Live data from Hacker News

US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices

thedrive.com

251–260 of 410 posts

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

#251

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…

The manufacturers got sued by the EPA for not actually enforcing the “for track use” only rule. A lot of the big name exhaust companies have stopped producing catless products; and others require all of your information to be on file if you’re buying a catless race downpipe. A lot of the install shops around here in Maryland that run a legit receipt paper trail of work type of business won’t even touch catless instal…

> not actually enforcing the “for track use” only rule

How does a manufacturer enforce the use of a device in that way?

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

#252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> pollute as much as 10,000 modified diesel trucks This is insanely hyperbolic. A Cessna Citation I carries 564 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~1,500 miles - 2.7mpg. A Ford F-250 carries 48 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~700 miles - 14mpg. It's not even 10x.

Leer jets, they so thirsty.

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

#253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you seriously want to take action here, then do this; 1) Look up your city ordinances on sound, there should be copies of this is the reference section of your city's public library. Identify the ordinance and paragraph that the people nearby are violating. Record/video one or more violations on your phone. 2) Call the police, don't "complain about the noise", tell them you want to "swear out a complaint" for viol…

I’m sure this has worked but I have gotten the same result by writing fix your exhaust on a piece of paper and tying it to a brick and throwing it through their back windshield. Some times two wrongs make a right.

Not really you're just an asshole.

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

#254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pollute as much as 10,000 modified diesel trucks This is insanely hyperbolic. A Cessna Citation I carries 564 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~1,500 miles - 2.7mpg. A Ford F-250 carries 48 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~700 miles - 14mpg. It's not even 10x.

They're not in a fuckin Cessna.

Of course they are.

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

#255
post #15

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

Sometimes to avoid costlier mechanical work like changing O2 sensors, where often cars still give a check-engine-light if you use an aftermarket one (dunno why the aftermarket ones are so poor that they cause emissions problems or if the car’s computer was deliberately/unintentionally so sensitive to force people onto OEM parts).

Oh my gosh, I've had to run a new wire for an O2 sensor because mine gave out and it was a PITA but I couldn't afford the labor at the time and it was putting my car in limp mode which disabled cruise control. so not only was it $150 sensor, but also 5 freaking hours of me watching youtube and get cuts on my hands underneath a car.

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

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> pollute as much as 10,000 modified diesel trucks This is insanely hyperbolic. A Cessna Citation I carries 564 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~1,500 miles - 2.7mpg. A Ford F-250 carries 48 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~700 miles - 14mpg. It's not even 10x.

Per mile

What if the little person and the wealthy person travel a different # of miles?

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

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. ok, it's just a single datapoint, but motocross racetracks in New England, already built in the woods away from civilization, started requiring mufflers about 50 years ago, early 1970's

Mufflers do not impact emissions. In the case of gasoline cars, there are mechanisms for controlling intake air, recirculating exhaust gas, and filtering emissions directly out of the exhaust gases. All of these impact carbon emissions. These defeat devices allow drivers to modify some or all of these attributes in favor of gaining engine performance.

Muffler delete is a known cause of misfires. It manifests as a popping sound surrounded by the other shitty sounds produced by such a modified exhaust. We have all heard it.

A misfire is raw fuel being expelled.

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

#258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but an F250 does not use leaded gas like many planes do, has much more complete and efficient combustion, and likely produces far less particulate emissions.

Private jets don't use leaded gas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel No amount of cherry picking is gonna get you to the 10,000x number upthread.

> No amount of cherry picking is gonna get you to the 10,000x number

I cherry-pick "5 miles in a F-150" vs "5000 miles in a Citation."

Cherry-pick complete.

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

#259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pollute as much as 10,000 modified diesel trucks This is insanely hyperbolic. A Cessna Citation I carries 564 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~1,500 miles - 2.7mpg. A Ford F-250 carries 48 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~700 miles - 14mpg. It's not even 10x.

They're not in a fuckin Cessna.

A Cessna Citation, not a Cessna 172.

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

#260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re not taking about mufflers. For example in California “Emissions defeat system” means you simply used an off-brand air filter that wasn’t blessed by the government. The parts may even be more efficient and less polluting, the government bureaucracy everyone here is worshipping doesn’t give a rats behind.

Exactly. Years back, I moved to California with an 80's sports car that was admittedly quite hotrodded, but I made very sure that the hotrodding did not worsen its emissions because 1. I wanted to keep driving the car in CA and 2. I don't want to pollute. First SMOG test in CA, the car blew clean as a whistle. It met emissions standards 40 years harsher than it ever had to meet. Except I had all sorts of aftermarket…

In Ohio in the early 2000s all us kids were removing cats and passing the sniffer test easily. There was a visual test so we would normally just hollow out the existing cats. A lot of times cars with missing cats would pass the visual as well.
Post reply on HN