EPA regulations to outlaw performance car parts

[dmsfrr]

My apologies for posting this to all 4 discussion boards but this applies to everyone who has a performance car that may have originally had emission equipment or a newer daily driver with emission controls.

The EPA has proposed to outlaw the sale of high performance parts as well as the right to convert vehicles into race cars, effective July 2016.
There is an online petition to sign if you wish to do so. This doesn't directly apply to pre emission control vehicles, but will negatively affect all after-market car parts suppliers.

Link to the SEMA news release...
https://www.sema.org/news/2016/02/08...-into-racecars

Link to whitehouse(dot)gov online petition...
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...les-racecars-0

Please share this information as you can.


.

[Talkwrench]

Ive already signed it ... And Im in Australia!

[Darrell S]

I signed it, how do non-elected bureaucrats get this much power? We should be all over our elected reps over this.

[Fredb_]

Signed it. Thanks.

[Bored&Stroked]

Just another example of our current Government being Hell bent on telling all of us what is the correct way to go and live our lives . . . taking more freedoms away from the common man. This is typical - spending government time/money on something that is such an insignificant contributor to 'emissions' . . . versus working on the 'BIG' things that actually will make a difference.

[CharlieLed]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Thanks for the heads-up...

[Bored&Stroked]

My brother did a bit of research - seems that SEMA isn't exactly correct on the issue:

SEMA's email generated a firestorm of response. Road & Track (and many others) followed up with the EPA and here is what they found:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorspo...ctually-means/

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/02/...to-a-race-car/

[1952henry]

Originally Posted by Darrell S

I signed it, how do non-elected bureaucrats get this much power? We should be all over our elected reps over this.

I've a theory, elections have consequences! Who appoints but those who are elected.

[Mike51Merc]

Originally Posted by Bored&Stroked

My brother did a bit of research - seems that SEMA isn't exactly correct on the issue:

SEMA's email generated a firestorm of response. Road & Track (and many others) followed up with the EPA and here is what they found:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorspo...ctually-means/

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/02/...to-a-race-car/

Thanks for pushing back against internet hysteria. Just as an example, this weekend I was shopping online for an exhaust downpipe for my OT car. I found more catalyst-delete pipes than OEM replacement pipes. In my view, catalytic converters shouldn't be deleted on street cars, especially daily drivers.

[moefuzz]

Thanks for the heads up,


Signed.

.

[expavr]

Originally Posted by Bored&Stroked

My brother did a bit of research - seems that SEMA isn't exactly correct on the issue:

SEMA's email generated a firestorm of response. Road & Track (and many others) followed up with the EPA and here is what they found:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorspo...ctually-means/

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/02/...to-a-race-car/

The devil is in the details. There are many production cars currently driven on the streets whose owners have modified the intake and timing systems (supercharged, injected, etc) to use them on the track on the weekends. Whether or not and how the EPA chooses to enforce their regulations regarding the use of these vehicles on the public ROW is a matter for concern. There are some jurisdictions like CA where these vehicles might not pass the SMOG testing and are limited to use on the track only. IMO if the EPA had its way that would be true on a national level. SEMA has blunted the attempt by CA and other local agencies to regulate the emissions from our vintage iron and I applaud their efforts to challenge the EPA on this point.

Les Williams

[Mike51Merc]

Originally Posted by expavr

The devil is in the details. There are many production cars currently driven on the streets whose owners have modified the intake and timing systems (supercharged, injected, etc) to use them on the track on the weekends. Whether or not and how the EPA chooses to enforce their regulations regarding the use of these vehicles on the public ROW is a matter for concern. There are some jurisdictions like CA where these vehicles might not pass the SMOG testing and are limited to use on the track only. IMO if the EPA had its way that would be true on a national level. SEMA has blunted the attempt by CA and other local agencies to regulate the emissions from our vintage iron and I applaud their efforts to challenge the EPA on this point.

Les Williams

Yes, they can't retroactively regulate old cars.

[ford38v8]

Originally Posted by Bored&Stroked

My brother did a bit of research - seems that SEMA isn't exactly correct on the issue:

SEMA's email generated a firestorm of response. Road & Track (and many others) followed up with the EPA and here is what they found:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorspo...ctually-means/

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/02/...to-a-race-car/

So your brother's research revealed the EPA's statement that they merely seek to clarify existing law.
Thank you, but I'll go with SEMA's interpretation of the EPA's intent. Where do I sign?

[Karl Wescott]

Originally Posted by Mike51Merc

Yes, they can't retroactively regulate old cars.

There is NOTHING in the US Constitution which could prevent Congress or the States from applying new laws to old cars.

One law in place for example: Oregon requires ALL automobiles driven at night to have operating turn signals. This of course means a 100% original early V8. Oregon's law does allow for cars originally not equipped with turn signals to be driven in daylight.

The only protection we have from malicious (to old cars) laws is us... Congress answers to the people, and listens. Write very nice letters to your senators and representative (both state and federal) telling how important your car is to you, with a photo of the car and your family, and your concerns about over restrictive rules.

[Mike51Merc]

Originally Posted by Karl Wescott

There is NOTHING in the US Constitution which could prevent Congress or the States from applying new laws to old cars.

One law in place for example: Oregon requires ALL automobiles driven at night to have operating turn signals. This of course means a 100% original early V8. Oregon's law does allow for cars originally not equipped with turn signals to be driven in daylight.

The only protection we have from malicious (to old cars) laws is us... Congress answers to the people, and listens. Write very nice letters to your senators and representative (both state and federal) telling how important your car is to you, with a photo of the car and your family, and your concerns about over restrictive rules.

Well, since you mention it, the Constitution doesn't mention cars at all, so I suppose they could be eliminated at any time. Perhaps I should write to Congress so they don't ban cars?

My point is that you need to stay on topic and know what you're fighting against, and not just some rumor.

[TJ]

Just for info Jerry Brown has appointed an ex state senator named Florez to the California Air Resources Board. This guy has previously introduced legislation to bring back a smog check program for older cars. He was headed off by SEMA. Now that he is on the board he no longer is responsible to the voters. We'll soon see how he treats the hobby. Being appointed by Brown does not bode well for the hobby.

[rotorwrench]

It wouldn't bode well for Brown to mess with the car hobby guys either. He might end up like Gray Davis.

[petehoovie]

Politicians come and go. It's the non-elected, overpaid, mindless, clock watching, mouth breathing, worthless, affirmative action, career bureaucrats who are to be feared. And, to think that 'progressive' liberals want even more of them - to oversee our health care and private lives - the EPA, IRS, ACA, NSA, & TSA no less - the list seems endless. And, these people are fireproof. Government is nothing but a gigantic 'jobs' program for the losers of society.

[J Franklin]

Karl, I drive my Model A at night and have working turn signals, My arm! Oregon laws are not retroactive.

[TJ]

Originally Posted by J Franklin

Karl, I drive my Model A at night and have working turn signals, My arm! Oregon laws are not retroactive.

The problem you have is driving a car is a privilege and not a right. They can tell you to install turn signals and those laws can be retroactive. Turn signals are for you safety. Hardly anyone understands hand signals any more and no one can see hand signals at night. In reality your insurance company could demand you put on turn signals and you would have to do it or they could cancel you policy. None of us like government intrusion, but there is common sense that can affect your own safety. I have turn signals on every one of my old Fords, because I don't want some nitwit to run into me because he doesn't see my hand signal or doesn't understand a hand signal.

[deuce_roadster]

This reminds me of when a guy I know said the local county government was going to put a water meter on my well. That was 35 years ago and I haven't heard anything about that idea since. He sure was all worked up about it though. Too little water isn't a problem in my particular area. I don't get all stoked up over what could or might happen, that covers too many things.

[ford38v8]

Originally Posted by J Franklin

Karl, I drive my Model A at night and have working turn signals, My arm! Oregon laws are not retroactive.

Karl stated the current law in Oregon. Operation of any motor vehicle not having working turn signals at night is a violation of Oregon State law.

[J Franklin]

Looking at Oregon statutes it reads my model A is covered by exemptions to the lighting law Motorcycles after about '83 are not.

[mrtexas]

I doubt the EPA has the best interests of antique car hobbyists in mind.

[expavr]

"I don't get all stoked up over what could or might happen, that covers too many things." (quote)

For the most part I would agree, except when there are forces such as CARB (California Air Resources Board) and the EPA that quietly chip away at our hobby in their attempts to regulate vehicle emissions. As a former CA resident and contractor I can say that CARB, a quasi legal agency which has the ability to levy and collect fines, represents an ongoing threat to the collector car hobby in CA and without SEMA and other similar efforts to keep a lid on these people the day will come when a 32 roadster like yours will have catalytic converters and other SMOG control devices on the engine or even worse the car won't be street legal for failing an emission test and will be drivable only to shows and then with a permit. Should CARB succeed in regulating our vehicles in this manner it won't be a huge step for the EPA to follow. When it comes to vehicle emissions as CA goes so goes the nation.
Les Williams

[Bored&Stroked]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Even though I posted the update on what Road & Track and others found out, I went ahead and signed the petition. I have no problem with SEMA, they are constantly fighting and protecting the rights of us as well as all the manufacturers they represent. Without folks/organizations to fight the over-reach of our Government, we'd all be in a world of hurt as far as building/operating our vintage autos. Hell, everybody would have to own a Prius for some to be happy.

[sidevalve8ba]

" Hell, everybody would have to own a Prius for some to be happy."

I have heard rumors of an organization called "The Anti-Prius League". Maybe the time has come to find out if it is real or imagined and if it is real what does it stand for?

[white64]

Using hand signals and having one taillight were on cars that rarely exceeded 35 mph, So.. imagine you're in a black model t at night on a 60 mph highly traveled roadway, using hand signals; and some kid or grandma traveling over the speed limit can't see your single blue dot taillight...

Just doesn't sound too safe to me, now I understand the bitchin', but I also understand the reasoning behind the regulation.

[rotorwrench]

Most Amish folks don't drive their buggies after dark but all that I've seen have the universal slow moving vehicle reflectors on the back. Most early Fords, Model A & prior, don't do well for too long in the dark anyway. At least the old Fords don't have to worry about the road apple situation. You can just tell the coppers that it's a tractor and your on your way home.

If folks don't get together and team up with some lobbyist organizations that look out for the car hobby's rights then they won't have much of a say about what goes on with their governments or their rights. Freedom ain't free. We have to step up and work at it sometimes to keep it livable for us.