emmissions on older cars

RAT BOY · TORONTO, ONT

emmissions on older cars

workin class · FINCH, ONT

427CARL wrote:
Interesting reading... The Government obviously does not know, how much money is spent on the car hobby... They will miss us, when we are gone

Na they will just tax us in other ways. Up here in SNOTTAWA the city started a program on how to save on water use it was so successful the water consumption dropped so they upped the water rate to compensate. No win.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Moe roadside guys don't "care" how clean it runs!!!!! They are just after the "infractions" as per the Moe rules!!! If the parts aren't there & they 'think' they should be by their book, FINE the CRAP out of you!!!!!! All this does is justify their job, & make it "look" like they are doing something "GREEN"

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

RAT BOY wrote:
dualquadpete wrote:
" then he show"d them his 86 Chevy 1/2 ton {Indy pace truck] they liked the truck & restoration but when they saw the "intake & headers" in the engine & they said " OH OH" get caught driving this & your BUSTED!!!
Wondering why headers on a 1986 P/U get you busted for environmental infraction.

Sorry Ray "my BAD" forgot to say that the AIR pump & plumbing were gone,as well as after Mrkt. intake w/out EGR.

30-S6 · NORTH BAY, ONT

The government knows exactly what they are doing.....Over paying people to write and word laws that double talk so nobody can make sense of what is bieng said.... Hire a lawer ? go ahead lawers will be all over this as the $$$ keep adding up in their eyes. Until they "Settle" meaning they've had enough lets make a deal.
The government passes laws to make money.....and hires people to make them money.

OldGuy 71Acadian · ONTARIO

RAT BOY wrote:
My 93 Fleetwood was not in the data base at the testing centre when I went to have it tested. It took 30 minutes for me to convince the tech to call Queens Park and find out what was going on and finally someone downtown took over his computer, loaded in the data and ran the test for me.
If you showed up with a 1978 car with this special catalytic converter I doubt that the test could be run. If they didn't have 1993 data what's the likelihood of having 78?
For the $38 or whatever it is for the test it is a good investment if you could prove a pass if stopped and present that as evidence if charged.

-- Edited by RAT BOY on Monday 20th of February 2012 12:52:07 PM

Unfortunately, as stated by others, they don't care if your old car will pass an E-test. All they look for, is if the proper equipment is present. The only problem they might have, is properly determining the year of the engine. Their ace in the hole is that, they just ticket you and then the onus is on you to prove your innosence. hmm

RAT BOY · TORONTO, ONT

RAT BOY wrote:
I have a meeting at Queens Park with a sitting member of parliament this week on a another matter. I will try and bring these matters up with him and see what advice he might offer and report back.

As promised I spoke to the member about the various issues raised here about historical plates and emmission equipment. We have a friendly ear, he owns three cars, a Grand Prix, T Bird and a Cross Fire.

He told me to write up the issues and he will do two things, send the concerns to the appropriate Minister via his office and Stand up in Question period and read the letter and gain a public response. He understood the issues.

PM me if you want to contribute to the letter. I will keep everyone apprised.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

PERFECT!!!! but ill bet the response is the same that my MPP got on this, from the MOE Minister just a bunch of B/S & then saying what a great job they are doing to keep the enviroment clean. Worth a shot , & hope they can "enlighten" us on the rgs. seeing as their office can't figure it out!!!

RAT BOY · TORONTO, ONT

I hear you, however we can all vote and right now we have the ear of an elected official who is willing to offer this cause support. It takes time to change the big wheel but we have to start somewhere. I

-- Edited by workin class on Friday 24th of February 2012 07:16:44 AM

RAT BOY · TORONTO, ONT

Still waitig for input guys, we have a willing member in Queens Park to raise our concerns on emmission rules. We have to start somewhere.

PS: I will hand deliver the letter, that will be a good excuse to have lunch in the Parliamentary Dinning room again biggrin

123pugsy · MARKHAM, ONT

I think the letter should say something about the MOE laws should have an exemption for cars that use these newer engines and can still pass the drive clean test. This is a much better thing than having parts on a hot rod that may or may not even function. The MOE guys don't care if these parts actually work, they just want to write up fines when they don't see them attached to the motor.

I for one will be running sequential fuel injection on a 1998 BBC and you can bet that it will pass drive clean. Only problem is that I was looking at pics of my motor from when I bought it and it had an EGR valve on it. My aftermarket intake can not take an egr valve. If I'm not mistaken, I believe newer motors don't even run these. If this is the case, the laws requiring the use of outdated technology are totally whacked.

Any of that make sense?

RAT BOY · TORONTO, ONT

I think you are making some very valid points there especially the fact that the old technology while present may not even function.

workin class · FINCH, ONT

my biggest concern is as new technology comes on line why would a law regulate you to use old redundant tech.

VirgilHilts · BELWOOD, ONT

"The MOE guys don't care if these parts actually work, they just want to write up fines when they don't see them attached to the motor."

There it is in a nutshell. It's about money. Breaking the law is big business and the government is out to make us all criminals and cash in. They won't rest till they have all our money yet they are morally bankrupt and have no right to judge being of lower moral fiber themselves. The "Crown"? what a joke, yeah all in the name of the Queen. She doesn't need my money. They have no accountability or oversite.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

I think the act should be "re-dundant" & go back to the yr. of vehicle, as it was before. Mc Goofy"s rebates & programs for getting "older" cars off the road have affected the old car hobby, as the wrecker or recylers "CAN NOT" sell any parts off these vehicles!!! A Lot of people here seem to think that a drive clean test will solve this, but for the older cars theres no info in the computor under 1988??? Also it should be stated that the old car hobbyist doesn't drive all yr. round, mostly to shows etc. vehicles kept "well in tune" & 1 train from Ottawa to Toronto would spew more pollution in one trip than we would, as a group , in 10 yrs+ Thats my input RAY!! Pete B

-- Edited by dualquadpete on Friday 24th of February 2012 07:30:45 AM

123pugsy · MARKHAM, ONT

VirgilHilts wrote:
"The MOE guys don't care if these parts actually work, they just want to write up fines when they don't see them attached to the motor."

There it is in a nutshell. It's about money. Breaking the law is big business and the government is out to make us all criminals and cash in. They won't rest till they have all our money yet they are morally bankrupt and have no right to judge being of lower moral fiber themselves. The "Crown"? what a joke, yeah all in the name of the Queen. She doesn't need my money. They have no accountability or oversite.

I really don't think this is the case here.

If you've ever been pulled over by these guys, you'll see they are power tripping. Its the fact that they "can" write you up and the fact they can't be real cops that gets them going.

The law itself I believe was just thought up by idiots. It should have always included a provision stating that in lieu of said components being attached to said engine, a drive clean certification would be acceptable.

At least present a fine which could be waved if the vehicle can pass drive clean in the next 48 hours or something like that.

These are measures that can help the environment, not bolting on old junk parts to keep Mr, Powertripper happy.

123pugsy · MARKHAM, ONT

dualquadpete wrote:
I think the act should be "re-dundant" & go back to the yr. of vehicle, as it was before. Mc Goofy"s rebates & programs for getting "older" cars off the road have affected the old car hobby, as the wrecker or recylers "CAN NOT" sell any parts off these vehicles!!! A Lot of people here seem to think that a drive clean test will solve this, but for the older cars theres no info in the computor under 1988??? Also it should be stated that the old car hobbyist doesn't drive all yr. round, mostly to shows etc. vehicles kept "well in tune" & 1 train from Ottawa to Toronto would spew more pollution in one trip than we would, as a group , in 10 yrs+ Thats my input RAY!! Pete B

-- Edited by dualquadpete on Friday 24th of February 2012 07:30:45 AM

I agree with going back to year of vehicle manfufacture but I can't see it happening. Don't forget that we live in California Junior.

sasquatch · NORTH BAY, ONT

If i can just mention something here about emissions,

Years back a friend of mine refulled planes at the North Bay airport.

He told me when i asked,, that a 727 ?? i think it was, back then left Toronto for North Bay, a 22 minute flight , and the jet used 500 gallons of fuel in that short time.

So,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ?????

With all our government flyin here and there, wonder if the emissions regulations should start elsewere.

Rusty Nuts · ONTARIO

Legal Rights

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIFE, LIBERTY AND SECURITY OF PERSON.
7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEARCH OR SEIZURE.
8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DETENTION OR IMPRISONMENT.
9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARREST OR DETENTION.
10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention

(a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;
(b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and
(c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.

Based on the above information copied directly from the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (specifically #8 and #9 ... "unreasonable search" and "not to be arbitrarily detained") ... what legal right do they have to randomly pull a car over (essentially "detaining" the driver and all passengers) and then requesting you pop your hood (essentially an "unreasonable search") for a visual test for emission controls compliance? They have the right to wave me over, they also have the right to ask me to pop the hood ... my question is "am I legally obligated to do either of those for them or is it within my rights as a Canadian citizen to refuse based on no reasonable grounds for them detaining me or searching (popping my hood) without my permission or a search warrant?" Is seeing an old car with newer "mag" wheels reasonable legal grounds to "detain" and "search" me?

It is my understanding that the Police can NOT enter/search your house without either reasonable grounds, your permission or a search warrant. In order to obtain a search warrant they need "reasonable grounds" ... does this also apply to our cars or do these "emission cops" have more power than a regular Police Officer?

Nothing stopping "Mr. Snifferdude" from waving me over ... is there anything stopping me from waving back and continuing on with my travels?

Adslow65 · LINDSAY, ONT

Rusty Nuts... Damn right! These are our rights as Canadian citizens, I'm no lawyer but I agree that these so called "emission searches" fall under the rights you mention (especially 8 & 9) So as you said...

"Nothing stopping 'Mr. Snifferdude' from waving me over... is there anything stopping me from waving back and continuing on with my travels?"

This is the question!! Going by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it seems we would be within our rights to carry on down the road!! Would be nice to get clarification on this! Anyone?

Lightspeed Mike · BELLEVILLE, ONT

There is no doubt the MOE guys are being unreasonable. Like I said before someone needs to take this to court.
As I was doing an E-test diagnose for a failure I realized what I was doing was technically illegal.
I did my diagnose and found the catalytic convertor was no longer working but the repair cost was over the $450 repair cost limit. It was just a license renewal so I was able to give the vehicle a conditional pass. This will be the third time in a row the customer has opted to do this. If you read the MOE law and the bottom of your E-test paper it states that all emission equipment must be functioning at all times. So he will be breaking the law by driving this car even though the government made a loop hole so he can continue driving. Even though the government has the power right there to stop him. Does this make sense?

sasquatch · NORTH BAY, ONT

Not very much makes sense any more that the government has anything to do with!!

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

I thought the conditional pass was a "one" time only,& after that the vehicle was "retired" by not issuing a renewal on plates, after conditional expired??? This was supposed to be the Gov's. way of getting the polluting vehicles "off the road"

Rusty Nuts · ONTARIO

The info below comes directly from the Ontario EPA website ... the "wave back and continue on" isn't looking like a good idea. If the person stopping you IS a "Provincial Officer" or a Police Officer, they apparently DO have the right. That being said, if you question the person who pulled you over and they are not a true Officer, you appear to be within your rights to refuse an inspection ... BUT, I'm guessing a refusal will simply bring attention to your car and you can most likely expect a FULL inspection of every kind available (emission equipment compliance, actual emission sniff test, complete safety check etc and I know a LOT of rods out there don't have wipers, heater/defrost, P-brakes etc). It's looking more and more like the best way to deal with this is to make your vehicle comply, either by adding the required equipement (based on what the engine came with, or finding an older engine block that pre-dates emission equipment). Below is the info taken directly from the Ontario EPA site ...

Stop and inspect powers: motor vehicle emissions.

(2) For the purpose of ascertaining whether a system or device installed on, attached to or incorporated in any motor vehicle to prevent or lessen the discharge of any emission is operating in compliance with this Act and the regulations, a provincial officer or a police officer may stop and inspect the motor vehicle.

Same

(3) An inspection under subsection (2) shall be limited to what is reasonably required to ascertain whether the system or device is operating in compliance with this Act and the regulations.

Same

(4) In an inspection under subsection (2), the provincial officer or police officer may,

(a) require the driver of the motor vehicle to submit the motor vehicle to such tests at such places and times as the provincial officer or police officer considers reasonable;

(b) require the driver of the motor vehicle to produce any documents, including licenses and permits, related to the operation or ownership of the motor vehicle; and

(c) require the driver of the motor vehicle to operate, use or set in motion the vehicle or any part of the vehicle, under the conditions specified by the provincial officer or police officer.

Police assistance

(5) Where a provincial officer considers it necessary or expedient to do so, he or she may call for the assistance of any member of the Ontario Provincial Police Force or the police force in the area where the assistance is required for an inspection under subsection (2), and it is the duty of every member of a police force to render the assistance. 1998, c. 35, s. 26.

Adslow65 · LINDSAY, ONT

Screwed again!

RAT BOY · TORONTO, ONT

Do these MOE Officers use vehicles with flashing red lights and siren, just wondering how they stop cars.

Hywayhauler · SUDBURY, ONT

The MOE guys used to hold spot checks on there own, but they do not have the right to "chase you down". So in recent years, they have been accompanied by either Regional Police, O.P.P., or MTO. Sometimes all of the above all at once. Often, when the MTO is present, they have an MTO Class A automotive mechanice with them, to assist the environmental ****heads with their inspections. Lets just say I try to stay off the 400 series with my old cars. I like it up here in Sudbury. There's a better vibe up here.

123pugsy · MARKHAM, ONT

RAT BOY wrote:
Do these MOE Officers use vehicles with flashing red lights and siren, just wondering how they stop cars.

Yes they do.

OldGuy 71Acadian · ONTARIO

RAT BOY wrote:
Still waiting for input guys, we have a willing member in Queens Park to raise our concerns on emmission rules. We have to start somewhere.
PS: I will hand deliver the letter, that will be a good excuse to have lunch in the Parliamentary Dinning room again

Thanks for helping out Ray. biggrin

I think that the Regulations are still too confusing to most people. They cross over between year of engine and year of vehicle manufacture. The information they use, is based on the car manufactures specs for engines and model years. These days there are so many after market parts that it is impossible to classify a heinz 57 built engine. For example, apparently, if you stuff an older V8 engine that never had an EGR or Cats originally, and put it into a vehicle that was originally equipped with a 4cyl that had an EGR and Cats, your replacement V8, must have an EGR and Cats. Here is where they get people confused and end up taking advantage of them out on the streets. Year of engine and year of manufacter must all, be takin' into account.

A good point has been brought up from members on here, that, In our hobby, our cars are on the road in most cases for less than half the year and usually only on weekends. Our daily drivers probably contribute more pollution/kilometer/year than our so called "Hot Rods".

Here are some more responces, I have received from the MOE as well as my local MPP's office.

_____________________________________________________________

The Honourable Jim Bradley (Minister of the Environment), The Honourable Dave Levac (MPP Brant), Ms. Kate Jordan (MOE Communications Branch)

I am writing to obtain clarification, on several regulations, regarding the Antique/Hot Rod/Kit Car Automobile Collectors and Hobbiests. As you can read below, I have been unable to get any specific clarification on these regulations from the MOE offices. I find it hard to understand why, the MOE would not want to help people fully understand these regulations in order to comply, instead of making it a cat and mouse game. The responce of hiring a lawyer to interpret these regulations seems unreasonable. Although my last email responce was sharp and on the derogatory side, I was upset to think, that as a concerned citizen, I was being brushed off. All I'm asking for, is to be able to communicate with someone, in the MOE, that can help myself and others, to fully understand the regulations, in order to comply and participate in helping to keep the environment as clean as possible while preserving our hobby. Any help, information or contacts, would be greatly appreciated.

___________________________________________________________

Hi Joe,

I just heard back from MOE. This issue or questions you raised are common concerns amongst Antique/Hot Rod/Kit Car Automobile Collectors and Hobbyists. MOE is currently consulting with collectors, hobbyists and clubs to prepare an easy to understand answer to your questions and explanation of the legislation. They expect to have this completed in March. I’m sure you will hear through your contacts and I will send the info to you as soon as I get it.

Bob Yuhasz (Constituency Assistant) for MPP Brant, Dave Levac's Office

____________________________________________________________

Dear Sir,

Attached is a response to your email of Feb 26th, 2012. Thank you, Sincerely, Donna ChenDirector’s AssistantMinistry of the EnvironmentSector Compliance Branch305 Milner Ave. Suite 1000 Scarborough, ON M1B 3V4 Telephone: 416-314-0274Fax: 416-314-4464Email: donna.chen@ontario.ca

See Below (Long Read)

____________________________________________________________

Ministry of the Environment
Sector Compliance Branch

305 Milner Ave, Suite 1000
Scarborough, Ontario
M1 B

Ministère de I’Environnement
Direction de la mise en
conformité des secteurs

305 Avenue Milner,
bureau 1000
Scarborough, Ontario
M1 B

March 1, 2012

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your dated February 26, 2012 to the Honorable Jim Bradley, Minister of the Environment, and the attached enquiry you recently made to the Ministry’s Drive Clean Office. The questions that you posed were forwarded to the Sector Compliance Branch for response. The Sector Compliance Branch administers the Vehicle Emission and Enforcement Program. The officers in this program are the ones that perform the road side emission inspections. In response to your questions we offer the following:

Q1 - lf a newer late model engine (say a 2009 LS engine) is installed in a pre 1988 vehicle, it must have all the emission controls that came with that engine?

A1 - Installing the 2009 LS engine into a pre 1988 vehicle would make the vehicle fall into the
hot rod category. So in this scenario the vehicle is required at a minimum:

I to meet the emission standards of the original engine that was installed in the pre 1988 vehicle and;

I the replacement engine is required to come equipped with all the emission equipment that would normally come installed with, in this case, the 2009 LS engine. This is to ensure the emission standards of the original engine are being met by the replacement engine.

Q2 - If a pre 1988 vehicle has an engine swap with a same year engine, the new engine must
be as emission efficient as the original and haveall the emission equipment that the car came with?

A2 - lf a pre 1988 vehicle has an engine swap with a same year engine and that engine was not available with that model vehicle then it would still be considered a “hot rod” and it needs to meet the same requirements as the above scenario.

lf a pre 1988 vehicle has an engine swap with a same year engine that was available on that model vehicle for that model year:

The vehicle would have to maintain all of the emission equipment that that originally came installed by the manufacturer on that vehicle.

Q3 - So here is the scenario that most people are concerned and confused about in the "Hot Rod" sector. As an example, say a person installs a year appropriate crate engine V8 into say a 1966 car that originally came with a 6 cylinder. Do they follow the car year scenario or the engine scenario?

A3 - ln this scenario a person installs a V8 crate engine (the block size does matter as sometimes different V8’s were available in the same year, ie. 350 cubic inch) into a 1966 car that originally came equipped with a 6 cylinder engine.

lf in 1966 a 350 cubic inch V8 engine was available on that model of vehicle for that year then it would have to maintain the emission equipment that originally came installed on the 350 cubic
inch engine of that year.

lf the 350 cubic inch engine was not available on that model vehicle for that year then it is required at a minimum:

I to meet the emission standards of the original V6 engine in the 1966 vehicle and;
I is required to come equipped with all the emission equipment that would normally come installed with the crate engine.

Q4 - What exactly does the MOE look for when they inspect the vehicle? People in the hobby want to comply but are confused as to how the process and requirements are. Can you please clarify further with examples. I would like to post these findings so that others can have a clear idea of what they need to do. I appreciate any and all information that you can provide.

A4 - Ministry of the Environment officers inspect vehicles to ensure they are in compliance with emission standards set out under the Environmental Protection Act. Officers can inspect any vehicle

I emitting excessive exhaust smoke and/or

I to ensure compliance with Drive Clean requirements and/or

to ensure emissions control equipment hasn’t been tampered with, removed, bypassed, modified, or altered.

When inspecting passenger vehicles, officers visually check for emission control equipment that would have been installed on the motor or motor vehicle when it was manufactured and determine the level of compliance or non compliance.

Emission control equipment that Ministry of the Environment officers look for during an inspection include but are not limited to; catalytic converters, EGR valves (exhaust gas recirculation valve), PCVS (positive crankcase ventilation), evaporative fuel systems, air injection systems, fuel metering systems as well as a number of sensors and modules connected to the electronic engine control system.

Each component is designed to reduce certain contaminants. When a component isn’t working or is removed, excessive smog causing pollutants, (nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, and fine particulate matter) as well as other toxins such as carbon monoxide may be emitted into the atmosphere.

Vehicle owners, including dealers, are responsible for ensuring that their vehicles have the correct emission components and meet Environment Protection Act standards. These standards are not verified at time of a safety inspection and the onus is on the operator and owner for compliance. Vehicles are also originally equipped with emission control information under the
hood of the vehicle.

All vehicles must have their original emissions control equipment (or suitable replacements) in place and working. But vehicles do not have to be retrofitted with emissions control equipment, if the motor or motor vehicles were not originally manufactured with them.

Dealerships and vehicle manufacturers can provide information about what equipment should be installed in particular vehicle models.

The Sector Compliance Branch is currently working with the Specialty Vehicle Association of Ontario on a plain language guide to explain these requirements and address similar questions. Your questions will be valuable in preparing this guide. Once the guide is finalized we intend to make it public through the Association and our own website.

Thank you, again, for taking the time to bring this matter to the attention of the ministry. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact Rick Lalonde at 416-314-4804.

Sincerely,

Andj Dominski
Director
Sector Compliance Branch

Slammed 35 · HOOTERVILLE, ONT

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Good post.That at least explains whats required. Doesn't look like there is any getting around these regs if you got the wrong block under the hood. I wonder how these guys determine an "engine". Are they referencing the block only or block and heads/ intake. If the heads and intake are considered in an inspection and they are aftermarket, does that cancel an early model block exemption? Or is it strictly the block (#'s) only. Does that make sense?

-- Edited by Slammed 35 on Saturday 3rd of March 2012 07:38:52 PM

workin class · FINCH, ONT

we could all join the Specialty Vehicle Association of Ontario. Or invite one of the board members to join us here.

http://www.iwebhosting.ca/svao/index.html

-- Edited by workin class on Saturday 3rd of March 2012 09:27:55 PM

Slammed 35 · HOOTERVILLE, ONT

workin class wrote:
we could all join the Specialty Vehicle Association of Ontario. Or invite one of the board members to join us here.

http://www.iwebhosting.ca/svao/index.html

-- Edited by workin class on Saturday 3rd of March 2012 09:27:55 PM

Not a bad idea on the invite

-- Edited by Slammed 35 on Sunday 4th of March 2012 12:17:44 AM

flatblack55delivery · PORT HOPE, ONT

That info is helpful and a lot of work thanks for you efforts.Hope they do include hobbiest in drafting the regs. Ed

workin class · FINCH, ONT

I sent the SVAO an invite to the site. With a link to the site so it will be easy to find us.

-- Edited by workin class on Sunday 4th of March 2012 08:18:23 AM

Slammed 35 · HOOTERVILLE, ONT

OldGuy 71Acadian wrote:
That's why I'm just going Nuts and not Rusty.
How about a World Products 632 block, Dart heads, all aftermarket internals, BDS Blower and Enderle Injection. Now What??????????????? Just an example, but what's the answer????????
The way I read it the engine has to be equipped with the original emission stuff it came with. In this case that would probably mean nothing. I don't think crate engines come with smog equip.

-- Edited by Slammed 35 on Sunday 4th of March 2012 12:06:25 PM

OldGuy 71Acadian · ONTARIO

Slammed 35 wrote:
Are they referencing the block only or block and heads/ intake. If the heads and intake are considered in an inspection and they are aftermarket, does that cancel an early model block exemption? Or is it strictly the block (#'s) only. Does that make sense?
-- Edited by Slammed 35 on Saturday 3rd of March 2012 07:38:52 PM

Absolutely makes sense Slammed. These are the questions everyone has and untill we find out exactely what they want and how they make their determinations, we are at their mercy. I encourage everyone to write their MPP's and the MOE, in order to let them know, that all we want are answers.

Also, If anyone on the board knows or can find a web site, listing the year, model and engine emmission requirements, please post it. I have searched high and low and so far come up empty handed. confuse biggrin

Rusty Nuts · ONTARIO

I am guessing the MOE is interested in the block and not the heads. I know, guessing just ain't good enough here though. The reason for my assumption is that head casting numbers are (generally) located in the rocker arm area and would mean removal of a valve cover in order to read the number. It would be easiest (certainly when dealing with a SBC) to simply go off the numbers/letters on the stamp pad on the deck in front of the passenger side head, on the block itself. Therefore (if I am correct) they are (should?) just be interested in the actual block build date.

I do (think) I understand most of what they require. Old car/newer engine ... engine must be equipped with whatever e-controls it left the factory with (evap/egr/cats/pcv) ... so in the case of using an engine from a 1980 Camaro in an early rod, you would need whatever the Camaro came with (oughta be fun locating all that old stuff). The part I don't understand is this ... let's say you have a 1969 Camaro. You go to a GM dealer and buy a replacement "crate" engine (ZZ4 350 just for example). GM sold you the engine knowing it was going in a '69 Camaro ... the engine DID NOT come with any e-control devices directly from the factory (because of it being a "crate" motor). What happens now? Am I OK just using the PCV the Camaro came with? Am I required to meet 2012 emission control requirements because the engine itself has a build date from 2012? The ZZ4 350 crate engine comes from the factory with a carburetor ready intake manifold ... but GM doesn't sell any carbed vehicles in 2012, so how is a person able to determine what emission control equipment it is required to have in order to be legal in an old car here in Ontario? Old car/old engine ... you're good. Old car newer engine you need the controls from the donor car. Old car/crate engine ... ?????? I have no idea what is required OR who you would ask to find out. Based on a reply posted earlier (from the Gov't letter) the Gov't can't/ won't tell me what I need in order to comply but they suggest I consult a lawyer for answers ????? HUH ???? "They" make the rules but leave it up to me (and my lawyer) to decipher what they mean????? If I understand the Gov't, as long as my lawyer makes the decision that all I need is a PCV on a crate engine, then I am good to go? Yeah, right. Wonder what kind of a reaction you would get from the roadside MOE guys when giving them the "no no, it's ok, my lawyer said so".

OldGuy 71Acadian · ONTARIO

That's why I'm just going Nuts and not Rusty. evileye biggrin

How about a World Products 632 block, Dart heads, all aftermarket internals, BDS Blower and Enderle Injection. Now What??????????????? Just an example, but what's the answer????????

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

I was looking at a GM crate engine in GM showroom last week, theres a "disclaimer" on the tag saying "Not street legal" in some areas, Off road use only!!!!! So there you go Gm's got their A$$ covered. & it's classified as a 012 engine [made in Mexico BTW] so by the rules[as I read them} your "screwed" unless you have all the emm. for 012 block even if it is Carburated!!!!

RAT BOY · TORONTO, ONT

To me the solution is simple. Align the Environmental Protection Act with the Drive Clean requirement so that 1987 and earlier cars are exempt period.

Remember 1965 was the first year that AIR was put on a Chevrolet engine so at some point parts for these early emmissions engines are obsolete and imposible to find. If you can find them they cost thousands because the 100 point concourse judged car guys pay thousands for these things.

RAT BOY · TORONTO, ONT

Thanks Pete, my idea is actually perfect. I spent 20 years as a civil servant in this province, 11 years at the Director level, I have written and enforced legislation. I have many friends who are current sitting members or former members, in all parties. I can tell you with certainty it is very very difficult and time consuming to change or revoke legislation or regulations.

Bureaucrats and Elected members don't like to deal with the masses, rather forcus on bona fide groups like SVAO. As Chris says we all need to join and become active in a club and make sure that club joins SVAO. This appears to be the only way that your opinions can be heard. Thanks to Chris for providing us with his upadate on these issues.

-- Edited by RAT BOY on Monday 5th of March 2012 10:53:36 AM

OldGuy 71Acadian · ONTARIO

RAT BOY wrote:
To me the solution is simple. Align the Environmental Protection Act with the Drive Clean requirement so that 1987 and earlier cars are exempt period.

Good point, to bring up to your "Elected Official". Drive Clean is a branch of the MOE. Drive clean exempts you, but the MOE hunts you down. It's very easy to understand why people feel like they are being entrapped. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, but the information should be readily available. I'm still searching. confuse

Rusty Nuts · ONTARIO

Well, I guess I have two choices ... add the required emission equipment (and hope I don't get caught on the road before I am able to locate and retrofit all the stuff) for an '83 SBC or dig one of my old blocks out of the shed and assemble one that predates emission stuff (and hope I don't get caught driving while the new engine is being machined/assembled). Sad ... I was really hoping my next install was going to be the '95 350 with factory roller stuff (to avoid any ZZDP issues) and a carb intake.

One other thing I guess I should mention ... it is my understanding that the laws regarding emission control equipment (and their removal) have been around for quite a while (years), the difference is they are now starting to enforce them.

I remember being "caught" out at Weston/Finch years ago with my '71 340 Duster in an emissions "sweep" years ago (early-mid 80's) ... they were clamping down on the street racing in the area to they decided to hassle the cars/owner who hung out there. I was given some kind of ticket (not a fine) that required me to report for an emission test (car was in my dad's name so he took it) ... I laughed because (as I told the cop) this car never had emission controls on it other than the PCV (which the car still had). His reply was "doesn't matter, it is still required to meet certain levels".

Rusty Nuts · ONTARIO

"To me the solution is simple. Align the Environmental Protection Act with the Drive Clean requirement so that 1987 and earlier cars are exempt period."

I'm willing to bet the Gov't doesn't see it your way. As far as they are concerned, they already have a solution, whether they are capable of defining/explaining it or not ... and one that will undoubtedly bring in revenue in the form of fines.

Seems Jim Carrey said it best in one of his movies (the Mask I think) ... something about "bending over and taking it up the tailpipe".

OldGuy 71Acadian · ONTARIO

I found one resource, to find out which emmission controls your vehicle originally came with. It will only set you back $79.10.!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.vintagevehicleservices.com/gen-tech.html

northerlynasher · New Member

Hello to all car nuts. My name is Chris Whillans and I’m chairman of the Specialty Vehicle association of Ontario (SVAO). As you can see from my handle, among the many old vehicles I like are the upside down bathtub Nashes of the early fifties (hey, somebody has to like them).

The SVAO counts over 80 Ontario collector clubs (plus businesses) with 4000 + members in its incorporated fold. We have been around since the early '90s and strive to represent the collector vehicle community in dealings with both the provincial and municipal governments. Over the years we have worked diligently with the MOE and the MTO to try to solve any potential problems between the various provincial and municipal government agencies and the specialty vehicle community. All members of our executive are volunteers and many hold positions of responsibility within their home clubs. Most of them have been with the SVAO for many years and have put forth countless hours trying to keep the ear of whatever government is in power. In addition, they have jobs, families, and cars to work on also.

At present we are active with the Drive Clean folks from the MOE in establishing communication lines to clarify some questions about how non-modified as well as modified vehicles fit within the Drive Clean scope. The SVAO will hopefully end up putting an agreed upon flow chart and some sample Q & A on its website to help out the public. We have been back and forth on this chart and I will update this forum as progress is made. I will caution everyone that we are working on getting the specifics of the chart done, not on arguing whether our cars need to be exempt. (Which I believe to be the case but we lost the rolling 20 year exemption in the last Drive Clean review.) That’s a whole other issue!

If you don’t belong to a club, get into one. If your club doesn’t belong to the SVAO, find out why because the more numbers we have on our side, the more easily we get listened to! I don’t want to make this into a book so I’ll sign off for now but be aware that the SVAO is out there. Thanks and I can be contacted through the information given on our website www.svao.org

flatblack55delivery · PORT HOPE, ONT

So is this issue something that your group is aware of and working on as it has been ongoing for the last couple of years and or is this new information and a new headache for the hobby.where can we view the chart to see what it includes. Ed

northerlynasher · New Member

The enforcement is nothing new and has been an on going thing for a number of years, almost as long as the Drive Clean program has been around. Depending on where you live, you may or may not have heard of it but each year more people have.

In the last few months the SVAO has sat down and had a number of meetings with the Drive Clean officials to try to come up with something that allows hobbyists to figure out what is expected of their vehicles so that all concerned know where they stand.

As stated in my posting, the chart will be available on the SVAO's website as soon as the Drive Clean folks finalize it, which I'm hoping will be in the next month.

Chris

flatblack55delivery · PORT HOPE, ONT

Thanks Chris please advise us when or if you need our input as you can see that this is an important issue to a bunch of people who buy a lot of special equipment and most of us would like to help in some way to keep our hobby fun an maybe a little less expensive. Ed

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

There are enough of us in this "boat" where we have late model engines in our old cars mainly due to the lack of availability of org. engines or as stated the emm. parts are obsolete!!!! The cost of up-dating is astounding & some were built before all this came to a head. I think we should "push for what Ray said & align it with Drive clean & 87 & older are exempt!!! Period!!!!