4 ms·

Not everyone lives in California so while OEM's might produce all cars to meet California standards, it is completely legal in states with more relaxed laws to

Not everyone lives in California so while OEM's might produce all cars to meet California standards, it is completely legal in states with more relaxed laws to make such modifications. At the least I think the government could argue about selling in jurisdictions where it is illegal.

dieselgate 3y ago
To tap into this thread - this is quite real. One can just remove a catalytic converter (or have it stolen) and they'd then be "defeating emissions" so this lawsuit seems a bit zealous to me. Recently saw a post on a diesel truck forum about a CA resident who had legal/registration issues because of an engine swap (post emissions engine into a pre-emissions vehicle) [1] Am under the impression this particular vehicle would be fine in WA state by comparison. It's frustrating to see consumer vehicles being so strongly targeted by regulatory shenanigans compared to "private jets" and the like [1] https://www.oilburners.net/threads/california-diesel-conversion-tale-of-woe.92837/ https://www.oilburners.net/threads/california-diesel-convers...
- adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
  for the non c02 pollutants it makes a ton of sense to go after consumer vehicles more than private jets. noise, N0x, and other pollutants have significant negative effects for anyone nearby. I care a lot more about the vehicles 20 ft from me than the ones 30k feet above me
- imp0cat 3y ago
  I think the reason is (any diesel mechanics around please correct me if I'm wrong) that modern engines stripped of their emissions equipment will pollute a lot more than old engines.
  - dieselgate 3y ago
    I understand the reasoning and am all for mitigating pollution. It may be frustrating for consumers when these systems have potential to decrease economy, performance, and reliability while increasing cost and maintenance.
    - imp0cat 3y ago
      Oh, absolutely. Emissions equipment in modern diesel engines is extremely complicated and expensive to repair/replace. Multiple cats/particulate filters that can get clogged. But, at least in Europe, diesel options in passenger cars are mostly gone, most SUVs nowadays are either gas powered (with a particulate filter, of course, so another thing that can go wrong) or some kind of gas/electric hybrid.
    - ospzfmbbzr 3y ago
      In the case of the DEF it absolutely reduces the lifespan of the engine. A truck engine that could last 500K miles lasts 200K max. Factor a second or third engine (whole new truck) and the energy and pollution to produce it and DEF looks not as great. Vehicles and engines that last 25 years are easy to build yet they are rare outside of commerical and military. The whole argument is disengenuous and proceeds from an unstated a priori desire by government to restrict movement of citizens and markets, rather than as a real requirement for a real benefit. It's all so tiresome...
      - superq 3y ago
        That DEF is insanely toxic, too. I rented a diesel truck for moving and everyone got passing-out sick just moving things in and out of the back of it.
        Scoundreller 3y ago
        Urea? It's used on foodcrops and you pee out 20-35g/day of it: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9161740/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9161740/ It has a boiling point of 135C. Something else was (I gotta say it, likely) causing your sickness.
        omginternets 3y ago
        There’s a reason you pee it out.
        3y ago
  - smileysteve 3y ago
    Modern (fuel injected with wideband) engines without emissions devices will produce much fewer hydrocarbon emissions but more Nitrous oxides

dieselgate 3y ago

To tap into this thread - this is quite real. One can just remove a catalytic converter (or have it stolen) and they'd then be "defeating emissions" so this lawsuit seems a bit zealous to me. Recently saw a post on a diesel truck forum about a CA resident who had legal/registration issues because of an engine swap (post emissions engine into a pre-emissions vehicle) [1] Am under the impression this particular vehicle would be fine in WA state by comparison. It's frustrating to see consumer vehicles being so strongly targeted by regulatory shenanigans compared to "private jets" and the like [1] https://www.oilburners.net/threads/california-diesel-conversion-tale-of-woe.92837/ https://www.oilburners.net/threads/california-diesel-convers...

adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
for the non c02 pollutants it makes a ton of sense to go after consumer vehicles more than private jets. noise, N0x, and other pollutants have significant negative effects for anyone nearby. I care a lot more about the vehicles 20 ft from me than the ones 30k feet above me
imp0cat 3y ago
I think the reason is (any diesel mechanics around please correct me if I'm wrong) that modern engines stripped of their emissions equipment will pollute a lot more than old engines.
- dieselgate 3y ago
  I understand the reasoning and am all for mitigating pollution. It may be frustrating for consumers when these systems have potential to decrease economy, performance, and reliability while increasing cost and maintenance.
  - imp0cat 3y ago
    Oh, absolutely. Emissions equipment in modern diesel engines is extremely complicated and expensive to repair/replace. Multiple cats/particulate filters that can get clogged. But, at least in Europe, diesel options in passenger cars are mostly gone, most SUVs nowadays are either gas powered (with a particulate filter, of course, so another thing that can go wrong) or some kind of gas/electric hybrid.
  - ospzfmbbzr 3y ago
    In the case of the DEF it absolutely reduces the lifespan of the engine. A truck engine that could last 500K miles lasts 200K max. Factor a second or third engine (whole new truck) and the energy and pollution to produce it and DEF looks not as great. Vehicles and engines that last 25 years are easy to build yet they are rare outside of commerical and military. The whole argument is disengenuous and proceeds from an unstated a priori desire by government to restrict movement of citizens and markets, rather than as a real requirement for a real benefit. It's all so tiresome...
    - superq 3y ago
      That DEF is insanely toxic, too. I rented a diesel truck for moving and everyone got passing-out sick just moving things in and out of the back of it.
      - Scoundreller 3y ago
        Urea? It's used on foodcrops and you pee out 20-35g/day of it: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9161740/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9161740/ It has a boiling point of 135C. Something else was (I gotta say it, likely) causing your sickness.
        omginternets 3y ago
        There’s a reason you pee it out.
        3y ago
- smileysteve 3y ago
  Modern (fuel injected with wideband) engines without emissions devices will produce much fewer hydrocarbon emissions but more Nitrous oxides