1 2 3 4 5 6
wspohn
wspohn Dork
2/23/18 1:08 p.m.

Maybe someone can explain this to me.

I've never understood why California fastens on originality of equipment when they are supposed to be worried about emissions. Why isn't the test one of emission level alone. As long as you pass the level set by a stock rated example of your car, they shouldn't look at what you may have done to the equipment - no harm, no foul?

yupididit
yupididit SuperDork
2/23/18 1:18 p.m.

Dude I got fined for washing my f250, my wife car, and two other cars in the same morning. Someone snitched! 

AngryCorvair
AngryCorvair GRM+ Memberand UltimaDork
2/23/18 1:19 p.m.
yupididit said:

Dude I got fined for washing my f250, my wife car, and two other cars in the same morning. Someone snitched! 

Did they later get stitched?

FuzzWuzzy
FuzzWuzzy Reader
2/23/18 1:19 p.m.

In reply to yupididit :

You're to blame for the drought.

accordionfolder
accordionfolder Dork
2/23/18 1:28 p.m.

In reply to Trackmouse :

Anecdotes a study does not make. ;) It's important to acknowledge confirmation bias (it's a hell of a drug). California has the highest population of any state and is ... rather large.

All I'm saying is, I'm allergic to gross generalizations. This thread is littered with blanket statements - we like to make things simple.

Everything is good or bad!
Black or white!
It's simple! "They" are the bad guys! 

The cosmic joke is that nothing is simple . 

accordionfolder
accordionfolder Dork
2/23/18 1:30 p.m.

In reply to wspohn :

You should re-read Keith's posts. Their snapshot of the emissions of a car is more complicated than the static image of it (i.e. it's not that simple...) 

Trackmouse
Trackmouse UltraDork
2/23/18 1:57 p.m.

In reply to accordionfolder :

But in reality everything is (supposed to be) very simple. Black or white. Yes or no. That’s the problem with today’s world, everyone wants to make it complicated, but it doesn’t have to be. 

The world really is 50/50, black and white. For instance (and this is just my opinion on how I see things) if I asked you “do you like the color blue?” You’re answer is “yes” or “no”. Somewhere is some statistics guy that’ll tell me there is a blah blah blah % chance you like blue because this study or some statistic. But in the end, either you like it, or you don’t. If you answer “yes I like the color blue, but only in certain circumstances” the. The answer is still. “Yes, I like the color blue”. If you follow up by saying “I don’t like the color blue on dodge trucks”, well my friend, you STILL like the color blue, just not on trucks. This means that you do like the color blue.

but that’s just how I see things. Also for the record, I’d like everyone here to know that I don’t belong to a political party. What-so-ever. I will NEVER belong to one. So don’t take my viewpoints as “oh this asshat is part of this or that party”. This asshat chooses his own opinions, albeit strongly. 

The0retical
The0retical UltraDork
2/23/18 2:15 p.m.

In reply to ultraclyde :

Nailed it. There's a bunch of info missing from the CARB article on exactly why JEGS was fined. If they were marketing as  "offroad is only" the onus is on the end user. If not then it's on JEGS.

Many companies will refuse to sell certain parts in Califonia (Corksport won't sell you a test pipe offroad or not for instance) to avoid getting tangled up in something like this. 

Really it isn't that hard not to run afoul of CARB as long as you take an hour or so to educate yourself on how the system works and how to search for an EO. I rarely defend some of California's ARB practices but it's not as opague as some of you seem to think.

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
2/23/18 2:20 p.m.
rslifkin said:

I can understand wanting the EO for certain things like aftermarket fuel tanks, etc. where evap emissions would be likely to effected and stuff like that.  But for a lot of mods, I'm sure it's possible to come up with a much simpler test profile that shows nothing has been thrown way out of whack.  

That's already the case. The tests you need to pass depend on what you've changed. For example, an intake that won't touch fuel lines won't get the evaporative test, but a turbo kit that changes out fuel lines will. Superchargers get an extra idle load test, turbochargers don't. The ARB also requires you to test the worst-case scenario. Say you develop a supercharger kit that can be fitted to 2006-15 Miatas. You will have to pass the tests for the 2015, and the older cars will get grandfathered. If that supercharger is available at multiple boost levels, you will test the highest boost variant.

dropstep
dropstep SuperDork
2/23/18 2:30 p.m.

I think it should be the end users responsibility and not the corporation selling the parts but I don't know exactly what happened. I'm a fan of smaller government and less over reach but then again I've spent my adult life in a red area with no emission or inspections so I don't have to deal with it.

MadScientistMatt
MadScientistMatt PowerDork
2/23/18 2:41 p.m.

I was curious if California had been expecting Jegs to control what their end users were doing, or if Jegs had gotten careless with their advertising. Sure enough, their current catalog specifically recommends a couple of non-CARB approved items for street use. Somebody writing that catalog got really careless.

Unfortunately, it's not clear if California had fined Jegs for selling parts that COULD be used illegally, or for not telling customers they were illegal to use on the street.

Kreb
Kreb GRM+ Memberand UberDork
2/23/18 2:45 p.m.

The reason why car boards shouldn't get political is that I want to think of you in terms of our shared passion for cars, not our ideological differences. Right now, I pretty pissed at one of you and want to call you out, but won't go there. If I were a moderator, I'd close this Canard (or canoe).

Hal
Hal UltraDork
2/23/18 3:32 p.m.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Yes, it is possible to modify a car and have it CARB legal.  I started out with a 2001 Focus that dynoed 108WHP stock.  When I got done it dynoed 223WHP.  It had numerous engine modifications including a supercharger.  Because I live in MD which tends to lean toward CARB style regulations, I made sure that all the parts I put on it had EO#.  It actually ended up being cleaner than stock on the emissions dyno test that was required her at that time.

.

accordionfolder
accordionfolder Dork
2/23/18 3:41 p.m.

Honestly this thread has stayed relatively civil. I'm digging the CARB info getting put down. It hardly seems to have spiraled that far out of control ... yet. 

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
2/23/18 3:53 p.m.
Hal said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Yes, it is possible to modify a car and have it CARB legal.  I started out with a 2001 Focus that dynoed 108WHP stock.  When I got done it dynoed 223WHP.  It had numerous engine modifications including a supercharger.  Because I live in MD which tends to lean toward CARB style regulations, I made sure that all the parts I put on it had EO#.  It actually ended up being cleaner than stock on the emissions dyno test that was required her at that time.

.

You may not have understood my posts. Of course it's possible. We sell parts that make it possible. I've been describing the process of how to actually obtain those EOs. And I'm pretty sure one of our superchargers is cleaner than stock, based on the work we had to do to cold start emissions. Those improvements wouldn't show up in a consumer emissions test, but they definitely show up in the EO tests. I'm pretty sure a stock 2015 Miata would struggle to pass them. Wouldn't be the first time.

MadScientistMatt
MadScientistMatt PowerDork
2/23/18 4:03 p.m.

Keith - if you don't mind sharing, how much does it typically cost to obtain one of the EOs, assuming one doesn't have the equipment to do all the emissions testing in house?

Patrick
Patrick GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
2/23/18 4:18 p.m.

If jegs wasn’t to blame and the end user was, the headline would probably say “jegs, summit racing, speedway motors, etc” no?  Because they could just go after every aftermarket and race parts supplier that ships non street parts to California in one swoop, and SEMA would be up in arms.

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
2/23/18 4:28 p.m.

You can't really do the final testing in-house. I'm not sure you're actually allowed, there are only a couple of labs around the country that are accepted. We did do initial testing with our own 5 gas analyzer, which meant our expensive lab time was basically just a confirmation. We used the SEMA lab in Diamond Bar.

Cost will depend on the tests you run. A 2017 car will be a lot more expensive than a 1990 and the required tests vary depending on the type of part. For the 2017 turbo, we had to run a cold 505, US06, FTP-75 and SC03. Plus a non-logged US06 and SC03 to make sure everything was cool before we did the official. I'll let people google those, you can actually view the drive profile laugh That's about $6500 worth of testing. I'm not sure what paperwork costs were entailed, or the costs to get the car to/from CA for the testing.

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
2/23/18 4:31 p.m.
Patrick said:

If jegs wasn’t to blame and the end user was, the headline would probably say “jegs, summit racing, speedway motors, etc” no?  Because they could just go after every aftermarket and race parts supplier that ships non street parts to California in one swoop, and SEMA would be up in arms.

How do you know they didn't? All we know is that JEGS has reached a settlement with the ARB. They are going after shops and manufacturers already.

Driven5
Driven5 SuperDork
2/23/18 4:35 p.m.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Wow...That's a lot cheaper than I expected.

Kreb
Kreb GRM+ Memberand UberDork
2/23/18 4:39 p.m.
Patrick said:

If jegs wasn’t to blame and the end user was, the headline would probably say “jegs, summit racing, speedway motors, etc” no?  Because they could just go after every aftermarket and race parts supplier that ships non street parts to California in one swoop, and SEMA would be up in arms.

I wish that we could get more specifics. It may well be like when OSHA periodically targets my industry. They don't have the resources to go after everyone, so they target one company who may be no worse than everyone else, and  fine them for all sorts of things. That company becomes the sacrificial lamb while all the other companies clean up their acts out of fear that they are next in the crosshairs.

markwemple
markwemple UberDork
2/23/18 4:52 p.m.

Everyone here does realize that several states follow California's rules, and that has improved our environment. I'm a gearhead but killing the planet isn't cool by any means. Anyone not cool with that concept can just effe off!

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
2/23/18 4:54 p.m.
Driven5 said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Wow...That's a lot cheaper than I expected.

That's just the tests, of course. First you have the R&D costs to make it clean. And it takes a looooooooooooooong time to get the paperwork through. This is also SEMA member pricing, I don't know what it would cost if you had to have the tests done at an ARB lab.

The OEs all have their own test cells. I think Mazda has something like 15 in the LA area. I can only imagine what Ford's got.

rslifkin
rslifkin SuperDork
2/23/18 5:20 p.m.
markwemple said:

Everyone here does realize that several states follow California's rules, and that has improved our environment. I'm a gearhead but killing the planet isn't cool by any means. Anyone not cool with that concept can just effe off!

Most of the other states that follow the Cali rules mean Cali emissions package on new cars, testing, etc. once they're on the road, but not the same visual as Cali has. 

What I find really screwy in a lot of states is that the "test" is just an OBDII plug-in.  So it's really easy to have a car that's puking out awful stuff and reports "all good".  Requiring a real sniffer test of some form country-wide (none of this some states not testing at all BS) would likely clean things up more than the Cali approved parts ever could.  And that means extending the sniffers back to older years too (like Cali does) instead of not testing anything older than a certain point. 

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
2/23/18 5:40 p.m.

Actually, using "just" an OBD-II plug-in test is a good choice. OBD-II is  designed specifically for this purpose and it's continually monitoring the car under all conditions. If the car has a cold start problem, the OBD-II will catch it whilst a sniffer test will not. It monitors the cat constantly, and you'd be amazed at how in-depth  the monitoring is on new cars. They will wake up at 3AM to perform checks of systems, you just don't know it.

1 2 3 4 5 6

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
JOHnEJaUO6gcpRcgurhgZEazcNl6mTp2nm8rhtDHe1M8rlsyQ76Ho98gqycs1r1p