[Diver]

Originally Posted by David70

What's referenced in the article doesn't seem to apply to me -



40 CFR 1037 - CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW HEAVY-DUTY MOTOR VEHICLES

I don't believe I own a heavy duty motor vehicle.

Part of the criticism is the regulations mainly deal with heavy motor vehicles but the EPA slipped this in and it applies to everyone.

The use of downpipes is already illegal. What the EPA is trying to do is get these products off the market entirely. That's overkill.

[jwzimm]

Originally Posted by verruckt

and lmfao, a quick search on this same forum shows you have broken the same laws you supposedly want enforced.



That's real rich...

Was that directed at me? If so, I am confused. I have never run a downpipe or any other emissions defeating device on my 335i or my M3. I did have a JB4 and an intercooler on my 335i but the downpipe was not touched intentionally.

[Irishsig]

The EPA can suck it!
They are a bunch of bureaucratic onerous, over reaching regulators.
I'd love to see how they would implement these so called regulations.
It would be incredible expensive to implement and have almost no appreciable change in the local air quality.

In the big scheme of things the tiny amount of pollutants that are produced by the fraction of cars that are modified in the States annually are infinitesimal compared to the pollution China & India produces in one day.
I'm not saying I don't want clean air of course, but this makes no sense.

[fravel]

Is that river in Colorado all cleaned up already? Frankly the EPA doesn't have any business focusing on anything else until they deal with that.

[verruckt]

Originally Posted by jwzimm

Was that directed at me? If so, I am confused. I have never run a downpipe or any other emissions defeating device on my 335i or my M3. I did have a JB4 and an intercooler on my 335i but the downpipe was not touched intentionally.

What do you think a JB4 would be considered?

[verruckt]

Originally Posted by fravel

Is that river in Colorado all cleaned up already? Frankly the EPA doesn't have any business focusing on anything else until they deal with that.

Nah, you see, that was just an accident...

The EPA's handling of that entire fiaso, and lack of responsibility shows just how much of a crap organization they are.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by jwzimm

Oh I realize my opinion is not a popular one. Those that don't like it are advised to ignore it.

It just irritates me when people think that they can simply ignore a law. It relates a sense of entitlement and arrogance that is unacceptable. If you don't like a law, then work to change it. I don't go around shooting people who annoy me in the head because I disagree with the laws against murder. Similar concept.

Former lobbyist.
Please remember that there such things as bad law, too much law, and incenting/penalizing the wrong behavior with the law.

The EPA, in this case, is not interested in improving the environment with this new regulatory/enforcement scheme. They are interested in a money grab (fines) and an increase in relevance which will lead to more power.

Agricultural pollutants are a more serious and relevant issue. This should be their focus.

Cheers-mk

[sp1tfire]

Originally Posted by jwzimm

Yes, I am serious. We all need to live here and that is why we have clean air laws in the first place. Why do you feel you are not subject to those laws?

Perhaps it should be changed to something like this. If you wish to purchase a product that is meant only to be used in track and off-road circumstances then you must surrender your registration so the car cannot be driven on the street. You are buying a product that is only legally allowed to be used off road anyway, why would you need registration then?

So when a person has non registered track only car - he somehow doesn't get air polluted?
Corporations do much more damages to the air and people are the ones getting restrictions and extra taxes.

[dragonsi]

Time to buy up all the test pipes, down pipes, x pipes, h pipes for all the cars I will want to own.

[jwzimm]

Originally Posted by verruckt

What do you think a JB4 would be considered?

My emissions equipment was fully intact.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by jwzimm

My emissions equipment was fully intact.

Perhaps.

If it was a bigger turbo (I don't know if it was or wasn't) you changed the mass flow rate and hence the amount of substance, i.e. exhaust, that was passing through your system. You did, in fact, change the entire system of which the emissions equipment, is only one part.

I can't speak for passing an emissions test but higher turbo velocity generally equals more exhaust flow, to a point. My engineering is running out here, as it was 25 years ago. Someone else can chime in.

Cheers-mk

[2HIGH~PSI]

Originally Posted by jwzimm

Lol! I did not say I do not stretch the laws as well. My point is that complaining about someone enforcing the law is futile and a little childish. If I am pulled over for speeding and am issued a ticket, I will step up and accept it like a man. I took the risk and I must own the consequence.

Hey, I fully support everything you are saying.

The difference between the 1MPH over the limit and ripping the cats off your car is one doesnt really affect anything or anyone except you are breaking a speed rule, the other is affecting the air quality etc.

What jwzimm is referring to here is actually more of a respect for the other people on the planet and the environment.

For full disclosure, I run a clear DP through catless pipes an HKS Ti exhaust on my supra.. Im not saying I abide either, however the law is in place to protect us and the planet.

Really not the worst idea.

Im not saying I will race out of my way to support it as an automotive enthusiast, but at the same time, Id feel like a pretty shitty human being to actively oppose it as well.

[jwzimm]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

Perhaps.

If it was a bigger turbo (I don't know if it was or wasn't) you changed the mass flow rate and hence the amount of substance, i.e. exhaust, that was passing through your system. You did, in fact, change the entire system of which the emissions equipment, is only one part.

I can't speak for passing an emissions test but higher turbo velocity generally equals more exhaust flow, to a point. My engineering is running out here as it was 25 years ago. Someone else can chime in.

Cheers-mk

No changes to the turbo either. Increasing the flow of exhaust through the system will not, necessarily increase emissions. If the Cat is intact the only thing that would increase is CO2 emissions (which is not measured or controlled by the EPA on cars).

Originally Posted by 2HIGH~PSI

Hey, I fully support everything you are saying.

The difference between the 1MPH over the limit and ripping the cats off your car is one doesnt really affect anything or anyone except you are breaking a speed rule, the other is affecting the air quality etc.

What jwzimm is referring to here is actually more of a respect for the other people on the planet and the environment.

For full disclosure, I run a clear DP through catless pipes an HKS Ti exhaust on my supra.. Im not saying I abide either, however the law is in place to protect us and the planet.

Really not the worst idea.

Im not saying I will race out of my way to support it as an automotive enthusiast, but at the same time, Id feel like a pretty shitty human being to actively oppose it as well.

Thank you for getting my point. We all have to live on this planet for a good long while so it is all of our responsibilities to follow the rules intended to protect it.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by jwzimm

No changes to the turbo either. Increasing the flow of exhaust through the system will not, necessarily increase emissions. If the Cat is intact the only thing that would increase is CO2 emissions (which is not measured or controlled by the EPA on cars).



Thank you for getting my point. We all have to live on this planet for a good long while so it is all of our responsibilities to follow the rules intended to protect it.

It does, volumetrically.

Does the exhaust flow rate and output at 1000 rpm = the exhaust flow rate and output at 8250 rpm? No.


Agreed on the second point, if:

We have responsible laws and agreed upon sensible standards.

No one is advocating despoiling the environment for shitz and giggles, we are asking for sensible regulations and this is a massive red herring.

I wonder how many of the nearly 300 million registered vehicles in the US are actually modded in this fashion? I'm guessing rather few. If I use my family including in-laws, as a very unscientific sample, between 14 people there are 19 vehicles. The only one that has that type of modification is my E63 M6. That is a bit over 5.3%. Red Herring.

If they want to make a lasting positive impact on the environment, ban cows.

Cheers-mk

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by jwzimm

Lol! I did not say I do not stretch the laws as well. My point is that complaining about someone enforcing the law is futile and a little childish. If I am pulled over for speeding and am issued a ticket, I will step up and accept it like a man. I took the risk and I must own the consequence.

There are already laws in place to discourage people from defeating emissions equipment. I have had friends fork out heavy fines for getting caught driving illegally modified cars in California. But like you said...they "will step up and accept it like a man." It is one thing to have fines vs just completely shutting down the industry...making building track or race cars illegal.

What if the EPA decided every street car needed a computer chip that didn't let you exceed the speed limit at all, not 1mph. Would you feel that to be alright, all in the name of clean air and less tail pipe emissions? Essentially shutting down the sports car market completely.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Savory

Here we are talking CO2 emissions and yet EPA doesn't want to address the gross pollution of animal agriculture. Apparently they want to focus on droplets in the bucket when there is a running faucet nearby. The power of lobbyists.

Why don't we all just kill ourselves and save the planet...

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

It does, volumetrically.

Does the exhaust flow rate and output at 1000 rpm = the exhaust flow rate and output at 8250 rpm? No.


Agreed on the second point, if:

We have responsible laws and agreed upon sensible standards.

No one is advocating despoiling the environment for shitz and giggles, we are asking for sensible regulations and this is a massive red herring.

I wonder how many of the nearly 300 million registered vehicles in the US are actually modded in this fashion? I'm guessing rather few. If I use my family including in-laws, as a very unscientific sample, between 14 people there are 19 vehicles. The only one that has that type of modification is my E63 M6. That is a bit over 5.3%. Red Herring.

If they want to make a lasting positive impact on the environment, ban cows.

Cheers-mk

You scofflaw you.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by jwzimm

We all have to live on this planet for a good long while so it is all of our responsibilities to follow the rules intended to protect it.

You do know that the scientific fossil record shows 99% of all species that have inhabited the planet have gone extinct, right? But somehow us humans are not going to follow suit...

You do know the sun is going die and burn the Earth to a crisp. You do know the Milky Way galaxy (our galaxy) is on a collision course the Andromeda galaxy in a couple of 100-million years, right?

Protect the planet from what?

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by DrFerry

This type legislation effort (scam) is routed in the debunked Global Warming con. Climate change is caused by sun spot cycles - not race cars or street cars emitting CO2. By the way people exhale C02. And while we are at it: There are currently approximately 1.3 to 1.5 billion cows grazing, sleeping, and chewing their cud at any given time on planet Earth. And these 1,300 pound (average weight for both a beef and dairy cow) animals eat a lot. Much like humans, when they eat, gas builds up inside of their guts and has to be expelled. (See Why Beans Make You Fart) Cows fart and burp… a lot. The result is a large amount of methane being introduced into the atmosphere.

In a 2006 United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization report, it claims that the livestock sector, most of which are cows, “generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport.” According to a Danish study, the average cow produces enough methane per year to do the same greenhouse damage as four tons of carbon dioxide. So is this significantly contributing to global warming?

The Global Warning scam is aimed at conning folks into accepting a carbon tax so various governments of the world and the UN can take your money while they fly around in private jets and ride around in luxury limos. No modding for the little people… No, no, no.

Climate change (global cooling) is a natural cycle of the earth and solar system. Yes, in the 1970s the media narrative was about global cooling. Then they fudged the data and switched to warming… So let's ban cows farting and giraffes and goats and pigs too before we accept the no modding con..

Article Link:
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index....lobal-warming/

You are just a ROUGE mutherF'er

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

You do know that the scientific fossil record shows 99% of all species that have inhabited the planet have gone extinct, right? But somehow us humans are not going to follow suit...

You do know the sun is going die and burn the Earth to a crisp. You do know the Milky Way galaxy (our galaxy) is on a collision course the Andromeda galaxy in a couple of 100-million years, right?

Protect the planet from what?

Jeeze...here you go AGAIN! Once more introducing actual science into the mix!!

[David70]

Originally Posted by Irishsig

I'd love to see how they would implement these so called regulations.

If I were them I would go after the suppliers, far easier to go after the few that make the parts than the ones that buy them. There's a reason why law enforcement focuses on drug dealers to reduce drug use.

Originally Posted by DrFerry

This type legislation effort (scam) is routed in the debunked Global Warming con. Climate change is caused by sun spot cycles - not race cars or street cars emitting CO2. By the way people exhale C02. And while we are at it: There are currently approximately 1.3 to 1.5 billion cows grazing, sleeping, and chewing their cud at any given time on planet Earth. And these 1,300 pound (average weight for both a beef and dairy cow) animals eat a lot. Much like humans, when they eat, gas builds up inside of their guts and has to be expelled. (See Why Beans Make You Fart) Cows fart and burp… a lot. The result is a large amount of methane being introduced into the atmosphere.

In a 2006 United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization report, it claims that the livestock sector, most of which are cows, “generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport.” According to a Danish study, the average cow produces enough methane per year to do the same greenhouse damage as four tons of carbon dioxide. So is this significantly contributing to global warming?

The Global Warning scam is aimed at conning folks into accepting a carbon tax so various governments of the world and the UN can take your money while they fly around in private jets and ride around in luxury limos. No modding for the little people… No, no, no.

Climate change (global cooling) is a natural cycle of the earth and solar system. Yes, in the 1970s the media narrative was about global cooling. Then they fudged the data and switched to warming… So let's ban cows farting and giraffes and goats and pigs too before we accept the no modding con..

Article Link:
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index....lobal-warming/

First, I am not sure why CO2 was brought to the front. I don't believe the emission controls on anyone's car can remove CO2 and the only thing that can cut CO2 is reducing the amount of fuel that is burned. The primary function of the emission controls is to remove CO (carbon monoxide), NOx, SOx, hydrocarbons (partially burned fuel that creates smog), and soot. Modifying your car (normally requires reprogramming) to burn more fuel will increase its' CO2 output, taking the cat off won't increase it.

The sun spot theory is a good one and I will consider it as a possibility along with the other theories until something is proven. You present it as proof just like all of the other theories. At the same time a large part of scientists also believe human activity is at least partially to blame. Based on the evidence I don't see making reasonable cuts in CO2 output as being a bad idea, worst case that I see is we cut the overall use of hydrocarbons which I think we all agree aren't in unlimited supply. Some say eating lots of red meat will lower my life expectancy but reality is many things might kill me and there still seems to be disagreement with scientists as to whether or not it even matters. Based on the evidence I decided to reduce how much red meat I eat but when I am 70 it may turn out that science was wrong and it was a waste of time.

I agree, all animals (I believe all) produce methane and CO2. Not sure why people defend what they do as being ok based on something or someone doing something that is the same or worse but it seems to be popular. In the end many feel we should cut all output, including ships, trains, animals (we really don't need to eat as much beef as we do), power plants, and slow population growth. I don't know if all of this is necessary or will even be helpful but I am open to listening and if the cut can be made without huge downsides I would probably want to do it (if someone said they could increase the mpg of ships or trains without major downsides I would be for it or when I was offered a high efficiency heating system I decided the extra cost was worth it even though I may not be in my house when it finally breaks even).

[Diver]

I don't think this about CO2. It's about smog causing emissions. The EPA goal is to make it impossible to advertise "for off road only" because that use will be prohibited. States will outlaw the sale of these parts and the manufacturers will be out of business. A wide range of motorsports will be banned. Racers will be limited to whatever crate engines they can get.