Thinking of removing and/or tampering with Cat or other emission equipment?

.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

That Law has been in Australia since the 80's I think.

Back in the late 90's when I got my 1st car, it was a AU $20,000 fine if you were caught tampering/removing emission stuff from your car. Businesses/dealerships copped an AU $250,000 fine!

Was too easy though, you could just say you bought the car "like that", if you got pulled over and your car was inspected by the transport department. Any car built from 1986 onwards>>> had to have cats and ALL emission gear fitted. Especially from a car yard or dealership. Once you got it home, you could pull it all off and run the risk of getting caught and trying to talk you way out of it.

If you got caught and it was a new/ish car and you were the 1st owner.......you would be is some deep sh*t!

 

Lol!!

 

Did you just discover this?

A potential problem in states with emission testing but unless the person is caught "red-handed" it's pretty unenforceable.

It's been a long time (probably a decade) since I heard of anyone being prosecuted for this.

Of course I would never be a party to such an egregious act of civil disobedience.

 

First he installed test pipes in his Ferrari.... next thing you know he was plotting with the Weather Underground.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Look at it this way.

Test Pipes are the Ferrari "Gateway Drug" to more mods, fines and jail time ............... IF you get caught in SOME locations.

 

Next thing you know, they are disconnecting pollution air pumps, air injector rails, adjust carbs and fuel injection, ignition timing and all that other highly illegal stuff. Makes me happy I register mine as a "collector car", so it's exempt from all that emissions testing stuff. Not that it's been modified in any way.

 

+1 . It is always shoot the messenger around here.

 

Sounds like a reasonable thing to me when they smog check vehicles in atlanta. They expect the items to be installed and not just to pass inspection.

 

I think a more likely scenario involves:

If it was manufactured before a 1996 (OBDII) it will be considered environmental contraband.

 

Seems like you are "Ayer"ing this out!

 

And this kind of BS is why I wanted a pre-cat, non-catalyst equiped car.

 

Lawmakers in certain areas are starting to wake up from the environmental kool-aid they were forced to drink by what Steven Hawkins and several other well respected environmental scientists called, "children's scientists" who do not present arguements that hold water. Certain states have done away with emissions testing for cars pre-'96 without OBD2 sensors. Step in the right direction IMO. What will Al Gore and M Moore try and sell next.

 

Not in Nevada. In Nevada they only care that it passes regardless of the equipment installed. Hydrocarbon and CO requirements are different according to the year of the vehicle all the way back to 1968. My '76 has is a 'pass' if it blows under 500 hydrocarbons and under 1.5% CO IIR. '78-'79 cars have to pass below 300 hydrocarbons which is still easy to do for a 308.

 

right on brother,

chris

 

I don't have Emissions testing where I live. We don't have annual equipment inspections either. Non-issue.

 

65 Chevy's didnt have EGR's, and neither does my 77 308. Those were more an 80's thing, like disco clothes.

 

Mr. Parker is a "crusader" on this issue...that is why he keeps beating this to death. Obviously no one should violate the law, and if they do, then they risk prosecution. We are adults here, we don't need to be preached to constantly.

Me? I have every emission control present on my cars, and have no reason or desire to remove them. But to each their own.

 

Having read many of your posts over the years, I believe you to be the "crusader" to end all crusaders. You would sue your own Grandmother, and have us all in bubble wrap crash suits if you thought you were able. If a wheel broke on a 1903 Curved Dash Olds, you could be voted most likely to sue Oldsmobile, even if it was shown to be vandalism.

My wifes first husband was killed when he was in a tight turn on a snowmobile. With his upper body leaned out over the side to balance the weight, his body stuck a small sapling rupturing his spleen. He died enroute. There was not so much as a scratch on the sled. Three seperate attorneys showed up on her doorstep over the next few weeks looking to sue Polaris for wrongful death. Even after she explained that he made a mistake, and it was purely an accident, two of them made the comment that they knew, but that it didnt matter, they could still get her a substantial settlement as Polaris would most likely settle out of court. I mean no offense, Franklin, but through all your postings you have come across as one of those types of lawyers.

 

HYPERFLOWS

 

+1

I also still have the air pump on my car. (of course it's frozen and doesn't have a belt and may be removed for repairs this winter, but that's a maintenance thing not a tampering thing!).