At 11:51 AM 7/25/98 -0500, you wrote:
>At 12:22 PM 7/24/98 , you wrote:
>
>>'Scuse me. Is this "junker law" a misnomer? I don't keep as current on
>>this stuff as I should.
>>
>>I would think that a "restored car" by definition couldn't be a junker
>>and therefore wouldn't be affected.
>
>I'm skeptical too, Mark. It's hard for me to believe that anyone would pass
>a law that outlaws restored classic cars. This reminds me of the scare
>tactics that keep going around about new EPA regs that will outlaw backyard
>barbecues. Utter nonsense yet they keep being passed off as fact.
>
As far as I know, none of these clunker laws have been passed yet,
(the sane members of society have been able to fight them off so far)
but they seem to resurface every year. There's some info at the
NMA web site in their "emissions" section:
http://www.motorists.com/emissions/
The basic idea is that the EPA and the govt. considers any car older than
1971 (or 1981, depending on who you talk to) a "clunker" worthy only of
being crushed.
-Jon-
.--- stei0302@cs.fredonia.edu ------------------------------------.
| Affiliations: DoD, EAA, MP Race Team, NMA, SPA, USUA. RP-SEL |
| '96 Dodge Dakota v8 SLT CC (14.98@90.18), '96 Kolb FireFly 447 |
`----------------------- http://www.cs.fredonia.edu/~stei0302/ ---'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:09:10 EDT