Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 410 posts

Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

#191

Post by deepsun »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #50

This is wonderful. I wish they did the same about modifications done to increase the noise. I've got 2 people living nearby that both have straight-piped their car and I literally cover my ears when they pass by. My Watch literally tells me that a noise peak happened when they drive by.

Are there any legislative initiatives to ban loud motorcycles (like they did in some EU countries)? I'd really want to vote for it.

US is all about freedom, and concern for neighbors is a necessary prerequisite to practicing freedom.

PS: I ride a motorcycle as well, there's no problem making it reasonably quiet.

Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

#192

Post by fsckboy »

rando_dfad wrote: post #167
dumbfounder wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am in favor of louder pipes for motorcycles for safety reasons. But there is such a thing as too loud.

not sure the safety argument has factual support; the sound would need to project forward from the motorcycle, wouldn't it?

hmmm, if I have to hear the noise, I would like a requirement that it blare forward! (so I can step into the crosswalk)

Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

#193

Post by Scoundreller »

enragedcacti wrote: post #166
sandworm101 wrote: post #25

My understanding is that such parts are not by themselves illegal. The crime is actually using them on the road. My understanding was that they were legal for track purposes. I would never want to say that people should be able to defeat emissions, but a part of me does not like the idea that every vehicle owner is beholden to the OEM for parts in perpetuity. The "right to repair" people should be all over this fight…

My understanding is that such parts are not by themselves illegal. The relevant text regulating the sale and manufacture merely allows the EPA to exempt products "that you intend to be used solely for competition, where we determine that such engines/equipment are unlikely to be used contrary to your intent." > but a part of me does not like the idea that every vehicle owner is beholden to the OEM for parts in perpet…

I was thinking more about O2 sensors. At least a lot of Toyotas don’t like the aftermarket ones for some reason. No idea if they’re truly out of spec or what.

But there’s a risk with living with a check engine light. Some vehicles disable stuff like traction control in that state, and you won’t know when a new unique code has hit that you should deal with for other reasons.

(The disabling of traction control is insane to me here: https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/25383/why-does... ). A catalytic converter problem is zero reason to do this.

Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

#194

Post by codexb »

RamblingCTO wrote: post #3

For the non-US and uninitiated, are these at fault for these coal burner people?

A small number, perhaps, but most of these are likely components that enable more aggressive tuning to increase fuel and airflow for more horsepower and performance.

Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

#196

Post by tbyehl »

plagiarist wrote: post #121
wutwutwat wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your municipality likely has noise ordinances for anything above a certain decibel level. This can be handled by your local PD giving them tickets for their exhausts. I’ve seen it done before. If they keep getting tickets/fines they will likely change their exhausts. You can probably call the city about it but you can also call the cops. Just remember what they say about snitches.

I have never heard of a municipality actually enforcing their sound regulations other than live performances being shut down.

Where I grew up, an automotive noise citation was easy to beat in court because the law incorporated a complicated and exacting standard for measurement.

Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

#197

Post by progman32 »

jrwoodruff wrote: post #144
RC_ITR wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say what you will about over-engineering, but the Germans got it so so so right with their metal full black out shades.

I'm unfamiliar with this, but I'd love some well-done black out shades - got a link or a brand?

Very common in Italy as well - search Images or Youtube for "finestra tapparelle" for an idea. The sound of tapparelle is super ingrained in many european minds, i.e. https://italybeyondtheobvious.com/taparelle/

They are also good for deflecting debris :)

Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

#198

Post by codexb »

beardyw wrote: post #15

Sorry to sound stupid but what is the point of an emissions defeat device?

There are many examples. Many SUV's in the US these days are only able to meet emissions requirements by automatically turning off the engine at stoplights or whenever the car comes to a stop. Many people find it annoying because there's a delay when you press the accelerator to go and then you press harder and the car then jumps. Most cars allow you to disable it, but you have to do it every time after you turn the car on. No one likes it. You can sometimes modify the car or access hidden computer settings to disable the setting. Technically, it's illegal to do.

Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

#199

Post by arcticbull »

Scoundreller wrote: post #184
kps wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think “harmful to public health” is a consideration. Pretty much every country with a functioning government requires RF certification for electronics, but especially radio transmitters. It's never going to be worth hunting down individual buyers or hassling tourists, but selling is another thing.

Cell phones do have emitted energy regulations based on estimated tissue absorption. And they vary country to country (some countries even further regulate them near schools & other locations). If they were causing harmful interference, I’d like to think they would be harder-headed about it.

All that RF radiation from any of these devices can do is mildly warm you up. When you get to kW it could cook you I guess.

It's not about health effects, there are none.

It's about the risk of interference.

Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

#200

Post by kps »

Scoundreller wrote: post #184
kps wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think “harmful to public health” is a consideration. Pretty much every country with a functioning government requires RF certification for electronics, but especially radio transmitters. It's never going to be worth hunting down individual buyers or hassling tourists, but selling is another thing.

Cell phones do have emitted energy regulations based on estimated tissue absorption. And they vary country to country (some countries even further regulate them near schools & other locations). If they were causing harmful interference, I’d like to think they would be harder-headed about it.

No one is saying they cause harmful interference. It's up to the vendor to get certified that they don't. You can't sell an uncertified radio transmitter. It's not a conspiracy.
Post reply on HN