I'm all for controlling emmissions, but do it right and fairly. In Califrnia we have pretty strict emmission standards--fine, but do it fairly. After looking

I'm all for controlling emmissions, but do it right and fairly. In Califrnia we have pretty strict emmission standards--fine, but do it fairly. After looking at max emmissions for various cars and manufactures; there dosen't seem to be a lot of "science" going into these numbers(My emmission books are from the ninties). That said, let me pass on a story(it won't affect most of you guys, but it might help out that one guy who car is flunked on their bi-annual emmissions test). When you get your car smogged in CA, all smog shops are required to have a written copy of the Of the Emmission's manual they used to evaluate your automobile. Most smog stations take the cheapest route and spend a little over a $100 for a current Motor Emmissions manual. That publication is filled with errors. So yes, if your automobile fails the smog test(ususlly the visual) you are stuck--arguing with a smog tech. Yes, there are other emmissns manuals. Mitchell emission manuals(OnDemand5) is a great, highly accurate alternative, but cheap smog shop owners(corporations) don't want to subscribe, or sport for a current copy. The Motor Emmission manual contained errors on the two cars I own. What are the odds of that? If you own an older Volvo, or Toyota truck and were failed on the Visual, double check the info with a Michell Manual. And no, 1988 Toyota(naturally aspired) trucks are Not required to have to have a MIL light. I honestly don't know if the Editors of Motor Emission literature understand the difference between a carburator, vs FI? Anyways, I know there are thousands of consumers affected by these errors yearly. Oh yea, when I tried to point out the errors to the corporation that publishes the Motor Emmission manuals they only got back to me after three emails, and then argued with me. They finally admitted they made a mistake, but I haven't verified they corrected this particular error. If a enterprising lawyer is reading this it might make a nice Class Action Lawsuit? I looked into liability in errors in technical publications, and they look like they have blanket liabilty--hopefully I'm wrong?