Warning for all performance cars!!!!
Evolved Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,137
Likes: 2
From: Oxnard Ca.
Yeah, California sucks 
...well, at least the emission regs do!
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
I'm personally looking forward to when the infrastructure for E85 is everywhere - this legislation will probably drive that initiative along with the other alt-fuels becoming widely available. Wouldn't you rather have a "green" 100+ octane available at your corner gas station for less than diesel #2 goes for? 
If more consumers buy hybrids, demand for oil-based fuels goes down which means for a *long* while fuel prices in general will go down.
Ultimately, you can't stop progress - and sometimes it works out better for you.
If more consumers buy hybrids, demand for oil-based fuels goes down which means for a *long* while fuel prices in general will go down.
Ultimately, you can't stop progress - and sometimes it works out better for you.
You guys are not seeing the big picture! Requiring new car manufactures to conform to this is just a stepping stone. Once it gets passed (and it will unless we make a stand!) congress with make a new bill for used vehicles. They will try to inforce tighter emissions on ALL cars.
Side note to everyone too. E85 may be a good alt fuel, but unless you vehicle was built with the intentions of running it, it is a BAD idea! Reason? E85 is a CORROSIVE fuel, it eats thru fuel lining and plastic tanks. E85 isnt always the same octane either. E85 eats the contaminates that are present in the tanker trucks transporting it and the contaminates in the holding tanks when being stored. Where do you think all that junk goes? In your fuel system! Think I am making it up? Call ANY dealer (I am from east coast) and ask them what would happen if you ran it in a car not made to. I have heard reports from other dealers having to replace the whole fuel system in new Mitsu's because of E85. And guess what? It is NOT covered under warranty which means YOU pay for the repairs.
Side note to everyone too. E85 may be a good alt fuel, but unless you vehicle was built with the intentions of running it, it is a BAD idea! Reason? E85 is a CORROSIVE fuel, it eats thru fuel lining and plastic tanks. E85 isnt always the same octane either. E85 eats the contaminates that are present in the tanker trucks transporting it and the contaminates in the holding tanks when being stored. Where do you think all that junk goes? In your fuel system! Think I am making it up? Call ANY dealer (I am from east coast) and ask them what would happen if you ran it in a car not made to. I have heard reports from other dealers having to replace the whole fuel system in new Mitsu's because of E85. And guess what? It is NOT covered under warranty which means YOU pay for the repairs.
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta
My sentiments exactly. I don't understand why people are so obsessed with running test pipes or running illegal parts just for some horsepower #... it's not like you do this as a living, most Evo owners don't even track their cars, and needless to say are not involved in some sort of competitive event. It's just dumb to get your panties in a knot over a test pipe and a few horsepower, I'm all for stricter emissions laws and a better future.
You guys are not seeing the big picture! Requiring new car manufactures to conform to this is just a stepping stone. Once it gets passed (and it will unless we make a stand!) congress with make a new bill for used vehicles. They will try to inforce tighter emissions on ALL cars.
there is no way they would pass a bill for older cars. most of the people in the country couldn't afford to pay for the work needed to be done to their cars to make them conform. they wouldn't want to **** off that many voters.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007..._int.html#more
6 states in the northeast have already adopted CA emissions testing. Vermont drivers have filed a classs action lawsuit back with funding by the auto makers to eliminate it there. if this goes 50 state, we're all screwed as the emissions will get tighter every 3 years to the point where our cars mught b relics like the old 60's muscle. we need to rally up & STOP this bill from going thru or our way of life in regards to performance will END.
6 states in the northeast have already adopted CA emissions testing. Vermont drivers have filed a classs action lawsuit back with funding by the auto makers to eliminate it there. if this goes 50 state, we're all screwed as the emissions will get tighter every 3 years to the point where our cars mught b relics like the old 60's muscle. we need to rally up & STOP this bill from going thru or our way of life in regards to performance will END.
OMG the sky is falling!!!
jeez dude get used to it, you can still make power and live under the rules.
settle down chicken little. the sky isn't faling yet.
there is no way they would pass a bill for older cars. most of the people in the country couldn't afford to pay for the work needed to be done to their cars to make them conform. they wouldn't want to **** off that many voters.
there is no way they would pass a bill for older cars. most of the people in the country couldn't afford to pay for the work needed to be done to their cars to make them conform. they wouldn't want to **** off that many voters.
The bill they pass (if they pass on) would be similar to the ones in place in Cali and other emmissions states. There older vehicles have to pass emmission levels that were in effect for that model year vehicle. Which means if you have a 2003 model vehicle, it would have pass emmission laws and levels that were set for the year 2003. If you do an engine swap, the car would have to pass emmissions laws for the year of the engine, example: 68 camaro with an 2000 LS1 engine swap. The Camaro would have to pass emmissions for the year 2000 not 1968.
i didn't mean to offend, i was simply using an ironic parrellel.
maybe i am missing something, but i didn't see anything about that in the article. from what i understand that was focused towards future vehicles.
and i am confused. don't vehicles already have to pass emissions for that model year? i have a 2006, so i would only expect that it would need to pass the emission's requirements for that year. also, swapping a newer engine into an older car, that makes sense too. why would it even be a problem for a year 2000 engine to pass year 2000 emissions in a 1968 car. i wouldn't expect that no matter what body you put it in, an engine for the year 2000 would be taking an emissions test for the year of the body?
i'm just not seeing your point here.
maybe i am missing something, but i didn't see anything about that in the article. from what i understand that was focused towards future vehicles.
and i am confused. don't vehicles already have to pass emissions for that model year? i have a 2006, so i would only expect that it would need to pass the emission's requirements for that year. also, swapping a newer engine into an older car, that makes sense too. why would it even be a problem for a year 2000 engine to pass year 2000 emissions in a 1968 car. i wouldn't expect that no matter what body you put it in, an engine for the year 2000 would be taking an emissions test for the year of the body?
i'm just not seeing your point here.
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: NC
My sentiments exactly. I don't understand why people are so obsessed with running test pipes or running illegal parts just for some horsepower #... it's not like you do this as a living, most Evo owners don't even track their cars, and needless to say are not involved in some sort of competitive event. It's just dumb to get your panties in a knot over a test pipe and a few horsepower, I'm all for stricter emissions laws and a better future.
Hey its a fact of life guys. Global Warming is real. The US is the last major continent to form some kind of alliance to use clean fuels and cars.
No Gore supporters here? LOL j/k
No Gore supporters here? LOL j/k
i didn't mean to offend, i was simply using an ironic parrellel.
maybe i am missing something, but i didn't see anything about that in the article. from what i understand that was focused towards future vehicles.
and i am confused. don't vehicles already have to pass emissions for that model year? i have a 2006, so i would only expect that it would need to pass the emission's requirements for that year. also, swapping a newer engine into an older car, that makes sense too. why would it even be a problem for a year 2000 engine to pass year 2000 emissions in a 1968 car. i wouldn't expect that no matter what body you put it in, an engine for the year 2000 would be taking an emissions test for the year of the body?
i'm just not seeing your point here.
maybe i am missing something, but i didn't see anything about that in the article. from what i understand that was focused towards future vehicles.
and i am confused. don't vehicles already have to pass emissions for that model year? i have a 2006, so i would only expect that it would need to pass the emission's requirements for that year. also, swapping a newer engine into an older car, that makes sense too. why would it even be a problem for a year 2000 engine to pass year 2000 emissions in a 1968 car. i wouldn't expect that no matter what body you put it in, an engine for the year 2000 would be taking an emissions test for the year of the body?
i'm just not seeing your point here.
On the example of the 68 & 00, when people install the LS1 in something else, they usually take the smog pump and the cats off it. Which causes it not to pass either the visual nor the sniffer tests.