Classic Mustangs List Archive

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Stevan Vlaovic)

Thought this might be important.

-stevan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 11:08:36 -0500 (EST)
From: (email redacted)
To: (email redacted)
Subject: NEW BILL THREATENS YOUR HOBBY--ACT NOW!



Dear Summit Racing Customer,

Your hobby is in danger! Proposed U.S. government legislation, U.S.
Senate Bill S.1766, would allocate federal funds for state scrappage programs
for vehicles more than 15 years old. In the process, it could threaten the
very existence of our hobby by:

*Destroying 1960s and 70s era musclecars

*Scrapping 1980s performance vehicles like Mustangs, Camaros, and Corvettes

*Eliminating many non-performance vehicles which provide an invaluable parts
source

Take a stand for your rights--and your hobby--by letting your U.S. Senator
know how this bill will directly affect you. Log onto our website at
SummitRacing.com for a copy of our Legislator Letter, which you
can print, sign, and mail to your Senator. Then, go to
enjoythedrive.com/san for a complete list of legislator names and
addresses, plus additional information on U.S. Senate Bill S.1766.

Act now--your hobby may depend on it!


How to Unsubscribe

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from Summit Racing, reply to this
e-mail, and in the subject, type: remove (your e-mail address)

Example: remove (email redacted)

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Cliff Koch)

> From: Stevan Vlaovic <(email redacted)>

> Thought this might be important.
>
> -stevan
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 11:08:36 -0500 (EST)
> From: (email redacted)
> To: (email redacted)
> Subject: NEW BILL THREATENS YOUR HOBBY--ACT NOW!
>
> Dear Summit Racing Customer,
>
> Your hobby is in danger! Proposed U.S. government legislation, U.S.
> Senate Bill S.1766, would allocate federal funds for state scrappage programs
> for vehicles more than 15 years old. In the process, it could threaten the
> very existence of our hobby by:
>
> *Destroying 1960s and 70s era musclecars
>
> *Scrapping 1980s performance vehicles like Mustangs, Camaros, and Corvettes
>
> *Eliminating many non-performance vehicles which provide an invaluable parts
> source

Yeah, I got it too. I went and looked at the bill (which is HUGE by the
way, it covers the entire energy policy). Not sure I see a major problem with
it. This is _not_ the mass destruction of older cars by companies in order to
get pollution credits like was done in California. The cars have to be in
running condition, owned by an individual, and the individual can only claim
one car per year. So, I don't see any musclecars, Mustangs, Camaros, or
Corvettes being scrapped. There may be _some_ non-performance vehicles
getting scrapped, but I don't see it happening in mass quantities and vehicles
already in junk yards are not eligible.

I suspect the arm waving is being done primarily by someone looking for
contribution dollars.

YMMV.

Cliff

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Eric E. Neumeister)

On the other hand, those people that would normally have the
car taken to a junk yard or sell the car may say "hey I can
get a few bucks for the car here" and turn in a car that one
of us could have taken some parts from.

I'm still unsure of my stand on the issue, this is just an
argument for the other side of what you said.

Eric
'66 coupe restomod musclestang

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cliff Koch" <(email redacted)>
To: <(email redacted)>
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 1:35 PM
Subject: [CM] Re: NEW BILL THREATENS YOUR HOBBY--ACT NOW!


>
> > From: Stevan Vlaovic <(email redacted)>
>
> > Thought this might be important.
> >
> > -stevan
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 11:08:36 -0500 (EST)
> > From: (email redacted)
> > To: (email redacted)
> > Subject: NEW BILL THREATENS YOUR HOBBY--ACT NOW!
> >
> > Dear Summit Racing Customer,
> >
> > Your hobby is in danger! Proposed U.S. government
legislation, U.S.
> > Senate Bill S.1766, would allocate federal funds for
state scrappage programs
> > for vehicles more than 15 years old. In the process, it
could threaten the
> > very existence of our hobby by:
> >
> > *Destroying 1960s and 70s era musclecars
> >
> > *Scrapping 1980s performance vehicles like Mustangs,
Camaros, and Corvettes
> >
> > *Eliminating many non-performance vehicles which provide
an invaluable parts
> > source
>
> Yeah, I got it too. I went and looked at the bill
(which is HUGE by the
> way, it covers the entire energy policy). Not sure I see
a major problem with
> it. This is _not_ the mass destruction of older cars by
companies in order to
> get pollution credits like was done in California. The
cars have to be in
> running condition, owned by an individual, and the
individual can only claim
> one car per year. So, I don't see any musclecars,
Mustangs, Camaros, or
> Corvettes being scrapped. There may be _some_
non-performance vehicles
> getting scrapped, but I don't see it happening in mass
quantities and vehicles
> already in junk yards are not eligible.
>
> I suspect the arm waving is being done primarily by
someone looking for
> contribution dollars.
>
> YMMV.
>
> Cliff
> _______________________________________________
> Classic-mustangs mailing list
> (email redacted)
>
mix.twistedpair.ca/mailman/listinfo/classic-mustangs
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) ((email redacted))

I would think any running car is worth more than $300

Paul
1965 Mustang 2+2
1989 Mustang GT Convertible

> On the other hand, those people that would normally have the
> car taken to a junk yard or sell the car may say "hey I can
> get a few bucks for the car here" and turn in a car that one
> of us could have taken some parts from.
>
> I'm still unsure of my stand on the issue, this is just an
> argument for the other side of what you said.
>
> Eric
> '66 coupe restomod musclestang
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cliff Koch" <(email redacted)>
> To: <(email redacted)>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 1:35 PM
> Subject: [CM] Re: NEW BILL THREATENS YOUR HOBBY--ACT NOW!
>
>
> >
> > > From: Stevan Vlaovic <(email redacted)>
> >
> > > Thought this might be important.
> > >
> > > -stevan
> > >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 11:08:36 -0500 (EST)
> > > From: (email redacted)
> > > To: (email redacted)
> > > Subject: NEW BILL THREATENS YOUR HOBBY--ACT NOW!
> > >
> > > Dear Summit Racing Customer,
> > >
> > > Your hobby is in danger! Proposed U.S. government
> legislation, U.S.
> > > Senate Bill S.1766, would allocate federal funds for
> state scrappage programs
> > > for vehicles more than 15 years old. In the process, it
> could threaten the
> > > very existence of our hobby by:
> > >
> > > *Destroying 1960s and 70s era musclecars
> > >
> > > *Scrapping 1980s performance vehicles like Mustangs,
> Camaros, and Corvettes
> > >
> > > *Eliminating many non-performance vehicles which provide
> an invaluable parts
> > > source
> >
> > Yeah, I got it too. I went and looked at the bill
> (which is HUGE by the
> > way, it covers the entire energy policy). Not sure I see
> a major problem with
> > it. This is _not_ the mass destruction of older cars by
> companies in order to
> > get pollution credits like was done in California. The
> cars have to be in
> > running condition, owned by an individual, and the
> individual can only claim
> > one car per year. So, I don't see any musclecars,
> Mustangs, Camaros, or
> > Corvettes being scrapped. There may be _some_
> non-performance vehicles
> > getting scrapped, but I don't see it happening in mass
> quantities and vehicles
> > already in junk yards are not eligible.
> >
> > I suspect the arm waving is being done primarily by
> someone looking for
> > contribution dollars.
> >
> > YMMV.
> >
> > Cliff
> > _______________________________________________
> > Classic-mustangs mailing list
> > (email redacted)
> >
> mix.twistedpair.ca/mailman/listinfo/classic-mustangs
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Classic-mustangs mailing list
> (email redacted)
> mix.twistedpair.ca/mailman/listinfo/classic-mustangs
>


---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Odyssey WebMail.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) ((email redacted))

I look at it fist as a "foot in the door" by the
govt. Give 'em and inch, they'll take a mile.
That said, I read the bill too (and no one has
asked me for money). My primary beef is that my
tax dollars may be thrown at an unworkable scheme
that will have about zero impact on emissions or
fuel consuption in this country. There are too
many instances of innoculous things like Section
803 turning into Federal sinkholes of dollars,
exploited by people that feed off of the public's
general ignorance of the details. Further,
section 803 would require that the new vehicle
credit issued be "redemmed by the owner...at the
time of purchase of new fuel-efficient
automobile." If you follow the trail to the
definition of "fuel-efficient" ( Title 49 USC
32902) you find that the vehicle must get better
than 27.5 MPG. Nobody I know that drives and old
car BY NECESSITIY can afford a car that gets that
kind of mileage. People may be somewhat inclined
to sell their beater for $1000 (or whatever)
thinking they can get a credit to use a Sams Used
Cars when in fact they may not be able to use it
at all. If they do and we assume that the credit
is similar to the buy back (nominally talked
about at $750), then you and I just bought a
rusty Impala for $1500. Thank you, no. Or,
maybe Sam will give 'em $300 for their credit
voucher, doctor up some papers and claim a
rebate.

---------------------------------------------
This message was sent from webmail.bitstreet.com
webmail.bitstreet.com/

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (mrussell4)

This bill affects muscle cars - or Mustangs and US! - in that Mustangs
always share parts with other Fords, that many consider worthless. Some
people may even consider Mustangs to be worthless when old and will trade in
and destroy them for pollution credits. We, as Mustang enthusiasts are not
in a majority. We have to protect what we treasure, or we will not have it.

I believe this bill is far reaching in terms of years in that it includes
years that include the 5.0 Mustang. Thats a pretty sobering thought to me.
Parts for 5.0 Mustangs will start to be destroyed while the 5.0 Mustang
restoration is in its infancy.

I have not read the bill. I do not know the details of this particular bill.
I am not a lawyer and do not enjoy trying to interpret the intent of several
hundred page bills. But I can guess at what some of the possible effects of
these movements, and none of them seem good for those of us that enjoy
classic cars.

I could try to make a feeble attempt at debating the con side of this bill,
but I think SEMA and others have done a much better job (try
enjoythedrive.com/san, I think ???).

Also, there does not seem to be any positive side to this bill, for classic
car hobbyists or anyone else, unless you would like to see companies that
produce real air pollution contribute money to the Daschle for President
campaign.

Our hobby is one of our freedoms, but nobody will give it to us. We have to
defend it, or it will slowly be taken away. SEMA and SummitRacing are
protecting their interests, but they happen to coincide with ours.