ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Question on NJ motor vehicle inspection

DJ Spanky

The Lunatic is in my Head
Moderator
Jul 25, 2001
65,098
40,978
113
I just transferred title of a 1997 model year car, and was told at the DMV that because it is 25 years old it is now exempt from inspection. I had never heard that before, is that new?
 
Quick google says 1995 and older gasoline powered vehicles. Even though it says 1995 and older maybe it’s suppose to be 25 years and older. I don’t know.


From the link:

What vehicles do not have to be inspected?

The following vehicles are exempt from inspection requirements (N.J.A.C. 13:20-7.2):

• Gasoline powered vehicles registered passenger, model year 1995 & older with a GVWR of 8,500 pounds or less
• Gasoline powered vehicles registered passenger, model year 2007 & older with a GVWR of 8,501 to 14,000 pounds
• Gasoline powered vehicles registered passenger, model year 2013 & older with a GVWR of 14,001 pounds or more
• Approved Collector Vehicles which are less than 25 years old


 
You can also get historic plates and lower insurance if you don't use it every day.
 
I just transferred title of a 1997 model year car, and was told at the DMV that because it is 25 years old it is now exempt from inspection. I had never heard that before, is that new?
Your first choice is to post this verse google it? Not trying to be a jerk, but like, really?
 
Does it make any sense to exempt old, shitty cars with no built-in safety systems from inspection?

I mean, wouldn't those be the cars you'd *want* to inspect?
First, remember that the only inspection in New Jersey is emissions inspection -- safety inspection was abolished years ago. Second, emissions inspection in New Jersey consists mostly of making sure that the fuel cap has not been tampered with to allow leaded gasoline and of testing the diagnostics on the car to make sure that the "check engine" light will come on if there is a problem with the emissions control system. Very old cars do not have diagnostics, and New Jersey (like most states with emissions inspection) decided it would be too much trouble to have a separate testing system for those vehicles because there aren't enough pre-1996 cars on the road to make any difference to air pollution levels.
 
Does it make any sense to exempt old, shitty cars with no built-in safety systems from inspection?

I mean, wouldn't those be the cars you'd *want* to inspect?
Retrofitting the geezer-mobiles to meet current standards would likely be untenable, and given that there are relatively few of such cool-looking menaces on the road an exemption was made. But when I see a disgusting piece of shit blowing unburned oil into the air it makes me wish there was a capture device on the thing. Or something.
 
Your first choice was to challenge someone's desire to get direct info from posters here rather than Google "What does 'convivial' mean?"

I'm still trying to figure out what verse I quoted. Was it from Stairway To Heaven? Bohemian Rhapsody? Dante's Inferno?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knight Shift
First, remember that the only inspection in New Jersey is emissions inspection -- safety inspection was abolished years ago. Second, emissions inspection in New Jersey consists mostly of making sure that the fuel cap has not been tampered with to allow leaded gasoline and of testing the diagnostics on the car to make sure that the "check engine" light will come on if there is a problem with the emissions control system. Very old cars do not have diagnostics, and New Jersey (like most states with emissions inspection) decided it would be too much trouble to have a separate testing system for those vehicles because there aren't enough pre-1996 cars on the road to make any difference to air pollution levels.

Retrofitting the geezer-mobiles to meet current standards would likely be untenable, and given that there are relatively few of such cool-looking menaces on the road an exemption was made. But when I see a disgusting piece of shit blowing unburned oil into the air it makes me wish there was a capture device on the thing. Or something.

Some missing of points.

First, I'm aware of how MVI works. I'm also aware of how it used to work.

My point is that shitty old cars should be subject to the inspections that they were subject to when they were shitty new cars. Check the lights, check the brakes, ensure that any and all modifications conform to the letter of the law - e.g. anyone driving around in a truck that's raised 3 feet, has wheels that are nowhere inside the wheel wells and no exhaust system should experience 1) confiscation, 2) incarceration and 3) eventual execution (upon exhaustion of all appeals, of course).

The point should NOT be to enable / encourage shitty old cars on our roads. It should be to make it so difficult to keep them that people give up trying.

The new cars of my youth sucked ass. The new cars of my father's youth were even worse. Speak not to me of "the glorious muscle cars of yore", for they sucked ass equal in quantity to their non-muscular brethren - they simply did it at much greater volume. They were, by today's standards, slow, uncomfortable, inefficient and unsafe. They should be purged.
 
Some missing of points.

First, I'm aware of how MVI works. I'm also aware of how it used to work.

My point is that shitty old cars should be subject to the inspections that they were subject to when they were shitty new cars. Check the lights, check the brakes, ensure that any and all modifications conform to the letter of the law - e.g. anyone driving around in a truck that's raised 3 feet, has wheels that are nowhere inside the wheel wells and no exhaust system should experience 1) confiscation, 2) incarceration and 3) eventual execution (upon exhaustion of all appeals, of course).

The point should NOT be to enable / encourage shitty old cars on our roads. It should be to make it so difficult to keep them that people give up trying.

The new cars of my youth sucked ass. The new cars of my father's youth were even worse. Speak not to me of "the glorious muscle cars of yore", for they sucked ass equal in quantity to their non-muscular brethren - they simply did it at much greater volume. They were, by today's standards, slow, uncomfortable, inefficient and unsafe. They should be purged.
I'm not entirely opposed to your first point regarding older vehicle inspections for basic safety and engineering, especially lifted trucks and cars with Maxwell coffee cans masquerading as exhaust systems.
However, if implementing your system results in the eradication of manual-transmission vehicles over time, then we have a problem. I'm willing to to battle over this.
 
I'm not entirely opposed to your first point regarding older vehicle inspections for basic safety and engineering, especially lifted trucks and cars with Maxwell coffee cans masquerading as exhaust systems.

I've always felt the elimination of the safety part of the inspection was a huge mistake. Why shouldn't cars have their brakes, lights, suspension, etc. checked?

In addition to lifted and heavily modified vehicles, another thing they've completely let slide is tinted windows for the front seats and front windshield. I guess they've forgotten those 2 state troopers shot and killed on the NJT from a car with exactly that setup.
 
Does it make any sense to exempt old, shitty cars with no built-in safety systems from inspection?

I mean, wouldn't those be the cars you'd *want* to inspect?
That was my first thought. Seems backwards.
 
I'm not entirely opposed to your first point regarding older vehicle inspections for basic safety and engineering, especially lifted trucks and cars with Maxwell coffee cans masquerading as exhaust systems.
However, if implementing your system results in the eradication of manual-transmission vehicles over time, then we have a problem. I'm willing to to battle over this.
We can still buy manual transmission cars. I have two and will likely get a third in the next few years.

But with EVs taking over, they are sadly going to go away for good in another few decades.
 
Does it make any sense to exempt old, shitty cars with no built-in safety systems from inspection?

I mean, wouldn't those be the cars you'd *want* to inspect?
Might be because people who tend to drive older cars won't have the money to get it up to code?
 
I remember ( back in the day) being told fix it or junk it when my first car failed inspection and received temporary sticker to place on window so could drive car legally for 30 or 60 days ( forget which)till had to take it back to be inspected .
Just got another car, that could pass and the junkyard received a new POS to add to the pile.
If safty check wasn't done when I first started driving and couldn't afford anything but a beater, my first pice of junk would have stayed on the road a bit longer before it hit the land of used auto parts.
 
I remember ( back in the day) being told fix it or junk it when my first car failed inspection and received temporary sticker to place on window so could drive car legally for 30 or 60 days ( forget which)till had to take it back to be inspected .
Just got another car, that could pass and the junkyard received a new POS to add to the pile.
If safty check wasn't done when I first started driving and couldn't afford anything but a beater, my first pice of junk would have stayed on the road a bit longer before it hit the land of used auto parts.
I'd be happier if inspections checked at least the basics, steering, tires, and brakes. I care about that stuff more than about emissions. Those are all basic maintenance issues and critical to safe operation of the vehicle.

It seems nuts to me that we don't check that stuff because most people don't pay attention to it until something else forces them to go to a mechanic who points out the problems. Which means they're driving around in an unsafe car on the road with our kids.
 
Exactly. This was a money saving measure by NJ. Shocking. That said to the original question. We had an old 1995 Honda Prelude that I kept around because mechanically it was sound but body wise it was a mess from deer hits and such. So messed around one winter and redid the body and painted it. DMV sent an envelope in the mail that said to keep it in the car to show the car was exempt from inspection. To that end since it drove well I sold that old bomber for $2K a couple years ago probably partially since it didn’t have to get inspected.
 
First, remember that the only inspection in New Jersey is emissions inspection -- safety inspection was abolished years ago. Second, emissions inspection in New Jersey consists mostly of making sure that the fuel cap has not been tampered with to allow leaded gasoline and of testing the diagnostics on the car to make sure that the "check engine" light will come on if there is a problem with the emissions control system. Very old cars do not have diagnostics, and New Jersey (like most states with emissions inspection) decided it would be too much trouble to have a separate testing system for those vehicles because there aren't enough pre-1996 cars on the road to make any difference to air pollution levels.
So you tamper with your gas cap to allow leaded gas - but where do find leaded gas?
 
I just transferred title of a 1997 model year car, and was told at the DMV that because it is 25 years old it is now exempt from inspection. I had never heard that before, is that new?
Of course there are restrictions for use but you can also register it as Historic getting Historic Plates and never have to pay to register it again :)

I brought my 1984 Kawasaki back to life last summer after sitting in the garage unused for years and saved something like 3 years of past registration fees plus no future one's doing this. It's only to be driven to shows and local stuff ...but that's all I'd be doing anyway.

And wonder how much real enforcement is out there given all the other serious driving crap not being remotely addressed. Have to be a serious D--k cop to bust your lug nuts .
 
Some missing of points.

First, I'm aware of how MVI works. I'm also aware of how it used to work.

My point is that shitty old cars should be subject to the inspections that they were subject to when they were shitty new cars. Check the lights, check the brakes, ensure that any and all modifications conform to the letter of the law - e.g. anyone driving around in a truck that's raised 3 feet, has wheels that are nowhere inside the wheel wells and no exhaust system should experience 1) confiscation, 2) incarceration and 3) eventual execution (upon exhaustion of all appeals, of course).

The point should NOT be to enable / encourage shitty old cars on our roads. It should be to make it so difficult to keep them that people give up trying.

The new cars of my youth sucked ass. The new cars of my father's youth were even worse. Speak not to me of "the glorious muscle cars of yore", for they sucked ass equal in quantity to their non-muscular brethren - they simply did it at much greater volume. They were, by today's standards, slow, uncomfortable, inefficient and unsafe. FUN They should be purged.
I had to add “fun” lol

I do agree with inefficient and unsafe. And yes, most cars today are faster- but it just isn’t the same. I had the 74 Super Nova with a 350 and a 77 TransAm with the Olds 403- both with headers and tge TA with a shift kit- air shocks on both and 60’s/50’s most of the time bald because I couldn’t afford new tires - kept the originals just for inspection
But spit on the road and you could be dead lol
 
Last edited:
I had to add “fun” lol

I do agree with inefficient and unsafe. And yes, most cars today are faster- but it just isn’t the same. I had the 74 Super Nova with a 350 and a 77 TransAm with the Olds 402- both with headers and tge TA with a shift kit- air shocks on both and 60’s/50’s most of the time bald because I couldn’t afford new tires - kept the originals just for inspection
But spit on the road and you could be dead lol

Yeah... dead in slow motion.

Would it surprise you to know that Car & Driver's full road test of the '77 W72 Trans Am demonstrated a 0 to 60 time of 9.3 seconds? The aftermarket headers and shift kit wouldn't have done much to improve that. At any rate, 9.3 seconds is nearly twice what would be considered "quick" by today's standards. There a literally dozens of new cars on the market that can get to 60 in the high 4s / low 5s. Most "sports cars" are down in the 3s.

This is why I'm generally anti-old car - and contemporaneously, when I was in high school, I *loved* the W72 T/A. That car was absolutely totemic. But time marches on and ain't nobody got time for "slow". 😉
 
Yeah... dead in slow motion.

Would it surprise you to know that Car & Driver's full road test of the '77 W72 Trans Am demonstrated a 0 to 60 time of 9.3 seconds? The aftermarket headers and shift kit wouldn't have done much to improve that. At any rate, 9.3 seconds is nearly twice what would be considered "quick" by today's standards. There a literally dozens of new cars on the market that can get to 60 in the high 4s / low 5s. Most "sports cars" are down in the 3s.

This is why I'm generally anti-old car - and contemporaneously, when I was in high school, I *loved* the W72 T/A. That car was absolutely totemic. But time marches on and ain't nobody got time for "slow". 😉
My 77 was also a 3 speed automatic- we did all types of things to up the HP- like breaking out the front of the useless hood scoop and placing screening in there instead. Believe they said it added about 4 HP…lol
 
My 77 was also a 3 speed automatic- we did all types of things to up the HP- like breaking out the front of the useless hood scoop and placing screening in there instead. Believe they said it added about 4 HP…lol

Nowadays it's very easy to add HP to a car, just put a bunch of speed shop stickers on the windows. I've heard you can get up to an additional 5HP per sticker!
 
Nowadays it's very easy to add HP to a car, just put a bunch of speed shop stickers on the windows. I've heard you can get up to an additional 5HP per sticker!
No need for the stickers. Just get the fastest color, duh. My butt dyno tells me I got at least 11HP more by doing that.
 
No need for the stickers. Just get the fastest color, duh. My butt dyno tells me I got at least 11HP more by doing that.
There may be some truth…I had the Red TA with the black/gold bird. It was the fasted of our group of trans ams back then. Lol
And btw- working on that engine with the headers and duals just sucked. Had to raise the engine to get to a couple of spark plugs.
 
There may be some truth…I had the Red TA with the black/gold bird. It was the fasted of our group of trans ams back then. Lol
And btw- working on that engine with the headers and duals just sucked. Had to raise the engine to get to a couple of spark plugs.
I had a highly tricked out '77 Chevelle that I bought from a widow in Jamesburg. Her husband had ordered the car, then died. She didn't know anything about it other than her husband had special ordered it, died and she didn't like driving it.

The guy who lived next door when I was growing up was the service manager at the old Briggs Chevy in South Amboy. He came over to look at it, stopped when he got to the tailpipes and told me to open the hood.

Apparently the old guy from Jamesburg had ordered a 1977 Chevelle with an L82 motor.
 
I had a highly tricked out '77 Chevelle that I bought from a widow in Jamesburg. Her husband had ordered the car, then died. She didn't know anything about it other than her husband had special ordered it, died and she didn't like driving it.

The guy who lived next door when I was growing up was the service manager at the old Briggs Chevy in South Amboy. He came over to look at it, stopped when he got to the tailpipes and told me to open the hood.

Apparently the old guy from Jamesburg had ordered a 1977 Chevelle with an L82 motor.
Very nice surprise. Funny to think how little HP these big blocks actually put out compared to now.
 
Very nice surprise. Funny to think how little HP these big blocks actually put out compared to now.
Right? The "standard" L48 'vette motor in '77 was 180 hp, exactly the same as the Oldsmobubble 403 ci engine in your T/A (the Pontiac engine was 190 hp). The L82 was 210 hp.

My freakin' Volvo has 316 hp from its supercharged/turbocharged 2.0l 4 cylinder.
 
No reason to do safety or emissions testing. Many states have discontinued both.

Florida eliminated emissions testing in 1981 and directed that funding to law enforcement.
 
No reason to do safety or emissions testing. Many states have discontinued both.

Florida eliminated emissions testing in 1981 and directed that funding to law enforcement.

"No reason"?

You're gonna need to show your work on that.
 
Right? The "standard" L48 'vette motor in '77 was 180 hp, exactly the same as the Oldsmobubble 403 ci engine in your T/A (the Pontiac engine was 190 hp). The L82 was 210 hp.

My freakin' Volvo has 316 hp from its supercharged/turbocharged 2.0l 4 cylinder.
Now- you do have to keep in mind many of the modifications we did back then, such as headers, shift kit etc.
while it doesn’t compare to some of the stuff now, pushing a TA close to 275-300 HP back then was just a mean vehicle.
My car, 3 speed automatic- if doing 50, pound the gas, drops down into 2nd, would chirp the tires at about 70 or so when it went back into 3Rd.
I had to be careful though, I couldn’t get away with shit back then in a small town. Bright Red, Bird on the hood, air shocks and white interior- everyone knew it was me.

Now, a real fun car- in the early 2000’s I went with my dream car as a 2nd car- bought an 1983 911 SC with the 930 package. Big whale fin in the back.
It had the 3.0 5 speed stick. Showroom condition all original. Car was not super fast off the line “compared to today’s cars” but if I was on the highway cruising at 75 and I didn’t want you to pass- if I dropped it down- not many going by me. Car was dangerous as hell. If you don’t have balls in it, you die in it. It was the first thing the owner told me- never, ever hit the break in a turn- you punch the gas or just keep going straight.
 
I recall the early 80s, a Porsche 911 and something about a drunk hockey player.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT