As the per the title I am trying to get a feel for how much rust is allowed to pass the Alberta OOPI. The car in question is not a Volvo (surprise, lol) and is currently in San Diego but will be RIV exempt as it's a 1966.

The back story is this is a 1966 Pontiac Parisienne convertible that was owned by Lisa's late brother that was formerly their Mother's car. We wouldn't have any interest in a car like this other than the emotional family connection and a desire to keep it in the family. The car is reportedly running and driving but has sat for a number of years. I have concerns with the rust I can see in the Craig's ad which of course leads me to be even more concerned about the rust I can't see. I also see what appears to be rust on the seat supports so who knows what the floors look like?

The rockers look crusty on both sides with the PS looking worse. The biggest issue I see is what appears to be perforation in the sill at the front of the door frame below the hinges. The DS sill is harder to see but it looks the same perforation as the PS, maybe not as bad but? The pics are not the greatest, but it doesn't look promising. It's an original Calgary car but spent a number of years in TO before ending up in SD. My guess is the rot started in TO as SD is a pretty car friendly environment.

Before I bother with trying to get the Trustee to take better pics, or order a 3rd party inspection, I am trying to get a feel for how much rust is too much to pass inspection. I have only ever done the one OOPI, and didn't have to deal with the rust issue. My gut feeling is we should just let it go...

https://sandiego.craigslist.org/esd/cto/d/1966-pontiac/6383129000.html



ETA: Was trying to figure out what the hose on the PS fender that seems to go nowhere was. Was thinking it looked looped back on itself and sure enough the heater core inlet/outlet on the firewall are just sitting there with no hoses attached. Add a heater core to the list... Also never mentioned the roof that has Tuck tape on it so add a new roof. With it sitting so long probably add roof hydraulics to the list. Lisa's sentimentality is waning...

I've only done a couple myself and neither of them were rusty either. With the rusty piles of crap running around our province I don't see the point of an OOP, but you can't fight the system designed for and by bureaucracy.

Sorry I can't be of any help. Maybe take the pix to someone you may have used for the OOP and get their input?

Yeah, the whole OOPI concept seems a bit off if we're not trying to get the homegrown wrecks off the road. Guess it keeps stealers from shipping cheap inventory from Rustario which is a good thing.

I used the Govt search tool and found a couple local shops that do the inspections (the shop I used for the 122 is gone). Like you suggested I was going to show them the pics to at least get half an idea of what we're up against.

Went to one of the local shops that does OOPI's and showed them the pics. He said it didn't look horrible and being an old school BoF vehicle the rusty rockers were not as concerning to him as say a unibody. He was pretty relaxed about it and said "I'm sure we could get it through". If we decide to go for this car I'll definitely take it there for inspection.

I can't say this is what you would find across the board for these inspections so YMMV elsewhere...

From my experience in Ontario they only care about rust where it causes a structural problem (duh) or hole to the passenger compartment where exhaust or fumes can get in.

Yeah, that's exactly what the shop here said as well. Still thinking it's a bit of a crap shoot depending on the inspector from some posts I found on various forums, so it pays to shop around for an inspection.