Guys both my state and a state my SIL lives in are dealing with this. Not so much a smog type but safety like lights, brakes, steering etc. One wants to do away with them one wants to start doing them. What are you thoughts on this issue. I know you can find some good and also a total joke with in this system. Guess I feel it is needed because at least once a year it forces some degree of upkeep to a vehicle. I am contacting my legislative people on this. Also for states that don't have them it always puzzled me how they keep the junk off the road. What happens to insurance rates if they are done away with? I welcome your thoughts.
- Thread starter JOCCO
- Start date
Gary from Muleshoe
Well-known Member
Texas requires them and I think it helps, one reason is you must have proof of insurance in order to get an inspection. The one thing I think is ridiculous about Texas is a vehicle with a badly cracked or even a shattered windshield will still pass because they have no criteria for windshields. But you must have rear view mirrors. Go figure..lol
David from Kansas
Well-known Member
We don't have that crapp here and I'm glad we don't. Have never heard of an accident caused by lack of maintenance. Hardly ever see any "old" vehicles on the road anymore. We are a rural community we get along fine without the harassment, which is what I consider government interference and controls. It will only add to the cost of state government and the state is already deeply in debt. Just my 2 cents.
Did a lot of inspections when I lived in Colorado in the late '70's. I thought we were doing the public a service by keeping unsafe cars from being driven on the road. Also made the shop money by fixing problems.
When emissions testing came to Washington after I moved here, I thought it was a joke because all they were checking was emissions. Just my 2 cents.
When emissions testing came to Washington after I moved here, I thought it was a joke because all they were checking was emissions. Just my 2 cents.
Goose
Well-known Member
Nebraska had an inspection law about 20-30 years ago and finally repealed it. We have no inspections now, and obviously law officers have the authority to cite and report vehicles that appear to be unsafe.
The problem with Nebraska's law was the authorized inspection stations were also repair shops, so you could predict the results. Some were honest, but a lot of them yielded to temptation and found all manner of things that their shop would need to repair before they would pass the vehicle.
The most fair and efficient system I've seen was in Memphis, Tennessee years ago. The inspectors were government employees who had no stake in whether a vehicle passed inspection or not. When you drove into the inspection bay, you drove onto a rack that checked the braking power of each wheel and compared it to the other three to check the brakes. You stayed in the vehicle and the inspector then did a walk-around of the vehicle, asking you to toot the horn, turn on your wipers, turn on your headlights and flash the high and low beams, checked the tail lights and turn signals, etc. While the inspector walked around the vehicle he was looking at window glass and other safety issues. Assuming the vehicle passed, the inspector then put a new sticker on the lower right corner of the windshield.
The whole thing took only a few minutes and the fee was minimal. I don't know if they're still doing it that way in Memphis or not.
The problem with Nebraska's law was the authorized inspection stations were also repair shops, so you could predict the results. Some were honest, but a lot of them yielded to temptation and found all manner of things that their shop would need to repair before they would pass the vehicle.
The most fair and efficient system I've seen was in Memphis, Tennessee years ago. The inspectors were government employees who had no stake in whether a vehicle passed inspection or not. When you drove into the inspection bay, you drove onto a rack that checked the braking power of each wheel and compared it to the other three to check the brakes. You stayed in the vehicle and the inspector then did a walk-around of the vehicle, asking you to toot the horn, turn on your wipers, turn on your headlights and flash the high and low beams, checked the tail lights and turn signals, etc. While the inspector walked around the vehicle he was looking at window glass and other safety issues. Assuming the vehicle passed, the inspector then put a new sticker on the lower right corner of the windshield.
The whole thing took only a few minutes and the fee was minimal. I don't know if they're still doing it that way in Memphis or not.
farmerwithmutt
Well-known Member
Mixed feelings on this i really don't want more legal garbage to go through or give give cops more power than they already have. How ever I've seen to many vehicles with bald tires and bad brakes plus reading the papers about fatal crashes caused by defective equipment that makes me think this might not be a good thing.
I wonder why more insurance companies wouldn't make inspections required . I would go for it if they would give a discount and doesn't farm insurance include an inspection?
I wonder why more insurance companies wouldn't make inspections required . I would go for it if they would give a discount and doesn't farm insurance include an inspection?
I don't suppose they can see a suspension problem. As for a loud exhaust system? What a joke. The only way they'll touch that is if they have a grudge against somebody in the first place. I sure wish they would enforce something. I'm a mile out of town at the top of a hill right after you go through a mile of curves coming out of town. They're either flooring it coming up the hill or crackling while they back off going down the hill and in to the curves. I don't know what's worse,the loud exhausts or the thumping radios.
Here in the province of Ontario it has gotten totally out of hand. Here are a couple of examples; plastic tire valve stem caps vs. metal is an offence. Tire pressures must be EXACTLY what the mfg states, know of a guy that was charged because he failed to indicate in his log book what province he was in when he stopped for his dinner.(I am sure no one would die because of that).
I agree that there has to be some common sense here but this kind of axe swinging is not helpful. I have said before that you could take any road vehicle, equip it as properly as the law asks then put the wrong person behind the wheel and negate the whole thing.
I agree that there has to be some common sense here but this kind of axe swinging is not helpful. I have said before that you could take any road vehicle, equip it as properly as the law asks then put the wrong person behind the wheel and negate the whole thing.
We have always had it in NY. Last ten years or so they have added the emissions component. That is a money grab.
When it was a simple safety inspection, most folks knew a mechanic that would sticker you with a wink and a nod.
State only allowed them to charge ten bucks for an inspection, so it was a loss for the garage from the git go.
In NY when you failed a yellow sticker was put on allowing you ten days to repair and reinspect. Yellow sticker also guaranteed that you would be pulled over and questioned by every LEO that saw it.
When it was a simple safety inspection, most folks knew a mechanic that would sticker you with a wink and a nod.
State only allowed them to charge ten bucks for an inspection, so it was a loss for the garage from the git go.
In NY when you failed a yellow sticker was put on allowing you ten days to repair and reinspect. Yellow sticker also guaranteed that you would be pulled over and questioned by every LEO that saw it.
Jaden
Member
- Location
- Eastern Nebraska
As Goose said, Nebraska used to have a vehicle inspection. There were dire warnings when it was repealed, but the rate of accidents never seemed to increase, and there were no calls to bring it back.
We used to have the same 'Government' system (purpose built test centers) decades ago when I was a certified mechanic in CT. I used to take cars over there all the time. It was a total joke. Bureaucrats who didn't know the top from the bottom of the car. They finally did away with it and there hasn't been any change in highway safety that I have seen until cell phones arrived. It was the same thing with the state emissions test centers. The local one was built next door to the sewage treatment plant. Every time the wind blew from there every car would fail. Finally got rid of that tax drain also.
RR: what happens around me they have a "pulse operation" What this is say for two weeks they will hammer vehicles. Many tickets are issued for various things (yes loud radios and exhaust) then they will due say out standing warrants. During that time frame you could most likely drive by a cop with loud exhaust and living free!!! Next session might be speeding cars. Seems to clean thing up for awhile when they do this. Also not so much now due to man power but in the past they would due a "road block" and go over cars and people; pick up drunk drives, warrants, stolen cars even illegal imigrants et!!! Hope this helps some
ptfarmer
Well-known Member
- Location
- San Antonio, Tx
Here in Texas they are talking about doing away with inspections. They only check the lights, horn, wiper blades, and quick test drive to test the brakes. A lot of them don't even do the test drive to test the brakes. You do have to have insurance in order to renew your license plates, and all the police have to do is "run your plate" without even stopping you to make sure you still have insurance.
Same thing where I live Randy, except it's just a 90? short curve. All the skeezers from the crusty village north of me have to hit the pavement past my house to get over the river before they can get back to the gravel on their beer/smokes runs. I think if you live in that village it must be an ordinance to NOT have a muffler. Been quieter though since last week though when one of the loudest offenders tried to use the double curve as a rally course and lost it into the guard rail. Blew every window out of it. He trashed about 3 sections of the guard rail and appeared to be trying to leave, so I helped him out and called the sheriff's office to assist him.
M-MAN
Well-known Member
- Location
- Bostic, NC
It's a money racket to increase the states coffers. We have alway's had it. I think the safety inspection is a good thing. I used to do them on my time off helping out my bil at his shop. There's alway's a few who drive in in something that isn't safe going down the driveway. They are the same ones who cuss you out for not giving them a sticker when you point out the brake fluid running down the tire, no exhaust system, or tires as slick as bologna skins. I'm afraid there would be more without it. It's the emission inspection I have a problem with. They are in effect penalizing you for not being able to drive a new car. In our state you can get a waiver For the year if you fail the emission test and you spend $200 trying to correct it. You have to pay a shop that $200 to work on it AFTER they fail it the first time to get the waiver. If you attempt to repair it yourself it doesn't matter if you spend a thousand bucks it doesn't count. You will still have to spend another $200 at a shop to get a waiver and a sticker.
rustyfarmall
Well-known Member
Iowa had that law many years ago, but it applied ONLY when the vehicle title changed hands. The inspection fee collected by the mechanic was not high enough to allow him to do a thorough, by the book inspection, so most of the shops just went through the motions. After awhile, most of the inspections were being done while sitting at a desk. All that was needed was the V.I.N., which was already on the registration receipt. The inspection law was repealed after just a few short years.
Indiana Ken
Well-known Member
Indiana passed an inspection law when I first started driving, out of high school. It was done at repair shops which was problematic as others has posted. Some shops looked at it as extra business and reputable shops found it a good way to get a bad reputation. It never caught on was phased out.
As with many things it depends on the process and how it is managed.
One question I would ask: What does the data show in your state, for accidents caused by vehicle defects? Is there a Pareto chart showing these defects are a leading cause of accidents. I am not for defective cars on the highway but there should be data showing they cause a significant number of accidents and require an inspection program to address?
1948CaseVAI
Well-known Member
David may be too young to recall that about 35 or 40 years ago Kansas tried that BS. "We The People" rose up and threatened havoc if it wasn't repealed and for once the state listened and got rid of it after only a couple of years.
I would not live in any state that trampled my rights so much as to "inspect" what I own and drive. As others have mentioned I have never seen a wreck caused by a ball joint, and I spent 20 years in a patrol car in an urban area with hundreds of thousands of vehicles. I have seen two or three disabled cars on the side of the road with one front wheel looking off in the distance but they did not cause wrecks. Certainly illegal turns are a whole lot more dangerous (and easier to correct - one $150 ticket provides a wealth of education).
farmer boy
Well-known Member
Here in Ontario, there's only an inspection when a vehicle is sold and changes hands. It's a pretty extensive inspection, and I feel it's a good compromise. It forces vehicles to be fixed up once and a while. Police will also do safety blitzes where they stop every vehicle (if only for 5 seconds), send the new vehicles and one that look to be in good repair on their way, and have the others pull into a parking lot and do an inspection on them. Don't really like this because they've been known to nit pick. Commercial vehicles are inspected annually. Anything with a registered GVWR of 4600kgs needs to be inspected annually, and that weight has to include the the weight of the trailer, so if you're going to be towing, it likely needs to be inspected. Most of Ontario is subjected to an E-test as well, based on population density. I'm in an exempted area luckily, because that whole thing is a racket.
showcrop
Well-known Member
We have had it here in NH at least since I was kid. It is dangerous enough on the roads without letting people drive around without tail lights, worn out brakes pads, ball joints about to fall apart, gas tanks about to fall off, no fan to clear their windshield amongst many other possibilites. Just like anything else a shop that tries to get extra work by making up things to fix will be out of business soon and they know it. Word gets around. True most of us are going to take care of our vehicles without the state making us, but how much carnage do you need to see caused by the 10% that won't? Cops can't see most of this stuff. In my life time I have seen many cars on the side of the road with a right side ball joint come apart. What happens to you if it is the left one and you are meeting them?????. And so what if you have never seen a vehicle in need of repair cause an accident???? How can that mean a thing unless you have been driving 10,000 miles a day every day for twenty years. Just incredible. Just Incredible.
Well here we don't have too much an issue with bald tires, winter road conditions seem to take care of that. As far as the rest? I don't see where it helps. I've seen one accident (vehicle off the road) due to a tie rod failure and that was on a vehicle that would have passed an inspection. That was a Dodge pickup where the tie rod end broke because of a design defect. inspection would have caught that. The state I lived in that had the most unsafe vehicles I ever saw also had a state inspection. That was TX and it seems that everyone knew a shop that did the inspections who would pass the vehicles for a small bribe. Friend there bought a used car from a dealers lot with a new inspection sticker and 4 bald tires!
I dot recall the state but one had state run centers and decided to close them when I was a kid. They took the money they saved and put more cops on the streets with instructions of writing traffic tickets. They reported at the end of several years a reduction of accidents.
Rick
I dot recall the state but one had state run centers and decided to close them when I was a kid. They took the money they saved and put more cops on the streets with instructions of writing traffic tickets. They reported at the end of several years a reduction of accidents.
Rick
Billy Shafer
Well-known Member
In my part of Texas. They don't even do that. Pull up show them you'r insurance paper. They give you an inspection paper. Even the DPS thinks there a
joke. Or as one garage owner said. Which comes first a 1100.00 dollar tire sale. Or a two dollar state inspection. The inspection needs to go.
joke. Or as one garage owner said. Which comes first a 1100.00 dollar tire sale. Or a two dollar state inspection. The inspection needs to go.
Billy Shafer
Well-known Member
You left out. Must have windshield wipers but no requirement for a windshield
Hobo,NC
Well-known Member
- Location
- Sanford, NC
Its farmed out here to any hole in the wall that can pass the test. The test is just another way to get your money.
1) its not a money maker if you do the inspection by the book it leads to just lick and stick it what does that help :roll:
2) if money could be made the state would do it they can not so farm it out to those that think they can make money at it. Its government in action someone in government gets a kick back from equipment manufacturers are the phone co. that handled the dedicated line that must be used for the inspection machine. I must have a dedicated line it use to have to be a line I got thru Verizon, I had to get the equipment from Verizon. When DMV inspectors retired guess were they went to work If you said Verizon go to the head of the class. That part is laxed now but you git my drift...
3) Emission testing should be performed by those that can fix it not parts replacers. Those hole in the wall shops throw parts at it having no idea if it will fix it are not they waist money guessing.
1) its not a money maker if you do the inspection by the book it leads to just lick and stick it what does that help :roll:
2) if money could be made the state would do it they can not so farm it out to those that think they can make money at it. Its government in action someone in government gets a kick back from equipment manufacturers are the phone co. that handled the dedicated line that must be used for the inspection machine. I must have a dedicated line it use to have to be a line I got thru Verizon, I had to get the equipment from Verizon. When DMV inspectors retired guess were they went to work If you said Verizon go to the head of the class. That part is laxed now but you git my drift...
3) Emission testing should be performed by those that can fix it not parts replacers. Those hole in the wall shops throw parts at it having no idea if it will fix it are not they waist money guessing.
old
Well-known Member
- Location
- Camdenton Missouri
We have it here in Missouri and it is sort of an every 2 years thing now that we can get 2 year plates. Just like with any law it can be walked around and if you know the right place you can pass any thing. When I have ti have my stuff inspected I do an inspection my self before I take it in so I know it is passable but any body who drives should inspect there own car/truck if you drive
Tramway Guy
Well-known Member
Ball joints are not part of the annual New York inspection. But the shop must pull at least one wheel and check brake pads/linings. Lights, tires, brake lines, wipers, horn, windshield,seat belts, serpentine belt (if it drives power steering pump), exhaust.
Car must now plugged in through the OBD port and connected to DMV to pass, unless there are special circumstances.
Car must now plugged in through the OBD port and connected to DMV to pass, unless there are special circumstances.
Steve@Advance
Well-known Member
We have annual safety and emissions inspections here in Texas.
It has gone through several changes over the years, now the emphases is on emissions. The safety part is a minimal quick look, sometimes a drive in the parking lot to check the brakes.
There has been talk of eliminating the inspection, but I don't see that happening, especially with the air quality issues in the metro areas.
Personally I wish they would leave it as it is. If I have a problem, I would much rather solve it myself or take it up with the inspection station.
If the inspections are eliminated, you can bet the lost revenue will be replaced by citations. That would give the police reason to stop any vehicle they choose just to do a safety inspection. Anyone want a ticket because the check engine light is on because the gas gauge isn't working?
It has gone through several changes over the years, now the emphases is on emissions. The safety part is a minimal quick look, sometimes a drive in the parking lot to check the brakes.
There has been talk of eliminating the inspection, but I don't see that happening, especially with the air quality issues in the metro areas.
Personally I wish they would leave it as it is. If I have a problem, I would much rather solve it myself or take it up with the inspection station.
If the inspections are eliminated, you can bet the lost revenue will be replaced by citations. That would give the police reason to stop any vehicle they choose just to do a safety inspection. Anyone want a ticket because the check engine light is on because the gas gauge isn't working?
dr sportster
Well-known Member
Went from every two years which became emissions only , no brakes etc. To Florida none at all. New jersey none at all for motorcycles. I was glad one year when the brake test caught a leaky wheel cylinder in my Saturn . Kind of appreciated the fail sticker until I had full brakes . One wet rear surely would have spun you out in a crisis. But now none. Florida is an insurance [or should I say uninsured motorist ] nightmare.
Chicago and Evanston had some inspection stations for some residents. A Chicago cop had habit of pulling cars over for some minor infraction or little thing barely seen and having DOT inspector help him do road side inspection, very thorough inspection of brakes tires, air cleaner, spare tire, under vehicle with mirror on stick and a jack test besides. lots of repair tickets to be brought to court for dismissal or else license plate pull was threat. Main point of his appearance in traffic court to push ticket seemed to be the 'found during inspection-see ticket' Felonies regarding drugs, stolen vehicles, stolen goods, fugitive, firearms in possession of felon. If ticket isn't prosecuted, evidence might be suppressed in the following criminal trial-SO, bald tires and noisy exhaust, smoky tailpipes were getting him a good felony bust at least once a week. some hassles about possible profiling- but if he has a rep in court for doing safety checks daily, then can't say he was picking on any one in particular. Ticket were timed at least one minute before any criminal charges recorded- the dirty exhaust was caused by half blocked air cleaner, blockage was plastic baggies with something in them- see lab report on material in bag- Felony amount of whatever. No blockage and clean filter -the vehicle doesn't have dirty exhaust and the new at time emission wand comes up dirty as initial test, clean after correction- and that means the evidence of the dirty exhaust is also presented to criminal court, can't be suppressed. As a side- lots of tires and brake jobs done that were needed, some tuneups also, wiper blades, headlights , etc. 10 needed repairs for safe vehicle and a 'just happened to find a felony during inspection for public safety'. Sold and delivered bunch of parts to shops doing repairs, noting ticket numbers on bills, saw the officer in court couple times. Court clerk said officer didn't write out ticket right maybe 8 years before and evidence suppressed, now officer was writing tickets and picking on random drivers with one bad light or smoke or tire just to cover his A$$ on the somewhat profiled felony busts- but all repair tickets had a good reason if no felony bust. Ferguson Missouri police seemed to write bunch of tickets for defective vehicles, make some other busts- now can't do that by agreement with federal prosecutors to avoid civil rights suit. Could be worse- UK has MOT inspections that are supposed to be a real hassle in main towns. RN
Welding man
Well-known Member
- Location
- West Virginia
We have annual inspections, costs $15.00. It is done by independent garages. Most of the guys I know that does inspections,say if they did them like the state wants them done they would lose money on every one. So they only do the proper inspections on the ones that they don't know, because now and then the state police send in a plain clothes cop to see if they are being done right. Very few are done by the book.Just a revenue generator for the state.
Billy Shafer
Well-known Member
No they need to go. Just a rip off from the state and some garage owners. They don't prove anything. Neighbor down the road bought a new truck. On the way home from the dealer. Front wheel assembly fell off. Totaled the truck.If you go to the local inspection station. Your not getting out for less than a hundred dollars. Those of us that know never go there. The program needs to be shut down.
As RRLund said below, we don't have an inspection law in MI. However, they will pull you over for a windshield that is cracked in driver's line of sight or badly cracked. They will also nail you if you have a loud exhaust in a quiet area, or happen to hammer it when there is a cop setting that hears it. I would think emissions testing would be fine if you had a metro address, as the concentration of that many people/vehicles seems to smog things up quickly. I have picked up many sets of semi tires/wheels/complete dual assemblies with the hub,rim, and drums still attached off the highway at work. Would a safety inspection catch these? Maybe, sometimes stuff fails on a long run with no previous indication. I guess that's sort of what our DOT enforcement cops do here in MI. I think the govt wants to phase out all of the old vehicles many of us own, and wants us to support their auto industry, make it look good that they bailed them out. I know I'm responsible for my own vehicles, maintaining them and such myself, but I'm also capable of doing that, most are not. What happens when someone is driving an old beater and can't afford to get it fixed to the specs because they need a new IPhone? They have to walk everywhere, or call someone to get a ride? I'm responsible for my own financial status as well, but some people would have no idea what to do if their vehicle was red tagged and had no money. Maybe that would be a way to learn some valuable life lessons for some that need them.
Louisiana has inspection, but like most others, it's a farce. I'm not aware of any inspection site that truly inspects the vehicle. They ask you to turn on headlights, tap brake, flip blinkers, blow horn. 30 seconds. You are not asked to crank your engine. I have had cracks in my windshield for years (they don't obstruct my view in any way), but I'm always able to get a new sticker.
The inspection, even if properly and conscientiously performed, says only that on that given day, everything worked properly. The next week the auto could fall apart but still be considered roadworthy for the remainder of the year. Plus, you can opt for a two-year sticker, so you can run a clunker for two years before facing inspection again.
All the inspection sites I've talked to say the inspections are a PITA and not worth the $10 they charge (and split with the State), but they feel obligated to provide the service for the convenience of their customers and potential customers.
The inspection, even if properly and conscientiously performed, says only that on that given day, everything worked properly. The next week the auto could fall apart but still be considered roadworthy for the remainder of the year. Plus, you can opt for a two-year sticker, so you can run a clunker for two years before facing inspection again.
All the inspection sites I've talked to say the inspections are a PITA and not worth the $10 they charge (and split with the State), but they feel obligated to provide the service for the convenience of their customers and potential customers.
NY has a very restrictive inspection for any car or truck made 1996 and newer. I lived there for 40 years and found it to be a huge nuisance. I now live in northern Michigan with no inspection and love it. I certainly do not need the government telling me to pay to have my vehicle put under scrutiny every year. I don't see cars and trucks falling apart any worse here then in NY. Many if not most older ones have their "check-engine-lights" on though. All of mine do. I check the code and if it is a nuisance code that does not affect fuel mileage I do not fix it. Just before I moved from NY, I had a perfectly running 2004 Subaru that would not pass inspection. After failing four times I contacted Subaru and they said is was a computer "nuisance" error code problem and I need a computer update. I said the heck with it and sold it cheap. Let some other poor sucker in NY deal with it.
I believe in annual vehicle safety inspections simply because without them I can 100% guarantee that a very significant portion of the vehicles on the road will have what amount to ineffective, if not inoperative, brakes and signals, to say nothing of cracked frames, bald tires or other pretty serious issues. Now, I'm as conservative as they come and don't like to see people have to jump through hoops or spend a lot of money on inconsequential stuff. But I've also see people injured and killed because of absolute neglect when it comes to things like brakes or turn signals. I base my 100% claim on a career as a police officer, as a DOT officer, a mechanic and from observing my family, friends and neighbors. Some people will always keep their cars up to snuff, maybe 20-25% of people are like that. Another portion will generally do what they have to whe it becomes obvious the car has a brake issue or something like that, but it'll get pushed back time and again because of money or time constraints or school plays or other activity. Then there's that bottom half that I estimate make up anywhere between 15-30% of drivers that either just can't grasp that things like cracked frames or locked up calipers occur, or they simply don't care as long as they can get from point a to point b in one piece. Sadly, I have to put a portion of our "professional truck drivers" in this category. Not a lot of them, but enough to where it's not really unusual to find a truck with 3 out of 4 rear brakes doing absolutely nothing and a driver whose defense is, "But it's got automatic slack adjusters!"
So, as much as it pains me, I think that the annual safety inspections are needed to address that lower section of the public I mentioned. We all saw what happened in London last week when a guy barrelled into a crowd with is car on purpose. The same idea applies when a guy barrels into a crowd because he has no brakes.
ptfarmer
Well-known Member
- Location
- San Antonio, Tx
When they did away with the inspection stickers, the cost of inspections went down to $7.00 (half of what it was). The state added the other $7.00 onto your license plate renewal. Should they do away with the inspections you can bet they will add the other $7.00 to the license plate renewals.
Compare the accident and death stats from a highly regulated state to a one with few regs. Like California to Michigan. Accident rate and death rate near the same. Kind of proves - at least to me - I don't need the government to be by nanny and protect me. Nor do I need so-called "authorities" breathing down my neck. New York is almost a regulated as California and has more deaths per mile then Michigan.
I would like to hear from someone in Massachusetts....I spent 3 years there while in the USAF. The vehicle inspection program was just rip off. Most inspections stations would 'red tag' you, so you would buy parts ! I soon learned of 'friendly' auto shops that passed your car without a blink... AM soooo glad Michigan does not do mandatory inspections !
jimg.allentown
Well-known Member
OK, as a formerly licensed NY State inspection mechanic and currently a licensed PA state inspection mechanic, here is my take:
The whole thing is a farce. Inspecting a car once a year, and passing an inspection is NO GUARANTEE that the same car will be safe to operate even a month from now.
A set of brakes that passes inspection - barely - today will have pads grinding up rotors within a couple thousand miles. That amounts to a month's worth of driving for a good many drivers.
Front suspension components do not wear out "suddenly," but progressively over time. BUT, the major cause of ball joint and tie rod end failure is lack of lubrication cause by a compromised boot. Grease runs out, water runs in, and the joint fails rapidly. So, 6 months after an annual inspection, the part fails, and the car either crashes or gets towed in to be repaired.
Other items like burned out lights, missing bumpers, rotted out exhaust, and cracked windshields are readily visible to law enforcement personnel, and should be stopped and told to make repairs via a "fix it" ticket.
Bear in mind that most unsafe vehicles will not be on the road for long. Bad brakes, bad steering, bald tires, and the like all have their consequences. A locked up caliper will completely burn out a brake long before causing a crash, and to the point that the car cannot be driven AT ALL, safety notwithstanding!
A bad ball joint or a loose tie rod end will soon come apart, and leave the driver stranded on the side of the road. These failures occur most commonly on a rough secondary road - not necessarily on a comparatively smooth expressway.
The whole business about it being a revenue getter for the state is utter nonsense. It costs them more to administrate the programs than the receive in revenue. The REAL beneficiaries are the repair shops. Those with inspection station licenses have carte blanche to rob the motoring public. Ever hear of the $1200 inspection on a 1 year old car? It happens! One place tried it on me some time ago. Funny how the tune changed when I laid my inspection license on the counter and asked for detailed report of why I needed to spend this much for inspection.
Why did I go to a third party for an inspection? Because it is preferred that inspection mechanics do NOT inspect their own cars - conflict of interest.
Overall, in general I oppose annual state inspections. I favor more law enforcement of obvious defects on the road by the police. It certainly isn't hard to spot the ones that seriously need repair work!
The whole thing is a farce. Inspecting a car once a year, and passing an inspection is NO GUARANTEE that the same car will be safe to operate even a month from now.
A set of brakes that passes inspection - barely - today will have pads grinding up rotors within a couple thousand miles. That amounts to a month's worth of driving for a good many drivers.
Front suspension components do not wear out "suddenly," but progressively over time. BUT, the major cause of ball joint and tie rod end failure is lack of lubrication cause by a compromised boot. Grease runs out, water runs in, and the joint fails rapidly. So, 6 months after an annual inspection, the part fails, and the car either crashes or gets towed in to be repaired.
Other items like burned out lights, missing bumpers, rotted out exhaust, and cracked windshields are readily visible to law enforcement personnel, and should be stopped and told to make repairs via a "fix it" ticket.
Bear in mind that most unsafe vehicles will not be on the road for long. Bad brakes, bad steering, bald tires, and the like all have their consequences. A locked up caliper will completely burn out a brake long before causing a crash, and to the point that the car cannot be driven AT ALL, safety notwithstanding!
A bad ball joint or a loose tie rod end will soon come apart, and leave the driver stranded on the side of the road. These failures occur most commonly on a rough secondary road - not necessarily on a comparatively smooth expressway.
The whole business about it being a revenue getter for the state is utter nonsense. It costs them more to administrate the programs than the receive in revenue. The REAL beneficiaries are the repair shops. Those with inspection station licenses have carte blanche to rob the motoring public. Ever hear of the $1200 inspection on a 1 year old car? It happens! One place tried it on me some time ago. Funny how the tune changed when I laid my inspection license on the counter and asked for detailed report of why I needed to spend this much for inspection.
Why did I go to a third party for an inspection? Because it is preferred that inspection mechanics do NOT inspect their own cars - conflict of interest.
Overall, in general I oppose annual state inspections. I favor more law enforcement of obvious defects on the road by the police. It certainly isn't hard to spot the ones that seriously need repair work!
jimg.allentown
Well-known Member
With all due respect, sir, I will have to disagree with you. As a former resident of New York state, I lived and worked as a mechanic for quite a few years there. New York, upstate in particular has its own set of problems. Heading the list is rust. Since you DO have annual inspections, I am sure that you can see that they are not effective. Too many places put stickers on with a wink and a nod. A good many inspections are done on the desk in the office. Looking to an inspection program to address the problem of unsafe cars on the road is simply wishful thinking.
As a trooper, I am sure that you see your share of crashes, since you are the one that is usually called to the scene first. BUT, it also gives you a serious case of tunnel vision. You see the worst of the worst, and under the worst conditions.
In my other post above, I have detailed my reasons for doubting the effectiveness of an annual inspection. A brake pad only needs 2/32 of an inch to pass. Is this enough to last to the next inspection??? Really? And rear shoe on a drum brake only needs 1/32 unless they changed that. Then there is an allowable amount of "play" in a ball joint. As I explained, the most common cause of ball joint failure is failure of the dust boot that also keeps grease in and dirt and water out. Some other failures are simply not predictable.
Following a long career as a mechanic, I went into driving tractor trailers for about 20 years. Finally retired from that. After about 2 million miles of commercial driving, I never saw a high frequency of equipment caused crashes in my travels. What I DID see is plain stupidity on the highways. I have seen drivers doing any number of plain stupid things while driving. From a nice high perch, you see a lot of things that you might not otherwise see. Folks reading a newspaper opened up on the steering wheel on their way to work. One woman had a full course meal spread out on the front seat and her lap while doing 65 miles per hour on an expressway. Another reading her new "Cosmo" on the Long Island Expressway as she crashed into the rear of another car in traffic. There were many more equally stupid things that I saw that might not make it past the filters here.
All in all, I think it would be more effective for the traffic police to crack down on plain bad driving. The kind of drivers that are weaving through traffic, running stop signs, cutting left turns in front of oncoming traffic, tailgating, and (my pet peeve) driving at night with their bright lights on in traffic.
As a trooper, I am sure that you see your share of crashes, since you are the one that is usually called to the scene first. BUT, it also gives you a serious case of tunnel vision. You see the worst of the worst, and under the worst conditions.
In my other post above, I have detailed my reasons for doubting the effectiveness of an annual inspection. A brake pad only needs 2/32 of an inch to pass. Is this enough to last to the next inspection??? Really? And rear shoe on a drum brake only needs 1/32 unless they changed that. Then there is an allowable amount of "play" in a ball joint. As I explained, the most common cause of ball joint failure is failure of the dust boot that also keeps grease in and dirt and water out. Some other failures are simply not predictable.
Following a long career as a mechanic, I went into driving tractor trailers for about 20 years. Finally retired from that. After about 2 million miles of commercial driving, I never saw a high frequency of equipment caused crashes in my travels. What I DID see is plain stupidity on the highways. I have seen drivers doing any number of plain stupid things while driving. From a nice high perch, you see a lot of things that you might not otherwise see. Folks reading a newspaper opened up on the steering wheel on their way to work. One woman had a full course meal spread out on the front seat and her lap while doing 65 miles per hour on an expressway. Another reading her new "Cosmo" on the Long Island Expressway as she crashed into the rear of another car in traffic. There were many more equally stupid things that I saw that might not make it past the filters here.
All in all, I think it would be more effective for the traffic police to crack down on plain bad driving. The kind of drivers that are weaving through traffic, running stop signs, cutting left turns in front of oncoming traffic, tailgating, and (my pet peeve) driving at night with their bright lights on in traffic.
Wish we had a GOOD inspection system here in Ohio, what we have is a joke. Just go out along road and park and stop cars going by. And don't even know if the cars have brakes, just look for stop light to come on to tell if brakes work. Years ago go into one and the car I was driving the stop light switch worked off the pedal linkage, not system pressure so as long as the parking brake worked it would have passed with nothing of the brake system left except that parking brake. It should be a good on hoist check over before any plates could be bought. A few years ago car I was driving looked like crap I got in a check and suprised the officer with all lights working and new tires. But I needed it in good mechanical shape as I was driving it on a 150 mile rual newspaper route and part time at night. I bought too many cars that were supposed to have good brakes and found out leaking wheel cylinders after the system was supposed to have been repaired before the deal, Last car was just a year ago and could not tell brakes were bad driving it, took it in to get a tire replaced and ended up putting everything in except master cylinder. If would have had a good inspection that car would not have been on the market.
JMG I really disagree on this. Now if it is done correctly vrs a joke type thing It will work. It will clean a lot of this stuff up and states that are strick you will see a lot of work at least one a year. Agree not enough money in it for the state or the private station to do it. And last my state has this thing on "will it last one year"? so 1/32 brake shoe or tire tread will not. But there again this is a faulty system just like dis honest stations saying you need work.
The biggest problem is not with the majority of the people. Most people want there cars/trucks to be safe. Theres always a few who could care less if there muffler is dragging, lights don't work, bad brakes. not a lot but those people are causing the problem. At least in Missouri now if you but a new car you don't have to get it inspected for a few years. I don't like to pay for inspections but where I get mine the fellow does a good job checking ball joints, rotors, lights, etc.. Besides bringing in more money to the states I think it is a good law as long as inspections are done correctly. just my 3 cents worth.
No argument on NY and regulation. I guess my question would be are you comparing apples to apples? IOW- take the inspections out of NY or Ca and what would happen to the rates you mentioned? Or initiate it in Mi and see what happens. There's also the question of even if a state doesn't have an annual inspection system, are the police in that state big compared to other states as far as dong equipment and safety enforcement? Are the drivers better or worse? I don't know if you can say for sure that inspections make no difference in deaths and injuries unless you have all the raw data available and the ability to make an accurate comparison.
I agree that there is certainly no guarantee that an annual inspection is going to catch everything or that it's going to stop all equipment failure. But it helps. My mechanic found that our Wrangler had a cracked and seriously rusted frame long before I ever noticed any issue. You get used to driving a vehicle and it's peculiarities. An inspection caught that for us. I'm long since retired now, but I've seen a LOT of uninspected vehicles with a laundry list of issues and a driver who was well aware of many of them. Does that mean I think NYS should be able to charge me 20 plus bucks to put a vehicle I've just had repaired and gone over 6 weeks before up on a rack just to get that sticker? Nope, but I think the system itself is a good idea. I won't even get into emissions, that's just a complete boondoggle outside of heavily populated areas IMO.
I get what you're saying and I agree with a lot of it. It's the same old story of "All the high dollar safety engineering in the world not being equal to the determined efforts of one fool." But, we still recommend safety glasses and not running with scissors, don't we? :lol:
FWIW, I don't know if the little baby Troopers still do this now that they have GPS so that some bean counter in HQ can micro-manage their every move, but we used to do what were called "equipment road checks". You'd pick a safe stretch of road, get a few guys together and check things like lights, signals, horn, tires, trailer brakes, safety chains, etc on every car coming down the road. You could go over a car in way less than 30 seconds and if you treated people politely and explained what you were doing most people were happy to comply. For a while we had stickers for the kiddies too IIRC. When you got too many cars backed up you'd wave them through and start over. Found a lot of unsafe stuff, a few drunks, a lot of dumb criminal type stuff and a few serious problems. That always seemed like a common sense way to do safety checks to me. But like I say, now they the kiddies on a real tight leash and they have to see the GPS moving around I'm told, or get and answer as to why they are sitting still.
showcrop
Well-known Member
I will sum it up this way. Overall, despite some poor shops, and some overcharging shops, Vehicle inspections are undoubtedly good for helping the driving public be safer than without them. But, just as with any other controversial topic, Many opinions come from focusing on the exception instead of what is working well most of the time.
SC Farmall
Member
I live in South Carolina (no Inspections) about 2 miles from the North Carolina (Requires annual Inspections) state line. There are a pretty equal number of rusty death traps, bald tires, smoking exhaust, loud exhaust, and busted ball joints on both sides of the state line. Friends in NC pay very similar vehicle insurance rates as I do.
Difference is the People of NC pay each year for an inspection at a 3rd party shop, plus pay increased state taxes to pay for the state inspection system bureaucracy. I dont pay for it, nor have to worry about less mechanically inclined friends and family being swindled by disreputable shops. I'll take no inspections any day.
Difference is the People of NC pay each year for an inspection at a 3rd party shop, plus pay increased state taxes to pay for the state inspection system bureaucracy. I dont pay for it, nor have to worry about less mechanically inclined friends and family being swindled by disreputable shops. I'll take no inspections any day.
Similar threads
We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.
Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.
Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy