Emissions Laws FAQ by Katech Performance
Administrator
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 66,409
Likes: 2,061
From: Bel Air (by way of Fort Worth, TX) Maryland
St. Jude Donor '12 thru '21
well I completely respect your view but too disagree with a couple of the sections...to download music....I highly disagree....ever since Napster came along and that whole debate, it has become a lot easier to find music. Once was just the one major company that people had to deal with....now there are tons and not only is it easier for music.....music is a thing of the past, now its full dvds, programs/applications, etc etc....Iam by no means condoning this type of action, just pointing out it has gotten a lot easier since the days of Napster.
As far as the cars go....I understand fully what the EPA is trying to accomplish but think they are barking up the wrong tree going after guys with literally brand new cars that throw next to nothing for emissions. You ever see some of the tractor trailors and diesels driving down the road....or what about the states that don't even test for emissions....makes no sense to me....We all breath the same air...its no different from one state to the next...If we are going to have rules we need to level out the playing field. Quit hurting people in one state by going super strict when you have another state that has no restrictions at all.
As far as the cars go....I understand fully what the EPA is trying to accomplish but think they are barking up the wrong tree going after guys with literally brand new cars that throw next to nothing for emissions. You ever see some of the tractor trailors and diesels driving down the road....or what about the states that don't even test for emissions....makes no sense to me....We all breath the same air...its no different from one state to the next...If we are going to have rules we need to level out the playing field. Quit hurting people in one state by going super strict when you have another state that has no restrictions at all.
As to the second half of your post, its only a matter of time before all 50 states adopt California standards (a lot already do to some extent) and starts to enforce them. OBDIII may become mandatory in the near future (C7?) and it is already somewhat difficult to defeat the environmental controls on your car OBDIII and the EPA will make that even harder. In fact it already is judging by the "requests for information" you see posted up on this forum.
My position on this issue is that if you want to take the cats off your car for race-only purposes, I have no problem with it. For a street driven car, I have a BIG problem with that (and so does the EPA and reputable tuners, etc....)
Last edited by Chemdawg99; Jun 8, 2008 at 03:45 PM.
Administrator
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 66,409
Likes: 2,061
From: Bel Air (by way of Fort Worth, TX) Maryland
St. Jude Donor '12 thru '21
Very interesting article on OBDIII
BEYOND OBDII
OBDII is a very sophisticated and capable system for detecting emissions problems. But when it comes to getting motorists to fix emission problems, it’s no more effective than OBDI. Unless there’s some means of enforcement, such as checking the MIL light during a mandatory inspection, OBDII is just another idiot light.
Currently under development are plans for OBDIII, which would take OBDII a step further by adding telemetry. Using miniature radio transponder technology similar to that which is already being used for automatic electronic toll collection systems, an OBDIII-equipped vehicle would be able to report emissions problems directly to a regulatory agency. The transponder would communicate the vehicle VIN number and any diagnostic codes that were present. The system could be set up to automatically report an emissions problem via a cellular or satellite link the instant the MIL light comes on, or to answer a query from a cellular, satellite or roadside signal as to its current emissions performance status.
What makes this approach so attractive to regulators is its effectiveness and cost savings. Under the current system, the entire vehicle fleet in an area or state has to be inspected once every year or two to identify the 30% or so vehicles that have emissions problems. With remote monitoring via the onboard telemetry on an OBDIII-equipped vehicle, the need for periodic inspections could be eliminated because only those vehicles that reported problems would have to be tested.
On one hand, OBDIII with its telemetry reporting of emission problems would save consumers the inconvenience and cost of having to subject their vehicle to an annual or biennial emissions test. As long as their vehicle reported no emission problems, there’d be no need to test it. On the other hand, should an emissions problem be detected, it would be much harder to avoid having it fixed—which is the goal of all clean air programs anyway. By zeroing in on the vehicles that are actually causing the most pollution, significant gains could be made in improving our nation’s air quality. But as it is now, polluters may escape detection and repair for up to two years in areas that have biennial inspections. And in areas that have no inspection programs, there’s no way to identify such vehicles. OBDIII would change all that.
According to Mark Carlock with California’s Air Resources Board, the technology exists now to make OBDIII possible. "The idea is to streamline the inspection process by only inspecting those vehicles that really need it." Carlock says the technology to do so is "no big deal." But he concedes that it would be the model year 2000 at the soonest before OBDIII might actually be required on new vehicles.
A prototype system built by GM Hughes Electronics has already been evaluated by ARB that uses a roadside transmitter to interrogate vehicles as they pass by. The system uses ultra low power 10 milliwatt receiver stations and 1 milliwatt transmitters (which is about 1,000 times less power than a typical cellular telephone) with a broadcast frequency of 915 Mhz. The system is reportedly capable of retrieving information from 8 lanes of bumper-to-bumper traffic whizzing by at speeds up to 100 mph!
When the vehicle receiver hears the query signal from a stationary or portable roadside transmitter, it transmits back an answer in the form of the vehicle’s 17-digit VIN number plus an "okay" signal or any trouble codes that may be present. The information can then be used to identify vehicles that are in violation of clean air statutes so a notice can be sent that repairs and/or smog testing is required. Or, the information could be used on the spot to identify vehicles for a pullover roadside emissions check or issuing an emissions citation.
The projected cost of such a system would be $50 per vehicle, says Carlock, based on similar transponders that are in use for electronic toll collecting. The transponders are about the size of a small calculator.
The same basic approach could also be used with existing cellular phone links (local station networks) and/or satellite systems. To keep motorists from tampering with or disabling their telemetry systems, vehicles could be interrogated randomly or on a scheduled basis to monitor their condition. The OBDIII telemetry could also be combined with global positioning system (GPS) technology to document or monitor the whereabouts of vehicles.
Orbiting 11,000 miles above the earth’s surface are 24 military satellites that make up the Navstar global positioning system. By timing radio signals from these satellites, the position of a vehicle, boat or plane anywhere on the earth can be fixed within a few meters. The GPS system is currently used by many fleets for tracking the whereabouts of their vehicles as well as by onboard navigation systems for pinpointing a vehicle’s location on an electronic map.
The advantages of using a satellite based telemetry system for OBDIII rather than a roadside system are:
Greater coverage of the entire vehicle population for more accurate surveillance. Vehicles could be monitored and queried no matter where they were, even while sitting in a garage or driveway. There’d be no way to avoid the watchful eye of the emissions police.
Being able to locate vehicles that are in violation of clean air statutes, either for "demographic studies" or to track down and arrest violators.
Being able to monitor the whereabouts of vehicles for purposes other than emissions surveillance such as recovering stolen vehicles (like today’s LoJack anti-theft system), keeping tabs on suspected drug dealers, gang members and other undesirables.
Being able to disable vehicles that belong to emission scofflaws by transmitting a secret code. Law enforcement officers might also be able to use such a code to disable a vehicle fleeing from a crime scene or one that belonged to someone with a backlog of unpaid traffic violations.
The specter of having Big Brother in every engine compartment and driving a vehicle that rats on itself anytime it pollutes is not one that would appeal to many motorists. So the merits of OBDIII would have to be sold to the public based on its cost savings, convenience and ability to make a real difference in air quality. Even so, any serious attempt to require OBDIII in the year 2000 or beyond will run afoul of Fourth Amendment issues over rights of privacy and protection from government search and seizure. Does the government have the right to snoop under your hood anytime it chooses to do so, or to monitor the whereabouts of your vehicle? These issues will have to be debated and resolved before OBDIII stands a chance of being accepted. Given the current political climate, such drastic changes seem unlikely.
Another change that might come with OBDIII would be even closer scrutiny of vehicle emissions. The misfire detection algorithms currently required by OBDII only watch for misfires during driving conditions that occur during the federal driving cycle, which covers idle to 55 mph and moderate acceleration. It does not monitor misfires during wide open throttle acceleration. Full range misfire detection will be required for 1997 models. OBDIII could go even further by requiring "fly-by-wire" throttle controls to reduce the possibility of misfires on the coming generation of low emission and ultra low emission vehicles.
So until OBDIII winds its way through the regulatory process, all we have to worry about is diagnosing and repairing OBDII-equipped vehicles and all the non-OBD vehicles that came before them.
Pretty soon, big brother will KNOW when you take the cats off.
OBDII is a very sophisticated and capable system for detecting emissions problems. But when it comes to getting motorists to fix emission problems, it’s no more effective than OBDI. Unless there’s some means of enforcement, such as checking the MIL light during a mandatory inspection, OBDII is just another idiot light.
Currently under development are plans for OBDIII, which would take OBDII a step further by adding telemetry. Using miniature radio transponder technology similar to that which is already being used for automatic electronic toll collection systems, an OBDIII-equipped vehicle would be able to report emissions problems directly to a regulatory agency. The transponder would communicate the vehicle VIN number and any diagnostic codes that were present. The system could be set up to automatically report an emissions problem via a cellular or satellite link the instant the MIL light comes on, or to answer a query from a cellular, satellite or roadside signal as to its current emissions performance status.
What makes this approach so attractive to regulators is its effectiveness and cost savings. Under the current system, the entire vehicle fleet in an area or state has to be inspected once every year or two to identify the 30% or so vehicles that have emissions problems. With remote monitoring via the onboard telemetry on an OBDIII-equipped vehicle, the need for periodic inspections could be eliminated because only those vehicles that reported problems would have to be tested.
On one hand, OBDIII with its telemetry reporting of emission problems would save consumers the inconvenience and cost of having to subject their vehicle to an annual or biennial emissions test. As long as their vehicle reported no emission problems, there’d be no need to test it. On the other hand, should an emissions problem be detected, it would be much harder to avoid having it fixed—which is the goal of all clean air programs anyway. By zeroing in on the vehicles that are actually causing the most pollution, significant gains could be made in improving our nation’s air quality. But as it is now, polluters may escape detection and repair for up to two years in areas that have biennial inspections. And in areas that have no inspection programs, there’s no way to identify such vehicles. OBDIII would change all that.
According to Mark Carlock with California’s Air Resources Board, the technology exists now to make OBDIII possible. "The idea is to streamline the inspection process by only inspecting those vehicles that really need it." Carlock says the technology to do so is "no big deal." But he concedes that it would be the model year 2000 at the soonest before OBDIII might actually be required on new vehicles.
A prototype system built by GM Hughes Electronics has already been evaluated by ARB that uses a roadside transmitter to interrogate vehicles as they pass by. The system uses ultra low power 10 milliwatt receiver stations and 1 milliwatt transmitters (which is about 1,000 times less power than a typical cellular telephone) with a broadcast frequency of 915 Mhz. The system is reportedly capable of retrieving information from 8 lanes of bumper-to-bumper traffic whizzing by at speeds up to 100 mph!
When the vehicle receiver hears the query signal from a stationary or portable roadside transmitter, it transmits back an answer in the form of the vehicle’s 17-digit VIN number plus an "okay" signal or any trouble codes that may be present. The information can then be used to identify vehicles that are in violation of clean air statutes so a notice can be sent that repairs and/or smog testing is required. Or, the information could be used on the spot to identify vehicles for a pullover roadside emissions check or issuing an emissions citation.
The projected cost of such a system would be $50 per vehicle, says Carlock, based on similar transponders that are in use for electronic toll collecting. The transponders are about the size of a small calculator.
The same basic approach could also be used with existing cellular phone links (local station networks) and/or satellite systems. To keep motorists from tampering with or disabling their telemetry systems, vehicles could be interrogated randomly or on a scheduled basis to monitor their condition. The OBDIII telemetry could also be combined with global positioning system (GPS) technology to document or monitor the whereabouts of vehicles.
Orbiting 11,000 miles above the earth’s surface are 24 military satellites that make up the Navstar global positioning system. By timing radio signals from these satellites, the position of a vehicle, boat or plane anywhere on the earth can be fixed within a few meters. The GPS system is currently used by many fleets for tracking the whereabouts of their vehicles as well as by onboard navigation systems for pinpointing a vehicle’s location on an electronic map.
The advantages of using a satellite based telemetry system for OBDIII rather than a roadside system are:
Greater coverage of the entire vehicle population for more accurate surveillance. Vehicles could be monitored and queried no matter where they were, even while sitting in a garage or driveway. There’d be no way to avoid the watchful eye of the emissions police.
Being able to locate vehicles that are in violation of clean air statutes, either for "demographic studies" or to track down and arrest violators.
Being able to monitor the whereabouts of vehicles for purposes other than emissions surveillance such as recovering stolen vehicles (like today’s LoJack anti-theft system), keeping tabs on suspected drug dealers, gang members and other undesirables.
Being able to disable vehicles that belong to emission scofflaws by transmitting a secret code. Law enforcement officers might also be able to use such a code to disable a vehicle fleeing from a crime scene or one that belonged to someone with a backlog of unpaid traffic violations.
The specter of having Big Brother in every engine compartment and driving a vehicle that rats on itself anytime it pollutes is not one that would appeal to many motorists. So the merits of OBDIII would have to be sold to the public based on its cost savings, convenience and ability to make a real difference in air quality. Even so, any serious attempt to require OBDIII in the year 2000 or beyond will run afoul of Fourth Amendment issues over rights of privacy and protection from government search and seizure. Does the government have the right to snoop under your hood anytime it chooses to do so, or to monitor the whereabouts of your vehicle? These issues will have to be debated and resolved before OBDIII stands a chance of being accepted. Given the current political climate, such drastic changes seem unlikely.
Another change that might come with OBDIII would be even closer scrutiny of vehicle emissions. The misfire detection algorithms currently required by OBDII only watch for misfires during driving conditions that occur during the federal driving cycle, which covers idle to 55 mph and moderate acceleration. It does not monitor misfires during wide open throttle acceleration. Full range misfire detection will be required for 1997 models. OBDIII could go even further by requiring "fly-by-wire" throttle controls to reduce the possibility of misfires on the coming generation of low emission and ultra low emission vehicles.
So until OBDIII winds its way through the regulatory process, all we have to worry about is diagnosing and repairing OBDII-equipped vehicles and all the non-OBD vehicles that came before them.
Pretty soon, big brother will KNOW when you take the cats off.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,188
Likes: 10
From: New Smyrna Beach Florida
Interesting. However as has been stated before, they are barking up the wrong tree. I see hordes of POS cars out there able to get from A to B but spewing pollutants. The gub't could target the newer more sophistcated cars such as C5 and C6 vettes but these cars are univerally well cared for and like new. As far as CARB goes, they have been doing there thing for decades and I pretty much ignore them, glad I don't live out there. Where I live, they have eliminated the emissions testing. Very expensive for Big Brother to regulate everything on the planet. I have worked as a gub't engineer for decades and I can tell you that allthough there are lots of intelligent working for Uncle Sam, the gub't (as we like to call it) as a whole is very stupid. Additionally, I have seen a great reduction in gub't intervention in recent years, just too expensive to stick their nose in everyones business. I don't think they will have enough people to monitor all this stuff. Personally I run cats, just ridiculous to to run without them on the public roads. I'm going to continue to modify as I see fit. 
Administrator
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 66,409
Likes: 2,061
From: Bel Air (by way of Fort Worth, TX) Maryland
St. Jude Donor '12 thru '21
Interesting. However as has been stated before, they are barking up the wrong tree. I see hordes of POS cars out there able to get from A to B but spewing pollutants. The gub't could target the newer more sophistcated cars such as C5 and C6 vettes but these cars are univerally well cared for and like new. As far as CARB goes, they have been doing there thing for decades and I pretty much ignore them, glad I don't live out there. Where I live, they have eliminated the emissions testing. Very expensive for Big Brother to regulate everything on the planet. I have worked as a gub't engineer for decades and I can tell you that allthough there are lots of intelligent working for Uncle Sam, the gub't (as we like to call it) as a whole is very stupid. Additionally, I have seen a great reduction in gub't intervention in recent years, just too expensive to stick their nose in everyones business. I don't think they will have enough people to monitor all this stuff. Personally I run cats, just ridiculous to to run without them on the public roads. I'm going to continue to modify as I see fit.
Original Founding Member!
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 9,037
Likes: 88
From: Granby, MA
Cruise-In 1, 3, 9. 10 & 11 Veteran
well ill agree with everybody on this
I definitely agree with everybody as far as gutting or removing your cats....just plain, I don't understand why anybody would do that to a street driven car.
1. No Cats: Your car smells like rotten eggs.
2. No Cats: Been proven it does not provide any significant hp increase over stock or high flow cats.
3. With Cats: Keeps down that dreaded exhaust drone everybody complains about.
So yeh....I don't know why anybody would NOT want cats on a street car, whether the goverment says you have to have them or not.
1. No Cats: Your car smells like rotten eggs.
2. No Cats: Been proven it does not provide any significant hp increase over stock or high flow cats.
3. With Cats: Keeps down that dreaded exhaust drone everybody complains about.
So yeh....I don't know why anybody would NOT want cats on a street car, whether the goverment says you have to have them or not.
Administrator
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 66,409
Likes: 2,061
From: Bel Air (by way of Fort Worth, TX) Maryland
St. Jude Donor '12 thru '21
I definitely agree with everybody as far as gutting or removing your cats....just plain, I don't understand why anybody would do that to a street driven car.
1. No Cats: Your car smells like rotten eggs.
2. No Cats: Been proven it does not provide any significant hp increase over stock or high flow cats.
3. With Cats: Keeps down that dreaded exhaust drone everybody complains about.
So yeh....I don't know why anybody would NOT want cats on a street car, whether the goverment says you have to have them or not.
1. No Cats: Your car smells like rotten eggs.
2. No Cats: Been proven it does not provide any significant hp increase over stock or high flow cats.
3. With Cats: Keeps down that dreaded exhaust drone everybody complains about.
So yeh....I don't know why anybody would NOT want cats on a street car, whether the goverment says you have to have them or not.
Original Founding Member!
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 9,037
Likes: 88
From: Granby, MA
Cruise-In 1, 3, 9. 10 & 11 Veteran
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvette Engines RANKED by Peak Torque (70+ Years of Muscle!)
Joe Kucinski
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Top 10 C9 Corvette MUST-HAVES to Fix These C8 Generation Flaws!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Revolutionary 'Corvette Firsts' Most People Don't Know
Joe Kucinski
5 Reasons to Upgrade to an LS6-Powered Corvette; 5 Reasons to Stay LT2
Michael S. Palmer
Instructor
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
From: lockport IL
I definitely agree with everybody as far as gutting or removing your cats....just plain, I don't understand why anybody would do that to a street driven car.
1. No Cats: Your car smells like rotten eggs.
2. No Cats: Been proven it does not provide any significant hp increase over stock or high flow cats.
3. With Cats: Keeps down that dreaded exhaust drone everybody complains about.
So yeh....I don't know why anybody would NOT want cats on a street car, whether the goverment says you have to have them or not.
1. No Cats: Your car smells like rotten eggs.
2. No Cats: Been proven it does not provide any significant hp increase over stock or high flow cats.
3. With Cats: Keeps down that dreaded exhaust drone everybody complains about.
So yeh....I don't know why anybody would NOT want cats on a street car, whether the goverment says you have to have them or not.
1. ive never smelt rotten eggs on my car
2. maybe not but i wanted as loud as possible
3. i like it loud
Race Director
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 15,960
Likes: 21
From: West Norriton PA
St. Jude Donor '08
Administrator
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 66,409
Likes: 2,061
From: Bel Air (by way of Fort Worth, TX) Maryland
St. Jude Donor '12 thru '21
Safety Car
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,933
Likes: 30
From: San Rafael CA
Depends on your state laws also .... in California if the "high-flow" cats have a CARB "sticker" (E.O.) they'd be OK .... unfortunately since there are no certified replacement cats for a C5 Corvette other than the OEM cats ... high-flow cats on a C5 are illegal in California.
Racer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 431
Likes: 5
From: Chico CA
Depends on your state laws also .... in California if the "high-flow" cats have a CARB "sticker" (E.O.) they'd be OK .... unfortunately since there are no certified replacement cats for a C5 Corvette other than the OEM cats ... high-flow cats on a C5 are illegal in California.
Thanks!
Team Owner
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 22,025
Likes: 192
From: At the beach in little Rhody
Do they list a CARB #? Curious as my QTP's came with these.
Safety Car
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,933
Likes: 30
From: San Rafael CA
Nope ..... those cats are NOT legal in CA ....
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/aftermk...es/amquery.php
scroll down to the second search box ..... select "By Manufacturer" and in the select box select "OBD2 Catalytic Converter" then click SEARCH ... you will see every non-OEM catalyst legal for sale in the state .... there are ZERO listings for Random Technology and ZERO listings for Corvette or LS1 or anything close to our vehicles.
The two major "players" in the E.O. catalyst database are "Car Sound" (which is the Corporate name for Magnaflow .... http://www.car-sound.com/ ) and "Miller" ( http://www.millercat.com/index.shtml ). The Magnaflow website shows ZERO Magnaflow catalysts for the C5 that are CA legal, same with the Miller site.
I am constantly amazed at how much stuff I see listed for sale as "50 state legal" when, unless you are counting in Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, etc. are NOT. Whether it is sloppy marketing or intentional false advertising I don't know ...... but the fact is the cost of getting an E.O. issued is VERY high .... and there are only a handful of parts for a C5 that have an E.O. issued for them.
At least there are some vendors such as Magnaflow who seem to make an honest effort to get an E.O. issued when they can, and also make it clear what parts have an E.O. issued and which don't. Unfortunately many other vendors/distributors aren't as forthcoming.
Caveat Emptor
Last edited by BlackZ06; Jun 9, 2008 at 06:44 AM.
Team Owner
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 54,204
Likes: 180
From: S.W. Ohio. . . . . . NRA Life Member
sadly; too many people stood by and said nothing as the environ-mental cases took -what was- simple stewardship of the earth... and elevated it to crazy psychotic extremes.
And school children are being indoctrinated by the "emotions" of the environmental-cases; facts need not be stated - nor are they important anymore.
And school children are being indoctrinated by the "emotions" of the environmental-cases; facts need not be stated - nor are they important anymore.
Thread Starter
Premium Supporting Vendor
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 13,975
Likes: 980
From: Clinton Township MI
C7 of Year Finalist (track prepared) 2019
High flow cats are still illegal in this instance. If your cats fail and/or your car is over 5 years old they need to be replaced with a model-specific catalytic converter approved for the vehicle, not the universal cats that come with header systems.
6th Gear
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Hello Everyone,
Just wanted to give kudos to 'BlackZ06' for his intelligent take on what electrics can do for clean air, independance from foreign oil, boosting our economy with high tech jobs, and last but not least 'fun factor'! Though I was raised on muscle cars and hot imports, the feel of 772 ft. lbs. of electric motor torque at 'zero' rpm has plastered what we 'EVers' call the 'EV Grin' on my face permanantly!
Some of the most engaging guys we run up against at the 1/4 mile drag track, are the Vette guys, and most all of them are great sports! I am a big fan of the 505 hp Z06, but will be going out soon to get even with the guy who got past us last year with his Z06 in a showcased battle at Portland's 'Street Warriorz' between my electric Datsun 1200 and his Vette when we had 'technical difficulties' that had us shutting down and coasting across the finish line to a slow 12.0 ET :-(
With this year's new lithium pack, we are pretty confident our fully street legal - drive to the track - electric Datsun will run 10s.
Ayway, thanks for the interest.
See Ya...John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland
Just wanted to give kudos to 'BlackZ06' for his intelligent take on what electrics can do for clean air, independance from foreign oil, boosting our economy with high tech jobs, and last but not least 'fun factor'! Though I was raised on muscle cars and hot imports, the feel of 772 ft. lbs. of electric motor torque at 'zero' rpm has plastered what we 'EVers' call the 'EV Grin' on my face permanantly!
Some of the most engaging guys we run up against at the 1/4 mile drag track, are the Vette guys, and most all of them are great sports! I am a big fan of the 505 hp Z06, but will be going out soon to get even with the guy who got past us last year with his Z06 in a showcased battle at Portland's 'Street Warriorz' between my electric Datsun 1200 and his Vette when we had 'technical difficulties' that had us shutting down and coasting across the finish line to a slow 12.0 ET :-(
With this year's new lithium pack, we are pretty confident our fully street legal - drive to the track - electric Datsun will run 10s.
Ayway, thanks for the interest.
See Ya...John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland
Safety Car
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,933
Likes: 30
From: San Rafael CA
PlasmaBoy
Thank you ... but you scare me .... how did you ever figure out that we were talking about you here ... was it the link to the picture that I posted that gave it away ???
You are doing some VERY interesting stuff ..... people like you are the pioneers of this upcoming technology (and remember, pioneers are the guys with arrows in their backs .... ) and there is NO DOUBT that the electric motor is the ONLY reasonable answer to our need for a cost effective transportation system.
What a lot of people don't think about are issues like .....
* Oil is not needed just as a fuel source (gasoline) ... it is the source for plastics and many other feedstocks (chemicals) used in every industrial process in the world. Many pharmaceuticals use chemicals based on oil ..... Fly over the Mississippi river area between New Orleans and Baton Rouge ..... chemical plant after chemical plant all using oil from the Gulf as their source product. A gallon of gasoline burned today is a gallon less source product in the future for important chemicals.
* Right now many people believe that hydrogen fuel cells will be the "answer" to our "problem" ..... but where do you get the hydrogen ????? Ironically, the "cheapest" and most efficient way to get "clean" hydrogen is to "crack" oil .... oil is basically a gigantic pile of Hydrogen and Carbon atoms, and it is "easier" to break those bonds than, say, breaking the Hydrogen - Oxygen bonds in water (H2O) ... oil may well be the source of the Hydrogen for our fuel cells.
OK ... I'll stop now .... someone could/should write a book on this .... put soap box away .....
Again, kudos to you PlasmaBoy
Thank you ... but you scare me .... how did you ever figure out that we were talking about you here ... was it the link to the picture that I posted that gave it away ???
You are doing some VERY interesting stuff ..... people like you are the pioneers of this upcoming technology (and remember, pioneers are the guys with arrows in their backs ....
) and there is NO DOUBT that the electric motor is the ONLY reasonable answer to our need for a cost effective transportation system.What a lot of people don't think about are issues like .....
* Oil is not needed just as a fuel source (gasoline) ... it is the source for plastics and many other feedstocks (chemicals) used in every industrial process in the world. Many pharmaceuticals use chemicals based on oil ..... Fly over the Mississippi river area between New Orleans and Baton Rouge ..... chemical plant after chemical plant all using oil from the Gulf as their source product. A gallon of gasoline burned today is a gallon less source product in the future for important chemicals.
* Right now many people believe that hydrogen fuel cells will be the "answer" to our "problem" ..... but where do you get the hydrogen ????? Ironically, the "cheapest" and most efficient way to get "clean" hydrogen is to "crack" oil .... oil is basically a gigantic pile of Hydrogen and Carbon atoms, and it is "easier" to break those bonds than, say, breaking the Hydrogen - Oxygen bonds in water (H2O) ... oil may well be the source of the Hydrogen for our fuel cells.
OK ... I'll stop now .... someone could/should write a book on this .... put soap box away .....
Again, kudos to you PlasmaBoy
Last edited by BlackZ06; Jun 9, 2008 at 11:18 AM.
Administrator
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 66,409
Likes: 2,061
From: Bel Air (by way of Fort Worth, TX) Maryland
St. Jude Donor '12 thru '21
Hello Everyone,
Just wanted to give kudos to 'BlackZ06' for his intelligent take on what electrics can do for clean air, independance from foreign oil, boosting our economy with high tech jobs, and last but not least 'fun factor'! Though I was raised on muscle cars and hot imports, the feel of 772 ft. lbs. of electric motor torque at 'zero' rpm has plastered what we 'EVers' call the 'EV Grin' on my face permanantly!
Some of the most engaging guys we run up against at the 1/4 mile drag track, are the Vette guys, and most all of them are great sports! I am a big fan of the 505 hp Z06, but will be going out soon to get even with the guy who got past us last year with his Z06 in a showcased battle at Portland's 'Street Warriorz' between my electric Datsun 1200 and his Vette when we had 'technical difficulties' that had us shutting down and coasting across the finish line to a slow 12.0 ET :-(
With this year's new lithium pack, we are pretty confident our fully street legal - drive to the track - electric Datsun will run 10s.
Ayway, thanks for the interest.
See Ya...John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland
Just wanted to give kudos to 'BlackZ06' for his intelligent take on what electrics can do for clean air, independance from foreign oil, boosting our economy with high tech jobs, and last but not least 'fun factor'! Though I was raised on muscle cars and hot imports, the feel of 772 ft. lbs. of electric motor torque at 'zero' rpm has plastered what we 'EVers' call the 'EV Grin' on my face permanantly!
Some of the most engaging guys we run up against at the 1/4 mile drag track, are the Vette guys, and most all of them are great sports! I am a big fan of the 505 hp Z06, but will be going out soon to get even with the guy who got past us last year with his Z06 in a showcased battle at Portland's 'Street Warriorz' between my electric Datsun 1200 and his Vette when we had 'technical difficulties' that had us shutting down and coasting across the finish line to a slow 12.0 ET :-(
With this year's new lithium pack, we are pretty confident our fully street legal - drive to the track - electric Datsun will run 10s.
Ayway, thanks for the interest.
See Ya...John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland
PlasmaBoy
Thank you ... but you scare me .... how did you ever figure out that we were talking about you here ... was it the link to the picture that I posted that gave it away ???
You are doing some VERY interesting stuff ..... people like you are the pioneers of this upcoming technology (and remember, pioneers are the guys with arrows in their backs .... ) and there is NO DOUBT that the electric motor is the ONLY reasonable answer to our need for a cost effective transportation system.
What a lot of people don't think about are issues like .....
* Oil is not needed just as a fuel source (gasoline) ... it is the source for plastics and many other feedstocks (chemicals) used in every industrial process in the world. Many pharmaceuticals use chemicals based on oil ..... Fly over the Mississippi river area between New Orleans and Baton Rouge ..... chemical plant after chemical plant all using oil from the Gulf as their source product. A gallon of gasoline burned today is a gallon less source product in the future for important chemicals.
* Right now many people believe that hydrogen fuel cells will be the "answer" to our "problem" ..... but where do you get the hydrogen ????? Ironically, the "cheapest" and most efficient way to get "clean" hydrogen is to "crack" oil .... oil is basically a gigantic pile of Hydrogen and Carbon atoms, and it is "easier" to break those bonds than, say, breaking the Hydrogen - Oxygen bonds in water (H2O) ... oil may well be the source of the Hydrogen for our fuel cells.
OK ... I'll stop now .... someone could/should write a book on this .... put soap box away .....
Again, kudos to you PlasmaBoy
Thank you ... but you scare me .... how did you ever figure out that we were talking about you here ... was it the link to the picture that I posted that gave it away ???
You are doing some VERY interesting stuff ..... people like you are the pioneers of this upcoming technology (and remember, pioneers are the guys with arrows in their backs ....
) and there is NO DOUBT that the electric motor is the ONLY reasonable answer to our need for a cost effective transportation system.What a lot of people don't think about are issues like .....
* Oil is not needed just as a fuel source (gasoline) ... it is the source for plastics and many other feedstocks (chemicals) used in every industrial process in the world. Many pharmaceuticals use chemicals based on oil ..... Fly over the Mississippi river area between New Orleans and Baton Rouge ..... chemical plant after chemical plant all using oil from the Gulf as their source product. A gallon of gasoline burned today is a gallon less source product in the future for important chemicals.
* Right now many people believe that hydrogen fuel cells will be the "answer" to our "problem" ..... but where do you get the hydrogen ????? Ironically, the "cheapest" and most efficient way to get "clean" hydrogen is to "crack" oil .... oil is basically a gigantic pile of Hydrogen and Carbon atoms, and it is "easier" to break those bonds than, say, breaking the Hydrogen - Oxygen bonds in water (H2O) ... oil may well be the source of the Hydrogen for our fuel cells.
OK ... I'll stop now .... someone could/should write a book on this .... put soap box away .....
Again, kudos to you PlasmaBoy
I think we are many years away from electric cars becoming prolific on the world's roads, but we are getting MUCH closer.
There is plenty of oil right here in North America. In fact we get most of our imported oil from Canada and not from the Middle East as the politicians would lead you to believe, but I digress....
We are slowly and begrudgingly moving toward European attitudes and policies. Not sure that is entirely a bad thing......
Last edited by Chemdawg99; Jun 9, 2008 at 04:03 PM.