Henry,
The survey is anonymous in theory. My problem is the GIGO nature of it. Take for example the odometer. It is meaningless in the classic car world. They roll over as they only have 5 digits. They get reset when rebuilt and on and on.
What will happen is that the survey numbers will get crunched and they will come to conclusions based on it. Those conclusions will use miles driven and odometer numbers but that data has no relation to reality. Yet, then will make decision on it.
The folks doing this survey are clueless as to the population they are surveying. Garbage in and Garbage out.
James
Hi James
Seems like your greenies are desperate to account for every last drop of evil CO2 producing oil. Our lefty government in Australia is heading that way too. Net zero to save the world from oblivion! Hopefully the rest of us will wake up and kick them out at the next election.
I do however question why you refer to “concourse car that is never driven”. Why would you register such a car? If it isn’t registered, it couldn’t get flagged for the survey.
Is there a penalty for not answering, or even falsely answering, the survey? I would have thought that sort of information would be private and not the business of the state. Land of the free and all that. I agree you should complain to your representative about your rights (while you still have some). You could also just throw the survey in the bin, or reply that the car has been converted to battery power... that will confuse them.
Sorry for my rant.
Cheers
Henry
To all Classic Car Hobbyists, particularly in California. I have had reports that the CARB has sent surveys to randomly selected people that were pulled from the Department of Motor Vehicles Data base. People who have classic cars.
The survey reads to the trained eye as a foundational study to regulate classic cars and their use.
The problem is that the survey methodology is so flawed as to make the results worthless in the real world. It can however be used by unscrupulous policy makers to back up ideas that they want to implement.
The questions, abbreviated are as follows:
- In which county is your MY 1978 or older vehicle primarily operated?
- What is the current odometer reading (total mileage since the car was new) on your MY 1978 or older vehicle? Please specify, and use your best estimate if you are not sure:
- Approximately how many miles does your MY 1978 or older vehicle get driven in a year? Please specify:
- How often is your MY 1978 or older vehicle driven?
- How is your MY 1978 or older vehicle stored when not in use?
- When you store your MY 1978 or older vehicle for an extended period of time when it is not being used, what do you typically do with the fuel tank?
Each question has a list of answers to choose from.
The problem with this so-called survey is the methodology which is so bad is to be an insult to professional Transportation Survey Researchers. The survey is a random sample from the DMV database. Their assumption is that the survey respondents are a representative sample of all the classic car owners in the DMV database. In techno speak the small “n” represents the large “N”. In this case it does not.
As classic car hobbyists all know, there are people who have collections of 5 cars, 10 cars, 100 cars. If someone with a collection responds to the survey on one car in a collection it is possible that the particular car, which was pulled at random for the survey, is this hobbyist’s daily driver classic car or it could be a concourse car that is never driven.
Even if they pulled enough data to have a legitimate 95% - 90% confidence level, the lack of homogeneity of the hobby means that their conclusions will be junk.
I suggest that every classic car hobbyist in California contact their elected representatives and ask why with a budget deficit looming in California that the CARB is being allowed to spend taxpayer money on junk science. Ask they investigate shutting this kind of junk science down.
As an aside, in the 1990’s there was a push by CARB and some legislators to place restrictions on classic cars. They made, what at the time, were clearly false representations as to data they had backing up their wish list. When confronted with their nonexistent data they backed down. We should not allow them to create bad science data to do the same things now. Act!
James Douglas
San Francisco.
--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CY5PR19MB61711E09EE6DEB00362D85F59309A%40CY5PR19MB6171.namprd19.prod.outlook.com.
