Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Heads up for California Diesel owners

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Hemet, Ca
    Posts
    77

    Default Heads up for California Diesel owners

    Friends,

    I've been away from the Diesel Page for a long time, tied up in another project (hybrid vehicle training program development) but something new is on the horizon that I thought might be worth mentioning here.

    California begins a light vehicle diesel inspection program on Jan 1st, 2010. All diesel powered vehicles 1998 and newer up to 14000 lbs will have to be inspected in three areas: Diesel smoke at 2-3k rpm (subjective eye-balls only test), visual inspection for non-approved aftermarket devices, and an OBD2 test.

    Things are being hammered out right now by the CARB (California Air Resources Board) and there is still plenty of grey area. For example, while removal of the CAT is plainly a modification and will constitute a failure, what about a 4" exhaust, cat back? Or how about an aftermarket air filter and cold air inlet? Plug in programmers like Edge, Banks, Bully Dog, and Hypertech are specifically pointed out in the CARB material as being non-approved modifications that must be failed. Downloaders that allow for the removal of the program will obviously be impossible to detect.

    Time will tell how this all works out. Some manufacturers, like Banks for example whose headquarters are in California, are working on getting EO numbers that will allow for installation without consequence. I don't know what the rest are doing, but I expect there will be serious consequences for the sale of performance diesel products in California.

    I thought a heads-up here wouldn't hurt. I own a smog station and also sell performance diesel, so I'm going to have a problem figuring out how to correct this issue.
    Owner, Phil's Auto Clinic, Hemet, CA, 1997 Napa/ASE tech of the year

    2001 D/A Crew cab long bed, Edge Juice w/Attitude Monitor, Banks Exhaust, S&B intake, BD exhaust manifold, 152k miles, 2nd set of injectors 06/25/07

    2000 Powerstroke Ford Club cab short bed, Edge Juice w/Attitude Monitor, 5" exhaust, S&B intake

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    10,920

    Arrow

    Thanks for the post.

    It'll be interesting to see how long it takes for the trucking industry to abandon CA.... and rail, manufacturing, and the auto industry, and.....

    Jim

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Klamath falls/keno Oregon
    Posts
    334

    Cool

    i hate this state....i have a small buisness and its tough to make a living here.
    everytime i turn around theres some looser holding his hand out for some tax..

    we have more than our share of liberal socialistic frog kissing sandle wearing sob's running the state into the ground.

    im only 30 miles from nevada...but then they have harry reidless..
    06 1ton 4X4 duramax/6speed ext.cab WT
    Hummer wheels :^)
    Kennedy dual lift pump
    Banks air intake

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    13,094

    Arrow

    I've been watching this since the proposal hit the senate floor. The new rules are progressive, beginning in 2010, so it won't effect everyone at once. The other thing with it is, EVERY proposed rule change is "contingent upon funding". So far, it has not been funded (it was "general funded", but all general funding has been pulled). And for the next 5-10 years, there are very few "programs" that can or will be funded. This program change is not self-supporting (an albatross), so getting a billion dollars for the start up isn't happening, just yet. CARB is one of many CA agencies on the chopping block (Yeah....a real heartbreaker). However, not many changes will be felt in the inner-city areas. They're already years deep in local commercial regulation.

    Anyway, it sucks no matter how you slice it.
    1985 Blazer 6.2
    2001 GMC 2500HD D/A
    dmaxmaverick@thedieselpage.com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    10,920

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DmaxMaverick View Post
    So far, it has not been funded (it was "general funded", but all general funding has been pulled).
    Most programs like this are funded by raising direct & indirect taxes on those who are being regulated..... i.e. higher diesel fuel taxes, registration fee increases, transport fee increases, business license fee increases, and so on.... All consumers are directly or indirectly affected by the increased costs - even the guy who only rides a bike.

    Jim

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    13,094

    Arrow

    No doubt. But, I'm trying to be optimistic, Diesel speaking. The state can't pay its employees (my wife is one), but not much funding was stopped from the special interest programs. New taxes and old have been earmarked just for survival of the state, and the budget is still in the red. SF is the hole in the boat, and Sacramento isn't interested in plugging it. The area I live in is one of the last to be absorbed by the new reg's, but it will eventually get here. Hopefully, CARB will be dissolved, reverting to Federal standards. One can only hope. In the end, it will be the commercial market mostly effected, but that effects all of us.

    And, we even have disposal fees for bicycle tires. I thought about burning a few tires for Earth-Day, but decided I'd better save them. I may need them later for heat, with all this global warming, and all. Oh, well. The tree huggers have no idea what will happen when the masses switch to survival mode. I have a pretty good idea.
    1985 Blazer 6.2
    2001 GMC 2500HD D/A
    dmaxmaverick@thedieselpage.com

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Lubbock TX, USA
    Posts
    4,194

    Default

    I'm starting to think that perhaps citizens in CA should overthrow their state Government... They may also get some help from neighboring states, or from far off (Texas) .

    Thanks for the news update though!

    and, what's performance diesel, seriously?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Hemet, Ca
    Posts
    77

    Default

    [QUOTE=DmaxMaverick;253518]No doubt. But, I'm trying to be optimistic, Diesel speaking. The state can't pay its employees (my wife is one), but not much funding was stopped from the special interest programs. New taxes and old have been earmarked just for survival of the state, and the budget is still in the red. SF is the hole in the boat, and Sacramento isn't interested in plugging it. The area I live in is one of the last to be absorbed by the new reg's, but it will eventually get here. Hopefully, CARB will be dissolved, reverting to Federal standards. One can only hope. In the end, it will be the commercial market mostly effected, but that effects all of us.

    I understand your frustration and I share it. But I don't thing CARB is going away, no matter how deep in do-do this fine state gets into. The "climate-change" liberal mentality control of the legislature is near-total. Now that we have an official stamp of approval from the oval office on climate change, we are doubly doomed.

    The diesel inspection program is of little real cost to the state. It adds a tax ($8.75 per certificate) to the owner of the truck that goes to program administration, plus whatever the cost of the inspection. I don't expect the program will make it by the deadline of January 1st, 2010, but I do expect it within a year from now.
    Owner, Phil's Auto Clinic, Hemet, CA, 1997 Napa/ASE tech of the year

    2001 D/A Crew cab long bed, Edge Juice w/Attitude Monitor, Banks Exhaust, S&B intake, BD exhaust manifold, 152k miles, 2nd set of injectors 06/25/07

    2000 Powerstroke Ford Club cab short bed, Edge Juice w/Attitude Monitor, 5" exhaust, S&B intake

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    10

    Default CA Emmissions Testing

    the biggest problem Ca has is that we are filled with fruits and nuts!> leaving the few of us left to deal with idiots all around us. Between the State senate and the idiot Govenator, we are surrounded by tree huggers and lunnes!..can we arrange Dianna F and BArbara B, along with Arnie and Princes Pinochiolosie to be in the same spot when some nutball illegal or islamo terrorist could blow his ass up with all of them watching and wooring about his "feelings".........maybe al Gore could fly in and jpoin them....geeze.........I have moved much of My business operations to NV...and some in Or,.......now if we can get Harry Reed to dissapear too.........as far as the diesel emmitions thing ,,,,,we have a 1996 Kenworth race car transporter rig, and by moving the ownership to a one rig terminal operation , we have gotten a automatic extension to 2012...and since the Bit and other "inspections" are not sound and consistent, there will be delays....it will start and be a useless process to pay the fee and get the cert and do little else for a few more years........

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Springville, CA
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Things started going wildly wacko in this state when the clowns in Sacramento began worshiping turtles.
    '04 GMC 2500HD LB7 CC SB 4x4, 265/75R17 Dueler Revo, Bilstein HD, Banks Ram-Air, Edge Juice w/Attitude, free-flowing quiet exhaust on the cheap

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    13,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OhmEye View Post
    Things started going wildly wacko in this state when the clowns in Sacramento began worshiping turtles.
    .......Lions, tigers and bears....OhmEye!
    1985 Blazer 6.2
    2001 GMC 2500HD D/A
    dmaxmaverick@thedieselpage.com

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Springville, CA
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DmaxMaverick View Post
    .......Lions, tigers and bears....OhmEye!


    Right you are, it'll likely get worse before it gets better. . .
    '04 GMC 2500HD LB7 CC SB 4x4, 265/75R17 Dueler Revo, Bilstein HD, Banks Ram-Air, Edge Juice w/Attitude, free-flowing quiet exhaust on the cheap

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,233

    Angry

    The PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF MARYLAND is talking about doing all trucks, under and over 26,000 lbs. and all motorcycles and maybe even Historic Vehicles like Hot Rods. Any mod whatsover will cause them to fail the vehicle even an extension on the exhaust like a chrome tip will have to be removed when getting an EP inspec. I was told this last week while I was going back for a retest on my wifes Z3 beamer. Which didn't fail but they wouldn't pass it until we drove it 200 more miles since repairing/replacing two O2 sensors. Go figure! It is about revenue!
    0000000

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    New Hampshire - Live Free or Die
    Posts
    5,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cowboywildbill View Post
    It is about revenue!

    No, I think it's about control.

    Remember when cars were exciting?
    The Constitution needs to be re-read, not re-written!

    If you can't handle Dr. Seuss, how will you handle real life?

    Current oil burners: MB GLK250 BlueTEC
    New ride: MB GLS450 - most stately
    Gone but not forgotten: '87 F350 7.3, '93 C2500 6.5, '95 K2500 6.5, '06 K2500HD 6.6, '90 MB 350SDL, Kubota 7510

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,233

    Talking

    Your probably right, but if they have all your money, then they probably already have control. Did you hear that GMC is getting renamed to Gov.Motors Inc.
    And now that all of the Dealerships are being closed and everyone will have to go to Jiffy Lube for service the Gov. wants to take over them also and call it JIFFY LIB.
    0000000

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Springville, CA
    Posts
    73

    Default

    I got an email the other day from Troy Clarke, president of GM North America. Bunch of us got the same email inviting us to get excited about the new changes at GM and the prospects of toughing it out with them. All sounded pretty good until he started talking about the new, comprehensive government-backed warranty. I wrote back and mentioned that the phrase "U.S. government-backed" is not one to instill confidence in the modern consumer. I suggested dropping that from future marketing campaigns.


    They did write back:

    Thanks so much for your helpful recommendation. We will take this into consideration for the future.
    Sincerely,
    The General Motors Marketing Team


    I responded with:

    You do understand?

    I love my GMC vehicles, but few have any confidence in the integrity of the U.S. government any more.

    David


    Haven't heard back from them. Do you think I will?
    '04 GMC 2500HD LB7 CC SB 4x4, 265/75R17 Dueler Revo, Bilstein HD, Banks Ram-Air, Edge Juice w/Attitude, free-flowing quiet exhaust on the cheap

  17. #17

    Default

    No, but look across the street...

    See that black Suburban with no plates and the two guys wearing sunglasses sitting in it...?

    2011 Chevrolet Tahoe 5.3L daily driver
    • Previous owner of two 1994 6.5L K3500s, '01, '02, and '05 6.6L K2500s, '04 C4500, '06 K3500 dually, '06 K3500 SRW, '09 K3500HD SRW, '05 Denali
    • Total GM diesel miles to date : ~950K

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Springville, CA
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rinker View Post
    No, but look across the street...

    See that black Suburban with no plates and the two guys wearing sunglasses sitting in it...?


    Really? No I mean really!! Most of the time people see stuff like that is when they haven't gotten enough sleep. Make sure there's not a little self-induced paranoia rearing its ugly head my friend! This is imperative. I'm not thinking at this point that this is you, Mark. From what I've gathered on the few posts I've seen here, you're a truck driver, thus hard-working and a member of a D.O.T. mandated drug testing consortium. Still, these cases of "M.I.B." are very rare. There are so many of us and so few of them. They're definitely nothing to be afraid of, though we've got some real dumb-a$$es in Washington who want us afraid: they can only exist if fear prevails.

    That being said, If you know that what you're seeing is what you're seeing, and these guys are really bothering you, just plan ahead a little and plot yourself a stealthy route so you can sneak up and scare the hell out of them. Take a friend with you so you can grab them both, but if your friends are all at work then just grab the clown in the driver's seat, put him on the ground and make him start answering your questions. Take his identification. Coach him on the wisdom of affixing license plates with up-to-date tags on his vehicle. His partner's not going to want to get involved, so don't worry about him. He's too worried about himself. These bozos are all about looking after #1.

    These guys aren't as sharp as the TV programs would have you believe, Mark. Especially since B.O. blew into the white house, your average agent is smug, arrogant, lazy, and stupid, in other words they exhibit all the attributes of someone who is all appetite.

    Let us know how it goes Mark! If you need any help, just call. We own these guys--our public servants--even though they would like us to believe that it is the other way around.
    '04 GMC 2500HD LB7 CC SB 4x4, 265/75R17 Dueler Revo, Bilstein HD, Banks Ram-Air, Edge Juice w/Attitude, free-flowing quiet exhaust on the cheap

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Springville, CA
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Here's the message back. They are truly oblivious.

    Thank you for contacting General Motors. Everyone at GM appreciates your concern and support.

    We are confident that we will emerge a leaner, stronger company for you, offering desirable, high-quality vehicles from the Chevy, Cadillac, Buick and GMC brands. The resulting General Motors will be more efficient. Smarter. Faster. More competitive. With a renewed commitment to cutting-edge automotive technologies, including improved fuel efficiency, quality and design.

    I invite you to stay up-to-date on our promising new future by visiting GMreinvention.com.
    Sincerely,
    The General Motors Marketing Team



    It seems they may have hired Outlook's "auto-reply" feature to be their new spokes-hole.
    '04 GMC 2500HD LB7 CC SB 4x4, 265/75R17 Dueler Revo, Bilstein HD, Banks Ram-Air, Edge Juice w/Attitude, free-flowing quiet exhaust on the cheap

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    klamath Falls, Oregon
    Posts
    131

    Default Update this discussion?

    Please let us update this discussion? I just got my notice to get my truck smogged. What is the latest on the testing? Expectations? Recommendations?

    /\/\/\/\/\/\

    PS: If you want to learn the truth behind how and why CA is soooo screwed up, you really need to read our past Austrian govenator's report. http://cpr.ca.gov/CPR_Report/ Hard to believe it was put together by a politician. The report is hugely detailed and for those that don't want to read it all, here's a short list of dirt that is of particular importance in this discussion.

    PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
    To address these problems, an integrated Infrastructure Department should be created from the different infrastructure operations currently spread across 32 departments, agencies, boards and commissions. The Department should have six operating divisions:
    1. Water;
    2. Energy;
    3. Transportation;
    4. Housing, Buildings and Construction;
    5. Telecommunications; and
    6. Boating and Waterways.

    In addition to a central Infrastructure Authority, there should be a division for planning, programming and evaluation and a division for research and development.

    This organizational framework is depicted in Exhibit 8.

    The mission of the Department should be to provide for and manage the full life cycle of the state’s infrastructure network to achieve the best value for the people of California, the business community and the environment. Its strategic goals should include:
    • Integrating transportation and housing to achieve sustainable communities;
    • Delivering energy and water where needed and when needed;
    • Managing state infrastructure assets to obtain maximum use and revenue; and
    • Delivering resources to maintain infrastructure, not fund overhead.


    Evaluating California’s Boards and Commissions
    Boards and commissions conduct a variety of tasks in California state government. Some simply provide advice to departments, programs, or even other boards or commissions. Some hear denial of benefit appeals. Some enact regulations and establish policy. Others are responsible for licensing and disciplining professionals such as physicians, contractors, or guide dog trainers.

    Some of these boards are highly paid, earning salaries of more than $100,000 a year for only a few meetings. In fact, the 17 boards and commissions whose members are the highest paid cost the state more than $9 million in board member salaries alone. While many boards and commissions are composed of volunteer members, they often have permanent staffs, pay rent, or create other costs for the state.

    While the cost of the state’s myriad boards and commissions is of concern, more important is the desire to ensure that California’s governance structure is highly accountable. The line between the Governor and the performance of executive branch functions should be as straight as possible.

    When state goals are pursued through un-elected boards and commissions, government is less accountable than if the tasks had been performed directly. If a program is failing Californians, good government demands that blame be easy to affix and hard to deflect. The current structure of boards and commissions creates the opposite situation. For this reason, we pursued a comprehensive review of all boards and commissions within the executive branch.

    Within the executive branch of state government, there are more than 300 boards, commissions, panels, task forces, committees and other appointed bodies. These entities are so scattered and numerous across government that arriving at a firm number is nearly impossible. In our search, there was no single source we could turn to find out which commissions existed and why. In fact, state government has no master list of all boards and commissions and the thousands of political appointees that populate them.

    While boards and commissions requiring appointment by the Governor or legislative leaders are fairly easy to catalogue, many boards and commissions are appointed by the heads of agencies, departments—even by other boards and commissions. Throughout our investigation new entities were routinely discovered. No doubt, appointed bodies remain deeply buried within the state government structure that we did not find. When they are located, they too will warrant direct evaluation.

    A Historical Perspective of Boards and Commissions
    Boards and commissions first became popular in the late 19th Century. As a response to the corrupt “big city bosses” that ruled American cities during the late 1800s and the early 1900s, reformers sought to remove power and influence over services from what they believed were the clutches of highly partisan and self-centered politicians. Instead, key government decisions would be made by boards and commissions comprised of “experts” who would supposedly apply their expertise in a neutral fashion, influenced only by what worked and what was right, or so the theory went.

    The controversy surrounding the criminal trials of the officers accused of beating Rodney King and the subsequent riots provides an excellent example of how boards and commissions can insulate elected officials and confuse accountability. During the riots, former Police Chief Daryl Gates was widely criticized for failing to send in a sufficient number of police soon enough to prevent bloodshed and looting. Yet, under Los Angeles’ boards and commissions structure, neither the Mayor not the City Council—those most accountable to the electorate—could fire the Chief. That could only be done by the unelected appointees of the Los Angeles Police Commission.

    While boards and commissions have in some measure successfully insulated decision-makers from politics and given a semblance of transparency and public access, the problem now is a lack of general accountability. When something goes wrong with a board or commission, the electorate feels powerless because it is powerless; there is literally no one to hold directly accountable. And transparency without accountability is a façade.

    With this in mind, we evaluated the state’s governance model to determine if it still made sense. We explored opportunities for consolidation, where overlap existed. Where decisions could be more logically and appropriately made by another entity, we explored transferring functions and eliminating the board leadership. We also considered whether or not the functions of the boards and commissions were appropriate at all. Our proposal, based on this analysis, is presented below.

    Importantly, eliminating a board or commission does not legally bar the government from soliciting the advice of relevant experts. Administrative agencies without statutory board or commission leadership do this all the time. They do it informally, through ad hoc consultations, or formally, through advisory boards or task forces appointed by the director of a program. When the head of an agency seeks such expertise, it will be because—as an accountable official—he or she thinks the advice is needed. It will not be because a statute passed thirty years ago forced the agency head to obtain the advice, needed or not.

    As former President Ronald Reagan once observed, “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Hence, an ongoing process is required to ensure that all boards and commissions, as well as other executive branch departments and functions, are subject to periodic and rigorous evaluation.


    Why a comprehensive review?
    The citizens who pay for boards and commissions through taxes and fees deserve to have the efficiency and cost effectiveness of those boards and commissions tested regularly for legitimacy, accountability, customer service, innovation and resourcefulness.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •