Emissions testing is a waste of time and money, as are doing “safety inspections”…
The proponents of these things have NEVER been able to prove that they make any difference in air quality or highway safety…
1 Like
I agree, Caddyman. Every statistical study I’ve seen shows there to be absolutly no difference in accident, injury, or death rates with safety inspections. And with emissions testinng there are two obvious problems; (1) while I understand the theory that if all the emissions systems are working properly emissions will be reduced, I’ve yet to see any data that shows any relationship. Far too many cars fail, far too many shops make money, for things that cannot be shown to have any environmental impact, The EPA is able to promulgate rules without, it seems, any responsibility to prove that they’re needed.
A CEL light does not mean one is polluting. And the lack of one does not mean one is not. And most states now are using CEL checks for emissions testing.
In addition, a particular region may have poor air quality readings and not be the one polluting. The pollutants can easily be coming on on upper level winds from another area. Yet the residents of the area with the readings have to test. We had that situation in NH.
It’s about money. Both safety and emissions testing are revenue generators for both the states and for the repair industry, who promotes safety and emissions testing at the legislative levels.
1 Like
I think it is reasonable for the state to insist all the emissions equipment is in place and appears to be connected and working. Beyond that, I’m inclined to agree with others here that stuff like treadmill tests aren’t very effective and just a waste of time and money. Plus there are loopholes galore. Certain kinds of vehicles get a pass. For example, cars older than a certain age – these would be the older carburated cars from the 60’s, 70’s, that would pollute 10 times or 100 times as much as a modern car – these cars are not required to be tested at all.
I disagree. The word “study” immediately makes me suspicious. First, I’d like to know where these studies are, I have never seen one. Second I would like to know who paid for the study and why. Someone has to pay for the study and the one paying usually expects the outcome to match their expectations. Please don’t say “government studies”, they are the worse, I have been involved with too many of them to trust any of them.
"It's about money. Both safety and emissions testing are revenue generators for both the states and for the repair industry, who promotes safety and emissions testing at the legislative levels."
Now that I do agree with, even though I think that the safety inspections and emissions inspections are effective to some degree.
I should have explained the NY inspection process better. They are done by private garages or oil change places that are licensed by the state. The mechanic that does the inspections is also licensed by the state. The shop has to buy an expensive machine that connects the OBD II port in your car to a DMV computer in Albany by telephone and the computer tells the shop if you pass or fail the emissions test. The computer also reads the vin of the car. There is no shop discretion on the emissions part of the test. After the emissions test the mechanic proceeds with the safety inspection.
I always go to an oil change place that doesn’t do repairs except for wipers and light bulbs. They don’t have any incentive for failing your car.
1 Like
I live in NY, and I have to say that unless you have a very old “clunker” sort of car - i.e. you already know it’s marginal for driving, I rarely hear of people failing the inspection. I have heard the inspection can be really stupid, for instance, if your drivers seatbelt doesn’t work, you fail, but the “seat” can be a milk crate - what the seat is isn’t specified in the inspection. Of course, I’m not a mechanic, so maybe they’ve been putting me on…
The emissions stuff seems to be what gets people annoyed because of the cost of catalitic converters or sensors, but I’m pretty sure you can fail one CEL category of emissions and still pass. At least the chain shop said so for my Sisters car…
As to lights, I prefer finding out when it costs me $45 to replace the bulb vs getting a ticket for a headlight out.
Like I said, if you’ve got multiple systems not working or your car is falling apart - you won’t pass inspection. But it’s not like many 5 year old cars are failing either… Maybe the poster(s) usually drive rather old (12+ yr old?) cars?
In NH. you cannot pass with a CEL on. The inspector will tell you what the code is, what is indicates is wrong, and you have to repair the vehicle and return to get stickered. Or let them repair it.
Keith, I’m sorry you feel that way. If I run across one again I’ll attach it.
In spite of all the complaining about inspections, I like knowing that the people around me are pretty likely to have working brakes and working turn signals, as compared to states without inspections.
1 Like
@GeorgeSanJose
Anyway, on my car, all the emissions measurement’s are fine except for the HC emissions at 15 mph.
Can you post the readings for the other gases for both 15 and 25 mph tests?
@lion9car I live in California and am a professional mechanic. We don’t have safety inspections in this state. Believe me, they are sorely needed. I would say at least 1/4 of all cars on the road here would fail your state’s safety inspection for various reasons.
I can’t speak for CA but OK used to have a safety inspection program and according to the state on their surveys about 15% or better of the cars should fail for one reason or the other.
Done right, a safety inspection program could be viable but I was an inspector here and the program was a total joke. The main purpose of the program was to provide revenue to the state troopers pension fund.
Originally the inspection was 2.00 with the mechanic getting a measly dollar and after much outcry it was raised to 5.00 with the mechanic getting a massive 2.00 of that. The state also said that a proper inspection should take over an hour so do the math on wages… 
Imagine the screaming from customers if a shop spent an hour on an inspection at the door rate of 80 or 90 dollars an hour to make the entire process financially viable.
When the state of OK decided at one time to recertify every current inspector I deliberately tried to fail the test by marking 70% of the answers wrong as the program was a pain in my neck and what did they do? Passed me anyway. Due to my answers on the form they even ran an OSBI and FBI check on me and then had a state trooper pay a visit to the dealership to present me with new certificate… 
For approving me, inspections became what’s referred to as “pencil whipped” consequences be darned.
If the car wasn’t a blazing inferno when pulled into the shop it was going to get a PASS.
In NY they are not supposed to scrape the old inspection sticker until your car passes and a new one can be installed. If your car fails then, hopefully, you have some time left in the month to get the car fixed and reinspected. The NYS inspection sticker is always good until the end of the month. Some unscrupulous garages will scrape your sticker before the emissions test and, if you fail, you have no choice but to let them fix it.
In MA if you fail for safety or emissions they replace your sticker immediately with one that has a bright red R on it and the clock starts.
I hated the idea of a safety check when I moved here. After seeing a small segment of the cars while waiting for mine I started to believe it was a good thing. Then two years ago they found a bad ball joint on my truck. I pride myself on doing a good job keeping my vehicles in good shape and for being aware of small changes, detecting things early. This was a total surprise so I was thankful they found it. It was pretty sloppy and definitely needed to be replaced.
Having a half dozen or so cars to sticker every year gives me a good opportunity to witness the goings on. The number of significant issues is surprising but even more so, the number of owners who get mad and refuse to accept there is a real concern is even more alarming. If I’m only seeing such a small population, what’s the true number out there?
There are good and bad shops here as you’d expect. I found a shop that is competent and fast so I always go there. Ran across the gamut before finding them.
TwinTurbo, when I was a safety inspector in OK it was not rare to get crossways with someone over an inspection on a vehicle that would obviously not pass.
One could look out through the front door of the shop and notice a front windshield busted from one side to the other, a bald tire sticking out, and so on and mention up front to the customer the car was not going to pass before the inspection sticker book was even pulled out of the drawer. This would lead to whiny pleas to pass it anyway, looking irate and stalking off, or becoming argumentative about passing it anyway. “I’ll take it right after I leave here and get it fixed” was a quote heard at times.
The law dictated that when a car failed an inspection it must have a rejection slip written up, the customer pays the inspection fee, and the customer then had several weeks to repair the flaw. They could return and get the new sticker with no additional charge if the problem was fixed in that period of time.
Many did not like that rejection slip or the thought of returning so this did lead to some friction too.
Ok, I have that emissions data for you @TwinTurbo. Early 90’s Toyota Corolla.
GSJ says … --all the emissions measurement’s are fine except for the HC emissions at 15 mph. Problem @15 mph HC measurement. Is it O2 sensor or cat or valve clearance?
@TwinTurbo says … Can you post the readings for the other gases for both 15 and 25 mph tests?
A brief history of the HC emissions results. x/y means x was measured, y is the max limit to pass.
Car new: 1/220 @2500 rpm. 1/100 @ idle. (No treadmill)
-
2 years: 4/220 @ 2500 rpm, 16/100 @ idle (No treadmill)
-
4 years: 28/140 @ 2500 rpm, 68/120 @ idle (No treadmill)
+8 years: 31/140 @2500 rpm, 100/120 @ idle (No treadmill)
+10 years: 127/130@15mph (1700 rpm), 48/105@25mph (2700 rpm) (Treadmill)
+12 years: 25/130@15 mph (1700 rpm), 38/105@25 mph (1900 rpm) (Treadmill)
+14 years: 129/130@15mph(1700 rpm), 44/105@25mph(1900 rpm)(Treadmill)
+16 years: 110/130@15mph(1700 rpm), 27/105@25mph(2800 rpm)(Treadmill)
+18 years: 128/130@15mph(1700 rpm), 37/105@25mph(2900 rpm)(Treadmill)
Note: Avg for vehicle make/model/year @15 mph is HC= 28.
The automotive insurance industry does NOT support safety inspections…Why? Because their studies have shown that it makes no difference in highway safety or accident rates…Cars with just one operating headlight somehow manage just as well as those with two…If safety inspections accomplished anything other than enriching the parts and repair industry, the insurance companies would demand inspections be performed. because it would improve their profits…California, with no inspections, has a better safety record than New York or Massachusetts, two states with strict safety inspections…Colorado dropped its safety inspection years ago with no measurable change in accident rates…It’s just another nightmare for lower income people…
2 Likes
WI is getting weird. A couple of tests ago there were bonified test stations, they would check the gas cap for leakage, mirror run under the car to look for problems, do the tests while driving on a rolling bar for different rpms, etc, new standard drive into a shop that is certified, they hook up to OBD, no codes goodbye. I suppose that is fine but back when people cared about pollution there was a proposal to run emission tests on lawnmowers. I like things in the middle and get tired of the pendulum being on this side or that side.
The automotive insurance industry does NOT support safety inspections...Why? Because their studies have shown that it makes no difference in highway safety or accident rates
The insurance industry for YEARS AND YEARS have been lobbying states to institute safety inspections. Every single safety feature in cars were also highly lobbied by the insurance industry.
1 Like