Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats. (https://www.miataturbo.net/)
-   Current Events, News, Politics (https://www.miataturbo.net/current-events-news-politics-77/)
-   -   EPA Seeks to Prohibit Conversion of Vehicles Into Racecars (https://www.miataturbo.net/current-events-news-politics-77/epa-seeks-prohibit-conversion-vehicles-into-racecars-87667/)

ThePass 02-10-2016 01:38 PM


Originally Posted by OGRacing (Post 1306556)
exactly. so anyone that sells the "off road use only" items will get a visit from the EPA. because now there will no longer be an exception.

say good by to all the small fry turbo manufactures.

This.

The change would mean that you no longer see any those "off road use only" parts for anything related to engine or emissions.

ThePass 02-10-2016 01:47 PM

Jalopnik did a much better job of getting clarification from primary sources than R&T did.

See that article below...

The EPA's Crackdown On Race Cars, Explained

MartinezA92 02-10-2016 01:58 PM


Originally Posted by OGRacing (Post 1306561)
that article is where i got the quote of the EPA wanting to shut down manufactures of racing equipment.


helping SEMA is our only hope SEMA Action Network (SAN) AA2016FED1

Yup, signed it as soon as I saw it

ThePass 02-10-2016 02:14 PM

I'm completely baffled how a government agency saying "we're changing the wording to close a loophole so that what you've been doing for years will now be explicitly illegal, but don't worry we won't come after you... (for now)" is supposed to put anybody at ease.

Ziggo 02-10-2016 02:16 PM

I want some data on how big of an effect track only and modified street cars has on overall fleet emissions anyway. This just feels like the EPA over reaching again to solve a problem that isn't really there.

If there needs to be a standard for tailpipe emissions on road going cars, fine, set it. Had to pass this test here in TX anyway. I had the same complaint with CARB in CA, if my car meets the emissions standards, who cares what parts I use.

OGRacing 02-10-2016 02:16 PM


Originally Posted by ThePass (Post 1306569)
I'm completely baffled how a government agency saying "we're changing the wording to close a loophole so that what you've been doing for years will now be explicitly illegal, but don't worry we won't come after you... (for now)" is supposed to put anybody at ease.

BTW all the companies that you support and love. We will shut them down first.

Joe Perez 02-10-2016 02:26 PM


Originally Posted by patsmx5 (Post 1306552)
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.

That's correct, you can race any car you want, so long as the emissions control devices haven't been tampered with.

And you can also build new cars specifically for the purpose of racing as well, so long as they're not titled / registered for street use. So real* racing series won't be affected.

* = I'm speaking from the point of view of an American, where "big money" motorsports is mostly NASCAR, IRL, F1, NHRA, and so forth. All scratch-built tube frame vehicles which never had a title. This would obviously have an effect on Baja, the various rally-type series, things like Spec Miata, the various "24 hours of..." series, and so forth.




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?

They don't have to target manufacturers who sell devices for cars used on public roads, since usage isn't a criteria. They only have to target manufacturers who sell devices intended for cars which were built in a factory, sold at a dealership, have a title, and originally came with emissions-control devices, whether it's the 2014 Corvette you drive to work every day, or the 1992 Miata getting flogged around a racetrack on Sunday.

So, in a worst-case scenario, this would affect all plug-n-play type ECUs, but not necessarily "universal" ECUs.

bahurd 02-10-2016 02:48 PM

So I guess this would benefit the OEMs like GM, Ford etc who sell crate engines for the purposes of "competition".

And if buying a used engine through a yard maybe a background check will be in order to ensure intended use. I mean we don't want a used engine to fall into the wrong hands now do we....

Dunning Kruger Affect 02-10-2016 02:49 PM


Originally Posted by Ziggo (Post 1306570)
I want some data on how big of an effect track only and modified street cars has on overall fleet emissions anyway. This just feels like the EPA over reaching again to solve a problem that isn't really there.

If there needs to be a standard for tailpipe emissions on road going cars, fine, set it. Had to pass this test here in TX anyway. I had the same complaint with CARB in CA, if my car meets the emissions standards, who cares what parts I use.

I think it's the same deal as the rolling coal bros and the Cobb Accessport guys. There's already a big ol' fine associated, ~$25k iirc, with tampering with a federally controlled emissions device (i.e. - an ECU) that is found being used on public highways. It doesn't stop anyone currently outside of some people in California with the literal CARB police (lol carb police /!\ pizza alert /!\).

People have been installing parts that have been specified with the CYA "FOR OFF ROAD USE ONLY" on road cars for ages, and it's now that it's being seen a prevalent problem. It's the same deal with Mustang owners at Cars & Coffee events; there's a reason why we can't have nice things. I mean, keep in mind, I also contributed to the problem, as well; however, I'm pulling the plate on my 94 this year because I really don't feel like doing the song and dance to pass a visual inspection.


Originally Posted by OGRacing (Post 1306571)
BTW all the companies that you support and love. We will shut them down first.

You're incredibly obnoxious and have only contributed white noise pearl clutching.

Joe Perez 02-10-2016 02:54 PM


Originally Posted by bahurd (Post 1306584)
And if buying a used engine through a yard maybe a background check will be in order to ensure intended use. I mean we don't want a used engine to fall into the wrong hands now do we....

Seems doubtful.

It's already been illegal for decades to install an older engine into a newer car, or an engine originally certified for one type of use (truck, marine, etc) into a different vehicle type (passenger car.)

Nothing changes with regard to the sale or use of used / aftermarket engines relative to the situation as it exists now.

fooger03 02-10-2016 02:54 PM


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.

If your car *looked* like it had been modified, then they might just decide to call your car an "emissions equipment", specifically calling out that your turbocharger or exhaust or track tuned suspension allowed the car to burn more fuel and therefore produce more emissions on the race track than it would have compared to the same car without a track-tuned suspension...

You can follow up with them in court later in order to try to get your crushed car back.

Dunning Kruger Affect 02-10-2016 03:05 PM


Originally Posted by fooger03 (Post 1306588)
If your car *looked* like it had been modified, then they might just decide to call your car an "emissions equipment", specifically calling out that your turbocharger or exhaust or track tuned suspension allowed the car to burn more fuel and therefore produce more emissions on the race track than it would have compared to the same car without a track-tuned suspension...

You can follow up with them in court later in order to try to get your crushed car back.

Oh look, I, too, can move the goal posts and invoke ~scary imagery~ about shit that isn't going to happen.

ThePass 02-10-2016 03:09 PM


Originally Posted by Dunning Kruger Affect (Post 1306586)
I'm pulling the plate on my 94 this year because I really don't feel like doing the song and dance to pass a visual inspection.

You appear to be missing the part where that's exactly what they're trying to change. Pulling your plate and never letting the car touch a public road would no longer afford you any exemption, the car would still be held to the same emissions standards and regulations that cars on the highway are. That's a dramatic change from current. How this would be enforced and to what extent is mostly speculation at this point.

bahurd 02-10-2016 03:18 PM


Originally Posted by Joe Perez (Post 1306587)
Seems doubtful.

It's already been illegal for decades to install an older engine into a newer car, or an engine originally certified for one type of use (truck, marine, etc) into a different vehicle type (passenger car.)

Nothing changes with regard to the sale or use of used / aftermarket engines relative to the situation as it exists now.

Where has it ever been illegal to install whatever into whatever so long as it's not for use on a public road? Isn't this thread about "competition use only" or converting something into "competition use only"?

Dunning Kruger Affect 02-10-2016 03:20 PM

The EPA has issued a clarification in the wake of the SEMA call to arms specifying that they recognize competition uses of motor vehicles and that they're trying to make sure that heavy-duty vehicles aren't falling into a competition loophole. Savington posted an article about it.

mgeoffriau 02-10-2016 03:22 PM


Originally Posted by Dunning Kruger Affect (Post 1306597)
The EPA has issued a clarification in the wake of the SEMA call to arms specifying that they recognize competition uses of motor vehicles and that they're trying to make sure that heavy-duty vehicles aren't falling into a competition loophole. Savington posted an article about it.

Does a spokesperson's clarification made to Road & Track magazine carry the force of law?

Dunning Kruger Affect 02-10-2016 03:25 PM

Well seeing how the laws have been on the books for 40+ years and drag racing has been met by regular car crushing for the past 30...

How is it that the EPA is simultaneously bumbling idiots who never did nothin' good while being cunning saboteurs who are going to steal and crush all of our Miatas? I'm a bit stuck on that part.

ThePass 02-10-2016 03:28 PM

Clarification about "intent" means very little, and they can flip flop on that any time they want. What matters is the actual words in the regulation, and as those currently sit they do not only target heavy duty vehicles. The EPA isn't stupid, they know that. They also have a bad reputation for trying to pull things like this, it's far from unprecedented behavior.

mgeoffriau 02-10-2016 03:29 PM


Originally Posted by Dunning Kruger Affect (Post 1306601)
How is it that the EPA is simultaneously bumbling idiots who never did nothin' good while being cunning saboteurs who are going to steal and crush all of our Miatas? I'm a bit stuck on that part.

Nobody is saying this. What are you even arguing about?

Dunning Kruger Affect 02-10-2016 03:30 PM

Yeah, but why aren't they crushing cars left and right now? The law's on the books. We're all outlaws.


Originally Posted by mgeoffriau (Post 1306603)
Nobody is saying this. What are you even arguing about?

I'm not the one questioning the authenticity of a PR person.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:58 AM.


© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands