For the non-US and uninitiated, are these at fault for these coal burner people?
I think you mean “coal roller”. The term “coal burner” is a racial slur.
Woops, yes you're right! Thank you for correcting me!
US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
371–380 of 410 posts
Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
#372Earlier 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.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_Citation_family
> In the fifty years following the 1969 first flight, more than 7,500 [Cessna] Citations were delivered, forming the largest business jet fleet.
The math is similar for a Gulfstream, if you prefer.
Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
#373Earlier 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.
A Gulfstream G700 carries 22,407kg of fuel (about 6,100 gallons at 800kg/m^3 ) and a max range of 14,353km (8,918.5mi), for 1.45mpg. Closer to 10x, by a bit. Using the 12,316km high-speed cruise range manages to bring it down to 1.24mpg, just under 10x worse.
Said Gulfstream carries 18 people, though. Whether 5x or 10x, it isn’t 10,000x.
Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
> not actually enforcing the “for track use” only rule How does a manufacturer enforce the use of a device in that way?
They will require you to fill out a waiver saying you that you will use it for offroad use only, and all liability is on you and not them. They will also require you to upload your photo id in order to purchase it.
Man I wish they would do that here for all the "offroad use only" aftermarket LED bulbs that idiots stuff into non projector lenses.
Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
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.
There is no reason you should be exposed to volatile compounds from a normal parked rental truck. I would have asked for another truck or avoided U-Haul altogether.
Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish it were simply just strait pipes. The biggest buffoons are the ones running "pops and bang" tune where the clown car's engine dumps fuel into the exhaust to make it pop, bang and gurgle. Makes the car sound like shit but these mental midgets think it makes their already ugly slammed trashcar somehow sound cool. The kinds of people who do this usually have very little going on upstairs.
You can (indirectly) blame World Rally for this. Those car started doing this 15 or so years ago - the engineers found that dumping raw fuel directly into the turbo (IIRC, they had a 5th injector in the exhaust manifold) kept it spooled up during shifts and throttle lifts.
injector antilag systems were around in the 80s, they are very hard on the turbos and manifolds however.
Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
#377[deleted]
Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
#378Great, now do Amazon. It is always amusing to see the evolution of "code names" for things that sellers use to try to get around algorithmic detection. And bottom line, I expect businesses operating in the country of origin will likely become the sellers of choice here.
Maybe Amazon helped here
Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this similar to the brass knuckles, I mean “belt buckles”, they sell in shady gas stations? Or the tobacco shops who sell pipes for anything but tobacco? As long as they don’t say it’s for illegal use it’s a gray area.
I miss the time in Canada when you’d walk into a bong shop and they’d look at you and smile when they’d say “and you put your… tobacco… here”
In the US, one must say “water pipe”, but then we have issues like GP
Re: US sues eBay for allowing sale of emissions defeat devices
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way does a higher equilibrium price cause collateral damage? Can you explain what collateral damage you're envisioning?
I would have thought: a lack of access to masks during a pandemic due to their in-affordability? But who am I to question the wisdom of the free market…
If you don't let people price goods at what they're worth the buyer is decided by random chance and you get shortages instead. Is there really a human right for "the fastest buyers on eBay should get the goods"?