License Plate News

[bulldog1979]

Michigan's Pure Michigan license plates are pure ugly.

They dropped the requirement for a front plate on April 1, 1981, while the black and white plates were being issued.
I see enough of them here in NE Wisconsin (driven by Yoopers) to agree and consider that to be a main reason why the state eliminated the front plates, they're that bad.

Mike

It was long before that when they eliminated them sometime in the early 80's when they were using the black and white plates.

[Occidental Tourist]

California's DMV gets its own license plate history wrong:

1982 – standard plate changed to a white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and "California" in red block letters. Last year any blue/yellow plates were issued.

Yellow-on-blue plates were still the standard plate for passenger cars and pickups through at least 1987.  The Golden State base plate (i.e., "white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and 'California' in red block[sic] letters") was an optional plate for an additional fee.  I believe there was a year where the Golden State base plate did become the standard plate briefly and they didn't issue yellow-on-blue ones anymore, but it was much later than 82 (during 87, I believe), there were many years of overlap where they issued yellow-on-blue and Golden State base plates, and the Golden State base plate was standard issue for less than a year before the state switched over to the ancestor to the current license plate.

The phasing out of yellow-on-blue plates was so that they could issue plates with reflective backgrounds.  The Golden State base plate had a white reflective background, and other than one addition paint color (dark yellow), didn't vary much from the post-87 standard issue plate in terms of design or cost.  The eventual evolution of the standard plate into the current unimaginative lipstick standard issue plate would have been totally unnecessary if they'd kept the Golden State base plate.

[OCGuy81]

California's DMV gets its own license plate history wrong:

1982 – standard plate changed to a white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and "California" in red block letters. Last year any blue/yellow plates were issued.

Yellow-on-blue plates were still the standard plate for passenger cars and pickups through at least 1987.  The Golden State base plate (i.e., "white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and 'California' in red block[sic] letters") was an optional plate for an additional fee.  I believe there was a year where the Golden State base plate did become the standard plate briefly and they didn't issue yellow-on-blue ones anymore, but it was much later than 82 (during 87, I believe), there were many years of overlap where they issued yellow-on-blue and Golden State base plates, and the Golden State base plate was standard issue for less than a year before the state switched over to the ancestor to the current license plate.

The phasing out of yellow-on-blue plates was so that they could issue plates with reflective backgrounds.  The Golden State base plate had a white reflective background, and other than one addition paint color (dark yellow), didn't vary much from the post-87 standard issue plate in terms of design or cost.  The eventual evolution of the standard plate into the current unimaginative lipstick standard issue plate would have been totally unnecessary if they'd kept the Golden State base plate.

Speaking of California, has the DMV been mute on what they're going to do for their next sequence? I believe they'll exhaust the 1ABC234 at some point in 2024

[hotdogPi]

The obvious decision seems to be to make the first "digit" A, B, C, etc., but that's only my suggestion.

[Occidental Tourist]

I'm assuming they'll reverse it just like they did with commercial vehicles, i.e., when the NLNNNNN series was exhausted several years ago, plate numbers switched to NNNNNLN (with the last digit being the anchor). 99999Z1 rolled over to 11111A2 once NNNNNL1 was exhausted. NNNNNL2 NNNNNL3 is the current range for commercial plates.

So with passenger cars, expect the next series to be NNNLLLN with NNNLLL1 getting exhausted and rolling over to NNNLLL2.

[mgk920]

The obvious decision seems to be to make the first "digit" A, B, C, etc., but that's only my suggestion.

I agree that going with Ontario's format is best (IMHO, also add a dash'-' between the letters and numbers for readability) - BUT, the words 'best' and 'California' just don't belong together in the same paragraph.  I would also convert to a 'plates stay with the cars' owners' system like is done in most other states, to conserve numbers.

Mike

[pderocco]

The obvious decision seems to be to make the first "digit" A, B, C, etc., but that's only my suggestion.

They never used 0 for the initial digit. They've done that on current commercial plates, though, so they could get another four years out of the current arrangement.

But the obvious choice would be to mimic Washington, and perhaps some other states, and do three letters and four digits. If they did four letters and three digits, they'd have a long list of words they'd have to disallow.

[Quillz]

California's DMV gets its own license plate history wrong:

1982 – standard plate changed to a white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and "California" in red block letters. Last year any blue/yellow plates were issued.

Yellow-on-blue plates were still the standard plate for passenger cars and pickups through at least 1987.  The Golden State base plate (i.e., "white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and 'California' in red block[sic] letters") was an optional plate for an additional fee.  I believe there was a year where the Golden State base plate did become the standard plate briefly and they didn't issue yellow-on-blue ones anymore, but it was much later than 82 (during 87, I believe), there were many years of overlap where they issued yellow-on-blue and Golden State base plates, and the Golden State base plate was standard issue for less than a year before the state switched over to the ancestor to the current license plate.

The phasing out of yellow-on-blue plates was so that they could issue plates with reflective backgrounds.  The Golden State base plate had a white reflective background, and other than one addition paint color (dark yellow), didn't vary much from the post-87 standard issue plate in terms of design or cost.  The eventual evolution of the standard plate into the current unimaginative lipstick standard issue plate would have been totally unnecessary if they'd kept the Golden State base plate.

Speaking of California, has the DMV been mute on what they're going to do for their next sequence? I believe they'll exhaust the 1ABC234 at some point in 2024

Yup. My new plates are coming at the end of the year and I'm already seeing cars in the 9T range.

I could have sworn I read somewhere the next pattern was: A000AAA and up from there, which would offer millions more combinations, but I guess that's not actually confirmed? Either way, probably going to need a new system within the next year or so. (The current system started in 1980).

[Quillz]

The obvious decision seems to be to make the first "digit" A, B, C, etc., but that's only my suggestion.

I agree that going with Ontario's format is best (IMHO, also add a dash'-' between the letters and numbers for readability) - BUT, the words 'best' and 'California' just don't belong together in the same paragraph.  I would also convert to a 'plates stay with the cars' owners' system like is done in most other states, to conserve numbers.

Mike

How does reselling a car work in this case? I agree this is a better system, but I'm wondering how the process differs.

[mgk920]

The obvious decision seems to be to make the first "digit" A, B, C, etc., but that's only my suggestion.

I agree that going with Ontario's format is best (IMHO, also add a dash'-' between the letters and numbers for readability) - BUT, the words 'best' and 'California' just don't belong together in the same paragraph.  I would also convert to a 'plates stay with the cars' owners' system like is done in most other states, to conserve numbers.

Mike

How does reselling a car work in this case? I agree this is a better system, but I'm wondering how the process differs.

You simply remove the plates and reuse them on the replacement car that you purchase, or you just keep them (for display on a wall, for example).  Whoever buys the car goes to the state office and registers the car in his or her name, getting new plates from them, or puts his or her own saved plates on it.  Easy peasy.

Mike

[wriddle082]

South Carolina has recently come to the end of LLLNNN for their standard issue plates and has switched to NNNLLL, but they have changed the font.  Previously the font was pretty much identical to the one that Tennessee uses, but the new font seems to resemble Clearview.  If you look at the 2, you'll see it.

[OCGuy81]

Yup. My new plates are coming at the end of the year and I'm already seeing cars in the 9T range.

I could have sworn I read somewhere the next pattern was: A000AAA and up from there, which would offer millions more combinations, but I guess that's not actually confirmed? Either way, probably going to need a new system within the next year or so. (The current system started in 1980).

It's really interesting how it's taken over 40 years to go through 1ABC234.  It's the same amount of combinations as ABC1234, which Texas started using in 2012, and is already into the "T" series.

My guess is that California uses a separate sequence for light trucks and SUVs?

[kalvado]

Yup. My new plates are coming at the end of the year and I'm already seeing cars in the 9T range.

I could have sworn I read somewhere the next pattern was: A000AAA and up from there, which would offer millions more combinations, but I guess that's not actually confirmed? Either way, probably going to need a new system within the next year or so. (The current system started in 1980).

It's really interesting how it's taken over 40 years to go through 1ABC234.  It's the same amount of combinations as ABC1234, which Texas started using in 2012, and is already into the "T" series.

My guess is that California uses a separate sequence for light trucks and SUVs?

NY is using ABC1234 as well, and after 22 years it is LHE-1234.
Granted, NY is 2/3 of TX and half of CA population wise, with NYC having low car ownership.   

[hotdogPi]

New Hampshire plates are about 5350000, and they're assigned sequentially. This is about 3.85 numbers per 1 person.

California seems to have about the same ratio of (9×10^3×26^3)/(CA population) ≈ 4.03.

I'm surprised they're that close.

[kalvado]

New Hampshire plates are about 5350000, and they're assigned sequentially. This is about 3.85 numbers per 1 person.

California seems to have about the same ratio of (9×10^3×26^3)/(CA population) ≈ 4.03.

I'm surprised they're that close.

26^3 is overly optimistic. I usually use a guesstimate of 20 (Q, O, I and all the funny combinations)
That would be a factor of 2 fewer plates.

[6a]

California's DMV gets its own license plate history wrong:

1982 – standard plate changed to a white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and "California" in red block letters. Last year any blue/yellow plates were issued.

Yellow-on-blue plates were still the standard plate for passenger cars and pickups through at least 1987.  The Golden State base plate (i.e., "white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and 'California' in red block[sic] letters") was an optional plate for an additional fee.  I believe there was a year where the Golden State base plate did become the standard plate briefly and they didn't issue yellow-on-blue ones anymore, but it was much later than 82 (during 87, I believe), there were many years of overlap where they issued yellow-on-blue and Golden State base plates, and the Golden State base plate was standard issue for less than a year before the state switched over to the ancestor to the current license plate.

The phasing out of yellow-on-blue plates was so that they could issue plates with reflective backgrounds.  The Golden State base plate had a white reflective background, and other than one addition paint color (dark yellow), didn't vary much from the post-87 standard issue plate in terms of design or cost.  The eventual evolution of the standard plate into the current unimaginative lipstick standard issue plate would have been totally unnecessary if they'd kept the Golden State base plate.

Speaking of California, has the DMV been mute on what they're going to do for their next sequence? I believe they'll exhaust the 1ABC234 at some point in 2024

Yup. My new plates are coming at the end of the year and I'm already seeing cars in the 9T range.

I could have sworn I read somewhere the next pattern was: A000AAA and up from there, which would offer millions more combinations, but I guess that's not actually confirmed? Either way, probably going to need a new system within the next year or so. (The current system started in 1980).

I'm wondering why not just keep counting? Go to 10AAANN, and so on. Then again, many things CA does don't make sense.

[jakeroot]

Spotted the kei-car version of the Shuri Castle license plate recently released by Okinawa Prefecture. The yellow border is a feature unique to kei cars, and the color version seen here is an optional extra:


Shuri-jo Kei Plate (rear) by Jacob Root, on Flickr


Shuri-jo Kei Plate (front) by Jacob Root, on Flickr

[kalvado]

California's DMV gets its own license plate history wrong:

1982 – standard plate changed to a white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and "California" in red block letters. Last year any blue/yellow plates were issued.

Yellow-on-blue plates were still the standard plate for passenger cars and pickups through at least 1987.  The Golden State base plate (i.e., "white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and 'California' in red block[sic] letters") was an optional plate for an additional fee.  I believe there was a year where the Golden State base plate did become the standard plate briefly and they didn't issue yellow-on-blue ones anymore, but it was much later than 82 (during 87, I believe), there were many years of overlap where they issued yellow-on-blue and Golden State base plates, and the Golden State base plate was standard issue for less than a year before the state switched over to the ancestor to the current license plate.

The phasing out of yellow-on-blue plates was so that they could issue plates with reflective backgrounds.  The Golden State base plate had a white reflective background, and other than one addition paint color (dark yellow), didn't vary much from the post-87 standard issue plate in terms of design or cost.  The eventual evolution of the standard plate into the current unimaginative lipstick standard issue plate would have been totally unnecessary if they'd kept the Golden State base plate.

Speaking of California, has the DMV been mute on what they're going to do for their next sequence? I believe they'll exhaust the 1ABC234 at some point in 2024

Yup. My new plates are coming at the end of the year and I'm already seeing cars in the 9T range.

I could have sworn I read somewhere the next pattern was: A000AAA and up from there, which would offer millions more combinations, but I guess that's not actually confirmed? Either way, probably going to need a new system within the next year or so. (The current system started in 1980).

I'm wondering why not just keep counting? Go to 10AAANN, and so on. Then again, many things CA does don't make sense.

restarting as 1NAAANN you mean?

[6a]

California's DMV gets its own license plate history wrong:

1982 – standard plate changed to a white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and "California" in red block letters. Last year any blue/yellow plates were issued.

Yellow-on-blue plates were still the standard plate for passenger cars and pickups through at least 1987.  The Golden State base plate (i.e., "white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and 'California' in red block[sic] letters") was an optional plate for an additional fee.  I believe there was a year where the Golden State base plate did become the standard plate briefly and they didn't issue yellow-on-blue ones anymore, but it was much later than 82 (during 87, I believe), there were many years of overlap where they issued yellow-on-blue and Golden State base plates, and the Golden State base plate was standard issue for less than a year before the state switched over to the ancestor to the current license plate.

The phasing out of yellow-on-blue plates was so that they could issue plates with reflective backgrounds.  The Golden State base plate had a white reflective background, and other than one addition paint color (dark yellow), didn't vary much from the post-87 standard issue plate in terms of design or cost.  The eventual evolution of the standard plate into the current unimaginative lipstick standard issue plate would have been totally unnecessary if they'd kept the Golden State base plate.

Speaking of California, has the DMV been mute on what they're going to do for their next sequence? I believe they'll exhaust the 1ABC234 at some point in 2024

Yup. My new plates are coming at the end of the year and I'm already seeing cars in the 9T range.

I could have sworn I read somewhere the next pattern was: A000AAA and up from there, which would offer millions more combinations, but I guess that's not actually confirmed? Either way, probably going to need a new system within the next year or so. (The current system started in 1980).

I'm wondering why not just keep counting? Go to 10AAANN, and so on. Then again, many things CA does don't make sense.

restarting as 1NAAANN you mean?

Correct (unless that's already being used for something else).

[mgk920]

'1LLLNNN' was used in the late 1970s when the original, 1960s-era 'LLLNNN' sequence ran out.  '10LLLNNN' could be next and make sense, but that also runs into readability issues.

Mike

[Quillz]

California's DMV gets its own license plate history wrong:

1982 – standard plate changed to a white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and "California" in red block letters. Last year any blue/yellow plates were issued.

Yellow-on-blue plates were still the standard plate for passenger cars and pickups through at least 1987.  The Golden State base plate (i.e., "white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and 'California' in red block[sic] letters") was an optional plate for an additional fee.  I believe there was a year where the Golden State base plate did become the standard plate briefly and they didn't issue yellow-on-blue ones anymore, but it was much later than 82 (during 87, I believe), there were many years of overlap where they issued yellow-on-blue and Golden State base plates, and the Golden State base plate was standard issue for less than a year before the state switched over to the ancestor to the current license plate.

The phasing out of yellow-on-blue plates was so that they could issue plates with reflective backgrounds.  The Golden State base plate had a white reflective background, and other than one addition paint color (dark yellow), didn't vary much from the post-87 standard issue plate in terms of design or cost.  The eventual evolution of the standard plate into the current unimaginative lipstick standard issue plate would have been totally unnecessary if they'd kept the Golden State base plate.

Speaking of California, has the DMV been mute on what they're going to do for their next sequence? I believe they'll exhaust the 1ABC234 at some point in 2024

Yup. My new plates are coming at the end of the year and I'm already seeing cars in the 9T range.

I could have sworn I read somewhere the next pattern was: A000AAA and up from there, which would offer millions more combinations, but I guess that's not actually confirmed? Either way, probably going to need a new system within the next year or so. (The current system started in 1980).

I'm wondering why not just keep counting? Go to 10AAANN, and so on. Then again, many things CA does don't make sense.

Because there is no need to introduce eight digits yet. You can just shuffle around the seven digits and every time you open up tens of millions of new combinations. This actually makes a lot of sense, because it's being resourceful. No need to add an eighth digit until every possible way of arranging seven digits has been exhausted.

And as mentioned, assuming license plates don't change size, then adding more and more digits forces them to get smaller and harder to read. Simply reversing the current pattern allows for an entirely new round of 175+ million numbers to be used. And then you rearrange them yet again for another 175+ million. And once you start going with more letters than numbers, you're getting into 400+ million combinations. All before you ever need to worry another adding another digit.

[Ted$8roadFan]

More on the brewing controversy in Kansas re license plate designs:

https://kansasreflector.com/2023/12/11/five-new-kansas-license-plate-designs-offered-after-first-try-met-with-widespread-disgust/

[kalvado]

California's DMV gets its own license plate history wrong:

1982 – standard plate changed to a white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and "California" in red block letters. Last year any blue/yellow plates were issued.

Yellow-on-blue plates were still the standard plate for passenger cars and pickups through at least 1987.  The Golden State base plate (i.e., "white background with blue characters with a sun graphic and 'California' in red block[sic] letters") was an optional plate for an additional fee.  I believe there was a year where the Golden State base plate did become the standard plate briefly and they didn't issue yellow-on-blue ones anymore, but it was much later than 82 (during 87, I believe), there were many years of overlap where they issued yellow-on-blue and Golden State base plates, and the Golden State base plate was standard issue for less than a year before the state switched over to the ancestor to the current license plate.

The phasing out of yellow-on-blue plates was so that they could issue plates with reflective backgrounds.  The Golden State base plate had a white reflective background, and other than one addition paint color (dark yellow), didn't vary much from the post-87 standard issue plate in terms of design or cost.  The eventual evolution of the standard plate into the current unimaginative lipstick standard issue plate would have been totally unnecessary if they'd kept the Golden State base plate.

Speaking of California, has the DMV been mute on what they're going to do for their next sequence? I believe they'll exhaust the 1ABC234 at some point in 2024

Yup. My new plates are coming at the end of the year and I'm already seeing cars in the 9T range.

I could have sworn I read somewhere the next pattern was: A000AAA and up from there, which would offer millions more combinations, but I guess that's not actually confirmed? Either way, probably going to need a new system within the next year or so. (The current system started in 1980).

I'm wondering why not just keep counting? Go to 10AAANN, and so on. Then again, many things CA does don't make sense.

Because there is no need to introduce eight digits yet. You can just shuffle around the seven digits and every time you open up tens of millions of new combinations. This actually makes a lot of sense, because it's being resourceful. No need to add an eighth digit until every possible way of arranging seven digits has been exhausted.

And as mentioned, assuming license plates don't change size, then adding more and more digits forces them to get smaller and harder to read. Simply reversing the current pattern allows for an entirely new round of 175+ million numbers to be used. And then you rearrange them yet again for another 175+ million. And once you start going with more letters than numbers, you're getting into 400+ million combinations. All before you ever need to worry another adding another digit.

True, but rearranging the pattern also breaks memorizing habits. And going for more letters, or for split groups of letters and numbers, also makes memorizing more complicated - even memorizing for a few seconds to type it in.
While 8 symbols is too much (although NY is doing that), coming up with some way of 10 series (2 numbers as a fraction maybe) can be reasonable

[Quillz]

I'd say maybe consider it after the next round. It just seems wasteful to introduce a seventh digit and then not utilize the fact it allows for hundreds of millions of combos multiple times over. Assuming the next refresh is just reversing what exists now, I'd say go with that, then consider something different.

[Quillz]

More on the brewing controversy in Kansas re license plate designs:

https://kansasreflector.com/2023/12/11/five-new-kansas-license-plate-designs-offered-after-first-try-met-with-widespread-disgust/

Interesting to see Kansas move to seven digits. Well, I actually like the first one shown, which is apparantly the "controversial" one. (Although based on the older article, looks like all they did was change the top from black to dark blue). Likewise, the same design but with the white background looks fine. Also interesting they're using a reversal pattern of what California uses now, which is supposedly what will be in use in California likely within the next year or so.