Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Should "Beaters" Be Taken Off the Road?
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
No wonder they keep you around, knowing what an upright citizen you are and never doing such a thing. I'm sure the cycle's owner quieted down out of deep respect for you as a model of what he wished to become....
Real World Trade-in Value
Shiftright
Visiting Host
In many cases, yes.
This is in New Jersey which has some pretty strict emissions laws as well. How the heck did this guy manage to get that car on the road?
Does New York have any exemptions in their emissions testing, where if the car fails, but then you spend over XXX amount of dollars to get it fixed and you still fail, then they'll waive you until the next test? Maryland is like that. If your car fails, they'll give you like 2 months to get it re-tested, and the re-test is free. (initial test is $14) If you spend at least $450 on emissions-related repairs and the car still fails, then you get a waiver that's good for 2 years. So you basically have 2 years to stink up all you want, and then just go through the cycle again.
Also, is New York's emissions test state-wide? In Maryland, it varies from county to county. The county I live in has a test, and so do most of the immediately neighboring counties. But where my Mom & stepdad live, down in St. Mary's county, there is no test. So they live down there, but drive up here to go to work, meaning they could theoretically drive a grossly polluting car and get away with it. So maybe that's what's happening in NY? And if so, people can always lie about where they live. For instance, if I really wanted to, I could claim my mother's address as my own, or somebody else's, get my registration info mailed there, and they'd be none the wiser.
I'm sure that if I've thought of it, countless others have actually done it!
I'd like to see these "sniffer cars" that can measure tailpipe emissions when they are in back of the offending car. Since a badly running car could create as much emissions as 50 or 60 healthy cars, it seems like a worthwhile thing to implement. Unfortunately I have heard that the technology for sniffer cars isn't good enough yet.
But I'd like to see that. Sniff your tailpipe and if you are a gross polluter, they call the tow truck and off you go. No ROAD FOR YOU!
I have no problem with a somewhat shabby car, if that's all you can afford, but you have no right to choke me.
As for beaters, it's just common sense to regulate certain forms of conduct incompatible with the general good of all. If your car is dangerous, or is stinking up the neighborhood, it doesn't seem draconian to pull it off the road.
But, to Fezo's point, you can pass inspection and then start smoking a month later and keep running that way for almost 2 years before your next inspection.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
tread on your tires
all the lights working
brake lining on the brakes
no excessive smoke
no excessive pollution
no taped up windows
no body damage that protrudes beyond the car's "footprint"
insurance policy
no frame or suspension rust perforation (surface rust okay)
(re: above--if you can poke a screwdriver through it, you're out).
This is not too much to ask I don't think as it is all safety related, not aesthetic.
Here I have my '86 Spider and a '92 mazda pickup.
The mazda doesn't have a nondamaged body panel on it. The engine makes a constant death rattle. It is almost frigtening to drive. Yet it passed inspection and is legal to drive.
The alfa runs like a top. Doesn't smoke. The body is perfect. All the electrics work. Yet I can't legally drive it on the road because I'm told it doesn't meet emissions requirements.
Out of the 2 vehicles, anyone looking at and/or driving them would assume the truck wouldn't pass while the alfa would. Yet that's not true. Go figure.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
One half of the test isn't good enough. So it makes sense to me. You need to pass both halves, like you need two eyes to pass a driver's test (in most states :P )
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
Right. Basically the stuff they test for in emissions testing is greenhouse gases. Invisible stuff that's often odorless and works its way into the upper atmosphere and contributes to the greenhouse effect, eats the ozone layer, etc. But by and large, won't really do any physical harm coming into contact with a human being. Unless you're exposed to too high of a concentration of it. It may be different in other states, but in Maryland they test for Carbon Monoxide (CO), Hydrocarbons (HC) and Nitrous Oxides (I think...it's abbreviated NOx). Cars nowadays run so clean that I don't think they can kill you anymore with carbon monoxide poisoning, although I guess if you're in a closed-off garage, eventually all the oxygen will be burned off and you'll still choke to death. It's just not carbon monoxide doing it to you.
As for the visible stuff you see, it pretty much remains low-level, near the ground, and doesn't really work its way into the upper atmosphere. It won't eat the ozone or contribute to the greenhouse effect, but I guess it can still cause cancer, respiratory issues, etc, and if there's enough of it and you have an atmospheric inversion that keeps it from dissipating, you could have a re-enactment of Donora PA.
Bzzzzttttt! No, I'm sorry that's incorrect... I've only had one legal eye since I was 10 and have been driving coming on 40 years. Most states work like NJ I think. If you flunk your test at the DMV they give you a form for you eye doctor to vouch for you. Well, that's the way they did it way back when anyway. They haven't sent anyone to grab my license yet...
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
This was a popular summer internship for Raytheon/SBRC when I was in high school. Its called smog-dog and basically they park this full size van on the shoulder of the road and set up an infrared camera/exhaust gas analyzer aimed at the cars going by. Inside the van, a computer reads the data from the analyzer and can map the contents and gases in the exhaust. It also takes a picture of the vehicle license plate although "it was not used for enforcement purposes."
In California, there is a 1-800 number to report gross polluters as well, which I guess flags them for a smog check.
The only gross polluters I have seen lately, have Baja Mexico plates. No way to nail them unless a cop stops them and issues a citation. Not sure if we have any agreement with Mexico on traffic violations.
And the 1-800 number for polluters nets nothing more than a polite letter to the car's owner asking them to please, if they should feel like it, have their car checked because someone has reported that it may be smoking. It is not attached to any type of extra enforcement of cars that get reported.
We need something much more vigorous. I am all for the "beater laws".
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
That must have been quite stressfull for you.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
"Need" is a strong word, which, in my view, should be supported by facts. While I don't necessarily disagree with you, nippon, do we have any data to support this? I find it difficult to endorse new laws based on perceptions and biases.
We also need to consider that, unlike many other industrialized countries, many of our cities and communities, unfortunately, have inadequate public transportation systems. What many of us would agree is a beater may represent the only way that the driver has to get to work, or to a doctor. How would you deal with these issues? Do you think that comparing our beater laws with those of countries with excellent public transportation infrastructures provides a fair and balanced comparison?
I always wondered about that kind of stuff. Seems to me that if there was any real enforcement attached to it, it could actually be abused. For example, if that soccer mom/trophy wife in the Lexus SUV cuts you off or irritates you in some other fashion, just call the 1-800 number and report her, saying that she's blowing smoke. Then, in a theoretical society with enforcement, perhaps said soccer mom would get a letter ordering her to bring her vehicle in for an inspection, or her registration will be suspended. In the end, once her vehicle passed, she'd be sent on her way, but in the meantime it would be one heck of a hassle for her.
That's probably why they DON'T have any real enforcement...simply because it would get abused by spiteful/vengeful drivers.
Again, driving is a privilege, not a right. You have no "right" to a car, none whatsoever. That's why you get a license. You don't need a license to speak your mind or vote. Those are rights.
Nobody is probably more leftie and bleeding heart than I am, but no way I'm going to allow a person to coat the buildings in my neighborhood with poison gas because he's poor. I'd rather give him a low-income tax break on registration fees than let him drive a toxic beater.
Not quite. You have the right to buy as many cars as you can in whatever condition you like. The privilege is to operate them on public highways.
Tightening standards and tests may be the relatively easy part of this issue. While there are probably multiple reasons - economic and psychological - why people drive beaters, I want to hope that the majority of beater owners can't afford something better. If that's indeed the case, or where it's the case, then I think that part of the overall solution to the beater issue should include dealing with the transportation challenges of these folks.
So I guess I'm saying that a lot of people who drive beaters just aren't "car people" at all. Careful maintenance is a waste of money. So they are RE-active, not proactive with their cars.
The people who drive the smoking beaters around here are the type who don't spend money on ANYTHING. Their vehicles look terrible; they dress like they last shopped at the local Goodwill store about 15 years ago; and those guys from Queer Eye for the Straight Guy would walk away in shock after seeing the results of their grooming habits (or lack thereof).
They probably have six-figure bank accounts, though.
RE: poorer neighborhood --- sure there's pride of ownership in every income level but I'm not sure all the $$ goes into maintenance. I'd bet a good deal of it goes into display, which makes sense, if that's the one nice thing you can afford to own.
Just out of curiosity, how are those "Smart Buy" things classified? Back in 1998, one of my friends, who was only 22 and had bad credit, got a new Tracker. The terms on it were $323 per month for 47 months, with a balloon 48th payment of $5600. Or if he chose, he could turn it in and would have to pay something like 10 cents per mile for every mile over 60,000 miles. It was called a "Smart Buy", but it sounded kinda lease-ish. Or rather some kind of hybrid between a lease and a purchase.
And as for how it turned out, when he hit the 48th month, he had about 92,000 miles on it. So he had a choice to either turn it in, pay them $3200 for the honor, and have NOTHING to drive, or cough up $5600 to keep the thing. He kept it. And damn if, the very next month, the transmission didn't crap out!
With these people with the blingy new cars though, I guess it's also possible that they're getting them into 72-, 84-month, or even longer terms? And I guess they'll let them roll over negative equity a couple times, but eventually, even with the longer terms, it'll eventually still snowball to the point that they can't do it anymore and finally get forced to stick it out with their car.
For the newer ones, I think some kind of decent credit is necessary...but one can lease a higher line make for under $500/month, and it seems many will live off credit cards for that privilege. I live in an area where a leased low to moderate optioned BMW 3er is very common.
When my cars were registered in Missouri, we would take them into a WalMart or a Goodyear dealer for inspection. They would find a cracked headlight or something minor and it would set me back $200 or so.
Then I would see cars with $1500-2000 in frontal damage and maybe one functioning light and they would pass without the repairs.
The St. Louis Post Dispatch printed an article showing that some shops passed nearly every vehicle inspected.
It had passed smog, but should it be really be on the road? I don't imagine it's very safe to drive in that condition. Imagine how many people a two-ton Lincoln could take out.....
.....I'm not sure if this car would meet Shifty's definition of a beater, but in poorer areas they aren't that uncommon. I needed 1-800-beaters to call tonight.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
In this case, I actually see two problems. First, with the failed suspension the car is probably going to flop around and be a bit unstable to drive, and will probably get unpredictable right when you need it most...in an accident avoidance situation.
Secondly though, if the front-end is pointing up in the air, then when the car is driven at night it's going to blind every oncoming driver on the road. IMO, that's actually a greater danger than the sloppy suspension. That is a major peeve of mine...badly aimed headlights. Or worse, drivers who have one low beam burn out, so then they drive around with their high beams on all the time!