FYI: The EPA wants to eliminate your future street race car conversion option.

This is not new news to some, but the white house petition is time sensitive.


SEMA Press release:
https://www.sema.org/sema-enews/2016/06/epa...s-into-racecars


Whitehouse .gov petition:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/...cles-racecars-0

Wow, nice way to put SEMA out of business.

Guess it makes our classics even more desirable...

But at some point they will regulate the classic car industry out of business be it due to the lack of contemporary safety and emission systems or something else...

I say Eff the government.

Good luck on getting red blooded American men out of their Classic cars.

They'd have a revolution on their hands.

I have a feeling they are trolling everyone just to get some #s on how many people really care about the issue.

Kind of like they did with the E15 and E20 gasoline initiatives.

May be the case. But I'm not taking the chance. I signed it.

Me too.

Thanks for the heads up. I think this will be a constant battle from now on. With the president signing the global agreement to reduce carbon emissions. I'd really be interested to see what percentage of total miles driven in this country are done by specialty vehicles. Less than a small percentage of 1% would be my guess.

Thank you 2nd amendment

Tell ya what, The day I'm told the Alien is off the road because I modified it is the day I drive without plates. When I make the news I think the roads will fill with hot rodders all over the US. You think the life's matter people can ball up traffic what until the freeways are blocked for miles with real American creativity.

Make sure you read the privacy information. Signing the petition they can use your name, email for whatever they want. (So at least put your junk email in)

Much ado about nothing. Read the fine print.

This is simply clarification of a law that's already on the books. The EPA isn't trying to take away your racecar.

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/02/no-the...nto-a-race-car/

There's more emissions coming out of cow butts, but that's not on the agenda....

It's actually from their burps, not their farts.

I thought it was pig farts?

Sema?
Call the EPA,ask them if their legal department is prepared to defend the proposed dictate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82W41de4TT4...8iH5X0EUD0w0L1j
http://www.volcanodiscovery.com/erupting_volcanoes.html

A flim flam scam,by wealthy politically motivated fraud artists.
A sceptical approach to their hot air will stimulate a growing economy.

/

'Murica!!!

Google the movie from 1981 called "The Last Chase"

Guy builds an old Porsche roadster inside his house, after private cars are outlawed.

So, the "black helicopters" are coming to take all our guns AND our cars?? OMG!! The sky is falling.

Was thinking about this this morning, actually, as I walked by a taxi parked in a driveway from the night before. Kind of a fun job, I imagine. That's probably grass is greener thinking, but I could see enjoying it in some ways. However, I imagine it's a job that will be disappearing, what with Uber in the short term and autonomous cabs in the long run.

The future of the car probably has everything to do with safety and liability was my next thought. If driverless cars will truly replace driven cars in the next 10-30 years, my guess is people won't buy or own cars, or few will. All cars, or at least a great many of them (especially in population centers) will be taxis.

That may turn car manufacturers into "fleet" makers. If car sales become largely or strictly B2B, styling and driving dynamics will be far less important than sexy things like safety, passenger comfort, and efficiency. The biggest question and driver may be liability, and that may come down to insurance. Which makes me wonder about privately owned cars, and what that will look like. Perhaps they'll be just as legal to own and operate as they are today, but the insurance may become prohibitive.

I hope I am 100% wrong.

Quick, quick, gather up your family and your arms, flee to your nearest bird-watching refuge and occupy it by force!!

Seriously, read the ars-technica article referenced above, or any other level-headed discussion by non-interested parties. Absolutely NOTHING has changed. No harm in letting the government know it's not welcomed, that's what freedom of speech is for, but no need to take up arms in revolution, either.

Wow...I think you are 80% correct.

Part of the reason for the revaluation of crude and uncertainty of valuation of capital. But...internal combustion isn't going away anytime soon.

I don't know about "sexy" and "styling" since it give us a sense of "importance". Who knows what that will look like 30 years from now.

The technology is certainly there already.

Used to be that everyone (that could afford it) had a stylish buggy with a fancy whip and fringe on the top.

Henry Ford thought of a way to market and produce the automobile that the "average" person could afford.

Horse and buggy's went by the wayside.

Things change. Embrace it.

'Murican history

Porsche content:

Makes my teener more valuable and old....like me.

I have read some of it, and I disagree with you. They are "clarifying" an existing rule in a way that contradicts the previous interpretations of it. So they can say, "Well you were breaking the law all along, we just never enforced it before." Much the same way that my home state does not require smog tests for 1975 and earlier cars, but they are all supposed to still meet all of the old requirements. So they can later say, "OK, we are testing again--and since the requirements didn't change, nobody is grandfathered out."

It looks like they are going to use this primarily to keep anyone from modifying any street cars, by going after anyone who makes non-certified parts for cars. So no more of getting "for off-road use only" parts though the mail--or if you do get them, they'll cost a whole lot more!

You might want to worry a bit more, Chris. That's your livelihood they appear to be after.

--DD

...or his custom closed track race oriented business will increase.

I tend to agree. SEMA's press release may or may not have been worded well, but this feels like getting ducks in a row to me, and is slipped into a bill that has nothing to do with light-duty trucks or cars—which always raises a red flag. Better to push back now and send a clear signal than to have no choice but to yield later.

To be honest, I am not against smog controls on track cars or even race cars in theory, but the EPA has far, far better things to focus on than that. Whether modified diesel pickups, escalators and hotel hall lights that run all the time, or... And Dave may be exactly right about going after the supplier side. Look at the fines: $3750 vs $37,500. The EPA representative R&T spoke to suggested that they're not all that interested in track cars, given their enforcement history, but her successor or bosses' successors can change all that if the laws are in the books. And they already are. So why the clarification, then?

The law is the Clean Air Act....and the proposal is not a Bill. It is an enforcement propsal as an interpretation of the intent of the law.

The EPA is the enforcement arm of the executive branch of our government.

Pure speculation. There's no fine for selling parts, never has been and none proposed here, only for using them in ways that are prohibited. There's a LOT of misinformation and speculation swirling everywhere. Look for the analysis of disinterested parties, you're more likely to get a realistic evaluation, not those with stakes in the game.

Not pure speculation. We do, however, agree that there is a lot of misinformation out there. To that end, I found the following two items interesting, and for different reasons.

Road and Track was less sensationalist than the majority, and Laura Allen's remarks are particularly interesting, as are the comments.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorsports/ne...actually-means/

And an alternate take, thanks to Jay Lamm hiring a lawyer on his own dime:
http://www.24hoursoflemons.com/images/EPA-...tm_medium=email

Of interest in the above:

The EPA’s approach reaches its zenith in two different sections of the proposed rule. 40 CFR 86.1854-12(b)(5)14 states that
Certified motor vehicles15 and motor vehicle engines and their emission control devices must remain in their certified configuration even if they are used solely for competition or if they become nonroad vehicles or engines...

The proposed rule is more draconian in 40 CFR 1068.10116, “What general actions does this regulation prohibit?” The answer is “don’t modify your engine, ever.”...

• Knowingly removing or rendering inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in engines/equipment in compliance with the regulations after such sale and delivery to the ultimate purchaser. Violation of same by a manufacturer or dealer comes with a civil penalty of $37,500 for each engine or piece of equipment in violation; violation by anyone else may be assessed a civil penalty of up to $3,750 per engine or piece of equipment;17
• Knowingly manufacturing, selling, offering to sell, or installing any component that bypasses, impairs, defeats, or disables the control of emissions of any regulated pollutant. Violation of same may draw a civil penalty of up to $3,750 for each component in violation;18
• Certified motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines must remain in their certified configuration even if they are used solely for competition or if they become nonroad vehicles or engines; anyone modifying a certified motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine for any reason is subject to the tampering and defeat device prohibitions of 1068.101(b): a civil penalty of $37,500 may be subjected for each engine or piece of equipment in violation by a manufacturer or dealer; violation by anyone else may be assessed a civil penalty of up to $3,750 per engine or piece of equipment;19
• Importation of uncertified engines or equipment is prohibited if it is defined to be “new.” The definition of “new” is broad for imported engines and equipment; uncertified equipment, including used engines and equipment, will generally be considered to be “new;” violators are subject to the manufacturer/dealer penalty of $37,500 for each piece of equipment in violation.20

Perhaps most troubling is the provision in 40 CFR 1068.101(a) that states that it is prohibited to sell, offer for sale, import, or introduce or deliver into commerce in the US any new engine or equipment after emissions standards take effect for the engine or equipment unless it is covered by a valid certificate of conformity for the model year and has the required label or tag...

Sounds to me like this may allow the EPA to trump CARB's current acceptance of later engines in earlier cars so long as all emissions equipment is present and functions as intended—but also that that's a small matter compared to the fines and enforcement structure. Or does the lawyer have it wrong? I'm not so sure...

Ok, I'll go there:

What they are after is uniform enforcement.

If it weren't for the C.A.R.B enforcement actions, Volkswagen would not have been caught.

They VW... took a calculated risk that it wouldn't be caught.

That is a political black eye for the EPA. They are after the big guys here....not Chris Foley.

When a bunch of Cal Tech student on a grant loan from the University of Virginia (EPA) grant bust the biggest car maker in the world that is betting that no one in the government will catch them.......................

Something's up......

Ya think?

I strip away the old debris
That hides a shining car
A brilliant Red Barchetta
From a better vanished time
We'll fire up the willing engine
Responding with a roar
Tires spitting gravel
I commit my weekly crime

I love Rush.....



Rant over.

Yes, who do you think the EPA gets their directive from.

Too funny thatsong was goingthroughmy head on page one of this thread

I'm sure the executive branch of our government has a lot more important things on its agenda than worrying about emission controls for race cars. Every so often organizations like the EPA, the FAA, the FDA etc. have to justify their very existence by showing the country that they are looking out for our best interests and are willing to take action. Weather it does any good or not is beside the point. That's why we have lobby groups like SEMA. On the aviation side we have the AOPA (Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association), the EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association). These are all powerful, influential organizations that represent large groups of voters. They are also knowledgeable enough to be able prove that some of these proposals are total horse shit.

Anyways, they love making racecars, car parts, furniture, steel, and most everything in China!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RRznrb0A58


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xnsk3sHZFqQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7LoRpoz4MI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npUTCz8BJxA

How the entire automotive industries of nations can be dismantled by dictate.
Who in the epa's administration has any regard for these people's livelihoods.
They must lose their office before they would come around to the idea of rights.
Polar bears,sealevel,greenhouse,green,red,bs.