In October, the recreational vehicle world was shocked by the revelation that California and other states announced incoming emissions rules that had the unintentional impact of harshly limiting the sales of large motorhomes. We’re now into 2025 when the ominous Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) regulation is supposed to go into effect. The expected effects of the regulation are worrying manufacturers and buyers in California and 10 other states, and the heavy-vehicle industry is fighting back. But what’s going on? What does the future look like? Let’s dig into it.
When I wrote about the California Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) regulation in November, many weren’t certain if California was going to go through with it. However, as Family RVing Magazine writes, it does appear that California is going through with this. At the very least, we now have some more clarity about what is likely to happen.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has the ability to grant waivers to the state of California that allow the state to enact tougher emissions rules than exist on the federal level. As Politico writes, these waivers also give California one extra layer of tape the federal government would have to cut through to stop the state. Thus, California is rushing to get the Biden Administration to grant its waivers in the handful of days remaining before President-elect Trump takes office.
On December 18, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) announced that the U.S. EPA approved waivers for its Advanced Clean Cars II (ACCII) rule as well as the Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Omnibus Regulation. These rules join forces with the Advanced Clean Trucks regulation and other regulations in an effort to phase out the sales of new internal combustion engines in everything from small lawn equipment to heavy mining rigs in California. The state also got a waiver for its zero-emissions plan for ferries while it also awaits potential approval for waivers concerning emissions-free locomotives as well as the state’s plan for zero-emissions fleets.
Advanced Clean Trucks
The Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) regulation’s waiver was granted a couple of years ago, but now California has even more levers to pull. The Omnibus regulation, which sets stricter emissions standards for ICE engines, had its waiver granted last month. ACT, which was adopted by CARB in 2020, requires the manufacturers of trucks and motorhome chassis with a gross vehicle weight rating of over 8,500 pounds to produce a percentage of zero-emission vehicles (ZEV).
The goal is to eventually phase out the sales of new internal combustion engines. California hopes to phase out the sales of all new internal combustion cars by 2035. Medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks have a little longer, with the state hoping that all new trucks sold in the state will be zero-emission vehicles by 2045. However, in the interim years, the state will require a manufacturer to sell a percentage of ZEVs in order to be able to sell ICE vehicles in the state. According to the rule, makers of medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks were required to begin building a small percentage of ZEVs beginning in 2024 and gradually rising from there. Here’s a chart:
Here’s how the classes break down in the chart above: Class 2b-3 is for on-road trucks with a GVWR between 8,501 and 14,000 pounds. Class 4-8 is for on-road trucks with a GVWR greater than or equal to 14,001 pounds. Finally, Class 7-8 covers vehicles with a GVWR greater than or equal to 26,001 pounds.
When I covered the rules back in November, five other states had followed California’s lead. The RV Industry Association is reporting that there are now 10 states following California’s lead on ACT. Those states are: Colorado, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. Of those states, Vermont is seeking to begin its implementation of ACT for the 2026 model year while Colorado, Maryland, New Mexico, and Rhode Island will be waiting for the 2027 model year.
Those states will refer to the above chart for their required ZEV percentages.
ACT Hits More Than Just RVs
According to Land Line Now, the media organization for the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, ACT was met with heavy pushback. Truck dealers, drivers, and fleet owners all attempted to point out to these states that the market for zero-emission Class 7 and Class 8 is microscopic. Earlier in 2024, FreightWaves reported, 19 states petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to review and possibly challenge ACT.
The heat on ACT was cranked up in November when the state of Nebraska, Renewable Fuels Nebraska, and Energy Marketers of America filed a lawsuit against Daimler Truck, Navistar, Paccar, Volvo and the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association. The suit alleges that the truck builders are colluding to force the adoption of electric trucks with the help of CARB and ACT.
On December 17, the hits to ACT kept on coming when trucking associations in Colorado, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington wrote letters to their governors pleading for their states to delay the implementation of ACT. The organizations claim that because ZEV technology just isn’t there yet to allow for the trucking industry to change over, truckers will just end up driving older trucks that pollute more. The organizations also claim that there just isn’t a good enough charging infrastructure for big trucks yet, either.
ACT has provisions to help manufacturers that either do not have ZEVs to sell or do not sell enough ZEVs to meet the required percentages. One is a sort of grace period, which we’ll get to later. The other is a credit system. Manufacturers that build ZEVs generate credits. The manufacturer can then use those credits for themselves as well as sell those credits to manufacturers that aren’t selling enough ZEVs.
The effects of ACT are already being felt in Oregon, FreightWaves reports. Daimler Truck, the parent of Freightliner, Western Star, Fuso, Thomas Built Buses, Detroit Diesel, Setra, Rizon, and more, has halted ICE sales in the state. The state claims this stems from a misunderstanding of ACT regulations on Daimler’s part, but Daimler claims that Oregon implemented ACT differently than California and that is preventing it from selling vehicles in the state. The two entities are still talking about it, but for now, Oregon-based dealers are under orders to halt new ICE sales.
The RV Industry Reacts
The RV industry is dealing with a related nightmare. RV manufacturers are considered to be secondary vehicle manufacturers. In other words, they take a base vehicle made by someone else and use that vehicle as a platform for an RV. At first, ACT didn’t really handle this, the RVIA says, which left the RV industry without answers. In October, ACT was amended and it now allows secondary vehicle manufacturers to buy credits to keep selling ICE vehicles.
The bulk of the RVs that would get caught up in the entanglement of ACT are primarily large Class A motorhomes and Super C motorhomes, the kinds of motorhomes rolling on specialized chassis. ACT’s 8,500-pound threshold does endanger far more RVs than just the biggest ones and more than just diesel engines, too. For example, the vans underneath Class B campers often have gross weight limits above that 8,500-pound limit. That includes variants of the Mercedes-Benz Sprinter, Ford Transit, and Ram ProMaster. However, the automakers that build the base vans also sell EVs, so more of them will be available compared to monster RVs.
This brings complications for the manufacturers of large motorhomes. Their coaches are built on platforms produced by heavy truck makers. There presently isn’t a single zero-emission Class A or Super C RV on the market. The market for all zero-emission motorhomes is also remarkably tiny with only startups selling small handfuls of all-electric camper vans. No big brand sells a low-emission or zero-emission motorhome of any kind, though some are in development. Likewise, these chassis manufacturers either aren’t building zero-emission trucks or aren’t building enough of them.
CARB does offer a path for builders wanting to sell large diesel-powered coaches, from SFGate:
CARB told SFGATE via email that “there is no motorhome ban.” A system of credits allows manufacturers that can’t meet the requirements to buy credits from those that do, giving them “the flexibility needed to sell as many internal combustion engines as is needed to meet market demands,” said spokesperson Lys Mendez. According to the board, manufacturers can also focus ZEV production on other vehicle types where that technology is more viable to meet the requirements.
The RV Industry Association says that chassis manufacturers also have a grace period of sorts:
Motorhomes can still be sold and registered either through utilization of the credit market or generating a carry forward deficit that will have to be offset by credits within three years.
This deficit make-up period provision permits a chassis manufacturer that has an outstanding deficit after the end of a given model year to make up that deficit within a consecutive three-model year period. This provision does not apply to motorhome manufacturers, who are considered secondary vehicle manufacturers. The three-model year period begins following the model year in which a chassis manufacturer generated the outstanding deficit. For example, if there is an outstanding deficit by the end of the 2024 model year, the makeup period would apply to the 2025, 2026, and 2027 model years.
To utilize the entire three-model year period, a chassis manufacturer would have to reduce the net deficit to below 30% by the end of the first and second years of the makeup period. Using the same example as above, this means that the manufacturer would need to reduce their net deficit balance, which would include the deficit from 2024 and any newly-accrued deficit from 2025, to below 30% by the end of the 2025 model year. By the end of the 2026 model year, the manufacturer would need to again reduce their net deficit balance, which includes outstanding deficits from 2024, 2025, and 2026, to below 30%. The entire net deficit balance would need to be offset by the end of the 2027 model year.
The RVIA also notes that the rule has no effect on model year 2024 and model year 2025 RVs that have already been built and shipped to dealers. ACT goes after new builds. Thus, if you go to a California dealership website today, you’ll find 2024 and 2025 models for sale. If you buy one of these already-delivered RVs, you should be fine registering it. Likewise, if an RV dealer does have stock that cannot be sold in California, the state does allow the dealer to sell to an out-of-state buyer. That being said, the RVIA notes that buyers in California will not be able to buy a non-compliant RV from another state and register it in the state unless it’s used with at least 7,500 miles.
To be clear here, there are so many headlines about RV and truck “bans” but that is not strictly true. Truck and RV manufacturers do have avenues to continue selling products. However, as you can tell, doing so will come with extra and potentially expensive hurdles. For some manufacturers, that might as well be the same thing as a ban.
What Happens Next
According to RV Travel, Spartan and Freightliner, two major diesel RV chassis builders, have decided to pull out of states implanting ACT. In response, Newmar RV told its dealers in those states that it would no longer be able to sell coaches that use those platforms. As of writing, you can still buy new Newmars in California. It’s unclear when buyers may begin to see the effects of ACT at dealerships. RVTravel believes RV buyers will begin seeing the effects later on in the year as stock begins drying up. However, Family RVing Magazine writes that the exact date for the enforcement of ACT has not been set yet.
Sadly, this means there are still a lot of unknowns. While the RV Industry Association admits that RV manufacturers technically do have a path forward, it expects the credits sold on the open market to be expensive. The organization also says that it has not received guidance from CARB on even if a chassis builder like Spartan can just buy credits to get around ACT.
Some manufacturers are having better luck than others. Ford, which sells a lot of EVs, will be able to sell its Godzilla V8-powered Ford F53 Class A motorhome chassis in these states.
In the eyes of the RVIA, CARB is not giving RV manufacturers enough options. As I said before, there are no ZEV RV chassis currently available for RV companies to build on. Thor and Harbinger are working on low-emission and zero-emission RVs, but those are not near-term solutions. Thus, for the foreseeable future, the only real option for a large RV manufacturer would be to buy credits or leave the market in up to 11 states.
Next week, I will be at the Florida RV SuperShow, where I hope to ask RV company representatives how their manufacturers plan to move forward in these states. But until we have more answers, it appears the RV industry is hoping the trucking industry’s various lawsuits and calls to delay regulation will be successful. If you’re looking to buy a large RV in one of these states, the guidance appears to be to buy one now while the model you want is still on the market.
The incoming president will accept gladly “donations “ to help fund his inauguration,on the bottom of the check just write in that you want him to institute a federal law that overrides the states laws on this issue.
Hell yeah, glad to see this going through.
Large RVs suck, anything that makes them harder to buy is a win in my book.
California Air Resources Board, how’s that working out?
Judging by how clean the air is here compared to years past it’s going great! And as a bonus my car is way more reliable and gets way better gas mileage!
Thanks for asking.
Eh, it should be harder. There should also be licensing requirements to drive these things.
Totally agree. The amount of truly dangerous driving by owners of large motor homes and 5th wheels is super high. I tow a modest trailer at tire-rated speeds, but I see these guys bombing along at 80 mph, and getting stuck in NP campgrounds they have no way to safely navigate.
Help me out here. When I road trip I see class A motorhomes more often that not towing a Jeep or Saturn, not so many Saturn’s now. I also see lots of trucks towing travel trailers / toy haulers.
It seems like the solution already exists with the pickup truck / travel trailer combo. Both options provide living space plus a smaller vehicle for driving to the beach / store / where ever.
Is there a big benefit or reason to go with a Class A over a trailer?
Get in and go.
Weirdly, in my experience, a lot of people are intimidated by trailers, assuming a motor home is much easier to drive. I’ve done both, and I greatly prefer a trailer. Preferably a modest sized one.
My dad and I used to do a lot of sailing, but then one day he sold our boat and bought an (even longer) RV with the money. Very, very disappointing. Boats are better.
Oof!!
Anyone who can afford ones of these rolling billboards of generational wealth can afford the loopholes required to buy one.
I do see the overarching regulation shortsighted without viable replacements to the ICE vehicles that move most of the goods produced in CARB compliant states, but I could care less about RVs that cost more than my home.
One might also argue that they are billboards to the end of generational wealth. Grandma and Grandpa’s 150k Class A isn’t going to be worth much 20 to 30 years later when the executor liquidates it.
Exactly what happened to my family. What my grandparents thought was a valuable asset ended up being a liability.
Unfortunate. We considered the RV life but realized what a money pit it would end up becoming.
Yup. It’s like buying a vacation home that depreciates!
Did anyone actually think these things would have any resale value after a decade or so?
Considering most rv parks have a 12 yr limit on vehicles allowed, after a decade they are pretty much worthless. If they last that long
With the end of the world coming up soon, none of this really matters, does it?
A great ZEV RV that can charge off grid would be an amazing bug-out vehicle when the world’s end is upon us.
“Ford, which sells a lot of EVs, will be able to sell its Godzilla V8-powered Ford F53 Class A motorhome chassis in these states.”
Now this reminds of the recent article about the updated Ram Heavy duty. On that vehicle, my reaction was that it wasn’t updated in the ways it needed to be.
https://www.theautopian.com/the-new-ram-2500-gets-an-all-new-1075-lb-ft-cummins-engine-and-two-more-gears/#comment-552566
Specifically… is there a heavy duty hybrid powertrain option?
Ram, Ford or GM all lack the foresight to have come out with a hybrid electric powertrains that would be used for RVs and other applications even though it’s clear there would be immediate demand from CARB states.
I really don’t have any sympathy for the truck or RV industry. They knew these regs were coming and they did nothing to prepare. For example… did any of them talk to Tesla, Rivian, BYD or other EV makers about getting a good electric or electric hybrid powertrain into their RVs?
As a matter of fact, instead of preparing, Ram did nothing and Ford/GM were actually doing the opposite of what they should have been doing.
Instead of spending money on heavy duty hybrid and electric powertrains, they spent money on a new gen of large conventional gasoline V8 engines (the Godzilla engine from Ford and the 6.6L L8T V8 from GM.
And the RV companies just blindly went along with it.
“ As I said before, there are no ZEV RV chassis currently available for RV companies to build on”
Technically that’s not completely true. There are now a number of commercial truck companies that have ZEV chassis they could base their RVs on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_electric_truck_makers
…and when I look at the gradual implementation of the rules per year, it’s kinda clear to me that the freaking out that’s going on is entirely because of a complete lack of planning, or apathy, or ignorance.
Had the industry started down this road 5 years ago, having 10% of their product available as a ZEV wouldn’t have been so horrible. AND the jerks could have charged a premium markup and made more money off them.
Resistance to any sort of change will doom an industry to being completely disrupted by someone willing to do the work.
“Technically that’s not completely true. There are now a number of commercial truck companies that have ZEV chassis they could base their RVs on.”
Something Harbinger, Lightship, and Winnebago engineers have suggested to me me it’s not a great idea to just slap an RV body on some random EV truck chassis like, say, a Bollinger B4. It’s their belief that the resulting vehicle will likely get hilariously terrible range and won’t be optimized for RV use. Then you’ll have to ask the RV buying public to spend six figures on such a thing. You won’t be surprised to hear that’s a very hard sell. Even Grounded RV isn’t moving a ton of product.
That’s why Harbinger isn’t just putting an RV body on its step van chassis, but burning through the cash to make an electrified RV platform. But who knows when that will be ready.
That’s what I mean when I say that there are no ZEV RV chassis on the market right now. Though, I suppose if these companies get desperate enough they could just make a “compliance RV” to satisfy the letter of the law.
“It’s their belief that the resulting vehicle will likely get hilariously terrible range and won’t be optimized for RV use”
But then I have to ask… how much ACTUAL work/effort/testing did they put into that?
My guess is nil, nada, nichts.
I mean, if Tesla can make a commercial truck that still gets 500 miles of range even when fully loaded, what’s the excuse of these “more experienced” companies?
https://electrek.co/2022/11/27/tesla-semi-completes-first-500-mile-trip-full-load/
” You won’t be surprised to hear that’s a very hard sell. “
It’s an easier sell when the choice is that or nothing. It’s also an easier sell if they put some effort into talking about the benefit of not having dreadful fuel economy RVs typically get and not needing a diesel generator anymore… and having the benefits of electricity at quiet camp grounds that don’t allow ICE generators… even “quiet” ones.
Except most diesel Semi trucks get 900 miles of range, minimum, with some of them getting up to 2000 miles of range on a single fuel up if they have large tanks. So if you’re getting 1/4 the range as a typical RV that could be quite limited…
You could get that range with a REX which could also be used as a hyper efficient generator of both electricity and heat.
What a total hassle and headache. All this BS needs to be dropped and those forcing all mandates need to be thrown in prison for life for forcing this and getting into people’s damn business. Let everyone drive whatever they want and if not, they can fuck off. Gasoline/diesel forever!
I’m of the opinion that clean air and global warming is more important. The people who should be thrown in jail are the CEOs of RV/Commercial truck makers who knew this was coming and did nothing to prepare.
And then we should throw you in jail to hang out with them.
Ha ha good one…it’s been fine for 100+ years since the car was invented and now being forced. No one will ever tell me what to drive or not…especially an appliance EV piece of trash. I’ll be driving the real classics since EV’s aren’t real cars. Yes, I would rather go to prison than own an EV and absolutely one has a place to tell me otherwise. Also, I love nature too (Yes, it’s actually possible to love cars and nature FYI) Absolutely no one can control Mother Nature and the planet, DUH
Climate science is well proven and well documented and we are making a difference in the climate and I just love all the nature lovers that crap on the liberals that protect the nature they say they love. Obviously, on a car website we are gear heads but many of us understand science and reality.
They’ve been saying that for decades…there are cycles…there could be an ice age again- nobody knows. All I know is that those who try to steal my happiness, fun and cars I want should be charged w/ theft and thrown in prison. They are ruining everything for everyone
Wow you hate and misunderstand science and evidence. Just admit you do not want to accept the actual proven and well-documented climate science. You do not know what they have been saying if you have not actually read the actual research publications. Just keep believing what you want.
Ok will do Thanks!
“Yes, I would rather go to prison than own an EV”
And with that, it’s like saying “I’m stupid and irrational”.
You’d rather go to prison that own an EV??? Seriously?
That’s fucking asinine.
It was to make a point that you’ll never understand, so I give up ha ha
You for sure made A point… In fact, I think you made it better than I think you could possibly understand.
Thanks! Crystal clear…I understand it way more than you, dummy
Unfortunately for you, a rather large proportion of the population (like those under 50) are more concerned about the future than you are, and they’re voting accordingly.
Are they?
No, but they’ll catch on eventually.
I doubt it.
God I hope so.
Ha ha, I care about the future w/o everyone trying to force everything on me. Oh, that’s a good one! At least Biden supported the UAW but I hope Trump does repeal EV mandates- that’s the only thing good about that felon clown who should be in prison already, doesn’t help he’s in cahoots w/ Melon Husk dipshit. Isn’t it ironic? Oh wow, it’s actually good to be able to look at both sides of any situation and actually be open minded and use your brain DUH
What specific federal EV mandate are you speaking of?
Ok yeah, I knew they weren’t federal…now that I think of it, it was the tax credits I was thinking of
You forgot to mark your comment as sarcasm.
Ha ha, no I’m serious
So some kid can go 100 mph in some old piece of rusty junk without brakes and smash into a minivan full of kids and kill them all because you do not like rules? Hell with safety let everyone die in a bloody mess on the roads?
Ha ha…no, that has nothing to do w/ it…that’s separate- anyone who doesn’t want to hurt themselves while driving their own car should have enough sense to take care of their own car, plus inspections, etc. I don’t want anyone to get hurt DUH
Now that we’re past hypothetical blaming, I was actually talking about how forcing unnecessary EV mandates down everyone’s throats when it was fine for so long is BS. No one has any place to get into everyone’s business and tell them what they can/can’t drive…am I telling you to drive an EV, no…so stop shoving it in my face and get a life
I have to agree. I do care about the environment but there has to be a better way than this. Why should the consumer have to pay for this? Large corporation owned factories and fleets should be the ones that are regulated not regular people.
I assume this is sarcasm or trolling. If not let me explain to you why you really do not want gasoline and diesel forever:
I lived in a world that nearly completely ignored the pollution and GHG of gasoline and diesel. It was the smogbowl of LA in the 1970s. Most cars were pre emissions; huge, smelly, unsafe, unreliable behemoths that got horrible gas mileage. 8-10 mpg was not uncommon, especially since tires were much worse at holding air, engines needed a lot more work to stay in tune and wore out a lot faster so they ended up blowing a lot of smoke sooner. A lot of people couldn’t be bothered to spend a weekend under the hood to do a tune up, or to take the car into a shop, or even pay for full service gas so someone else would check the air, coolant and oil. Car trips usually ended in a pounding headache thanks to a combination of heat, exhaust fumes, secondhand cigarette smoke and dehydration.
In the smog bowl first degree smog alerts were not uncommon in the summer.
The closest most Americans can come to that today is being downwind of a major wildfire. Such days were getting more and more common as LA got more and more crowded. Buildings were filthy. I remember being disgusted at seeing the absolutely black wash water when I saw one being power washed and being amazed at how much better the building looked clean.
At least our rivers didn’t catch fire like they did back east.
That was with 3.8B people on the planet. Now we have over 8B. And proportionally more people have cars and people drive those cars a lot more. So we’d have a LOT less gas, what was left would be a LOT more expensive, cars would use a LOT more of that gas so travel would be a lot more expensive, people would be even stupider and more violent thanks to all the airborne lead*, have a lot more respiratory issues, more cancer, etc. And more war.
You do not want to live in that world.
*In my case the lead was especially bad since the country’s biggest lead battery recycler was located a few miles away. They were often in trouble for egregious environmental violations.
You guessed wrong, I’m serious.
I’ve heard about the smog bowl/lead thing and it’s great that things were improved there, cars were made more efficient, etc
I just don’t like the idea of being forced to drive something that I don’t like/want and will not stand for it…I want an Uncle Buck car or any land yacht since they are awesome/fun. Anyone who says otherwise is stealing my choice, has no place to do that, and can kick rocks. Do you get into people’s business and tell them every little thing to do/think like most people do now?
(Oh, wait…it looks like that’s what you’re doing right now!)
Now can we get some driver training for the old overconfident people thinking they can drive these house-sized RVs safely even if they have never driven anything bigger than a Camry in their lives?
Sounds like you just have to take the scenic route home from that out of state dealer.
Sounds like a great idea! With the best of intentions! What could possibly go wrong?
Sounds like this may have the unintended effect of causing more emissions. Why? RV buyers are going to take a 7500 mile trip before registering it in one of these states.
Or odometer fraud. This time adding miles instead of subtracting them.
Do these need to be all electric or would a PHEV or EREV with sufficient specs meet the requirements too?
Hey Mercedes, Do you know if LIV will be at this RV Show?
Perfect opportunity for Edison Motors to start making RV drivetrains
That would be great, though I imagine they’ll be limited on capacity for a while.
Could license some of their designs to the manufacturers at least. Otherwise, yeah they’re still slow going on full production without a larger shop.
I’d like to propose a trade: RVs can have an exemption from new emissions rules (because their mileage is relatively low per annum) if they give up the exemptions that allow them to drive a Class A motorhome without a Class A license.
Yeah, motorhomes generally already get so many exemptions, I’m hesitant to give them another pass here (even if this one is probably a bit more reasonable than the others they get).
Lol. Most of the folks buying those busses couldn’t pass a dot physical, much less the driving test.
People who spend $200K+ on an RV can afford to cross state lines and register their vehicles elsewhere.
This is nothing new.
When my folks bought their Newmar DutchStar 20+ years ago, they bought it direct from the factory in Indiana, and registered it in Delaware.
“That being said, the RVIA notes that buyers in California will not be able to buy a non-compliant RV from another state and register it in the state unless it’s used with at least 7,500 miles.”
This is not so very different from purchasing a non CA-emissions car and relocating to CA – You have never needed to get a CA emissions car to register and operate it in CA.
All RV manufacturers will start shipping their products to California with 7500 miles on the odometer.
Imagine the irony if this actually happens: a rule intended to curb emissions results in thousands of RVs needlessly circling around Elkhart for 7,500 miles.
They’ll have chassis dynos running 24/7 and all RVs will be sold as CPO with warranty.
you mean no useable warranty, just like new ones, right?
Steve Lehto has many versions of this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP_u2JR51_Y
Sorry, I left the “” off of “warranty”.
RV laws are perfectly balanced with no exploits
Well it is 2041 miles from Elkhart to Truckee…
Next up! All the companies that set up in Nevada (or another emissions and tax friendly state) that own all the RVs used in movie and television production!
I’m going to “well actually” this comment.
In Nevada, the emissions rules depend on the owner’s zip code. If you reside in certain zip codes in Las Vegas and Reno you’re subject to annual emissions tests. AFAIK, older RVs are subject to emissions rules and not just cars and light trucks.
Oh no! Anyways…