[Jockey]

Honestly, the thread title should be changed as it's super misleading.

But gotta scare people by not telling them the whole story and just a catchy headline.

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by Mr. E92

This question in-tells the problem. It is what 'they' define as a racecar. Possibly, not the actual definition of a proper racecar. As well as the fact, that your question shouldn't really matter. We should have the ability to sit in our garage, gut a car, do whatever work we're going to do and set it up for track use. Period.

Agree but it's illegal to bring your "on-road" vehicle out of emissions compliance.

[itsglen]

Originally Posted by Jockey

Honestly, the thread title should be changed as it's super misleading.

But gotta scare people by not telling them the whole story and just a catchy headline.

Given your post count you are no novice (I am) what is the whole story? I was ready to sign but what's the deal - thanks for your share

[jmg]

Originally Posted by ///Mac

Meh, if it means less annoying mufflers on riced-out civics and racer-wanna-be cars, then I certainly hope this act won't pass.

I live in the city where I'm woken up by one of these every night. Most of the parts in question are exhaust modifications, which are disproportionately loud. It's time to silence the "because race car" crowd.

And who are we kidding, really? - We all know that virtually no street cars are being converted into race cars. Instead, 99.99% of so-called "race car" parts end up being installed and driven on street cars. To make matters worse, most of these modifications are distasteful and yes, I am the authority on what "tastefully modded" is.

One of my neighbor's kid just decatted his shitbox and I have hear him scream past my house every morning like he's leaving pit lane on the way to a perfect sprint to his minimum wage job. Fucking tool bag. If it was a decently fast car and he legitimately knew how to drive the car enthusiast in me would excuse it. But even I close a flap coming into the neighborhood. No one wants to hear that shit, especially from a shitty riced out heap.

[KevM2]

Not to get all political nor to dive deep into the astrophysics of changes occurring to our solar system/climate change, but if anyone believes human pollution or cow farts are a significant contributor to climate change, please look further into the matter

[RedScytheM3]

Originally Posted by KevM2

Not to get all political nor to dive deep into the astrophysics of changes occurring to our solar system/climate change, but if anyone believes human pollution or cow farts are a significant contributor to climate change, please look further into the matter

No need to get political. Or even talk about astrophysics (human pollution and climate change have virtually nothing to do with physics regarding distant stars). You could start by picking up a book at your local library. Or taking an intro to environmental sciences course at your local community college.

[RedScytheM3]

I'm not signing that BS.
Misleading title.
Shame on whoever decided to post this on the main page.

[Moflow]

Yeah. I’ll most likely sign it. I dunno, I do actually own a street car converted for track use. The whole thing was done on an extremely tight budget (less than 5k including the price of the car, but not including labor.) honestly, my friends and I run it in 1-3 endurance races a year. I don’t think it’s that big of a deal to run without cats for a grand total of probably fewer than 40 hours a year. Racing doesn’t need to be prohibitively expensive and I’d like to keep it that way.

[silverstar335]

I agree, what is the back story, can somebody elaborate by providing factual information?

[e90335e36m3]

Why is the law needed? We have laws against modifying emissions equipment on street driven automobiles and people just circumvent those laws. So what if there's a similar law for race cars or will those laws be strictly enforced by race track owners precluding cars with modified emissions from racing?

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

Why is the law needed? We have laws against modifying emissions equipment on street driven automobiles and people just circumvent those laws. So what if there's a similar law for race cars or will those laws be strictly enforced by race track owners precluding cars with modified emissions from racing?

Originally Posted by silverstar335

I agree, what is the back story, can somebody elaborate by providing factual information?

About 2-3 yrs ago the EPA cracked down on tuners who were selling emissions deletes and reiterated applicable law regarding the deletion of such equipment.

These companies tried to using a customer waiver to skirt the law and protect themselves.

Large fines were handed out and the market (diesel especially) for emissions deletes evaporated.

[silverstar335]

Originally Posted by F32Fleet

About 2-3 yrs ago the EPA cracked down on tuners who were selling emissions deletes and reiterated applicable law regarding the deletion of such equipment.

These companies tried to using a customer waiver to skirt the law and protect themselves.

Large fines were handed out and the market (diesel especially) for emissions deletes evaporated.

Not trying to be argumentative but >95% of cars with "emission" related modifications have never seen a track/HPDE event IMHO. So not sure how this petition helps, we are trying to help the 5% even though the vast majority do these modifications because it is "cool".

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by silverstar335

Not trying to be argumentative but >95% of cars with "emission" related modifications have never seen a track/HPDE event IMHO. So not sure how this petition helps, we are trying to help the 5% even though the vast majority do these modifications because it is "cool".

My WAG is that codifying the customer waiver into law is the intent of this bill.

[e90335e36m3]

Originally Posted by F32Fleet

About 2-3 yrs ago the EPA cracked down on tuners who were selling emissions deletes and reiterated applicable law regarding the deletion of such equipment.

These companies tried to using a customer waiver to skirt the law and protect themselves.

Large fines were handed out and the market (diesel especially) for emissions deletes evaporated.

But aren't the same companies still manufacturing these components for road cars? I'm curious why there was no similar attempt to pass a law for road cars where a much larger support base exists. What makes race cars so unique that it requires a special law?

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

But aren't the same companies still manufacturing these components for road cars? I'm curious why there was no similar attempt to pass a law for road cars where a much larger support base exists. What makes race cars so unique that it requires a special law?

A political decision was made to exempt purpose built race cars (ex NASCAR) from the Clean Air Act.

There never was an exception for "on-road" vehicles being converted into/used for "off-road" but the EPA never enforced it.

Allowing an exemption for "on-road" would kneecap the CAA unless, IMO, the vehicle was re-registered as "off road".

[e90335e36m3]

Originally Posted by F32Fleet

A political decision was made to exempt purpose built race cars (ex NASCAR) from the Clean Air Act.

There never was an exception for "on-road" vehicles being converted into/used for "off-road" but the EPA never enforced it.

Allowing an exemption for "on-road" would kneecap the CAA unless, IMO, the vehicle was re-registered as "off road".

Understood, but short of race tracks denying entry to cars with modified emissions equipment, the end effect for manufacturers of emissions circumventing equipment will be exactly the same as the current state for road use cars. I doubt race cars would be subject any more scrutiny than road use cars from the state or federal enforcement agencies.

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

Understood, but short of race tracks denying entry to cars with modified emissions equipment, the end effect for manufacturers of emissions circumventing equipment will be exactly the same as the current state for road use cars. I doubt race cars would be subject any more scrutiny than road use cars from the state or federal enforcement agencies.

Agree. However every company doing business selling cat-less dp's, tunes, etc is at some level of risk today. I guess diesel "rolling coal" tunes were the worst offenders and the easiest to prosecute.

[Jockey]

Originally Posted by itsglen

Given your post count you are no novice (I am) what is the whole story? I was ready to sign but what's the deal - thanks for your share

This is about tuners and manufacturers worried about losing the street tuning money. This is not about losing race cars or the ability of people turning street cars into track cars.

Basically, stop breaking the law.

[FlyingLow78]

Originally Posted by r33_RGSport

Guys,

SEMA is asking for us the manufacturers, retailers, and customers to sign on this RPM ACT so it can get passed by the Congress.

This act clarifies that a road driven car can be turned into a race car, that's all we're fighting for here.

No, the act clearly doesn't say that. As with any change in laws that affect you, it's important to read the actual verbiage being proposed, not just the headlines.

Back story: Evans Tuning gets fined by the EPA for over 100 violations of the Clean Air Act (CAA):

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production...stuningllc.pdf

EPA sues Derive: https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa...defeat-devices

The title of the act is VERY misleading. Similar to the “Save Our Tips” Act which was sponsored by restaurant owners in an attempt to keep waitstaff wages below the federal minimum wage limit, the RPM Act is a deliberate attempt to insulate manufacturers and vendors of non-compliant emissions equipment (i.e. exhausts, catless downpipes, intakes, etc) in their efforts to circumvent the requirements of the Clean Air Act.

This Act is sponsored by 21 Republicans and 7 Democrats, and went before the Senate back in October. Read the proposed language and list of sponsors here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-...bill/2602/text

Section 3a: No action with respect to any device or element of design described in paragraph (3) shall be treated as a prohibited act under that paragraph if the action is for the purpose of modifying a motor vehicle into a vehicle to be used solely for competition, and that vehicle is not authorized for operation on a street or highway.

This seems as though it’s just clarifying the law to exclude cars used only on the racetrack from the provisions of the CAA, buuuut....

the Administrator shall not—

(1) create a Federal database, or identify or require the creation of a State database, of vehicle registration information that is required to be consulted at the point of manufacture, sale, installation, or use of parts or components; and

(2) require the registration of a vehicle or a part or component of a vehicle by the manufacturer, seller, purchaser, installer, or user of the vehicle.

The implementation language states that the EPA administrator may not create a method for tracking compliance of these items, nor may he/she compel states to do so. California required manufacturers of aftermarket parts to get CARB certification numbers for their parts indicating they had been tested and complied with the state’s clean air laws. The proposed language in this bill would prevent the creation of any way to track a vehicle’s actual status (road legal or not) with its parts, unless a state went above the regulation, as with California).

Vehicle registration is a funny thing, since it’s generally a state responsibility. Manufacturers are required to certify their vehicles as compliant when they offer them for sale, and the bill would prevent any association of federal vehicle records and aftermarket modifications with the existing database. This provision prevents the EPA from compelling aftermarket parts manufacturers or installers to maintain any kind of records about what parts went on what car, so when the EPA delivers a subpoena, manufacturers, sellers, and installers can argue they aren’t required to record the specifics of each item they sell. They could simply say "we're not required to track that information beyond what our tax laws mandate" and their sales records could simply say "sold 100 widgets".

The second portion then circumvents California’s ARB part registration laws by saying parts are not required to be “registered” by anyone in the supply chain from manufacturer to end user. This could have the effect of neutering California’s laws, since a primary method of ensuring compliance is testing and certifying the parts, then assigning a tracking number.

But, we’re talking about cars only used on the racetrack, right? Nope, because the RPM Act deliberately blurs those lines as well.

The regulation under subsection (a) shall—

(2) provide that evidence of physical attributes of a vehicle to be used solely for competition may be sufficient to qualify for the exemption under the amendment made by section 3(a)

So, if a car’s physical attributes now may qualify it as a race car, anyone with track-focused parts could argue they are exempt from the CAA. This could reasonably extend to cars that simply have stickers on them, since race cars have stickers.

(3) provide that a manufacturer, seller, or installer of a part or component seeking to use the exemption under the amendment made by section 3(a) may not rely solely on unsupported declarations from the purchaser or owner of a vehicle about—

(A) the legal status of the vehicle; or

(B) the intended use of—

(i) the part or component; or

(ii) the vehicle.

This last bit is intended to fully insulate the manufacturer, sellers, and installers from any liability under the Clean Air Act by saying they need not inquire with a vehicle’s purchaser or owner as to how a part is going to be used. So, everyone running BM3s or catless DPs is now solely responsible for the compliance of their vehicle, and if the Feds wanted to come after the manufacturer, the manufacturer could argue that they weren’t required to ask any questions related to how a part was going to be used. It allows the legal assumption that any sale is for off-road use only, and would prevent the EPA from holding accountable companies which had been pursued in the past (like Evans Tuning or Cobb Tuning).

The EPA's settlement with Evans Tuning states, "The EPA's longstanding view is that conduct that may be prohibited by§ 203(a)(3) does not warrant enforcement if the person performing that conduct has a documented, reasonable basis for knowing that the conduct does not adversely affect emissions. See Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum IA (June 25, 1974)." This bill is written specifically to prevent the EPA from enforcing the CAA with their current methods.

So, if the bill passes and the EPA can’t come after the manufacturers of such devices, they will have no one left to pursue except the end user, because the bill doesn’t insulate the people driving the car on the street.

[OhMyXM]

I see some have taken this thread on different tangents about gun ownership, NRA and dick sizes... common on folks, let's not ruin a good forum trading insults over the internet... It just makes ya look bad. If ya want to duke it out, meet up, grab some gloves and the first one down loses.

[AlpineWhite_SJ]

Originally Posted by FlyingLow78

So, if the bill passes and the EPA can’t come after the manufacturers of such devices, they will have no one left except the end user, because the bill doesn’t insulate the people driving the car on the street.

As it should be - companies should be able to manufacturer performance parts for off-road or race use. If someone decides to knowingly use those parts, deleting their cats for example, it’s on the end user because they’re the ones who chose to violate the state or federal ordinances by using their vehicle with those modifications on the street.

[OhMyXM]

So just slap a clause in there with any car registered as "off road" not being assigned a physical plate and will be impounded immediately with additional fines incurred upon infraction. Make tuners who sell &/or install "off-road" parts send in a form to DMV. Keeps them clean and clear and free to do business with actual race cars & their owners...

I am all for tuning cars and being an enthusiast, but it can be done in a way that maintains compliance for street use. Lets keep the race cars for sure! On the track. It's better, and safer for all of us. Once that road car is "turned into a race car" it really shouldn't then be driven on the road, right? Because then it's a "road car"... We have too many unskilled drivers already thinking they drive race cars, don't really more.