• Welcome to The Truck Stop! We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.

    Your truck knowledge is missing!
    • Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
    • We have tons of knowledge here for your diesel truck!
    • Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
    • NO ADS! The site is fully functional and ad free!
    CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

    Problems registering? Click here to contact us!

    Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!

EPA Study on Diesel Tuners

Ok, so most States do not emission test diesels. And those that do test diesels only do it via subjective visual tests of the exhuast plume and whether the inspector is able to correctly assess that certain hardware is in place.

Even the States that do tailpipe emission tests, this only happens if the vehicle is pre-OBD-II. The NYT article correctly identifies that hooking-up to a OBD-II plug is not a real test.

Given all the lack of actual emissions testing, the surprise here is???

And why focus just on diesels? Gasssres have plenty of tunes to push power as well.
 
JayTheCPA said:
Ok, so most States do not emission test diesels. And those that do test diesels only do it via subjective visual tests of the exhuast plume and whether the inspector is able to correctly assess that certain hardware is in place.

Even the States that do tailpipe emission tests, this only happens if the vehicle is pre-OBD-II. The NYT article correctly identifies that hooking-up to a OBD-II plug is not a real test.

Given all the lack of actual emissions testing, the surprise here is???

And why focus just on diesels? Gasssres have plenty of tunes to push power as well.
Click to expand...

I permanently registered my ‘99 K2500 diesel Suburban in Montana.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't consider what I have done to my 6.5 as increasing pollution. Before I improved things it would belch smoke like crazy if I tried to accelerate hard.

Yeah, there are quite a few guys that roll coal but the number of guys that can afford a new truck and then really increase pollution is smaller. I'd say most real polluters are guys that own the 4-8 year old truck out of warranty who don't want to pay such high prices for stock parts without some improvements and things are not operating as well as the truck ages anyway.

There is really not much need to hot rod a new truck. A "pedal commander" or tuner to increase sportiness maybe but how much extra pollution can you make a new truck put out unless you are driving like a bat out of hell all the time.

There is more waste increase in big tires and lifts IMO than tuning.
 
In Clark County Nv (where Vegas is) smog tests were and are done with wand in tailpipe measuring actual particulate. They also now read computers and get fooled by obd2 like the vw scandal- but can still be used to get actual output readings.

Diesel tests are done on a dyno to load engine and get more realistic testing of acceleration from 0-30(35)mph. We tested the 6.5 db2 compared to ds4. Remember the ds4 was made for obd2 compliance of being able to read demand and supplied fuel volume. The obd2 with all other parts the same- got lower emissions of ALL contaminates both as a whole and on individual levels, had better mpg, and more power. This all at stock levels. The keep in mind you can modify the db2 to run leaner, or produce WAY more fuel than any ds4 to suit your needs. Dont even need to bring in the more rare db4 or insanely rare db0. But GM had to meet legal requirements, so abracadabra ds4. Honest results isn’t always what they want- they need enforceable legislation.

Mpg is direct correlation of fuel burned per work done and therefore more emissions expelled

Lift kits and bigger tires is simply change in weight and aerodynamics. A slightly older friend I grew up with that is nowdays an automotive engineer argued truck height and mpg affects. He used this as main part of his college thesis.
We did with it with mini trucks (late80’s trend) and jacked up 4x4s. Identical truck only changed ride height- had no change until going from 1” ground clearance to 1/2”ground clearance at the track- before Vegas speedway became a big time track. We foundsame results using 70& 80 style chevy, 80 ford 1/2 tons, 80’s style Toyota &Nissan mini trucks. Then did 4x4 adding taller lift kits, doing just shackle raises and tortion adjustments but running same tires it had so no other variables.

the extremely lowered trucks all saw very slight improvement at speeds above 50 mph. But taking one of my buddies 78 chev 1/2 ton which was already on 33s that barely fit would rub a hair off road in sharp corners and raised it with his new lift kit be bought early to help on the testing with - which he had gobs of clearance with running 48” afterwards... and we put all the other lift kit parts in the bed so truck had same weight the whole time- saw no notable change. He ran a full tank of fuel each way like all the other trucks. He even ran a full tank with the new tires just to see the fuel loss of the weight - hilariously 0.2 lower mpg from 33” to 48”.
Taking you side mirrors off on the 80’s trucks had bigger impact found from another guy in same engineering class on his report of the 80’s trucks that the height and tires as far as hiway miles goes. Granted city driving of start stop should have shown exteme difference.

That memory stuck with me when driving my hummer with 37x12.50 mud terrain 160 lbs EACH tires,2 piece steel rim, runflat/beadlock combos. But my hummer came with Cepek aluminum rims and no runflats when I bought it used. The off-roading I did on a volcanic mountain area destroyed tires nearly every trip to that area, but I could buy used tires with 1/4” tread@ 4 for $100 so I didn’t care back then. I had a stockpile discount tire would be proud of. So I mounted up 4 on the aluminum rims without the runflat/beadlock and ran them on the road for a couple tank fulls just for mpg and 0-60 comparison. It was something like 80 lbs difference per tire. 0-60 had no noteable change. A friend argued that I improved 0.1 second so, ok maybe. City driving habit had been the same as I did for years already: foot to floor until speed limit then let up until 5 over. When you 0-60 is 1/4mile and prius beats you- no cop knows you are doing an exhibition of power! Haha! Mpg improvement city driving = 0, and no one could argue the math. Then I did hiway testing with no noticed loss, and maybe a tiny advantage to the heavier tires- since that gets argued by physics- gonna call that variation of driving. And all that is sprung weight. So all it proved is the gearing to weight ratio is so dramatic that it skews the conventional knowledge in the automotive world.

Another example would be Tesla semi height/weight vs other semi mfrs. the aerodynamic design of the hood&cab has far more effect on aerodynamics and drag coefficient than ground clearance.

So with all that, I am gonna take the opinion that tire size/weight and rig height doesn’t affect it that much. Engine tune is a critical part of emissions output. Tuning a db2 would be basically predetermined engine timing, fuel screw setting and of coarse plunger size and channel boring. Ds4= mostly tune.

All That does not mean what mods you do to a 6.5 makes it pollute worse. My hummer- when driving at the same 0-60 rate of acceleration and driving speed limit everywhere I went for a couple tank fulls meant an increase of 2mpg with gm6 turbo over n/a. When I drive foot to floor, same mpg with or without turbo,I just accelerate faster, but emissions test showed burned cleaner. So there is NO DOUBT that better boost ratio improved mpg, power, and emissions. But like I said- EPA has to pick where they draw a line in the sand, not actually looking at results.

If I ever get fined, I will take the time to win the fight in a court of law. Until then (if it ever happens), I do things that I know are better for my rig and the environment at same time. I also wont post anything online that might get misconstrued that I am going to do anything illegal.
 
And therein lies the problem. Not all mods are bad for the environment.

Technology and real world results change, but the regulations make for a tall bar to prove that any mod is equal or better than OE. Then again, there are plenty of people that knowingly defeating emissions controls and rely on the fact that there is no real emissions testing for most of us. As the NYT article correctly identifies, many small scale violations add-up when taking into account the scope of all the defeats. Irony here is that by *not* making it easy to show that a mod is beneficial, CARB is standing in the way of cleaning-up older diesels and basically requiring that they pollute just as much as the day they were made.

Last I checked, to prove that a mod is environmentally beneficial requires lab time and certifications from licensed entities which are well outside of the average person's reach due to all the costs, time, and expertise necessary to navigate the system. Some businesses take the effort to get certification which helps. If our legislators and regulators wanted to make a true difference, we would see more tail-pipe testing rather than anecdotal visual inspections. Will, am truly glad to see that you get actual tailpipe readings for diesels down to the passenger level; this makes the first jurisdiction that I am aware of. If every State that tested emissions focused on tailpipe and not on installed hardware or OBD-II readings, then it would eliminate all the confusion and stress over what does (and does not) pass. Oh, and a tailpipe reading would eliminate the ability for any OBD-II defeat ;)
 
Yeah tail pipe test tells the truth- until you live here and know how to defeat it too. Everything 1996 and newer uses the obd2 port here. Our local laws of tailpipe monitoring could be changed at any time by politicians and they could wipe out any car older than 96 on our roads instantly. Look at Cali and the 2035 law passed. No reason it cant go instant instead of planned to future, and can happen anywhere.

Epa laws are federal. Doesn’t matter if your local authorities choose to not make you smog all the time or not. When they decides to enforce in your area or on you individually, they will. On the PUBLIC front they are chasing down companies.
 
It's about diesel emissions being visible, gassers are not, that is why diesels are targeted. Thank all the diesel ricers out oraling blacking out the roadways for this. So I know in 2011 GM went to an uncrackable ECM, Cummins dud similar, but as we seen the aftermarket found a way. So in 2017 GM went even further with a patented security protocol that was higher than nsa level, but again, the aftermarket found a way(though be it expensive this time). They are bound and determined to stop tuning, plain and simple. They have pressured the manufacturers to do everything possible, but it's not working. This latest push I believe is the manufacturers pushing back, saying they have went above snd beyond to stop it, but they can only do so much. So now they're trying to put the blame on the owners because until now it has been the manufacturers and tuners getting all the blame.
 
Yup blame the morons putting #0 fuel plates in their P-pumps and 150 over injectors on their Cummins and then going out and rolling coal everywhere to make up for their small penis sizes for the crack down on diesel emissions. Everybody rolling coal with their stacked boxes, dirty tunes and mis-sized turbos were railing on Gale Banks - and his preaching clean exhaust was maximum power with no wasted fuel - for being out of touch and too expensive for his upgrades for the power they produced. But in the end, because of all the R&D time and money he put in, he was proved right by not only receiving CARB approval on his upgrade kits, but also being used by OEMs to produce specialized platforms like Marine Duramaxes or Military upgraded power plants. Meanwhile, aftermarket tuner manufacturers like a certain one out of Utah were shut down for their powerful, but filthy, tunes and kits that defeated factory pollution equipment.
 
Husker6.5 said:
Yup blame the morons putting #0 fuel plates in their P-pumps and 150 over injectors on their Cummins and then going out and rolling coal everywhere to make up for their small penis sizes for the crack down on diesel emissions. Everybody rolling coal with their stacked boxes, dirty tunes and mis-sized turbos were railing on Gale Banks - and his preaching clean exhaust was maximum power with no wasted fuel - for being out of touch and too expensive for his upgrades for the power they produced. But in the end, because of all the R&D time and money he put in, he was proved right by not only receiving CARB approval on his upgrade kits, but also being used by OEMs to produce specialized platforms like Marine Duramaxes or Military upgraded power plants. Meanwhile, aftermarket tuner manufacturers like a certain one out of Utah were shut down for their powerful, but filthy, tunes and kits that defeated factory pollution equipment.
Click to expand...
I would NOT put Gale on a platform, several insiders have come out and said he is a driving force behind the latest crackdowns. It makes sense for him to do it, most don't have carb approval, he does, so he uses the epa to drive all his competition out of business. I don't condone those bellowing out clouds of soot, but I also don't agree with ratting out your competition because you haven't been relevant in over a decade until you started a new social media advertisement campaign trash talking diff covers.
 
Never put Gale on a platform, Ferm. Just saying that there was a right way and wrong way to go about getting more power and staying within the emissions rules, which I agree with. Dumping in tons of fuel willy-nilly isn't. Maintaining a clean burn, while adding fuel, is. Yes, Banks has CARB and EPA certification, that comes with spending the money on R&D and equipment. Of course, that didn't stop a major OEM manufacturer who did, Volkswagen, from getting busted trying to cheat the system, either. Others in the aftermarket tried to seat-of-the-pants shortcut to save those expenses and got nailed for it, either by dirty tunes or deleting emissions equipment like exhaust air injection soot traps or DEF, for example. Since I highly doubt that I'll ever own a DI diesel vehicle newer than 2011 of any kind, not my fight. I'll be happy with my old IDI that I can run on damn near anything and keep what's coming out the tailpipe clear as long as I don't really romp on it.
 
Cannot blame Banks if he is a driving force in crack-downs. Competition is completion and when some want to play outside the field, it is fair game to cry foul. So if a business (or individual) gets busted for playing in the dirty diesel arena, that is like an Indy 500 wannabe complaining of a speeding ticket. Or, the same Indy 500 wannabe complaining about the neighbor whom invited LE to sit in their driveway to catch the wannabe. In the end, if we do not like a law / regulation, the best course of action is to get into the political process and get enough people voted into power to change things. Flouting the law and complaining about getting stung is a fools game. Just say-in ;)

If there is one thing that will really help the diesel community, is to make the emissions process easier to demonstrate that a change to the platform is actually better for the environment than when it was OE. Doing this would clean-up a lot of older diesels *today*. But with the heavy regulation of putting a large burden on owners to simply comply with OE configurations and not touch anything, the same regulators looking to clean-up the diesel engine are standing in the way of an average individual from actually doing so.


And about the drive for un-crackable computers, am not so convinced that it was purely to satisfy emissions. Manufacturers are spending a LOT of money trying to put independent repair shops out of business by way of forcing owners to go back to the manufacturer for repair and hiding behind emissions as the excuse. I do know that there is a law suit (or more) flowing through the courts on this and that one jurisdiction somewhere in New England just put into law a right to repair without forcing the owner to go back to the manufacturer. By the way, this effect is not limited to vehicle manufacturers and the 'fruit' IT company does it too (but without the emissions excuse).
 
JayTheCPA said:
CARB is standing in the way of cleaning-up older diesels and basically requiring that they pollute just as much as the day they were made.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. Don't forget CARB has made out of state business owners use DPF equipped trucks to run on CA roads. You can retrofit some old diesels to a DPF Tier whatever, but, the cost is insane. There is a lawsuit going on over violations of Interstate Commerce... At the end of the day our 6.2/6.5 vehicles are illegal to use to do business in CA as an out of state business. I would NOT deliver parts or RV's to CA for this reason and that was almost a decade ago.

So CA is making you take the old diesel off the roads OR Retrofit them to the cleaner DPF emissions equipment. CA businesses were, of course, given exceptions.

We can now thank GM for being cowards now as they have just changed sides on CARB. :finger:

gmauthority.com

GM No Longer Backs Trump’s Legal Fight Over California Emissions Standards

GM calls on other automakers to withdraw their support as well.
gmauthority.com gmauthority.com
 
The issue with CARB is, like many other gun point agencies, they start out getting support by promoting and promising one thing then expanding and changing. Some of the original stuff made sense and some went to far-nkw almost all of it went too far. based on individual opinion of course.

GM decision ofdropping the fight in cali is like every other decision they make= $$$ and political under tones.

They now realize they can be one of if not the biggest volume vehicle sells in cali. Tesla/Musk was set to clean up but got fed up with the issues and pulls out as much as he can. Problem is underground boring and more importantly space landings to & from cali is a must. And he wont kill profit from spaceX to fund tesla enough to meet full market demand. His his passion is Mars not making the most cars. So Gm will fill the electric void since it is now obvious Elon won’t.

While Ford’s operation has always been sell the most, and Dodge brothers set theirs at wanting the best, GM just focused on being near the best for most stuff and best in one or two of 10 categories at a time in order to build a conglomeration the size of godzilla. They really dont give a crap about people- even us die hard chevy guys. Hell, the Ivey memo is best evidence of that.

And the lawsuit against Cali that happened to be with Trump on the same side was because they were going to loose out on millions of car sells in Cali and no other reason. GM probably did the same thing they have been doing for decades- uust like they did with making the ds4- back door agreement to lead the way to “better emissions” and get a fst gubmint check or gubmint Guarantee of buying X amount of cars in exchange for them losing money the first year or two in development. Why they jumped ship on Trump right now?- easy- no loose situation if they make deal with Biden crew. Trump wins election in the courts and He still pushes to over rule the no gas cars law so GM still sells millions of gas cars. Biden wins and GM will wind up with monster deal of R&D $ or Gubmint contract sells thru GSA in Cali. If Trump wins and drops lawsuit completely, they are now in bed with Cali governor and crew so they still get the steak dinner, just no gravy. Simple smart business. Is it Honest or show integrity? Nope. Is 10% of their customer base going to leave them over it? Nope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top