http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/05/576.asp

California Crackdown on Modified Cars
$5 million in federal money will fund a Sacramento, California effort to stop drivers in modified cars.

Unmodified Subaru looks modifiedPolice in Sacramento, California announced Wednesday that they would use $5 million in federal money to begin cracking down on auto enthusiasts who modify their vehicles. The money will be used to form an undercover "Drag-Net" unit to stop motorists who appear to be driving modified cars.

The concept, which originated in San Diego in 2001, has been spreading throughout the state and generated significant revenue for the California Highway Patrol and local departments. In Santa Fe Springs, for example, twelve officers on Drag-Net duty issued 300 citations and impounded 50 vehicles in just one weekend. Several cities have drag-racing ordinances that allow police to auction off seized cars and keep the profits.

Under Drag-Net, San Diego officers come to train other departments how to look out for what they believe to be tell-tale signs of illegal modification such as window tinting, large spoilers, extra gauges or racing stickers. Police say this gives them probable cause to stop and inspect a vehicle and its engine compartment.

In practice, "excessive exaust noise" tickets are the most common violation. California law does not require police to measure sound levels objectively. Instead, according to the California Highway Patrol, the "citation is based on officer's judgment."

Drivers of stock vehicles that come from the factory with some of the characteristics of modified cars have experienced harassment under this provision. One such motorist complained on an enthusiast website that the Calfiornia Highway Patrol was using these programs to make "driving while Asian" a crime, pointing out that the department's own website has several pages dedicated to Asian involvement in street racing and "vehicle modification."

Those receiving a vehicle modification "fix-it" ticket must visit a California Bureau of Automobile Repair office and pay a $35 fee to have their car inspected. If the car fails, a judge can impose another fine of up to $2000 for failing to meet California emissions requirements.

Looks like it's time for me to buy some 18" wheels and get some tint for my IS300...Too bad it's not a turbo, or I'd put on a blowoff valve to make some noise...just to piss them off.

Unmodified Subaru looks modified

Like... THIS ONE?!?

illegal modification such as window tinting, large spoilers, extra gauges or racing stickers.

Gee, the windows are tinted, but well within legal spec. That spoiler? Stock. There is no option to get this car without it. I've got extra gauges, but they came with the car.  Racing stickers? Don't have any, but I hear they give you more HP.

Police say this gives them probable cause to stop and inspect a vehicle and its engine compartment.

No it fucking does NOT! And am I supposed to believe that they know enough about car engines to be logical during their "inspection" when something as simple as firearms knowledge and basic law surrounding it is so poorly known?

Just because some asshats make their cars look a certain way and then do illegal stuff with them does NOT give probably cause to profile ALL cars like that. Kinda like how not everyone with an AK-47 clone killed someone today.

Motherfuckers!

I've already been profiled at night in Benecia, which I'm sure was because of the car (They gave a bogus reason - I "tried to run over an officer") I guess I'm about to get some more harassment now.

Quoted: No it fucking does NOT! And am I supposed to believe that they know enough about car engines to be logical during their "inspection" when something as simple as firearms knowledge and basic law surrounding it is so poorly known?

 I am thankful they don't know too much about the engines on the imports. When they point at a huge turbo, you can tell them its stock, and they won't know the difference. Not that I've ever done that

Quoted: Quoted: No it fucking does NOT! And am I supposed to believe that they know enough about car engines to be logical during their "inspection" when something as simple as firearms knowledge and basic law surrounding it is so poorly known?  I am thankful they don't know too much about the engines on the imports. When they point at a huge turbo, you can tell them its stock, and they won't know the difference. Not that I've ever done that

I've gotten into arguments with people about my car being stock. There are some really stupid people out there who do not know jack about cars, especially imports, and they'll ever admit it. I even show them the owner's manual showing the different parts as being stock, and they think I made it up!

I'm screwed if some anti-racing-know-nothing-about-inports LEO decides to harrass me about my car.

terrible... hopefully they dont care abuot european cars  only japanese cars thanx!

looks like there'll be alot more sleepers out on the road.

Next they will modify the chips in our newer cars that disables the engine past 100 mph so that it reads censors on the road that tell the car what is the fastest it can go.

Hell, while we are at it lets limit water and air intake to help build revenue. What? you have a UTI or Kidney problems? Sorry, no more water for you. Lets also modify butter knives so they can't be sharpened. We should give the enforcing offers double lightning bolt insignias and just hide in the walls when they come around.

Quoted: $5 million in federal money will fund a Sacramento, California effort to stop drivers in modified cars.

What is a modified car?
Is there some sort of definition that is illegal?
20" rims?
I hope this crackdown has some sort of legal and illegal modification definition.

Under Drag-Net, San Diego officers come to train other departments how to look out for what they believe to be tell-tale signs of illegal modification such as window tinting, large spoilers, extra gauges or racing stickers. Police say this gives them probable cause to stop and inspect a vehicle and its engine compartment.

I agree with leelaw here, not only does it not give probable cause, I myself would lawyer up, or find a couple of other people that they wrongfully violated, and call it class action.

In practice, "excessive exaust noise" tickets are the most common violation. California law does not require police to measure sound levels objectively. Instead, according to the California Highway Patrol, the "citation is based on officer's judgment."j

This would never stand up to a legal challenge,  At the motor-cross park, they have a decible reader to see if you have violated the law, a Chp is no expert on decible ratings either. wihtout an electronic reader, its subjective to his hearing.

Drivers of stock vehicles that come from the factory with some of the characteristics of modified cars have experienced harassment under this provision. One such motorist complained on an enthusiast website that the Calfiornia Highway Patrol was using these programs to make "driving while Asian" a crime, pointing out that the department's own website has several pages dedicated to Asian involvement in street racing and "vehicle modification."

A good lawyer could pull records to see how many people are being harrased and not charged, and have a heyday with thisif this is true.


This seems to be another case of divide and conquer, I don't own a modified car, so in my feeble mind this does not affect me.  In reality, it affects anyone who drives a car.
Kind of reminds me of the gun laws, "I don't own an assaault rifle, these laws don't affect me, I just own this hunting rifle"
Someon better do something less the majorities apathy gives away more of our rights. (yes, iknow driving is a privlege and not a right, but all these things associated with it are rights.)

sounds like they are after idiot rice burners, yeah those kids are idiots and their cars are slow but come on how is a sticker probable cause.  As a matter of fact when i use to race the slowest cars were the ones with spoilers and huge gauges.  The "fast" cars (or as close as a honda can get) always had their money into the engine and drivetrain not pointless cosmetics.

Wow, even the cops in my state have better things to do than worry about this kinda stupid shit.

R-32: Its not that our LEO's don't have anything better to do, its just that theres hundreds of thousands if not millions of modified cars on our streets. To the state of California, it's an easy way to get out of debt. Ticket and fine offenders auction off impounded cars and watch our deficit turn into a surplus.

1911Greg: To repeat what colossians323 was saying, during the AWB, many people who considered themselves recreational shooters/hunters didn't view it as a threat. Their rifles and shotguns didn't have protruding pistol grips, detachable magazines, bayonet lugs, or flash supressors. According to you though, these are all just pointless cosmetics, right?

So, just like those recreational shooters and hunters who sat back in smug complacency, when the state of California decides to go after modified cars, it won't be that big of infringement on you or your childrens rights. What the hell, it doesn't affect you!

What next

Quoted: R-32: Its not that our LEO's don't have anything better to do, its just that theres hundreds of thousands if not millions of modified cars on our streets. To the state of California, it's an easy way to get out of debt. Ticket and fine offenders auction off impounded cars and watch our deficit turn into a surplus.

  It's more than just that. Many anti racing laws have been put on the books that are redundant, draconian, or worse. I'm not at all for street racing, but these laws are written very poorly. You can be driving a perfectly legal car, get a random ticket, and YOU have to pay the burden of proving your innocence, instead of the police being required to prove that you were in violation of the law. They can also confiscate vehicles and in some cases auction them off with very little evidence needed at all.

 These laws were knee jerk reactions to incidents involving street racing and death. Sounds even more similar to stupid gun laws now, doesn't it?

Quoted: The same with the twin turbos, free-flow cats, modified exausts ...

 You put a Greddy twin turbo kit on it? You should take it to the strip, It'd be interesting to see how it does.

I use to own a black Acura NSX and would get hassled by the cops all the time.They would pull me over to see if I had insurance,modified exhaust,etc,etc.I would usually get a ticket for tinted windows,and exhaust.Got tired of it so I sold the car and bought a Benz and the cops dont even bother me now.

so if I have an NRA sticker on my car is that probable cause for them to pull me over and check if I have any illegal weapons?

Quoted: I know that when I tint my windows there is a limit (70% on the side windows, anything you want on the back ones) and choose to violate that law. Front license plates are likewise required ... $10 ticket whoopie! I know that speeding on the highway is a ticket too but where safe to do so, and when traffic allows I find triple digits under my foot from time-to-time. The same with the twin turbos, free-flow cats, modified exausts ... they check the car every six years for pollution compliance. i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/paul1960/BilletGrill01.jpg I don't drive a Honda so I'm not worried about it.

...NICE...

I'd love to encounter that in the middle of nowhere, of course me driving my 300C.

I love to put the goofy American "Let's stuff a bigger mill in it" against, for example, the Japanese solution to the same problems, but with finesse rather than brute strength.    

I think they should pull over any car with a Mexican flag on it and check for illegals.

Well I don't drive a Honda either, I drive a WRX.  Nor have I ever been hassled by the cops.  The exhaust, however, is quite loud.  Remember though that it's a good loud since it's a boxer engine.

Trouble is, I don't street race.  In fact I just want an AWD car that's fast and has decent gas mileage.  So why then can't I have a custom exhaust?  Kali is such a joke.

Do you really really think that they won't be able to spot illegal modifications? hell if Abdul or Pedro the Smog Tester can, why shouldn't they?

And the crybabies from out of State, how many states have mandatory inspections?  We don't.

And if you were lucky enough to live here in the 50's and remember how noxious the smog was then with so few people would be forever grateful for the emissions controls.

PaDanby,
this shit is so rediculous for sooo many reasons.

First of all, my turbo motor swap crx with smoke mustangs day and night(1800 lbs + turbo + motor swap will do that to you) and I still get better gas mileage and pollute less, but under cali law my setup is illegal.

Remember, this is the same state the has rediculous gun laws so why would car laws be any different?

Secondly,

They should spend this 5 million dollars and go catch illegals or gang members that are causing way more problems than street racers.

Thirdly,

what the fuck constitutes a modified car. There are cars that from the factory pollute more and have more horsepower than almost all modified cars....IE Hummers(polluting) and 911 turbos(insanely fast).

They need to pull there heads out of their asses and see that this law is full of shit.
jesus christ people...we are in kalifornia for christ sake.

yea how abuot them hemi motors too. big gas guzzlers

Quoted: Do you really really think that they won't be able to spot illegal modifications? hell if Abdul or Pedro the Smog Tester can, why shouldn't they?

  They will be able to spot the most obvious ones, like the ones that have stickers still on the part. Beyond that, no I don't think they can spot the mods. And from my experience, Abdul and Pedro the smog tester can't either.

  I've had 2 cars nearly fail for having the stock parts on them. I had to explain to these guys that they are in fact about to flag as illegal a stock part. On one the Mitsubishi logo on it should be a clue(it was my 100% stock mass air sensor that they thought was illegal????).

 I also had to explain to them that the car came with a turbo stock, and they couldn't test it on the rollers because it was all wheel drive.  I wound up giving them a brief explanation of how the turbo system works, and that was that.

Quoted: And if you were lucky enough to live here in the 50's and remember how noxious the smog was then with so few people would be forever grateful for the emissions controls.

 I can certainly understand that. But you are talking about emissions, this discussion is about modified cars, not gross polluter 30 year old black cloud producing turd boxes that people run until they fall apart. Don't assume one is the other. Thinking that all "illegal" modifications kill the environment is as silly as thinking all assault weapons kill people.


 If you look at when most of these new street racing laws and crackdowns come into play, it is almost every time done as political posturing by someone who wants to get tough, either right after a fatal street racing accident, or whenever they need an issue to get tough on.

Quoted: Do you really really think that they won't be able to spot illegal modifications?

I dunno, the stated guidelines for "tell-tale" illegally modified cars seem to be 100% legal modifications.

Last I checked tinting, spoilers, stickers and exhausts are perfectly legal, and in a lot of cases they are stock items (sans stickers).

hell if Abdul or Pedro the Smog Tester can, why shouldn't they?

They can't. They go "stick probe here, rev engine for x minutes, remove probe, read print-out sheet"

A guy who failed to pass a GED exam can do that.

And the crybabies from out of State, how many states have mandatory inspections?  We don't. And if you were lucky enough to live here in the 50's and remember how noxious the smog was then with so few people would be forever grateful for the emissions controls.

Note that the article does not mention anything about stopping pollution or reducing smog, just going after "modified cars" like stereotyping them will really crack down on street racing.

Right there in the article they said that this was for revenue generation. "The concept... ...has been spreading throughout the state and generated significant revenue for the California Highway Patrol and local departments."

Making up a concept for revenue generation only, under the guise of something else is as stupid as banning evil looking guns under the guise of public safety.

Quoted: Making up a concept for revenue generation only, under the guise of something else is as stupid as banning evil looking guns under the guise of public safety.

How is this for revenue generation. How about you spend this 5 million on finding illegal aliens, siezing all their property and kicking them out of the country.

Seems a lot easier to crack down on 10 million obvious illegals then it does to go on a wild goose chase looking for modified cars.

Quoted: Quoted: Making up a concept for revenue generation only, under the guise of something else is as stupid as banning evil looking guns under the guise of public safety. How is this for revenue generation. How about you spend this 5 million on finding illegal aliens, siezing all their property and kicking them out of the country. Seems a lot easier to crack down on 10 million obvious illegals then it does to go on a wild goose chase looking for modified cars.

Only problem is, is that what you propose makes common sense!

Quoted: Quoted: Making up a concept for revenue generation only, under the guise of something else is as stupid as banning evil looking guns under the guise of public safety. How is this for revenue generation.

Right here:

"The concept, which originated in San Diego in 2001, has been spreading throughout the state and generated significant revenue for the California Highway Patrol and local departments."

Ohh great... They found another way to extort us all in California.

Almost 2 years ago I got a ticket for "Modified smog equipment" or something like that...  I took the air intake box and factory air filter off of my mustang and put on a foot long K&N filter because  its less restrictive.  The ticket was $350 AND I had to take it to a STATE smog guy and give him $35(?) to veify that the car was back to legal.  Waste everyones time and $400 of mine.

The lamest part about it is there was no CARB (CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCE BOARD?)
legal air intake kit for my car at the time so I just piced one together for 50 dollars or so. I could have waited a few months and bought one that was CARB certified ($200) and it would have been the same damn thing just with a little sticker that says "CARB E.O.#1234"

Yes techniclay the air filter was not "legal" but there is no diffrence in function or emmisions in anyway  to the one that has the CARB Executive Order Number.

The Chip told me I was lucky because I was getting a warning on my tinted windows and NO front license plate...  Lucky Me.  

Fun Fact. In LA City if you are caught street racing the cops "Confiscate" your car and then they crush it. Guilty untill proven guilty.

I believe in self-policing.  Break the law, just turn yourself in

Quoted: but these laws are written very poorly.

Hmm, sounds like a great many gun laws in this state and throughout the country as well.



Does anyone remember the tests that Peterson's 4 wheel & off-road did maybe 10 years ago or so? They took a mid 70's Ford truck, got a stock rebuild, took the truck in for smog. They then hopped it up with a different cam, carb, intake, headers, etc. The truck passed by almost 30% cleaner than the stock motor did, however would not pass the visual inspectionhinking.gif

Here's my story on "illegal modifications" and Kaliban rule:

When I was 16, I bought a 1966 Ford Galaxie 500 (428ci). At that time, all cars from 1966 on up had to be smog tested. I had removed the air pump, because it blows air right behind the exhaust valves and is a huge contributor to burned valves. I also set the timing correctly, and adjusted the idle mixture - normal tune up stuff. The car ran fantastic.

When it came time to have the car smogged, it passed he sniff test in flying colors. It failed the visual however. At the time, the state required that I install a NOX kit, which primarily consists of a smog pump, changed timing and caps over the idle mixture screws. It cost me over $300. When they were finished, they had set the timing to 0deg BTDC (!!!) and leaned out the idle mixture considerably (I'm suprised it ran). When it was retested, the hydrocarbon emmisions nearly doubled and it almost didn't pass. The car stumbled and missed, and was backfiring. It wouldn't get out of it's own way. Despite this, the car passed and I was on my merry way. Tell me again how they do this because of environmental concerns. They failed a cleaner running car. I was dumbfounded.

I got home and tore everything back off and put it in a box. The idea was to re-install everything next time I had the car smogged. I ended up registering the car in Tuolomne County (no smog) until they changed the law to only require testing on cars made after 1976.

I don't have a problem with emissions testing. Anybody that has lived in a populous area in California for a long time knows how bad the air used to be. We all want gross polluters to fix their damn cars or junk them. I just wished they used some common sense. If somebody can modify their vehicle giving it increased performance while at the same time maintaining low emissions, then I don't see what the problem is. This proves that the smog laws have more to do with revenue generation than any genuine concern for the environment.

Quoted: It turns out about one in a hundred cars polluted more than the other 99 of them. You use to be able to spot them with the blue "BC" plates. Now I've noticed most of them are sporting California plates. I have no idea how the afford the insurance payments let alone how they made smog exam. "They" need to track down the worse 1% of polluters and crush their cars.

SHH! This isn't about progress.

Quoted: Quoted: Do you really really think that they won't be able to spot illegal modifications? I dunno, the stated guidelines for "tell-tale" illegally modified cars seem to be 100% legal modifications. Last I checked tinting, spoilers, stickers and exhausts are perfectly legal, and in a lot of cases they are stock items (sans stickers). Check again BOZO hell if Abdul or Pedro the Smog Tester can, why shouldn't they? They can't. They go "stick probe here, rev engine for x minutes, remove probe, read print-out sheet" A guy who failed to pass a GED exam can do that. And the crybabies from out of State, how many states have mandatory inspections?  We don't. And if you were lucky enough to live here in the 50's and remember how noxious the smog was then with so few people would be forever grateful for the emissions controls. Note that the article does not mention anything about stopping pollution or reducing smog, just going after "modified cars" like stereotyping them will really crack down on street racing. Right there in the article they said that this was for revenue generation. "The concept... ...has been spreading throughout the state and generated significant revenue for the California Highway Patrol and local departments." Making up a concept for revenue generation only, under the guise of something else is as stupid as banning evil looking guns under the guise of public safety.

These have been the law here for years.

Exhaust Systems Modifications

27150.1.  No person engaged in a business that involves the selling
of motor vehicle exhaust systems, or parts thereof, including, but
not limited to, mufflers, shall offer for sale, sell, or install, a
motor vehicle exhaust system, or part thereof, including, but not
limited to, a muffler, unless it meets the regulations and standards
applicable pursuant to this article.  Motor vehicle exhaust systems
or parts thereof include, but are not limited to, nonoriginal exhaust
equipment.
  A violation of this section is a misdemeanor.

27150.5.  Any person holding a retail seller's permit who sells or
installs an exhaust system, or part thereof, including, but not
limited to, a muffler, in violation of Section 27150.1 or 27150.2 or
the regulations adopted pursuant thereto, shall thereafter be
required to install an exhaust system, or part thereof, including,
but not limited to, a muffler, which is in compliance with such
regulations upon demand of the purchaser or registered owner of the
vehicle concerned, or to reimburse the purchaser or registered owner
for the expense of replacement and installation of an exhaust system,
or part thereof, including, but not limited to, a muffler, which is
in compliance, at the election of such purchaser or registered owner.

27151.  (a) No person shall modify the exhaust system of a motor
vehicle in a manner which will amplify or increase the noise emitted
by the motor of the vehicle so that the vehicle is not in compliance
with the provisions of Section 27150 or exceeds the noise limits
established for the type of vehicle in Article 2.5 (commencing with
Section 27200).  No person shall operate a motor vehicle with an
exhaust system so modified.
  (b) For the purposes of exhaust systems installed on motor
vehicles with a manufacturer's gross vehicle weight rating of less
than 6,000 pounds, other than motorcycles, a sound level of 95 dbA or
less, when tested in accordance with Society of Automotive Engineers
Standard J1169 May 1998, complies with this section.  Motor vehicle
exhaust systems or parts thereof include, but are not limited to,
nonoriginal exhaust equipment.

Tinting/Stickers

26708.  (a) (1) No person shall drive any motor vehicle with any
object or material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied
upon the windshield or side or rear windows.
(2) No person shall drive any motor vehicle with any object or
material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied in or upon
the vehicle which obstructs or reduces the driver's clear view
through the windshield or side windows.

26708.5.  (a) No person shall place, install, affix, or apply any
transparent material upon the windshield, or side or rear windows, of
any motor vehicle if the material alters the color or reduces the
light transmittance of the windshield or side or rear windows, except
as provided in subdivision (b), (c), or (d) of Section 26708.
  (b) Tinted safety glass may be installed in a vehicle if (1) the
glass complies with motor vehicle safety standards of the United
States Department of Transportation for safety glazing materials, and
(2) the glass is installed in a location permitted by those
standards for the particular type of glass used.

Quoted: Quoted: Last I checked tinting, spoilers, stickers and exhausts are perfectly legal, and in a lot of cases they are stock items (sans stickers). Check again BOZO These have been the law here for years. Exhaust Systems Modifications 27150.1.  No person engaged in a business that involves the selling of motor vehicle exhaust systems, or parts thereof, including, but not limited to, mufflers, shall offer for sale, sell, or install, a motor vehicle exhaust system, or part thereof, including, but not limited to, a muffler, unless it meets the regulations and standards applicable pursuant to this article.  Motor vehicle exhaust systems or parts thereof include, but are not limited to, nonoriginal exhaust equipment.   A violation of this section is a misdemeanor. 27150.5.  Any person holding a retail seller's permit who sells or installs an exhaust system, or part thereof, including, but not limited to, a muffler, in violation of Section 27150.1 or 27150.2 or the regulations adopted pursuant thereto, shall thereafter be required to install an exhaust system, or part thereof, including, but not limited to, a muffler, which is in compliance with such regulations upon demand of the purchaser or registered owner of the vehicle concerned, or to reimburse the purchaser or registered owner for the expense of replacement and installation of an exhaust system, or part thereof, including, but not limited to, a muffler, which is in compliance, at the election of such purchaser or registered owner. 27151.  (a) No person shall modify the exhaust system of a motor vehicle in a manner which will amplify or increase the noise emitted by the motor of the vehicle so that the vehicle is not in compliance with the provisions of Section 27150 or exceeds the noise limits established for the type of vehicle in Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 27200).  No person shall operate a motor vehicle with an exhaust system so modified.   (b) For the purposes of exhaust systems installed on motor vehicles with a manufacturer's gross vehicle weight rating of less than 6,000 pounds, other than motorcycles, a sound level of 95 dbA or less, when tested in accordance with Society of Automotive Engineers Standard J1169 May 1998, complies with this section.  Motor vehicle exhaust systems or parts thereof include, but are not limited to, nonoriginal exhaust equipment. Tinting/Stickers 26708.  (a) (1) No person shall drive any motor vehicle with any object or material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied upon the windshield or side or rear windows. (2) No person shall drive any motor vehicle with any object or material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied in or upon the vehicle which obstructs or reduces the driver's clear view through the windshield or side windows. 26708.5.  (a) No person shall place, install, affix, or apply any transparent material upon the windshield, or side or rear windows, of any motor vehicle if the material alters the color or reduces the light transmittance of the windshield or side or rear windows, except as provided in subdivision (b), (c), or (d) of Section 26708.   (b) Tinted safety glass may be installed in a vehicle if (1) the glass complies with motor vehicle safety standards of the United States Department of Transportation for safety glazing materials, and (2) the glass is installed in a location permitted by those standards for the particular type of glass used.

 Look at the section 27151(b) that you quoted for exhausts. As long as the exhaust is under 95 dB, it is legal.

Your selective quoting of the tinting laws seems to have omitted the parts that make the tint legal. I will post it with the omitted sections included, and highlight the relevant sections for you:

Window Tint:
Summary: As long as you have side and rear view mirrors, the rear side, and rear windows can be as dark as you want. The front side windows can be no darker than 70% light transmission, but even then you must carry with you a certificate from the manufacturer of the tint that it meets CA code requirements. The front windshield can be tinted down to a certain height, as long as you use the right type of tint.

26708.  (a) (1) No person shall drive any motor vehicle with any
object or material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied
upon the windshield or side or rear windows.
  (2) No person shall drive any motor vehicle with any object or
material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied in or upon
the vehicle which obstructs or reduces the driver's clear view
through the windshield or side windows.
  (3) This subdivision applies to a person driving a motor vehicle
with the driver's clear vision through the windshield, or side or
rear windows, obstructed by snow or ice.
  (b) This section does not apply to any of the following:
  (1) Rearview mirrors.
  (2) Adjustable nontransparent sunvisors which are mounted forward
of the side windows and are not attached to the glass.
  (3) Signs, stickers, or other materials which are displayed in a
7-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest removed
from the driver, signs, stickers, or other materials which are
displayed in a 7-inch square in the lower corner of the rear window
farthest removed from the driver, or signs, stickers, or other
materials which are displayed in a 5-inch square in the lower corner
of the windshield nearest the driver.
  (4) Side windows which are to the rear of the driver.
  (5) Direction, destination, or termini signs upon a passenger
common carrier motor vehicle or a schoolbus, if those signs do not
interfere with the driver's clear view of approaching traffic.
  (6) Rear window wiper motor.
  (7) Rear trunk lid handle or hinges.
  (8) The rear window or windows, when the motor vehicle is equipped
with outside mirrors on both the left- and right-hand sides of the
vehicle that are so located as to reflect to the driver a view of the
highway through each mirror for a distance of at least 200 feet to
the rear of the vehicle.
  (9) A clear, transparent lens affixed to the side window opposite
the driver on a vehicle greater than 80 inches in width and which
occupies an area not exceeding 50 square inches of the lowest corner
toward the rear of that window and which provides the driver with a
wide-angle view through the lens.
  (10) Sun screening devices meeting the requirements of Section
26708.2 installed on the side windows on either side of the vehicle's
front seat, if the driver or a passenger in the front seat has in
his or her possession a letter or other document signed by a licensed
physician and surgeon certifying that the person must be shaded from
the sun due to a medical condition, or has in his or her possession
a letter or other document signed by a licensed optometrist
certifying that the person must be shaded from the sun due to a
visual condition.  The devices authorized by this paragraph shall not
be used during darkness.
  (11) An electronic communication device affixed to the center
uppermost portion of the interior of a windshield within an area that
is not greater than 5 inches square, if the device provides either
of the following:
  (A) The capability for enforcement facilities of the Department of
the California Highway Patrol to communicate with a vehicle equipped
with the device.
  (B) The capability for electronic toll and traffic management on
public or private roads or facilities.
  (c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), transparent material may be
installed, affixed, or applied to the topmost portion of the
windshield if the following conditions apply:
  (1) The bottom edge of the material is at least 29 inches above
the undepressed driver's seat when measured from a point 5 inches in
front of the bottom of the backrest with the driver's seat in its
rearmost and lowermost position with the vehicle on a level surface.
  (2) The material is not red or amber in color.
  (3) There is no opaque lettering on the material and any other
lettering does not affect primary colors or distort vision through
the windshield.
  (4) The material does not reflect sunlight or headlight glare into
the eyes of occupants of oncoming or following vehicles to any
greater extent than the windshield without the material.

  (d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), clear, colorless, and
transparent material may be installed, affixed, or applied to the
front side windows, located to the immediate left and right of the
front seat if the following conditions are met:
  (1) The material has a minimum visible light transmittance of 88
percent.
  (2) The window glazing with the material applied meets all
requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205 (49
C.F.R. 571.205), including the specified minimum light transmittance
of 70 percent and the abrasion resistance of AS-14 glazing, as
specified in that federal standard.
  (3) The material is designed and manufactured to enhance the
ability of the existing window glass to block the sun's harmful
ultraviolet A rays.
  (4) The driver has in his or her possession, or within the
vehicle, a certificate signed by the installing company certifying
that the windows with the material installed meet the requirements of
this subdivision and identifies the installing company and the
material's manufacturer by full name and street address, or, if the
material was installed by the vehicle owner, a certificate signed by
the material's manufacturer certifying that the windows with the
material installed according to manufacturer's instructions meets the
requirements of this subdivision and identifies the material's
manufacturer by full name and street address.
  (5) If the material described in this subdivision tears or
bubbles, or is otherwise worn to prohibit clear vision, it shall be
removed or replaced.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Last I checked tinting, spoilers, stickers and exhausts are perfectly legal, and in a lot of cases they are stock items (sans stickers). Check again BOZO <Selective quotation of the law> <E-bitchslap>

Bozo who now?

Divide and conquer?

I got a modified exhaust ticket on my FZR1000 back in the early 90's from a CHP in LA County.

It was, I had a McDanials/Dutchman Racing full pipe with a race can on the end.

I didn't get the ticket because it was too loud.

Yamaha FZR1000's (and others) have an EXUP valve.
It's a valve just aft of the header collector that closes off the collector to create back pressure for the bottom end.
As the RPM's rise the valve opens up.
You can remove the muffler and at idle and engine speeds just above idle it's very quiet.

I got the modified exhaust ticket becuae the cop could not see the "stock pipe meets federal noise standards" disclaimer.

When I got home I cut the stock pipe apart and cut off that piece and rivited it to the backside of the can.

I found a local CHP and had him sign it off.


Back in 1977 I had a '68 El Camino with a 396 in it.
The person who owned it before me had pulled off all of the smog stuff and tossed it.
When I had to smog it, the El Camino failed because the smog pump was missing and the air cleaner assembly was gone.

Funny thing was that it passed the emissions test.

I had to go to a junk yard and find a pump and all of the brackets and shit to hook it up, plus I had to pay $$ to the Chevy dealer to get the air filter assembly.

I think that you are going to be ok if you don't hang out with kiddie racer packs running the streets of SoCal at 2 am racing eveyone with "nawwwwz" or leave every street light with the motor wound up to 8,000 rpms and the fart can blatting.

In another 30 years this state will be full blown communists.

I'm sorry but clear colorless and transparent is NOT TINTING

What part about clear and colorless was hard to understand???


(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), clear, colorless, and
transparent material may be installed, affixed, or applied to the
front side windows, located to the immediate left and right of the
front seat if the following conditions are met:
(1) The material has a minimum visible light transmittance of 88
percent.
(2) The window glazing with the material applied meets all
requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205 (49
C.F.R. 571.205), including the specified minimum light transmittance
of 70 percent and the abrasion resistance of AS-14 glazing, as
specified in that federal standard.
(3) The material is designed and manufactured to enhance the
ability of the existing window glass to block the sun's harmful
ultraviolet A rays.
(4) The driver has in his or her possession, or within the
vehicle, a certificate signed by the installing company certifying
that the windows with the material installed meet the requirements of
this subdivision and identifies the installing company and the
material's manufacturer by full name and street address, or, if the
material was installed by the vehicle owner, a certificate signed by
the material's manufacturer certifying that the windows with the
material installed according to manufacturer's instructions meets the
requirements of this subdivision and identifies the material's
manufacturer by full name and street address.

Ask anyplace that applies "tinting" if they are able to comply with this.  I'll bet you won't find any that  can or will.  Tinting is what he said and tinting  are the sections I mentioned not the sections that talk about CLEAR and transparent.

Now you find a shop that meets the specs

And you can be sure that Abdul checks for mods, because both the Smog and  Auto Repair  run checks and if they ignore them, they lose their licenses.  

Quoted: yea how abuot them hemi motors too. big gas guzzlers

Multi-displacement... look it up.

Quoted: I'm sorry but clear colorless and transparent is NOT TINTING What part about clear and colorless was hard to understand???

 What part of the section below the clear and colorless that I kindly highlighted did you not understand? Obviously, you missed something. But as long as it transmits 88% visible light, and 70% overall light, it is legal. It seems like it is spelled it out very clearly. Or are you saying something that is designed to cut a certain % of light transmission is not window tint? The shop I linked to below seems to think it still is window tint, but they probably don't understand tint laws as well as you.

Quoted:Ask anyplace that applies "tinting" if they are able to comply with this.  I'll bet you won't find any that  can or will.  Tinting is what he said and tinting  are the sections I mentioned not the sections that talk about CLEAR and transparent. Now you find a shop that meets the specs

Ok, it took all of 5 seconds with google. I've looked for it before, and found even more. Here is the first one for you though. I will leave it to you to read down the first page until you get to the part where they describe CALIFORNIA LEGAL TINT. Make sure to note that they call the 70% window film on the front windows "tint".

www.campbelltint.com/automotive.htm

Quoted: And you can be sure that Abdul checks for mods, because both the Smog and  Auto Repair  run checks and if they ignore them, they lose their licenses.

 And YOU can be sure that Abdul may not recognize mods when he sees them. Please read the part where I was almost flagged because Abdul thought my stock airmeter was aftermarket. In addition to thinking stock parts aren't stock, Abdul isn't going to recognize all aftermarket parts.

If it bolts up the exact same as stock, how is Abdul going to recognize a turbo twice the size of the stock one? Answer: he isn't, unless it has big stickers on it.

 If it's inside the engine(cams, pistons, etc), is Abdul going to tear the engine down? No. He MIGHT be able to tell cams if they idle rough, but even that can be explained away with"I must need new spark plugs". Not that I've ever said that....

 What is Abdul going to recognize? air filters that arent CARB exempt. removal of smog parts. aftermarket manifolds, intakes, and downpipes. aftermarket turbos on cars that didn't come with them. BOVs, intercoolers, nitrous, anything with shiny aftermarket stickers on it. Lots of additional wiring in the stock engine compartment that doesn't look like it goes to an alarm would probably make him look twice too.

 In order for these guys to be trained to recognize EVERY aftermarket part, they would have to be intimately familiar with EVERY model of car. And that just isn't realistic.

Hey it's your car if you want to be stupid with it you can be.  

Ask them if that CA legal tint can go on the front window, and where it can be installed.

Quoted: Hey it's your car if you want to be stupid with it you can be.

 Am I being stupid with my car, or are you being ignorant of the law? What is so stupid about understanding the laws, instead of just saying "You can't do that", and calling people bozos?

Quoted: Ask them if that CA legal tint can go on the front window, and where it can be installed.

 What did it say when you bothered to read the link? Obviously you didn't read it, the answers were on that page. I'd also bet you didn't bother doing any research to back up your incorrect opinion on what is legal. Good thing you don't let facts get in the way.

Woops, here's another link, from the a tint industry association website:

www.iwfa.com/iwfa/Law_Chart/State%20Law%20Chart.htm

 Damn, it says the same thing I did. So, are you going to keep on arguing that you are right, and the whole window tint industry is wrong?  You really should let them know that!

Quoted: Quoted: Hey it's your car if you want to be stupid with it you can be.    Am I being stupid with my car, or are you being ignorant of the law? What is so stupid about understanding the laws, instead of just saying "You can't do that", and calling people bozos? Quoted: Ask them if that CA legal tint can go on the front window, and where it can be installed.  What did it say when you bothered to read the link? Obviously you didn't read it, the answers were on that page. I'd also bet you didn't bother doing any research to back up your incorrect opinion on what is legal. Good thing you don't let facts get in the way. Woops, here's another link, from the a tint industry association website: www.iwfa.com/iwfa/Law_Chart/State%20Law%20Chart.htm  Damn, it says the same thing I did. So, are you going to keep on arguing that you are right, and the whole window tint industry is wrong?  You really should let them know that!

Seriously PaDanby, nothing against you and your incorrect allegations, but just drop it.

You're digging a hole and it just keeps getting deeper and deeper.

Quoted:  If it's inside the engine(cams, pistons, etc), is Abdul going to tear the engine down? No. He MIGHT be able to tell cams if they idle rough, but even that can be explained away with"I must need new spark plugs". Not that I've ever said that....

Think he would've believed my old car just needed plugs?

Link to video clip

Quoted: Think he would've believed my old car just needed plugs?

 That sounds very nice. I'd really hope he'd think there was something else up with that car besides plugs.

 I'm guessing it had some pretty extensive exhaust mods he might notice too? Was it idling high?

I need to get a sound clip of my car up.

Paul, that is an awesome car. I would totally go for the greddy turbo kit!!!