DHS wants to force car owners to use OEM parts
- Thread starter faltic
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
But someone who buys a new Camaro, Corvette, 5.0, etc, wouldn't be able to order a well made set of headers from Kooks and then go have it tuned by a shop.
There's another piece of the puzzle, related to what you mentioned, that a lot of people don't know. It applies to much of Canada, and given our regulatory similarity in some of these matters, it may apply down south, at least in places, too.
When talking about exhaust, yes, there are rules about tampering with emissions equipment; here the enforcement is spotty. Nonetheless, if you're replacing an exhaust system and using an aftermarket one, one has to watch the noise. Beyond that, any "universal fit" exhaust systems, which obviously refers mainly to mufflers, are considered illegal for street use. An exhaust system or muffler is legal when there is a spec sheet for the specific vehicle in question.
But someone who buys a new Camaro, Corvette, 5.0, etc, wouldn't be able to order a well made set of headers from Kooks and then go have it tuned by a shop.
There's another piece of the puzzle, related to what you mentioned, that a lot of people don't know. It applies to much of Canada, and given our regulatory similarity in some of these matters, it may apply down south, at least in places, too.
When talking about exhaust, yes, there are rules about tampering with emissions equipment; here the enforcement is spotty. Nonetheless, if you're replacing an exhaust system and using an aftermarket one, one has to watch the noise. Beyond that, any "universal fit" exhaust systems, which obviously refers mainly to mufflers, are considered illegal for street use. An exhaust system or muffler is legal when there is a spec sheet for the specific vehicle in question.
Originally Posted By: mk378
It has always been illegal to modify a car in a way that increases its emissions. I like that rule. I don't want to have to breathe your [censored] pollution.
Aftermarket parts that do not affect emissions are legal and will continue to be.
Then taller tyres, lift kits, and any other optional extra you choose that increases kerb weight should also be illegal as more weight needs more fuel to push it.
Mandatory downsizing of vehicles and engine size in the US would have a big impact on emissions.
It has always been illegal to modify a car in a way that increases its emissions. I like that rule. I don't want to have to breathe your [censored] pollution.
Aftermarket parts that do not affect emissions are legal and will continue to be.
Then taller tyres, lift kits, and any other optional extra you choose that increases kerb weight should also be illegal as more weight needs more fuel to push it.
Mandatory downsizing of vehicles and engine size in the US would have a big impact on emissions.
This means an auto maker could invent a part that fails far too quickly, and nobody could do anything about it. It would instead be a big money maker for the parts man.
Originally Posted By: Kruse
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
The 15 largestships volcanoes create more pollution than all of the worlds cars combined.
There. That would be closer to being correct.
All the volcanoes in the world are only a few percent of what man releases, so probably 6-10% of vehicular sources in total.
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
The 15 largest
There. That would be closer to being correct.
All the volcanoes in the world are only a few percent of what man releases, so probably 6-10% of vehicular sources in total.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Kruse
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
The 15 largestships volcanoes create more pollution than all of the worlds cars combined.
There. That would be closer to being correct.
All the volcanoes in the world are only a few percent of what man releases, so probably 6-10% of vehicular sources in total.
Yea, that's why is put the word "closer" in my reply.
Originally Posted By: Kruse
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
The 15 largest
There. That would be closer to being correct.
All the volcanoes in the world are only a few percent of what man releases, so probably 6-10% of vehicular sources in total.
Yea, that's why is put the word "closer" in my reply.
Originally Posted By: Kruse
Originally Posted By: AdRock
Manufacturers are only required to produce replacement parts for 10 years.
A parts man told me the complete opposite. I'm pretty sure your comment is an internet myth and there really is no law that says they have to produce parts for any amount of time, period.
Although if you could provide a link to your comment to prove me wrong, I would stand corrected. Got a link?
He's right, and it's 7 years. I know this from owning Lincoln Mark VIII's. Ford couldn't wait until that 7 years was over. The moment it was, they dropped everything like a sack of manure.
Originally Posted By: AdRock
Manufacturers are only required to produce replacement parts for 10 years.
A parts man told me the complete opposite. I'm pretty sure your comment is an internet myth and there really is no law that says they have to produce parts for any amount of time, period.
Although if you could provide a link to your comment to prove me wrong, I would stand corrected. Got a link?
He's right, and it's 7 years. I know this from owning Lincoln Mark VIII's. Ford couldn't wait until that 7 years was over. The moment it was, they dropped everything like a sack of manure.
Originally Posted By: Olas
Originally Posted By: mk378
It has always been illegal to modify a car in a way that increases its emissions. I like that rule. I don't want to have to breathe your [censored] pollution.
Aftermarket parts that do not affect emissions are legal and will continue to be.
Then taller tyres, lift kits, and any other optional extra you choose that increases kerb weight should also be illegal as more weight needs more fuel to push it.
Mandatory downsizing of vehicles and engine size in the US would have a big impact on emissions.
It would also have a big impact on Freedom of Choice. But we already know from 1776 that the UK and the US have never seen eye-to-eye on that little detail.
The major issue here is that people defeating emissions controls is a much smaller issues than the elephants that the EPA allows corporations to get away with every day of the week.
The EPA pursuing this matter so heavily is equivalent to Inspector Javert chasing Jean Valjean over that stupid loaf of bread. Is there a transgression? Yes, but are there larger issues that are being ignored while the EPA tries to plug pinholes in the grand scheme? Yes, and in a big way.
The EPA also cuts a lot of corrupt deals that hurt the environment as well, in the name of doing things that sound good on paper. They also do a lot of things that help the environment, but do significantly more to line pockets with profit.
The EPA, NHTSA, other government agencies and the auto manufacturers have long been after the ideal that the only good car is a new car, and the right place to fix your car is the dealership and nowhere else.
Emissions has been used as a tool for years to force people into new vehicles and destroy older vehicles. Not for the purpose of helping the environment, but to allow those pollution credits to be sold to someone who is going to destroy the Earth in a different way.
It's nothing but a money game.
Originally Posted By: mk378
It has always been illegal to modify a car in a way that increases its emissions. I like that rule. I don't want to have to breathe your [censored] pollution.
Aftermarket parts that do not affect emissions are legal and will continue to be.
Then taller tyres, lift kits, and any other optional extra you choose that increases kerb weight should also be illegal as more weight needs more fuel to push it.
Mandatory downsizing of vehicles and engine size in the US would have a big impact on emissions.
It would also have a big impact on Freedom of Choice. But we already know from 1776 that the UK and the US have never seen eye-to-eye on that little detail.
The major issue here is that people defeating emissions controls is a much smaller issues than the elephants that the EPA allows corporations to get away with every day of the week.
The EPA pursuing this matter so heavily is equivalent to Inspector Javert chasing Jean Valjean over that stupid loaf of bread. Is there a transgression? Yes, but are there larger issues that are being ignored while the EPA tries to plug pinholes in the grand scheme? Yes, and in a big way.
The EPA also cuts a lot of corrupt deals that hurt the environment as well, in the name of doing things that sound good on paper. They also do a lot of things that help the environment, but do significantly more to line pockets with profit.
The EPA, NHTSA, other government agencies and the auto manufacturers have long been after the ideal that the only good car is a new car, and the right place to fix your car is the dealership and nowhere else.
Emissions has been used as a tool for years to force people into new vehicles and destroy older vehicles. Not for the purpose of helping the environment, but to allow those pollution credits to be sold to someone who is going to destroy the Earth in a different way.
It's nothing but a money game.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
The EPA, NHTSA, other government agencies and the auto manufacturers have long been after the ideal that the only good car is a new car, and the right place to fix your car is the dealership and nowhere else.
Emissions has been used as a tool for years to force people into new vehicles and destroy older vehicles. Not for the purpose of helping the environment,
It's nothing but a money game.
You know the unions will be supporting this as well.
You need to keep buying cars, or dealer parts to keep their wallets filled.
The EPA, NHTSA, other government agencies and the auto manufacturers have long been after the ideal that the only good car is a new car, and the right place to fix your car is the dealership and nowhere else.
Emissions has been used as a tool for years to force people into new vehicles and destroy older vehicles. Not for the purpose of helping the environment,
It's nothing but a money game.
You know the unions will be supporting this as well.
You need to keep buying cars, or dealer parts to keep their wallets filled.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: Kruse
Originally Posted By: AdRock
Manufacturers are only required to produce replacement parts for 10 years.
A parts man told me the complete opposite. I'm pretty sure your comment is an internet myth and there really is no law that says they have to produce parts for any amount of time, period.
Although if you could provide a link to your comment to prove me wrong, I would stand corrected. Got a link?
He's right, and it's 7 years. I know this from owning Lincoln Mark VIII's. Ford couldn't wait until that 7 years was over. The moment it was, they dropped everything like a sack of manure.
No such law, just like there is no law that I have to give someone a part number when they ask for it. They are only required to make parts through a vehicle's warranty period, after that a manufacturer only makes it based on popularity. GM and Chrysler going bankrupt screwed over a lot of the smaller Tier 2 and 3 suppliers that made parts for everyone.
Originally Posted By: Kruse
Originally Posted By: AdRock
Manufacturers are only required to produce replacement parts for 10 years.
A parts man told me the complete opposite. I'm pretty sure your comment is an internet myth and there really is no law that says they have to produce parts for any amount of time, period.
Although if you could provide a link to your comment to prove me wrong, I would stand corrected. Got a link?
He's right, and it's 7 years. I know this from owning Lincoln Mark VIII's. Ford couldn't wait until that 7 years was over. The moment it was, they dropped everything like a sack of manure.
No such law, just like there is no law that I have to give someone a part number when they ask for it. They are only required to make parts through a vehicle's warranty period, after that a manufacturer only makes it based on popularity. GM and Chrysler going bankrupt screwed over a lot of the smaller Tier 2 and 3 suppliers that made parts for everyone.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
The 15 largest ships create more pollution than all of the worlds cars combined.
Come on...surely your internal B$ meter pegged when you saw that, let alone let you repeat it as a fact.
http://www.industrytap.com/worlds-15-big...-the-world/8182
This University referenced is local to me. As part of a work en devour I had the pleasure to meet some of their brightest professors, including that man. If he's wrong I would welcome something other than a Waynes World level "no hway." I know, it's only for certain types of pollutants.
Engines like this are running 24 hours a day http://www.autoblog.com/2011/07/22/worlds-largest-diesel-engine-makes-109-000-horsepower/
The EPA is worried about Billy Bobs Cummins with a DPF delete after getting worked up watching YouTube videos.
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
The 15 largest ships create more pollution than all of the worlds cars combined.
Come on...surely your internal B$ meter pegged when you saw that, let alone let you repeat it as a fact.
http://www.industrytap.com/worlds-15-big...-the-world/8182
This University referenced is local to me. As part of a work en devour I had the pleasure to meet some of their brightest professors, including that man. If he's wrong I would welcome something other than a Waynes World level "no hway." I know, it's only for certain types of pollutants.
Engines like this are running 24 hours a day http://www.autoblog.com/2011/07/22/worlds-largest-diesel-engine-makes-109-000-horsepower/
The EPA is worried about Billy Bobs Cummins with a DPF delete after getting worked up watching YouTube videos.
The professor's take on the situation is to lobby for less ship pollution, not more car pollution.
Cars don't emit sulfur oxide because oil refineries are required to remove practically all sulfur from gasoline and road diesel. I wouldn't doubt that they then put that sulfur into the bunker fuel sold for ships just because that is presently a legal way to get rid of it.
Cars don't emit sulfur oxide because oil refineries are required to remove practically all sulfur from gasoline and road diesel. I wouldn't doubt that they then put that sulfur into the bunker fuel sold for ships just because that is presently a legal way to get rid of it.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked