awatkins

Well, to be clear what I'm saying about San Clemente from 13 years ago is specific to SB100 because "the author" of the law represented that district, which has little to do with missing titles, etc. However, although I've never done a "document-free" registration myself, my impression from reading DMV docs is that at worst they require a bond to protect against subsequent claims that someone else owns the car, and that these aren't expensive. The key here would be to carefully read the DMV docs because it's not a new topic at all.

In 2010 when I lived in Encinitas I deliberately went to the San Clemente office because it was rumored to be associated with State Senator Johannesen, a Lotus Seven owner (https://www.semasan.com/driving-force/november-2001, who was the driving force behind SB100. Sure enough, they knew exactly what to do without looking anything up. Whether any of that is meaningful 11 years later is anybody's guess but I would expect the chances are good.

Yaaay!

Tom, et al, Which referee station did you or are you going to use?

papak -- SB100 absolutely does require any smog equipment that applies to the engine as of the year of the engine or year of the body, whichever the owner chose. California cars all had PCVs since 1964. Even so, what anyone thinks SB100 specifies is irrelevant. What the Referee wants is the only thing that matters. Many referees, if not all, require an actual PCV system. What you are describing is what Heloman did, and it flunked. What he needs to do is what is shown in this picture:

It’s not hard and need not be expensive. Find someone who understands this stuff.

Great! By the way, one more detail that might ensure you sail through: some people have said their referee wanted to see “PCV” hose used for that connection. Sounds strange but they do sell it at parts stores and it would be a form of insurance: https://www.oreillyauto.com/detail/c/prestone/belts-hoses/hoses/bulk-hose/anti-smog-pcv-hose/81d6b29f64f9/prestone-crankcase-vent-hose/prs1/cv1132?pos=2

Tom. — No, it will not work great. It will fail. The PCV valve is to be be connected to the intake manifold NOT to the airfilter in any way. If you use that Caterham tube connect it to crankcase. I want you to pass this test because if you do it will prove that there is no problem with BAR or CARB, and I can confidently order my kit.

“Looks like I have to route from the catch can to the intake manifold.” Not quite. Below is how it’s done. The only thing connected to the intake manifold is the PCV valve itself (as shown) and it has to be the correct end of the PCV valve. Anything else risks letting uncontrolled air into the intake manifold potentially leading to engine destruction from lean running, etc. Explanation of exactly what PCV valves do. This is worth understanding: https://innovationdiscoveries.space/what-does-a-pcv-valve-do-best-answer/ (Don’t know what “OEM System” refers to below, not my drawing)

Good. So you will have no problem. When’s your appointment?

The real issue is what the inspector will accept. Asking ahead of the appointment will save a lot of grief.

This subject calls for some care. I have heard that the so-called “closed system” requirement in reality varies from referee to referee. There are at least two interpretations of what “closed system” means: 1. The crankcase is connected to the air cleaner housing by a hose or tube, and is otherwise not open to the atmosphere. 2. The crankcase is connected to the intake manifold (i.e downsteam from the throttle body(s)) via a positive crankcase ventilation valve which carefully meters the ingress of fumes so as not to interfere with the air/fuel mixture. It is my understanding the modern Caterhams come with neither. So it’s not clear to me Tom is “probably good to go.” If anyone has facts to the contrary I would like to hear them.

This is consistent with a rumor that the CARB recently decided to discontinue its resistance to Caterham’s being registeed under SB100.

Tom — Sorry the link I posted to the ARB staff directory was pointing to someone specific at ARB entirely unrelated to your issue. This link: https://agency.calepa.ca.gov/staffdirectory/ takes you to the top of the directory where you can find anyone’s phone #, email, etc. I suggest calling the people you spoke to before. The email addresses I have seen have both their first and last name so finding them in the directory should be easy.

Try this: https://agency.calepa.ca.gov/staffdirectory/

Telephone?

Tom — If I remember right you had a conference call with two or three people from CARB. Have you tried contacting them individually?

A suggestion based on years and years of chasing people by telephone: #1 if you are told someone will call you back, ask when you should expect a call back, #2 If that answer is reasonable call back no later than 24 hrs. past that deadline, if #3 is not reasonable call back every two days until you get a response. Squeaky wheel, etc.... And BTW, if your first email isn't answered within 48 hrs., send one more stating that it's a resend, give that 24 hrs., then get on the phone (see above).

Take a look at the appropriate form to see what they say about your own labor. I don’t remember the details.

Under current rules (unlike a few years ago) you really can’t start early because (I have read)) you can’t get your sequence number until the car is complete; you have to get brake and light or CHP inspection first (I don’t remember which). In addition, in principle, you can’t pay your use tax until the car is complete because you don’t know how much of your own labor is used to build it, and you are taxed on your own labor, which you report as part of the application. Even if you could do that, if you changed your mind, became disabled, died, etc. before finishing the process, you would want to ask the state for all your money back. I believe that can be done but it seems risky and unnecessary trouble. And finally, if you pay up before completion all that use tax is in the states hands not yours while you are laboring away.. That’s not very good financial management. I really doubt SB100 is going to be “terminated” and certainly not without warning. But of course, no one can predict the future.

Here is an old but good treatment of how to get through SB100: http://www.clubcobra.com/forums/bay-area-cobra-club/101739-sb100-conference-mustang-ranch.html#post1013652 Orher good sources are the club cobra, GT40s.com, factory five, etc forums.

The EPA docs came from you. The others are scattered and I don’t know any particular links off hand. Most of my SB100 knowledge is in my head from doing it years ago. Just Google kit car, replica, SB100, Special construction, etc.

There are two different sets of laws in this discussion: California SB100 which says you can register a self-built replica of something originally made before around '68 but you have to buy the engine from a different business than the one that sold you the chassis (or kit), and if you do that it needs to comply only with pre-72 emission laws, which require nothing but a PCV. Federal Clean Air act. It says among other things that you can't play games by pretending an engine in one box and a chassis or kit in another is not really a whole car.

“I thought buying the drivetrain from a different company on a different invoice helps to circumvent that issue?” Which issue are you referring to?

"The production, sale and importation of vehicle parts (engines, transmissions, chassis, vehicle bodies, etc.) are not regulated by EPA because parts are not considered motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. However if the parts constitute a disassembled vehicle or an approximate disassembled vehicle, the combination is considered a motor vehicle under the Clean Air Act. Any attempt to use this policy to circumvent the Clean Air Act or the Imports regulations will be considered a violation of the Clean Air Act and will be strictly enforced. An example of such circumvention is: A kit car maker who also provides the engine and transmission before or after production/importation of the body/chassis." Referring to the part starting with "However": they are saying that a collection of parts that could be assembled into a vehicle is a vehicle under the CAA. A Caterham kit is just such a collection of parts. The first sentence means "if you import an engine alone that is a part, not a car." "if you import a transmission alone, that is a part, not a car".... etc. The next sentence means "If you import a box containing an engine and transmission and chassis and body and all the other stuff you need in order to make a car, it's a car." This is what they meant in the text in your first post: "They [Caterham] are bypassing customs, EPA, and CARB regulations by shipping the vehicle in parts"