I understand your cynicism. But you and I can spout off until we're blue in the exhaust. I was looking for a more authoritative statement.
I've started looking at this from a practical point of view. There are limits to what a tech can be expected to even look at, where he has no way to ID the parts. They aren't supposed to take anything apart, after all. Many of the rules are aimed at vendors and shops.
Then we have confusion about some very visible and obvious parts. On air cleaners, for example, the online "Replacement Parts Guidelines" say:
Most emission controlled vehicles will have an air cleaner that is a closed element type or thermostatically controlled. A replacement air cleaner must meet the same specifications as the original and connect to any emissions equipment that was attached to the original equipment air cleaner. Any replacement air cleaner elements may be used as long as they meet original factory specifications. Any air cleaner that does not meet the original factory specifications requires an Executive Order to be legal for street use.
These cars came with a "closed element type," but it was not thermostatically controlled and had no emissions equipment attached to it, other than the MAF in the air tube. So, does that mean we must have the original air cleaner box in place? After reading the online "Guidelines" you'd think so, but in practice an open element "cone" filter causes no trouble.
How can this be? Turns out there's a Smog Check Reference Guide, with an Appendix G, "Aftermarket Parts Verification Guidelines," which says:
Air Cleaner / Assembly - 1995 model-year and older without Thermostatic Air Cleaner. Changes are acceptable provided all required emission controls are connected and appear functioning.
So that explains why open element "cone" filters are fine for these cars.
About the ignition system....
Ignition System Modification - Performance distributors, control modifications, etc.
....for that there's a check mark under "
Requires Verification of EO During Inspection."
But is this a "control modification," or even an "etc."? Being pessimistic we might assume so by default, but we might be wrong in this case.
