-
CARB banning older 2 stroke bus conversions
-
Detroit 2 strokes are unit injection (1 injector per cylinder, camshaft timed and operated),so there are no adjustments.
-
If by year of manufacture like 1992, is allowing 40% opacity in a California test on a 2 stroke, theres no need to leave CALIF. Do you know how dense 40% opacity really is. Very thick
-
I live here in California and am monitoring this, as I yawn. There is no reason to worry, as it is usually the CA bashers that live outside the state that are the experts on this subject. Keep on trucking folks, and don’t let anyone steal your dream.
-
Well. I am a California resident and post this information as it seems like something to be aware of and watch how this new CARB program rolls out this year and next.
Mike seems to feel this is all a joke or something but I know from all my years in the state is CARB is no agency to dismiss, particularly when it comes to getting 2 strokes off the roads here. Not sure if he was asleep when the last massive CARB sweep was done but it was an extremely costly and disruptive series of regulations that got many old semis off the road.
As to opacity, check yourself on youtube. Look for certification videos where they conduct visual opacity tests.
As to 3% opacity, that level is quite low. A CARB presentation talked about DPF retrofits on engines and if working the level would be around 1-2%. The threshold is 5% and her comment was anything running at 3% or greater had some leak or other malfunction in the DPF.
As to tweaking engine to easier meet threshold, since the test is a snap or accelerator test, someone said to adjust the throttle to not rev as high. Lower it to pass but put back to get it downt the road again.
My bus will be back in commercial truck alley (i5/i80) in a week, and I will post my opacity test results here.
-
I am not joking around nor am I laughing, just yawning. When and if the time comes, the California DMV will let you know with plenty of notice, Until then no need to fret. Keep on Bussin!
-
I have to strongly disagree with Mike.
What he is suggesting is to let this rolling freight train gain speed without any effort to stop of modify the insanity.
When you get the notice, tuck your head between your knees and kiss your ass good bye. Because when that happens it is too late.
Don is on top of this and is correct in what he posts.
-
Jon, I respect your knowledge of busses but you are mis-interpreting both sides of the message. What is posted above is a copy and paste from a website with no actual relevant information. If you actually look into this matter it states nothing definitive. Us folks with older busses don’t need to be concerned until there are actual dates and criteria tied to it. Since you decided to chime in here I am going to pose the question to you, what do you recommend the folks with Busses registered in CA do?
-
CA, and possibly other states are on a mission to clean up the environment. In their wisdom they are picking on easy targets, which are older vehicles. The targets are easy because there are so few, yet politicians can brag about being environment friendly by supporting regulations and legislation that imposes standards.
Some of those standards exceed the standards that applied when the vehicles were manufactured. Testing to the standards is a given. Even if the test criteria is the same as when the vehicle was produced the cost to comply as a result of age, modifications, lack of maintenance may be sufficient to effectively price the vehicle off the road. What is absent from all discussions is the cost to benefit ratio. Since vintage vehicles represent a small percentage of vehicles, and their use is likely way below average the impact on cleaning up the environment is likely minimum, if any but its effect on what is primarily a hobbyist is considerable.
With that my suggestion is for interested groups to band with the purpose of promoting reasonable laws and regulations that do not economically punish vintage vehicle owners disproportionately.
The camel has its nose in the tent and with each passing day what you view as merely a pesky issue will blossom into an expense or legislation to cause the scrapping of older vehicles. At one time your bus met every requirement for emissions. Now you are going to pay to prove it, and as time passes you may find new requirements you do not meet, causing its value to drop below the cost to meet those requirements.
I do not live in CA or a state targeting vintage vehicle emissions so I do not care what Californians do, but the politicians are creating new legislature daily taking away your freedoms to drive and use what you choose and it is a clear signal doing nothing is going to have a negative result.
-
After talking to my Mechanic Friend again , His Friend and His Dad has a business, North Califorkia , and several 2006/2008 International trucks (over 26,000 lbs.) bought new years ago and DOT says they can’t tag/Register them unless they put in a 2010 ot later engine’s in them. Dot approved and checked. Rule came into being Jan 1 2023. Same with their smaller Pickups from 14001 lbs. to 26,000 lbs. Few exceptions apply. Don’t know about the Older 2 Strokes. Probably hammer them also.
-
Have at it Mike, or do nothing, your choice about getting informed about the ongoing increasing CARB regulations over diesel heavy vehicles. You seem to disregard and devalue the summarized finding in the OP. This information was gathered after many hours of research and multiple chats with various industry folks. Here is the link to get you started should you wish to cull through all the direct and indirect regulations and rulings related that affect we old 2 stroke busnuts.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/heavy-duty-inspection-and-maintenance-program
I am currently establishing the viability and long-term benefit by obtaining historic plates that then bring the bus into an exempt category. Since my bus is actually running on the road so few hours, my use would be defensible.
It also appears you are not aware of the past and ongoing CARB efforts to get 2 stroke engines crushed, even those used off-road like agriculture, earthworks, production, etc. They want them all gone. This is just another whack at the 2 stroke diesel pinata.
Even with an engine that meets the recurring testing requirements, once or twice a year, one needs to decide how long to hold on and endure being a pawn in their game.
For some, the resulting lower street value of CA bus conversions not passing might be of interest to some here and across the country. What happens if a few hundred nice condition bus conversions hit the market? Do bus owners in other states think their own coaches might be worth less? Some won’t care, some will. This is a CARB regulation creating a knock on effect on others outside the state.
-
Windtrader, don’t assume i know or don’t know anything without asking me first.
-
I had an opacity test done on my engine 8v71na, fully rebuilt about 11k ago. Easily cleared the incoming limits defined in the CARB Clean Truck Check program.
For the first time, after many attempts to get some sort of anecdotal or objective opinion on how much visible smoke is 40%, 20%, etc. , the tester said “40% is a lot of smoke”, implying obvious visible smoke.
Mine rarely shows visible smoke from the driver seat except for two instances. Initial starting may blow some, not thick or a lot but visible. The other time when visible is when pedal to the metal on long uphill grades (6% range).
Hopefully, my experience provides some insight and guidance on how you plan for the new regs. Remember to check the chart to see which number your engine needs to pass, they are different depending on year.
Jim n Chris statement on opacity level is spot on but I needed to have objective numbers to benchmark against the new opacity level regulations. thanks
-
I think these environmentalists just want them (Old 2 Strokes) gone. Makes no Diff how clean some run.
-
Glens. NOPE!! Geez!
Log in to reply.