:39 PM
This is why I love my 60's cars(no emissions), but the 20+ sound violations I have gotten kinda suck... Like the old sayin says, if its too loud your too old:D

dude i roll open headers around here and cops dont say anything to me.