New emission laws: What are we going to do??
11-19-05, 01:16 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Mississauga, ON
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New emission laws: What are we going to do??
Hello all,
I'm aware of the emission related thread that's currently active. Near the end of that thread, someone had mentioned the new emission law, which is what I like to discuss about. For those who don't know, the following link is the article from Toronto Star:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...acodalogin=yes
Some of the major points include:
And the following point is what I'd like to discuss about. It seems no one has yet to be made aware of this:
EVERY F*CKIN YEAR??!! That's ridiculous! It sounds like there's a way to voice our opinions regarding issue; anyone has an idea of what we can do to prevent this?
And if this comes true, what are we going to do? There HAS to be a way around this.....
Thanks,
Howi
I'm aware of the emission related thread that's currently active. Near the end of that thread, someone had mentioned the new emission law, which is what I like to discuss about. For those who don't know, the following link is the article from Toronto Star:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...acodalogin=yes
Some of the major points include:
Originally Posted by TorontoStar
Starting Jan. 1, vehicles under five years of age will be exempt from the test that coincided with registration renewals every two years. However, cars or light trucks 20 years old or more must now be tested after previously being exempt. That rule takes effect in 2007, beginning with 1988-model vehicles.....
That means about 350,000 fewer vehicles will be tested each year, but about 10,000 vehicles that are the worst polluters will now be checked every two years.....
A garage could be fined up to $250,000 and decertified as a Drive Clean facility, while an operator or car owner could be fined up to $50,000 if caught issuing or presenting fake Drive Clean certificates.....
That means about 350,000 fewer vehicles will be tested each year, but about 10,000 vehicles that are the worst polluters will now be checked every two years.....
A garage could be fined up to $250,000 and decertified as a Drive Clean facility, while an operator or car owner could be fined up to $50,000 if caught issuing or presenting fake Drive Clean certificates.....
Originally Posted by TorontoStar
The province is also seeking the public’s comments on several other changes, such as requiring vehicles 12 years or older to undergo the emissions testing every year.
And if this comes true, what are we going to do? There HAS to be a way around this.....
Thanks,
Howi
11-19-05, 01:40 PM
#3
sprayfoam autobody expert
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fergus Ontario
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
**** no...., wait, mines an 83 does that mean it doesn't have to pass regardlessof the new rule? cause there only going to be testing 88 and newer?, or are they testing all years?
someone please answer, i don't want have to replace all the emmisions crap i ripped out.
someone please answer, i don't want have to replace all the emmisions crap i ripped out.
11-19-05, 01:58 PM
#5
sprayfoam autobody expert
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fergus Ontario
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envregistry/026516ep.htm
aright, so if its 1988 or newer it has to stay in the system, if its older than 1988 it doesn't have to pass emmisions, thats great, well not so great for some of the FC guys, but great for me, i almost had a freakin heart attack thinking about buying/finding all the parts my 83 would need to pass
aright, so if its 1988 or newer it has to stay in the system, if its older than 1988 it doesn't have to pass emmisions, thats great, well not so great for some of the FC guys, but great for me, i almost had a freakin heart attack thinking about buying/finding all the parts my 83 would need to pass
Trending Topics
11-19-05, 02:29 PM
#8
Defected to the dark side
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: toronto
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tempusfugitive
http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envregistry/026516ep.htm
aright, so if its 1988 or newer it has to stay in the system, if its older than 1988 it doesn't have to pass emmisions, thats great, well not so great for some of the FC guys, but great for me, i almost had a freakin heart attack thinking about buying/finding all the parts my 83 would need to pass
aright, so if its 1988 or newer it has to stay in the system, if its older than 1988 it doesn't have to pass emmisions, thats great, well not so great for some of the FC guys, but great for me, i almost had a freakin heart attack thinking about buying/finding all the parts my 83 would need to pass
11-19-05, 02:37 PM
#9
400WHP or bust
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Walkerton, Ontario Canada
Posts: 4,048
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Either way living in the boons pays off, I likely have one of the worst polluters, and no E-test here, it's great not having any cats, or airpump, ect.
11-19-05, 02:48 PM
#10
sprayfoam autobody expert
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fergus Ontario
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think what they mean is that by the time this is in place, the 88's will be 20 years old, and then from 1988 onwards they will test everything as it becomes 20 years +.
11-19-05, 03:15 PM
#11
Defected to the dark side
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: toronto
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tempusfugitive
i think what they mean is that by the time this is in place, the 88's will be 20 years old, and then from 1988 onwards they will test everything as it becomes 20 years +.
11-19-05, 04:04 PM
#14
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Mississauga, ON
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys have misunderstood. Please read this again, note the part in captital letters:
In other words, cars that are previously exempt for the e-test (cars that are already 20+ years old), are no longer exempt. This also means 1988 model cars will be the YOUNGEST model cars in the 20+ years old category which the new emission law applies to.
Sorry guys but I'm afraid we're all screwed. All of us. Even the newest FD will be at least 12 years old, which means e-test every ****** year.
Howi
Originally Posted by TorontoStar
However, cars or light trucks 20 years old or more must now be tested AFTER PREVIOUSLY BEING EXEMPT. That rule takes effect in 2007, BEGINNING WITH 1988-MODEL VEHICLES.....
Sorry guys but I'm afraid we're all screwed. All of us. Even the newest FD will be at least 12 years old, which means e-test every ****** year.
Howi
11-19-05, 04:22 PM
#15
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,791
Likes: 0
Received 114 Likes
on
96 Posts
The real question is what are the consequences if you fail? Right now it's not a big deal. You just have to prove that the repairs would be more then $400 or so, and then you get a conditional pass.
11-19-05, 04:53 PM
#16
Well I don't think this could hold up charter scrutiny. I think a 1988 year old vehicle is not that much different than a 1987 and therefore the different treatment is unjustified. In fact many could have been built in the same year. There are way two many people affected by this for someone to not challenge it.
It is a crock of **** anyway, it is still a cash grab as long as they don't start forcing the manufacturers to make more pollution free cars. I know they do this is part but not as aggressively as they seem to be taxing the end users.
I sold my 89 and I only have my 87 left so I am personally ok for now but I will never by an FD if this actually sticks. It will hurt the value of alot of great older cars if this happens.
It is a crock of **** anyway, it is still a cash grab as long as they don't start forcing the manufacturers to make more pollution free cars. I know they do this is part but not as aggressively as they seem to be taxing the end users.
I sold my 89 and I only have my 87 left so I am personally ok for now but I will never by an FD if this actually sticks. It will hurt the value of alot of great older cars if this happens.
11-19-05, 06:37 PM
#18
Almost thawed
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Frozen Bits, ON, Canada
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm up in the middle of nowhere, ON in the Algoma District, so I don't have to worry about the whole e-test thing.
For the FCs, I think that '86s and '87s will be restored more that being used as parts cars as they are now. There will be a lot more transplants from the 88-91s into the 86-87 cars if the older bodies are still in good shape.
As someone who has an '87, this is a good thing, as I might be able to find newer parts for the 'ol beast.
Z
For the FCs, I think that '86s and '87s will be restored more that being used as parts cars as they are now. There will be a lot more transplants from the 88-91s into the 86-87 cars if the older bodies are still in good shape.
As someone who has an '87, this is a good thing, as I might be able to find newer parts for the 'ol beast.
Z
11-19-05, 07:14 PM
#19
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Aaron said, it's not a big deal, but it means that we'll have to continue paying somewhere under $450 every E-test to fail and get a conditional pass. eg. Last year I paid ~$250 and couldn't do more repairs without going over $450. What are you going to fix on a FD for less than $450? 
What Aaron isn't telling you is that he has found an even cheaper solution to avoiding E-tests. Remove the engine from your RX-7 and leave it in the garage!
As for the testing every year part, recall that a couple of years ago they were seeking the public's comments on eliminating driveclean all together. It's obviously still here. Why assume that testing every year will become law?
How is it a cash grab? The gov't doesn't make any money on it. Heck shops don't make money unless they get to do repairs. When it's all said and done they don't really make any money. They find driveclean a pain in the butt too.
What Aaron isn't telling you is that he has found an even cheaper solution to avoiding E-tests. Remove the engine from your RX-7 and leave it in the garage! As for the testing every year part, recall that a couple of years ago they were seeking the public's comments on eliminating driveclean all together. It's obviously still here. Why assume that testing every year will become law?
How is it a cash grab? The gov't doesn't make any money on it. Heck shops don't make money unless they get to do repairs. When it's all said and done they don't really make any money. They find driveclean a pain in the butt too.
11-19-05, 08:02 PM
#21
Navy MarCom
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On a Boat!
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thak Buddha for methyl Hydrate and Acetone in the right mix...thank buddha's belly that sandalones are ( in comparison to failing a test every year ) cheap and multi map select-able.
The only thing that pissis me off is that the govv't will arbitraility raise the pass/fail numbers without telling the public.. unless of course you surf thier many prohibitivly poorly laied out websites to find the new info.. I'm pretty sure my 91' had to pass the new numbers( 63ppm HC as an example ).. that were higher ( lower PPM count ) then the manufacturer's numbers.
The only thing that pissis me off is that the govv't will arbitraility raise the pass/fail numbers without telling the public.. unless of course you surf thier many prohibitivly poorly laied out websites to find the new info.. I'm pretty sure my 91' had to pass the new numbers( 63ppm HC as an example ).. that were higher ( lower PPM count ) then the manufacturer's numbers.
11-20-05, 08:46 AM
#22
Originally Posted by Snrub
How is it a cash grab?
I am all for a cleaner environment but this is a just pandering to the public when the solutions are obvious but will not be implemented.
11-20-05, 09:05 AM
#23
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,791
Likes: 0
Received 114 Likes
on
96 Posts
I was actually thinking abou this last night and came to a realization: There is no reason that 99% of the cars here shouldn't pass anyway.
My logic is this: Cars with street or stock ports don't really have large overlap issues. If the car is in good tune, running the correct A/F ratio and not hacked, then it's no big deal to run a high flow cat. There are plenty of cars being produced today that make a lot more HP then those 99% of people here, and they all have cats. If you're driving around pig rich, you are gaining nothing anyway and just wasting gas and making less power. Especially true if you have a standalone. Again why not run a cat?
My disclaimer of course is that when my car goes back on the road, I will not be running a cat. My porting will have too much overlap.
For cars with more wild porting (bridge, peripheral), then indeed this would be an issue. The excess reversion caused by a cat just wouldn't work, and I would imagine that any cat would plug up very quickly.
My logic is this: Cars with street or stock ports don't really have large overlap issues. If the car is in good tune, running the correct A/F ratio and not hacked, then it's no big deal to run a high flow cat. There are plenty of cars being produced today that make a lot more HP then those 99% of people here, and they all have cats. If you're driving around pig rich, you are gaining nothing anyway and just wasting gas and making less power. Especially true if you have a standalone. Again why not run a cat?
My disclaimer of course is that when my car goes back on the road, I will not be running a cat. My porting will have too much overlap.
For cars with more wild porting (bridge, peripheral), then indeed this would be an issue. The excess reversion caused by a cat just wouldn't work, and I would imagine that any cat would plug up very quickly.
11-20-05, 09:11 AM
#24
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the limit definately getting changed to $600 or are they talking about it?
As for Aaron's comments, I have no idea why my car did so poorly on the E-Test last year. I had like 5% CO.
Granted I had a turbo that was puking oil into the exhaust and the plugs were in rough shape, but 5% still seems like too much. My car dynos well so I'm not sure what I could possibly do to bring that number in line.
As for Aaron's comments, I have no idea why my car did so poorly on the E-Test last year. I had like 5% CO.
Granted I had a turbo that was puking oil into the exhaust and the plugs were in rough shape, but 5% still seems like too much. My car dynos well so I'm not sure what I could possibly do to bring that number in line.
11-20-05, 03:14 PM
#25
Full Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Calgary
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ouch this doesn't sound good at all.
• Annual testing for vehicles 12 years old and older (i.e., starting in 2007, 1995 and older vehicles (back to 1988) would require annual testing).
So does that mean my 87 won't require annual testing?
Gee
• Annual testing for vehicles 12 years old and older (i.e., starting in 2007, 1995 and older vehicles (back to 1988) would require annual testing).
So does that mean my 87 won't require annual testing?
Gee