Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Long tube headers not for sale in CA?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    pretty much any law that adds regulation and record keep is bad news, Dan....
    My fabulous web page

    "If it don't go, chrome it!" --Stroker McGurk

    Comment


    • #32
      Just watched a documentary on sink holes in the USA, covered the Corvette museum in depth.
      Seems that sucking up so much ground water is causing these "cave ins".
      Then there was "Fracking" which when water is pumped back in very deep is causing many earthquakes where before, there were hardly any.
      Finally they went to Palm Springs where a company is pumping water into the ground to a depth of three thousand meters,
      right under the San Andreas fault.

      Long tube headers donīt seem that bad any more......

      Comment


      • #33
        I remember back in the mid 80's Hot Rod had an editorial about a guy who had a late model emission control Chevy that the owner had swapped in a BBC with a 6-71 and dual quads. The guy failed CA inspection at one station because the SC manifold didn't have a CARB exempt number. He got passed at another shop because the BBC engine was a 65. The ironic part of the story was the fact the emissions from that 6-71 dual quad BBC were actually LESS then current model year catalytic cars!
        Tom
        Overdrive is overrated


        Comment


        • #34
          Not surprising, really...

          Comment


          • #35
            The emissions of the engine weren't less....but the engine could pass the test for the late model.

            Keep in mind that these laws and regulations are mostly based on politics. And the politics are based on lots of stuff that you might not even consider to be relevant.


            My fabulous web page

            "If it don't go, chrome it!" --Stroker McGurk

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Huskinhano View Post
              I remember back in the mid 80's Hot Rod had an editorial about a guy who had a late model emission control Chevy that the owner had swapped in a BBC with a 6-71 and dual quads. The guy failed CA inspection at one station because the SC manifold didn't have a CARB exempt number. He got passed at another shop because the BBC engine was a 65. The ironic part of the story was the fact the emissions from that 6-71 dual quad BBC were actually LESS then current model year catalytic cars!
              Very few of Cali's emissions laws have anything to do with the car actually running clean.
              BS'er formally known as Rebeldryver

              Resident Instigator

              sigpic

              Comment


              • #37
                Their assumption is that they have forced the manufacturers to build the cleanest cars in the world and any deviation to the design that they have forced WILL make for a dirtier car and therefore will not be tolerated. I'll wager that pretty much any of you can shoot innumerable holes in that argument - and be correct.

                EPA, on the other hand, really DOES try to make sensible rules though a lot of time the Agency is pushed into stuff by Congressional rulings (they're called "laws"). Senator Somebody gets a wild hair and the EPA has to live with it - happens more than you would think. Remember, Congress assigns the $$.

                Dan

                Comment


                • #38
                  Dan, is it against federal law to reduce maximum allowable emissions on a car by a state emissions commission? Because CARB has been. A friend who had an 82 Cutlass with the 3.8 ltr had reports for 12 years on his car. Six different tests. Each time, the maximums allowed were lower than two years before.
                  BS'er formally known as Rebeldryver

                  Resident Instigator

                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Unfortunately, there's a provision in the Federal law that allows (with Congressional permission) for states (or organizations of states) to set more stringent standards than the Federal ones. That was included specifically for California in order to get their Congressional delegation on board for the Clean Air Act (it was thought that without CA the law wouldn't pass - the kind of ugly compromises necessary to get stuff done in DC). CA immediately set up CARB and they've been a pain in everyone's butt ever since. This is why CARB goes off on their tangents.

                    The answer to your question is that CARB can do pretty much whatever they want. As has been pointed out, the EPA sues them frequently to try to get some kind of consistency in emissions regulations across the US but it's a tough battle. CA DOES have the right to set more stringent standards based on air quality goals so the EPA has to prove that their science is flawed or that in some other way what they're doing won't work.

                    The battle goes on.

                    Dan

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Another thing to consider is that the testing done by states is never nearly as strict as the EPA standards for new cars. That example above of the blown big block being able to pass the state emissions test for new cars, clearly shows this. I don't know how many of you guys have played with even a 2 gas exhaust analyzer, and seen what the HC and CO numbers look like on a number of different cars, under different conditions? on cars from the 70s-80s, when the catalytic converter lights off, the numbers go down by 90-99%. Yet a good running car of that age, without a working catalytic converter, will usually pass the sniffer test.

                      My fabulous web page

                      "If it don't go, chrome it!" --Stroker McGurk

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Just to let you guys know, I just purchased a set of long tube headers from Summit. Before I could buy them I had to check the box stating I promise not to install these on a vehicle registered for the street. Ok, I promise ;) They shipped em.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Sniff sniff do you smell pants burning?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Happy New Year!
                            Basically any header is illegal in CA on a 1965 or later vehicle unless it has a CARB listing (and EO number) associated with it. Of course they only check 1975 and newer rides biannually so theres a bit of a disconnect there. Its been that way for a long time (like 1983 I think) My 98 Dakota has a set of EO/CARB approved long tubes on it and it passes every time I show the test shop the paperwork. If you installed an item on your vehicle and it had a valid EO number at the time, but in the meantime the certification was rescinded, the parts are still legal on your vehicle if you (or the test shop) can determine the date of purchase via a receipt or the date code on the part itself. Shops can refuse to test your vehicle if they feel you are cheating in any way that may come back to bite them, so big cams are a bit dicey these days, even though they can pass with great low numbers. Doing performance modifications in CA requires good paper work retention skills. In CA we don't really care about noise as there are no tests, no laws and no way to enforce a "noise" violation. Loud pipes save lives. Its all about emissions and keeping the air safe/er to breathe. FYI, in the early days of catalytic converters extra heat was (and still is) required to "light them off" to help with start-up and warm-up emissions. Some mfgs used insulated double wall pipes (Honda etc.) to make this happen. That's how the header became part of the smog equipment early on. I used to fight it. Now I try to deal with it.
                            BKB
                            Last edited by BKBridges; January 7, 2016, 03:57 PM.
                            www.FBthrottlebodies.com
                            Bruce K Bridges

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X