Originally Posted by bahurd
(Post 1306508)
Like I said, I think it's an overreach but nonetheless, the R&T article (even though leaning towards the "don't worry be happy") is correct in its wording.
The SEMA article is incorrect in it's opening line; "The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a regulation to prohibit conversion of vehicles originally designed for on-road use into racecars." If someone were to convert a street driven car into a race only car, under the wording of the propsal here https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-20...sec85-1703.xml it would be legal. Correct?? Not trying to have an argument, just trying to understand today's law vs any proposed. |
Originally Posted by OGRacing
(Post 1306509)
FYI that's a proposal from 2010. it just states what a motor vehicle is.
|
R&T requested further clarification and got it.
No, the EPA Didn't Just Outlaw Your Race Car
Originally Posted by Laura Allen, EPA Spokesperson
This clarification does not affect EPA's enforcement authority. It is still illegal to tamper with or defeat the emission control systems of motor vehicles. In the course of selecting cases for enforcement, the EPA has and will continue to consider whether the tampered vehicle is used exclusively for competition. The EPA remains primarily concerned with cases where the tampered vehicle is used on public roads, and more specifically with aftermarket manufacturers who sell devices that defeat emission control systems on vehicles used on public roads.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Government agency:
"Hey, we know this proposed language sounds intrusive and like an overreach with all kinds of negative unintended consequences, but we promise we'll be reasonable in how we enforce it. You have nothing to worry about." Public: https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455127128 |
1 Attachment(s)
|
Originally Posted by bahurd
(Post 1306508)
If someone were to convert a street driven car into a race only car, under the wording of the propsal here https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-20...sec85-1703.xml it would be legal. Correct??
For the past 40 years there has been an understanding with current wording of things that if a production car is removed from street use and only used on racetracks or off-road, then it is a "nonroad" vehicle and does not need to adhere to emissions regulations. Under the guise of "correcting the wording", the EPA is attempting to backpedal from that and now explicitly exclude any production car originally intended for street use from being able to fall into that nonroad category Consider the difference between the current state of things where a car removed from street use has the freedom to remove cats, run a different engine, remove smog equipment etc. and what they are trying to change it to: that if the car is a production car, sure you can take it to a racetrack, but even if it is never going to touch a public road you cannot tamper with anything emission or engine related. That they are claiming this was always the case, telling everybody it's just a minor wording change that we need not concern ourselves with, and burying the change in a 600 page regulation proposal in the hopes that it slides through without much notice should be cause for alarm on its own. Straight from the EPA: We are proposing to clarify the language describing how to manage the precision of emission results, both for measured values and for calculating values when applying a deterioration factor. This involves a new reference to the rounding procedures in 40 CFR part 1065 to replace the references to outdated ASTM procedures. EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 1037.601(a)(3) to clarify that the Clean Air Act does not allow any person to disable, remove, or render inoperative (i.e., tamper with) emission controls on a certified motor vehicle for purposes of competition. An existing provision in 40 CFR 1068.235 provides an exemption for nonroad engines converted for competition use. This provision reflects the explicit exclusion of engines used solely for competition from the CAA definition of ‘‘nonroad engine’’. The proposed amendment clarifies that this part 1068 exemption does not apply for motor vehicles. |
So, if you built a street car that had a turbo for example, but kept all the emissions equipment installed and functional, that would be ok? As in all the emissions equipment is installed and fully functional, car passes OBD II codes, etc. Just that it's been modified to go faster.
|
Originally Posted by patsmx5
(Post 1306537)
So, if you built a street car that had a turbo for example, but kept all the emissions equipment installed and functional, that would be ok? As in all the emissions equipment is installed and fully functional, car passes OBD II codes, etc. Just that it's been modified to go faster.
|
Originally Posted by 2ndGearRubber
(Post 1306039)
How the hell would this even be enforced?
1: Show up at a racetrack. 2: Claim reasonable suspicion based on easily-observable factors (loud noises coming from cars, presence of racing fuel, etc.) 3: Start popping hoods. |
Originally Posted by OGRacing
(Post 1306539)
that is a loop hole yea. but you can't tune the OBD2 ecu on a miata. so it wouldn't much faster.
But let's say you found a way to fix that. So the stock ecu is happy, and you can also tune it to be safe under power and pass OBD II codes with all emissions equipment in place and working. If this became law, I'm sure someone would figure this out anyway. So then it's ok to still have a fast turbo car? You just have to make it pass emissions. Yes a huge pain in the rear, but not impossible. |
Originally Posted by patsmx5
(Post 1306537)
So, if you built a street car that had a turbo for example, but kept all the emissions equipment installed and functional, that would be ok? As in all the emissions equipment is installed and fully functional, car passes OBD II codes, etc. Just that it's been modified to go faster.
How do you make a car faster without interfering with emissions control devices? Stepping in and altering ECU commands is altering emissions equipment, same as re-flashing the ECU. All that stuff is certified legal by the manufacturer before it leaves the factory, unless it's a vw... |
I wonder if the whole VW diesel nonsense had any impact on the push for these newly enforced, reenforced EPA regulations? I find it extremely odd that of all the shitty things for people to eat, drink, smoke, ingest that this is their area of concern.
Teenagers grow up with automotive/ racing passions, they wrench on their own cars, they stay in school to pursue their passion ect. And a result of that, is they become productive members of society, they have a marketable skill which is the byproduct of a life long passion. But they are setting out to remove that path of growing development for individuals. Now instead, children do the opposite, get into drugs, vandalism ect. A bit drastic maybe, however I am sure we all know of a handful of people whos lives have benefited from a racing/ automotive passion. |
"This clarification does not affect EPA's enforcement authority. It is still illegal to tamper with or defeat the emission control systems of motor vehicles. In the course of selecting cases for enforcement, the EPA has and will continue to consider whether the tampered vehicle is used exclusively for competition. The EPA remains primarily concerned with cases where the tampered vehicle is used on public roads, and more specifically with aftermarket manufacturers who sell devices that defeat emission control systems on vehicles used on public roads." -EPA spokesperson Laura Allen
better buy your ECU's now... the EPA is gunning for them. sign this to help stop the EPA from outlawing DIY Autotune. http://semasan.com/page.asp?content=aa2016FED1&g=SEMAGA |
I didn't read the 600 page document. Basically just asking if I'm at a track, and they show up and look and my CEL off, it passes OBD II codes, I have a valid inspection report, and every piece of emissions equipment is installed and functional, would they give me a thumbs up and leave, or crush my car anyways? It seems they aren't saying I can't race the car, they're just saying I have to keep the emissions equipment installed and working as designed.
I think if all that were true you'd get a thumbs up and be ok. Yes getting it to do that will be hard, but not impossible. |
Originally Posted by OGRacing
(Post 1306550)
better buy your ECU's now... the EPA is gunning for them.
|
Originally Posted by patsmx5
(Post 1306552)
I didn't read the 600 page document. Basically just asking if I'm at a track, and they show up and look and my CEL off, it passes OBD II codes, I have a valid inspection report, and every piece of emissions equipment is installed and functional, would they give me a thumbs up and leave, or crush my car anyways? It seems they aren't saying I can't race the car, they're just saying I have to keep the emissions equipment installed and working as designed.
I think if all that were true you'd get a thumbs up and be ok. Yes getting it to do that will be hard, but not impossible. |
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 1306554)
Yeah, I didn't understand this. Every single aftermarket part is already sold with "Off road use only" disclaimers. How are they going to target only the manufacturers who sell "devices" for cars used on public roads?
say good by to all the small fry turbo manufactures. |
Originally Posted by Savington
(Post 1306524)
|
Soon the racetracks are going to be full of Teslas and Electrical engineers.
|
Originally Posted by MartinezA92
(Post 1306559)
*crossing fingers*
helping SEMA is our only hope http://semasan.com/page.asp?content=aa2016FED1&g=SEMAGA |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:28 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands