Re: WTF

As somebody or other once said - silence is assent. So speak up and prod a politician.

Let your congressperson, senators and White House know you don't like this stupid stupid thing. You don't have to write them the Gettysburg Address. See at the bottom for what I wrote. Paste and copy if you like. If you have a small business or job that would be affected, note that. Write too much and the intern who actually reads it will space out and go TL;DR.

Enough public pressure and this will be defeated (at least for now).

http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_i … rs_cfm.cfm

https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

And if you haven't signed this, do it dagnabit (please). At 22,000 signers now.

https://www.change.org/p/president-of-t … dification


-------------------------------

I am strongly opposed to the proposed "Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles--Phase 2." issued by the EPA on February 8. This is because they will ban any engine modifications of street cars and even conversion of street cars into race-only racecars.

This will enormously damage the motorsports hobby and industry in the United States. Many millions of motorsport participants and fans will be affected. As well, a very large number of jobs will be lost.

I am an active motorsports participant and a voter. Please tell the EPA to eliminate these provisions of the proposed regulations.

25X Loser - Delinquent Racing - '86 Rust-Tite Merkur - 9 years (when do I get to stop?).

Re: WTF

billybobster wrote:

One small way to start fighting this - Change.org petition. Already at 15,000 signers. Spread this around...

https://www.change.org/p/president-of-t … dification

They asked why I signed the petition......."Because Racecar"....

45+x Loser.....You'd think I would learn......
5x I.O.E  Winner   1 Heroic Fix Winner   1 Org Choice Winner
2x  I Got Screwed Winner    2x Class C Winner
(Still a Class B driver in a Class A car)

Re: WTF

There's also a petition now on the White House petition site.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petiti … racecars-0

BigBird wrote:
billybobster wrote:

One small way to start fighting this - Change.org petition. Already at 15,000 signers. Spread this around...

https://www.change.org/p/president-of-t … dification

They asked why I signed the petition......."Because Racecar"....

Dagnabit! Why didn't I think of that!

25X Loser - Delinquent Racing - '86 Rust-Tite Merkur - 9 years (when do I get to stop?).

Re: WTF

Everybody take a breath and read this from Road & Track
http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorsports … lly-means/

Re: WTF

and this
http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorsports … e-to-race/

31 (edited by billybobster 2016-02-09 10:23 PM)

Re: WTF

horizoninspect wrote:

Everybody take a breath and read this from Road & Track
http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorsports … lly-means/

I would suggest looking at this post - http://forums.24hoursoflemons.com/viewt … 32#p291832

mharrell did some excellent regulatory reading (a truly painful thing to do - thank you!), I will copy the most damming quote from the proposed regs.

mharrell wrote:

I don't think that's the part that's causing the fuss. The "racing exemption" is in 40 CFR part 1068. The summary of the proposed change, given on p. 391 of that document, is:

A motor vehicle qualifies for a competition exclusion based on the physical characteristics of the vehicle, not on its use. Also, if a
motor vehicle is covered by a certificate of conformity at any point, there is no exemption from the tampering and defeat-device prohibitions that would allow for converting the engine or vehicle for competition use. There is no prohibition against actual use of certified motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines for competition purposes; however, it is not permissible to remove a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine from its certified configuration regardless of the purpose for doing so.

Namely, under the new proposed regs, you can't do any mods that would affect the emissions-related performance of a car once that car has gotten a certificate of conformity. Ever. Even for racing-only. This covers both the engine and the car. So you can't do swaps unless it is stock for stock. So either you run bone-stock engine production racecars, or you run purpose built racecars with purpose built engines. No in between.

This is why I'm running out of breath re the EPA.

25X Loser - Delinquent Racing - '86 Rust-Tite Merkur - 9 years (when do I get to stop?).

Re: WTF

I think this paragraph from the SEMA comment is a good one to include if you are corresponding with your Congresspersons

Based on the statutory text and the legislative history, it is clear that vehicles used solely for competition, including a race vehicle that has been created by converting a certified vehicle to a racecar, are not within the purview of the Clean Air Act. Administrative rulemaking is not a process by which an agency is permitted to circumvent Congress, however, it appears that the EPA is attempting to alter current law as it relates to vehicles used solely for competition. The EPA’s proposal would alter current law by adding the following provision to the regulations: “Certified motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines and their emission control devices must remain in their certified configuration even if they are used solely for competition or if they become nonroad vehicles or engines.” See Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles--Phase 2, 80 Fed. Reg. 40138, 40565 (July 13, 2015). This new language is in conflict with the statutory text and legislative history and should not be inserted into the regulations unless Congress indicates an intent for such a rule to be put in place.

Re: WTF

I saw that first R&T article. While they are correct that a lot of people are overreacting to this regulation, they have a lot of the facts dead wrong. The quote in there from the EPA about this restriction already being in effect is one example, if I read the SEMA objection correctly. R&T also seems to think this regulation is a law that will need to be passed, when in fact it's a regulatory change that does not require congress to act. So they kinda need to get their shit together before they hurt the momentum we've got going against this.

I hadn't seen the Baruth article, though. (I'm glad he's got something to distract him from bashing crapcan racing for the time being.) He does make a great point. It would help a lot to get some actual science to put the environmental effects of racing into perspective. Scope insensitivity is a real thing, and there are plenty of voters out there (who have never driven a car in anger) who think of NASCAR and get a gut reaction that it must be the worst thing ever for the environment.

Re: WTF

Also, here's the language I used on the change.org petition and will probably be recycling for my congressfolk. (I mostly stole the wording from SEMA.) All are free to steal/use it.

"This proposed regulatory change is an arbitrary and capricious abuse of power that could effectively devastate the sport of amateur racing while providing minimal benefit to the environment. The change also appears to have been hidden in a proposed regulatory ruling where it was not relevant and was not referenced in the summary or table of contents. This strongly suggests that the EPA did not adequately notify the public that would be affected by this regulation."

Re: WTF

SpaceFrank wrote:

Scope insensitivity is a real thing, and there are plenty of voters out there (who have never driven a car in anger) who think of NASCAR and get a gut reaction that it must be the worst thing ever for the environment.

"Scope insensitivity" - great expression.

Here's some numbers I lay on people who go off on the impact of motorsports on the environment.

Indycar ethanol mileage - 2 MPG (I believe) - 33 cars - 500 miles

If all cars go 500 miles (which they don't) - 8,250 gallons of Ethanol

Modern airliner jet fuel (aka kerosene with additives) efficiency -100 MPG per person
Coast to coast round trip - 6000 miles
Fuel per person per coast to coast round trip- 60 gallons
Number of people flying coast to coast  round trip to use 8,250 gallons - 138

OK, a lot of apples/oranges there, on both sides of the environmental impact. We'll skip that

So if someone says we should cancel the Indy 500 because it wastes fuel, by this logic we should cancel anything that causes people to fly. Like environmental conferences.

And of course, that doesn't pass the common sense test.

And, I would love to see a well done qualitative analysis of the environmental impact of various kinds of motorsports, put in context with other common modern activities.

25X Loser - Delinquent Racing - '86 Rust-Tite Merkur - 9 years (when do I get to stop?).

Re: WTF

Just do some simple maths while bored at work. Say your crapcan gets 5gph efficiency, pretty low I would assume, in a 14hr race that's 70 gallons. Now take that to a street car with a 30mpg efficiency that's 2100 miles on that 70 gallons. You could do 6 races to a average cars 12k miles per year. Granted if your race car has no cat or egr it will pollute more but how many teams run 6 plus races? Somebody should run a race with an exhaust gas meter and document the results compared to a similar daily driver, should make for a good argument

Re: WTF

Here's another EPA vs. racing petition at WhiteHouse.org... 93,000 signers and rising.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petiti … racecars-0

25X Loser - Delinquent Racing - '86 Rust-Tite Merkur - 9 years (when do I get to stop?).

Re: WTF

Yet another way to prod the EPA into not banning street-based racing. Found this via a good article at Jalopnik - http://jalopnik.com/how-and-why-you-can … 1758288770

This allows you (and you too) to post a comment to the Official Docket. This is part of the public comment process required for every regulatory change.

Go here and do it - comment either pro or con - over 223,000 comments so far (but this goes back to October when they first released this).

http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDeta … -2014-0827

I posted what I posted on the other petitions and politician contact forms. Feel free to copy and paste.

----------------------------------------

I am strongly opposed to the proposed "Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles--Phase 2." issued by the EPA on February 8. This is because they will ban any engine modifications of street cars and even conversion of street cars into race-only racecars.

This will enormously damage the motorsports hobby and industry in the United States. Many millions of motorsport participants and fans will be affected. As well, a very large number of jobs will be lost.

I am an active motorsports participant and a voter. Please tell the EPA to eliminate these provisions of the proposed regulations.

25X Loser - Delinquent Racing - '86 Rust-Tite Merkur - 9 years (when do I get to stop?).

Re: WTF

addict#52 wrote:

Say your crapcan gets 5gph efficiency, pretty low I would assume, in a 14hr race that's 70 gallons. Now take that to a street car with a 30mpg efficiency...

That's an entirely useless comparison. (the modifications to make a "racecar" aren't going to win any efficiency contests.) HOW the car is driven matters most to the MPGs. Let's look at real world numbers from my 2001 Beetle (turbo)... on the street (city and interstate) it will do 30-35mpg when driven "reasonably"; driven on track (VIR Full) it will do less than 7mpg. High revs and long periods of WOT use fuel at a mighty rate. Both (eventually) burn the same amount of gas. One just does it in a much shorter period, albeit rarely. (and that is 100% within these damnable new idiotic rules -- the "certified" configuration is entirely unmodified.)

And even your "racecar" (assuming it's still street legal) will do better when not driven on track, because you aren't WOT all the time. (at least I hope you aren't.)

The actual error here goes back to the original definition of "motor vehicle" where the morons used the terms "designed for" instead of calling out the actual "used for" that they intended.

Duff Beer Civic (#128) -- 2014 Sebring - Class B (#1 of 7), 2016 Barber - Class B
1981 Jet Electrica 007 [Plymouth Horizon TC3] (#128) -- Mk.1 - Index of Effluency Eco (IOEe) @ 2016 Lemons South Fall, Mk.2 - Judges' Choice @ 2017 'Shine Country Classic, Mk.3 - Index of Effluency @ 2017 Southern Discomfort

Re: WTF

I was shooting more for a co2/carbon output not efficiency, you would have to be really stupid to assume a race car will ever be more efficient then a street car. Do we really gain much from cutting cats off and bypassing egr? I agree that not being able to swap any motor you please into a non-road vehicle is ridiculous

Re: WTF

When it comes to energy consumption, it's the participants and spectators that have the greatest share.  The actual type of event is almost irrelevant.  Look at the logistics of holding a concert or festival...even a farmers market.  The participants/vendors had to acquire product and transport it to the facility.  Spectators/customers had to get to and from the facility.  All consume energy which is almost entirely derived from fossil fuel.  Nascar is really no more or less consumptive than a concert series or the Burning Man festival.  98% is used by those who attend or sell at the event.

Re: WTF

Some of the issue isn't exhaust emissions, it's the aromatic Hydrocarbons from open fuel systems, and open crank case systems more than anything. Although this again falls into the same argument as lawn equipment and other "Non Road Engines" they seem to have no problem with.

Mistake By The Lake Racing (MBTL)
88 Thunderbird "THUNDERBIRDS ARE GO!", Ex Astris, Rubigo / Semper Fracti
A&D: 2014 Sebrings at Sebring (NSF), 2014 NJMP2 Jurassic Park (SpeedyCop), 2012 Summit Point J30 (PiNuts)
2018 Route Sucky-Suck Rally Miata, 2019 World Tour Of Texas 64 Newport

Re: WTF

Guildenstern wrote:

Some of the issue isn't exhaust emissions, it's the aromatic Hydrocarbons from open fuel systems, and open crank case systems more than anything. Although this again falls into the same argument as lawn equipment and other "Non Road Engines" they seem to have no problem with.


I don't know about that.  I have been hearing for years that they had small utility engines in their sights.  It's not that they have "no problem" with them.  It is that they have not figured out how to go after them.

That said, there is a special place in hell for gas-powered leaf blowers.  Electric ones too.

44 (edited by rmcdaniels 2016-02-11 08:53 PM)

Re: WTF

cheseroo wrote:

After all, this is a byproduct of the aftermarket parts suppliers who slap a "For racing use only" sticker on a part and market it to fit 2016 street cars and not the automakers.

Bingo! This really isn't about us. Nobody actually cares about street cars that are used on the track. For many years, the aftermarket performance industry has sold parts that are illegal to use on the street because they had a loophole; they just had to put a disclaimer that the product "is never to be used on a vehicle used on a public street", because the product could be used on a street car at the track. In almost all cases, they are used on the street. This is just an attempt at closing the loophole because it has been universally abused. There is a massive industry that makes products that are almost always used illegally. That industry is now trying to get the track community to pull their asses out of the sling that they have fashioned for themselves by flaunting the law. This will be used to go after the manufacturers, not the racers, although it will make some aftermarket parts more expensive and difficult to buy. I don't see this as the end of crapcan racing.

Everybody grab your brooms, it's shenanigans!

45 (edited by Burdizzo 2016-02-11 09:49 PM)

Re: WTF

rmcdaniels wrote:
cheseroo wrote:

After all, this is a byproduct of the aftermarket parts suppliers who slap a "For racing use only" sticker on a part and market it to fit 2016 street cars and not the automakers.

Bingo! This really isn't about us. Nobody actually cares about street cars that are used on the track. For many years, the aftermarket performance industry has sold parts that are illegal to use on the street because they had a loophole; they just had to put a disclaimer that the product "is never to be used on a vehicle used on a public street", because the product could be used on a street car at the track. In almost all cases, they are used on the street. This is just an attempt at closing the loophole because it has been universally abused. There is a massive industry that makes products that are almost always used illegally. That industry is now trying to get the track community to pull their asses out of the sling that they have fashioned for themselves by flaunting the law. This will be used to go after the manufacturers, not the racers, although it will make some aftermarket parts more expensive and difficult to buy. I don't see this as the end of crapcan racing.


You would think an annual safety inspection and/or emissions test for vehicles on the street would be able to address this issue. That's probably too much to ask of some flunky making $15/hour.

Never underestimate the potential for the government to suck all the fun out of a room.

Re: WTF

Annual safety/emissions inspections for street cars already exist. We have them here in NC and they have them in other states. Once a year I used to put the stock exhaust, injectors, and ECU back on the car so I could pass the test, then put the turbo, 1000cc injectors, and aftermarket ECU back on the car so I could have 400+ HP. The inspection never really slowed me down. Other people just bribe the inspectors. It's never been an effective means of addressing the issue.

Everybody grab your brooms, it's shenanigans!

Re: WTF

In-what nows? Ohio, land of the heaps.

Mistake By The Lake Racing (MBTL)
88 Thunderbird "THUNDERBIRDS ARE GO!", Ex Astris, Rubigo / Semper Fracti
A&D: 2014 Sebrings at Sebring (NSF), 2014 NJMP2 Jurassic Park (SpeedyCop), 2012 Summit Point J30 (PiNuts)
2018 Route Sucky-Suck Rally Miata, 2019 World Tour Of Texas 64 Newport

Re: WTF

Burdizzo wrote:

You would think an annual safety inspection and/or emissions test for vehicles on the street would be able to address this issue.

Negative. Those types of things are pure revenue sources for the state. (and local shops) It's been batted around here in NC to drop that useless crap, but there's too much money in it -- $6 to the gubment, and $23 to whoever does the inspection. That last part is why places want to be able to do as many inspections per hour as possible. So, as you might predict, the "test" isn't any actual test; for OBDII cars, the station simply asks the easily-programmed-to-lie ECU "are you in spec" to which it'll always say "sure, whatever." NC used to perform actual emissions tests (decades ago), but that was expensive (upkeep, calibration, etc.) and time consuming (20-30min to get a car in and out)

Duff Beer Civic (#128) -- 2014 Sebring - Class B (#1 of 7), 2016 Barber - Class B
1981 Jet Electrica 007 [Plymouth Horizon TC3] (#128) -- Mk.1 - Index of Effluency Eco (IOEe) @ 2016 Lemons South Fall, Mk.2 - Judges' Choice @ 2017 'Shine Country Classic, Mk.3 - Index of Effluency @ 2017 Southern Discomfort

Re: WTF

What am I missing if I just chisel the VIN tag off my car? Who's to say I didn't do some panel beating and constructed, from the ground up, a purpose-built racecar that just happens to resemble an '80s Ford? You can't tell me I need 88 Thunderbird emission equipment if you can't tell me its an 88 Thunderbird

Interceptor Motorsports
351w Foxy T-Bird - Class B Winner!, 440 Bluesmobile - Judges Choice, Org Choice & IOE!, Camero, Fuego Turbo - Heroic Fix & IOE!

Re: WTF

rmcdaniels wrote:
cheseroo wrote:

After all, this is a byproduct of the aftermarket parts suppliers who slap a "For racing use only" sticker on a part and market it to fit 2016 street cars and not the automakers.

Bingo! This really isn't about us. Nobody actually cares about street cars that are used on the track. For many years, the aftermarket performance industry has sold parts that are illegal to use on the street because they had a loophole; they just had to put a disclaimer that the product "is never to be used on a vehicle used on a public street", because the product could be used on a street car at the track. In almost all cases, they are used on the street. This is just an attempt at closing the loophole because it has been universally abused. There is a massive industry that makes products that are almost always used illegally. That industry is now trying to get the track community to pull their asses out of the sling that they have fashioned for themselves by flaunting the law. This will be used to go after the manufacturers, not the racers, although it will make some aftermarket parts more expensive and difficult to buy. I don't see this as the end of crapcan racing.

The problem that the performance aftermarket faces is the unbelievably expensive certification process and total lack of common sense to its application. 
I worked for a company that did certify some performance equipment back in the 1990's.  The certification process was so expensive that it was simply not worth doing.  Imagine doubling the cost of aftermarket parts...that's what it would lead to for popular vehicles, and nothing available for obscure cars.  The process is too long to describe here, but imagine re-doing the same tests over and over, for the same part, installed on every year, make, and model you want to get a certification for.  This means you certify a part for a 5.0L Ford V8 in a Mustang...doesn't apply to the same engine in any other Ford product.  You have to redo the process for an F150.  An F150 with a 5.8L engine...total recert again.  Same engine in a Thunderbird...do it all over again.  The powers that be have made it impossible for the aftermarket to comply for all but the most common vehicles. 
As for real racing products used on the street...the only way to stop that is to make racing equipment illegal, or require some sort of registration and inspection, then form a bureaucracy to monitor it.