Cobb has received California Air Resource Board (CARB) Executive Orders yet, to best meet the regs, there will be some changes–meaning some reduced features in its tuning software.
A Cobb e-mail to its dealers explains the changes:
As a market leader in the custom tuning market, we have taken the position that we must help all of our partners address the regulatory …
Translation: Make sure you have good backups of the previous versions of Accesstuner and Accesstuner Pro!
(And please ignore this glaring example of the dangers of closed-source ECU tuning software 
)
In reply to GameboyRMH :
While you do have a point, I doubt that any of the open source tuning software solutions and open source ECUs will ever be able to get a CARB EO, given that it should be relatively easy for people like us to tweak the software to change parameters outside of what was approved by the CARB EO.
BoxheadTim said:In reply to GameboyRMH :
While you do have a point, I doubt that any of the open source tuning software solutions and open source ECUs will ever be able to get a CARB EO, given that it should be relatively easy for people like us to tweak the software to change parameters outside of what was approved by the CARB EO.
The greater problem being that none of this retuning of software has ever been legal. Anti-tampering laws have been around since the CAA was founded. So companies who make money doing this, well....
This is mostly due to EPA pressures, not CARB. But getting a CARB EO is currently the only method to prove you're complying with EPA regs, other than a new program from SEMA that allows you to do all the testing and just not submit the EO paperwork.
And no, as long as you have user-adjustable parameters that could affect the emissions, you won't get an EO. We used to have a kit that used a programmable piggyback but it was shipped without the programming interface, that was okay.
In order for a full ECU to get an EO for a 1996 or later car, it's going to have to return OBD-II codes - and accurate ones with all the testing behind them, not just "something to fool the code reader". We've had some initial conversations about this with the relevant parties and while it's technically possible, it's a long and expensive road. In short, that's not going to happen.
The only surprising thing about this announcement from Cobb is the fact that it's happening now and not a couple of years ago.
alfadriver said:BoxheadTim said:In reply to GameboyRMH :
While you do have a point, I doubt that any of the open source tuning software solutions and open source ECUs will ever be able to get a CARB EO, given that it should be relatively easy for people like us to tweak the software to change parameters outside of what was approved by the CARB EO.
The greater problem being that none of this retuning of software has ever been legal. Anti-tampering laws have been around since the CAA was founded. So companies who make money doing this, well....
Not "none". It can be done legally :) But you have to prove you haven't affected the emissions, and that's out of reach for a lot of people.
I do have a friend who has obtained what is basically a single-car EO for his modified Delta Integrale, but we don't all have Silicon Valley money.
Keith Tanner said:The only surprising thing about this announcement from Cobb is the fact that it's happening now and not a couple of years ago.
The reward/risk calculator turned up to "not worth it anymore."
Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) said:Keith Tanner said:The only surprising thing about this announcement from Cobb is the fact that it's happening now and not a couple of years ago.
The reward/risk calculator turned up to "not worth it anymore."
If they hadn't done this, the EPA would have inevitably hit them with a massive fine. I suspect there were already ongoing conversations. So it wasn't really a risk, it was going to happen.
HP Tuners has also been making changes.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Fair enough. But it's not all that common that people or companies that tamper actually prove what they are doing. Heck, some of the EO's I'm aware of- I'm surprised they still exist.
But tampering without proof has never been legal.
alfadriver said:In reply to Keith Tanner :
But tampering without proof has never been legal.
That's what a lot of people miss. The laws haven't changed. The enforcement has.
You'll need to log in to post.
