Every time I mention something about anti-antique automobile legislation, I always get tons of retorts saying crap like, "That's just in California...the rest of the nation will never follow in its footsteps." Oh, really? If my state were about to do what Virgina is proposing, I'd move. They currently have introduced a bill that would restrict the use of "antique" vehicles to no further than 50 miles from their residence (Currently, it's 250 miles). On top of this, it clearly states that no such vehicle be used for work-related purposes (commuting included). Their definition of an antique is that of a vehicle 25 years old or older. Doing the math, your grandma's '79 Regal falls under that definition. Yeah, CA sucks big time when it comes to this, but the rest of the US is not immune to idiotic legislation that in essence is doing nothing to help the environment, much less the economy.
You wouldn't think they'd bother with legislation for automobiles that comprise MAYBE a half percent of the vehicles on the road. I'm glad to hear that they are spending valuable time and taxpayer dollars on incredibly important legislation such as this!
Your wording here is confusing me. Are they forcing all vehicles 25-years-or-older to be registered as antiques, or is it voluntary like it is here in Michigan? As I recall, they cut people a lot of breaks on licensing an antique vehicle. However, you can always license it (here at least) as just a regular car and use it however you please (insurance being another matter entirely). Essentially, it sounds like they're trying to prevent abuse of their antique plate system. I've got a matched set of YOM plates for my car, but I don't run them because I don't want to have the Secretary of State dictating to me how I use my vehicle.
It's big government at work. Especially states ran by god-damned-liberal legislatures. It's a sign of the times, perpetuated by thumb-sucking society that whines every time they have a problem and expects the government to take over their lives for them. People that can't deal with their neighbors, call the cops every time their kid gets in a fight with the neighbors, instead of dealing with it..............
It is confusing, and I went back and re-read it a few times...still confused. There's one clause that states, "H.B. 288 discourages owners of qualifying vehicles 25-years old and older to register as antiques thereby potentially increasing their use if registered as daily drivers. " That almost seems like the state doesn't mind daily use of older cars, and like you said, would help prohibit misuse of antique titling for insurance purposes. Collector insurance already puts a cap on annual mileage, just not so precise as VA is proposing.
I will take a chance at translation: BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District Yes, that law is drastic and even worse than CA has tried to implement. Ever wonder about why they never give us credit for recycling old cars? The energy to produce a new car is approximately equal to the amount of energy (ex: gas) that the car uses in its lifetime. Not to mention the air pollution and other hazardous waste created by the new car manufacturing process.
Even if it is 250 miles now, that would be nuts !! So if you wanted to take your 1955 Buick to the 2007 Buick Nationals in Seattle, you couldn't???? ...and like someone pointed out, do you mean any old car can not be used for commuting, or just antique plated cars? Assuming they get some breaks (like in WA state) that would be fair, but not if it applies to ANY old car... You may want to get SEMA involved in this, that's just ugly !
It sounds like what they're aiming at, as Bigcheese suggested, is to keep people from getting the cheap Antique Auto or Year Of Manufacture plates and using them on daily drivers. In Michigan, you can buy Antique Plates, or run Year Of Manufacture plates (1949 Michigan plate on 1949 vehicle, etc) for much lower than the cost of standard issue yearly-renewable plates...but you are only supposed to operate vehicles with Y.O.M. or Antique plates on a limited basis...to car shows and back, parades, etc. People have been abusing the system, though...so I suspect other states will jump in and attempt to enforce the laws governing the useage of these plates alot more closely as well. I just buy regular issue plates for my cars, then throw on an older one if desired for effect...but carry the issued plate with me in case I'm stopped. Personally, I always thought Year Of Manufacture plates looked retarded on most rods and customs....they belong on factory restored cars, if you ask me. A 1928 Model A with a blown big block Chevy running 1928 plates looks goofy...totally out of era. Now...if you could run say...a 1969 plate on that same Model A, that would be cool. My 49 Chevy was built to look like a late 70s/early 80s beater, so I ran around with a 1979 Michigan plate on it most of the Summer, affixed over the current issue tag. Never got pulled over for it. (I had a 49 Michigan plate...but my car wasn't a factory orignal restoration, nor a hot rod/custom built to replicate 1949, so I never ran it on the car.) I don't have a problem with this law if it's intent is to stop the abuse of Antique and Y.O.M. plates in order to dodge the anual registration fees associated with driving a car in normal useage.
*ding* most of you would probably shoot me for what we were working on, especially if you drive diesels/ big rigs...sorry. Lots of mass transit stuff, a few other odds and ends, most of it dies in the comittee review process. If could have seen some of the nut jobs wearing burlap sacks that came in there espousing ideals and fantasies would make your head spin...
The way I understand it "Antique" plates are issued to cars that are 25 years old, personally I thing that 25 year old and mussed the crusher rule is a problem. Pre WWII is a clllector car to me, Pre 1916 is ANTIQUE. Too many people are driving rolling werecks with "antique" plates here in Connecticut as well. Stop in any lumberyard or discount building supply and see all the 1980 station wangons and beat to shit trucks with cheap "antique" plates. THAT is the problem.
RF, is this for classification of those running Antique plates (vs. date correct plates). down here we can run Antique license plates but we are limited on the car use. Or is this for any car older then 25 yrs...
FB, those are not burlap sacks, that is HEMP clothing!!! According to those goofballs, that is the answer to all the world's problems if we could legalize hemp and marijuana. Yes, we do live in the land of fruits and nuts here in the bay area.
SEMA is always involved with ANY legislation that affects olde(er) cars. There is only so much they can do without getting help from people at our level. As for this particular proposed bill (which it is, just proposed), I have a feeling it's only aimed at cars that are willingly titled as "Antique" and not just blanket-tagging all vehicles 25+ years old as such. And for those vehicles affected, how are they going to gauge "how" the mileage is accumulated? You can't drive more than 50 miles from home, but you could drive 35 miles each way round-trip 10 times in a month and rack up 700 miles. There has to be a structure of how the mileage is racked up. Even with the current limitations, 200 miles would only get me most the way to Paso. I guess I could just flatbed the difference.
Me I always hate it when CA gets some great idea about cars cuz I know it won't be long before the vegons in washington will think what a great idea. and I know VA has there own freaky ideas. kind of the CA of the east coast.
As of the last few years Missouri has a LOG BOOK,that is required to be kept. This is on any Historic vehicle registered as such. The mileage is restricted in amounts and types of situations the car can be used under..... Any Historic plates issued BEFORE this log book being issued are EXEMPT fro=m said log book requirement. As a side note- it is very rare that a Missouri law officer will ask an owner of an OBVIOUSLY historic auto to see that log....... ANY cars 25 years old are eligible......
funny how everybody blames environmentalists for every stupid law, it never occurs to you that it might be the greedy politicians who cater to their corporate contributors. this law, to cut down on the abuse of the effective tax break given to antique vehicles that get little use, is not much different than the crackdown in CA of tax fraud perpetrated by the likes of boyd coddington by claiming ridiculously low sale prices on vehicles. i really doubt there is a lobby of environmentalists trying to get us to stop driving antique cars behind this proposed bill. follow the money.
Thank God I live in Wisconsin where we don't have any of this goofball legislation being passed around. However, I do see the point that people with beat up old shit from 1980 are registering their cars as antique/collector just to escape the registration fees. In two more years, the first Dodge Caravans will be eligible for collector plates, and there ain't a single one of those that deserves it. If this law happens, I think they're just going to go after these people, I don't think it'll effect hotrodding too much.
Is that if you are registered under "antique tags"? Here in OK, you are only supposed to drive it in parades to and from shows etc. Not for commuting purposes. But, If you buy a regular tag these restrictions do not apply.
i still say... WHY IN THE HELL WOULD ANYONE WANT TO BE IN CALI-FORN-I-A? you know my area of the world isn't exactly easy on older cars either, but it seems the legislators know the antiques place in society though. the govt. has decided here you can get a lifetime antique plate for $150, this includes using an old plate of that year even...kinda cool. I have an old liscense plate from 54 in the shape of tennessee thats black w/ orange lettering i can use permanently as my regular plate. However this only includes restorations. to paraphrase, "the vehicle shall appear stock in construction with no alterations to the body, chassis, or drivetrain and it shall only be used with no more milage than 3,000 miles per year." I cant see why any state agency would think that is unreasonable.
Unlike some of you guys, I don't wory much about the "liberals" or the "hippies". Why? Because they're not the ones with the juice to affect real change. The ones who have that power and money, the ones who would benefit most from restricting the use of any vehicle older than 5 to 10 years old, and the ones I fear will eventually ruin the hobby, are the manufacturers themselves. Once they decide that there are too many of us out here who are perpetually re-building & recycling antiques, and that we represent a signifigant enough percentage or market share or whatever and that they can no longer afford to have us out there NOT buying their product every 4 or 5 years like the rest of the flock, we're fucked. They'll go lobby congress (or in other words BRIBE them), and don't think for one second that our friendly elected officials won't sell us out in a hearbeat. I think we'll probably see this with motorcycles first. Don't think Harley Davidson isn't feeling the heat of the custom chopper craze, and don't think they aren't in the backroom trying to figure out how to kill it. Here soon we will probably see legislation that will put the indy bike builders out of business by not allowing these bikes to be registered. I hope I'm wrong.
I think we'll probably see this with motorcycles first. Don't think Harley Davidson isn't feeling the heat of the custom chopper craze, and don't think they aren't in the backroom trying to figure out how to kill it. Here soon we will probably see legislation that will put the indy bike builders out of business by not allowing these bikes to be registered. I hope I'm wrong.[/QUOTE] This is already happening. Unless you are a licenced "bike manufacturer" there is now a deal where you only get 1 bike in your lifetime that is excempt from the new law. In other words, the guys like us who build bikes in there garage because they like too, can now only get one of them registered.
This is already happening. Unless you are a licenced "bike manufacturer" there is now a deal where you only get 1 bike in your lifetime that is excempt from the new law. In other words, the guys like us who build bikes in there garage because they like too, can now only get one of them registered.[/QUOTE] yeah I read about this law too.. and its from the federal level If I recall correctly.. but alas.. I think ray has it right.. follow the money trail.. sawzall
Mate its the same bullshit over here in our over regulated, tax payers funds being wasted country too. So I hope now that you dont feel left out !! Rat
The Jalopy Journal
