emmissions on older cars

69SS454 · MILTON, ONT

emmissions on older cars

hemi43 · ONTARIO

From my understanding, the cat needs to be as close to the head as possible to get the Cat to heat up quicker. Too far away and it wont even work. The idea behind a cat is to get the catalysing material inside of it to glow white hot. This will burn any fuel left in the exhaust, and that's why air pumps are used to give it more oxygen.
Like I said, it's just my understanding.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

hemi43 wrote:
Here's a bit of good news !!

http://www.sema.org/?q=node/3504

-- Edited by hemi43 on Thursday 14th of June 2012 06:38:59 PM

That sounds good for south of the border, BUT they have "lobbyist's" & their Gov. listens to them. Mc Goofy is carring on like he has a "majority" & has never listened to outsiders. Not saying it isn't worth the try, "IT IS" just hope the GOOF listens, he didn't, to the list of things sugested to cut spending, & carrys on spending, like a drunken sailor!!!!

30AV8 · BURLINGTON, ONT

Just got back from a cruise, and have 43 signatures in hand, would have gotten more but people are interested about the discovery that MOE goes by engine year not vehicle, and they like to talk. Slowly they are coming around, but we need more people to go out there. I also sent a note to Old Autos newspaper stating that there are various sites around to inform them of whats going on, especially this one, great site for Ontario enthusiasts, so hopefully that will be published in their next edition.

fatstax · COBOURG, ONT

air pumps are used to push air into the exhaust stream to fool the emmision equipment, you want to pass an emmision test easy, rig the air pump to run all the time if you have one. or install one to make sure your car passes

flatblack55delivery · PORT HOPE, ONT

I guess this will be my last post on this issue because I find all the drama and whining tireing,nowhere have I read any facts on either side .They say there not targeting pre 1970 cars and trucks you say they are ,prove it ,all I have read here is "I heard ,a friend of a friend,apperantly,so and so said" but no actual documantation,Around here there are lots of rods and muscle cars and I have only heard Fore shure of one pre 70 truck being hasseled in all these years .Lots of later model stuff has been stopped,hell my son has been stopped twice in his s10 and lots of 80s stuff is being stopped but up till now no rods.So why all the paranoia.The problem as I see it is not the rules they have been there since 2008,the problem is getting ahold of the rules .The petition should say "we want to be compliant but we need clearly written ,and accessable guidlines to go by covering all vehicles and engines involved." This is the part that is going to get me in trouble.Times change guys and attitudes change people years ago would say look at that cool rod now they say look at that gas guzzler.Our cars are not cool to alot of people nowadays, get used to it, they are just old polution spewing dinosaurs ,and with the petition as it is worded you are just proving that statment to be true.It isn't hard to get the car up to standards,you are hot rodders aren't you,seams like many on this site have made there cars legal without too much trouble.You must have had to overcome some obsticles building your rod didn't you.Do you need for someone to come up with a billet EGR before you stick it on your 500hp street motor,really how much do you loose by being legal and how much difference does it really make to a street driven rod,when I race I will make the necessary changes for that use.As for appearences ,really ,who made the rule that a motor or rod has to look a certain way,as I said times change and sometimes we need to change with them .Take a look around at the new rodders they aren't restricted to some 50yr old style,they have the right idea to build it like they want it to look and to hell with anyone who doesn't like it ,THey build 4drs and oddball makes and have a blast with there own ideas.I personally don't care if you don't like my cats or EGR or PCV or what ever else I do to make my car fun,driveable and legal .I am shure some Parts supplyer,or hot rod shop, is putting together a package of shiney stuff to make cars legal as we speak,Bob?Untill then use your skills to get around these old laws,open your mind to new styles as rodders have been doing as long as there have been rodders and rules.But above all please rethink the poorley worded petition and get some help rewriteing it.All most of the rodders want is clarity on the rules if you get that we all win.As I said many times this is a hobby I do it for fun. Ed

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Flatback, it's not 'hearsay" Know for a fact the 2 rodders from local cruise have been "done" in 36 Dodge P/up, & 30 Ford "Rat Rod" + the 85 Monty Carlo in Lindsay [that was illegal] I'm into my 4th yr. of building my 52, that was legal when I started it [or so I thought] have spent over $1300 in dual/quad intake, carbs, & linkages etc. not to mention the machine work on engine, headers, custom built exhaust ++++ Now I can still run it [68 SBC] but if I had to change all this,because they changed the rules in 08 but didn't release the new act, or change it next yr. AGAIN where does that leave us. Not saying that ignorance of MOE Act. is not involved, but when you think it's "the yr. of vehicle" thats been in effect forever, then thats how you build it. I'm into this car for over $20 G's now, the after market people have made lots of sales from me, Insurance co. is as well,even though it's not on the road yet. If I have to change all this, Intake has no EGR, replace the "custom" exhaust, as it wasn't designed for CATS +++ Then the $$ investment is out the window, you end up with a vehicle that you won't be able to sell in Ontario,the after mrkt. will close up, insurance co. will no longer insure you [getting that way now] & the hobby will be "DEAD" We have to FIGHT this!!! Not "roll over" if we do that, then the Gov. will just keep on "Pushing to the LIMIT"!!!!!

flatblack55delivery · PORT HOPE, ONT

Just because I don't agree with the stated intent of the petition doesn't mean I am saying we shouldn't fight .I am just stating my opinion that we may differ on what we should be fighting for .I would like to have vintage vehicles exempt from the emission laws(remember all unmodified vintage cars are already exempt) as much as you but I can't see that happening in the tree hugger world that we live in,so what I want is a clear rule book that we can all understand and that the MOE has promised for years now.If we can get that it would save a lot of greef for a lot of people.Yes it is costing me a lot of money I dont really have to make the changes necessary to make my car legal but I enjoy the hobby and like driving my car If I have to go back to a stock pre 70 sbc I will because the fun for me is looking out over that big round hood on my 55 what is under it is not really as important to me .I have no plans to sell my car, my friends and I build our cars to drive the wheels off every day we can so all I want is for the MOE to play fare and publish the rules so that I can get on with my summer hassel free.I would sign a petition and have called and talked to the MOE in Scarborough many times and they really don't know any more than we do. The inspectors are the ones setting the rules and it will be years before anything works its way thru parliment so if you want to drive your rod we need to play by the rules while we try to change them.There are some large groups(SVA) working on this and maybe a meeting with them first is the way to go.It is never wrong to fight the powers that be if you are wronged but you need to know your enemy and your goals before you start. Ed

30AV8 · BURLINGTON, ONT

I know flatblack doesnt like to hear stories and wants proof, but just because someone heard from someone doesnt make them false. Most of the signatures I received from the petition, the guys said they dont even have a computer, so it they were ticketed, they wont be telling their story let alone know didnt know about the petition or the MOE clampdown until they got their ticket.

So first one happened in Cayuga, guy was racing his car on the track, no problem. He drove it home afterwards, got pulled over, opened his hood and his pcv valve popped off from his racing, placed it back on, and was given $500 ticket. Best one was in Smithville, guy bought a GM crate engine, put emissions on, not all though, went to get it e-tested, passed, later got pulled over, fined(not sure of the amount) for not having an EGR valve. MOE guy said he doesnt care if you passed e-test. So there you have it, MOE doesnt care about the enviornment as much as we do, they just care about money and keeping their supervisor happy.

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

Okay! I've printed off couple of dozen copies of the petition and have gathered 20 signatures today (Sunday morning). I sent out 40 emails last night, the balance will go out tonight. Don't worry about the details of the wording if MPP J. O'Toole is going to re write it to the correct wording. I have faith in this MPP. He's the guy that got us Y.O.M plates. The copy of the petition on the Performance Improvements site has MPP J. O'Toole's address.
Get going and start collecting signatures at EVERY Cruise night and car show, at work, the coffee shop, anywhere. If you have never got politically motivated this is the time you need to start. DO NOT wait for someone else to do this. This time it's your turn!

Also, We need to stop the "friend of a friend said". We need guys that were charged to speak up. The 2 guys I KNOW were charged, and I will tell there stories with their names when they give me the OK. Both were missing emissions parts, both were charged by police.
There could be other circumstances that caused a vehicle to be impounded or driver charged such as safety defects like no wipers or parking brakes or no front brakes, even impaired or suspended driving privileges etc. especially if multiple Ministries were involved. (MTO, MOE, police etc.).

Remember when Cam Wooley used be an OPP and was in the camera yapping about "we pulled the plates off 25 vehicles that were unsafe today!"? What he left out was they pulled over 85 vehicles that his EXPERTS felt were unsafe on the road and were wrong with 60 that they inspected. This type mentality that "the end justifies the means" is what we are experiencing and we all need to pitch in to correct this situation.

the Kid.

flatblack55delivery · PORT HOPE, ONT

Ya I remember Cam Wolley smugely looking at the camera and rapping on about how he had saved the lives of everyone on the road today cause they had pulled the plates on some poor smuck who had a cracked windshield.All I could think was there is someone who can't get to work tomorrow and just lost his car and everything in it and that smiling face and his pals are making a hundred grand a year. Ed

123pugsy · MARKHAM, ONT

Gwillyville Kid wrote:
Okay! I've printed off couple of dozen copies of the petition and have gathered 20 signatures today (Sunday morning). I sent out 40 emails last night, the balance will go out tonight. Don't worry about the details of the wording if MPP J. O'Toole is going to re write it to the correct wording. I have faith in this MPP. He's the guy that got us Y.O.M plates. The copy of the petition on the Performance Improvements site has MPP J. O'Toole's address.
Get going and start collecting signatures at EVERY Cruise night and car show, at work, the coffee shop, anywhere. If you have never got politically motivated this is the time you need to start. DO NOT wait for someone else to do this. This time it's your turn!

Also, We need to stop the "friend of a friend said". We need guys that were charged to speak up. The 2 guys I KNOW were charged, and I will tell there stories with their names when they give me the OK. Both were missing emissions parts, both were charged by police.
There could be other circumstances that caused a vehicle to be impounded or driver charged such as safety defects like no wipers or parking brakes or no front brakes, even impaired or suspended driving privileges etc. especially if multiple Ministries were involved. (MTO, MOE, police etc.).

Remember when Cam Wooley used be an OPP and was in the camera yapping about "we pulled the plates off 25 vehicles that were unsafe today!"? What he left out was they pulled over 85 vehicles that his EXPERTS felt were unsafe on the road and were wrong with 60 that they inspected. This type mentality that "the end justifies the means" is what we are experiencing and we all need to pitch in to correct this situation.

the Kid.

My story is not a friend of a friend deal.

Read my posts and PM me for my name if you like.

-- Edited by 123pugsy on Monday 18th of June 2012 05:29:29 AM

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

My comment regarding " a friend of a friend" is NOT to through doubt on anyone's contribution but to build or argument about how this is being situation is happening. "My name is XXX, I was charged with xxxxx by the xxxxx police on xx/xx/xxxx" is facts that are traceable. There has already been comments made by MTO that no one has been issued fines totalling $4000 for emissions equipment missing, yet that statement has been made with no name attached.The values of tickets varies, but is supposed to be $365.
If we are going to be successful in this matter we need the details that are recorded not something that might be true but is unverifiable. We all know something about this so let's build a good strong representation of our position with undisputable facts.

And use this link; If you have had an experience with the MOE and your collector car, email Bob: bmcj@performanceimprovements.com, he's working on an article for an upcoming issue.

Keep collecting signatures on petition, completed forms can be dropped off or mailed to ANY Performance Improvements store.

This is a serious matter and is worth standing up for.

the Kid

64sd · DUFFERIN COUNTY, ONT

427CARL wrote:
You can use my 356 High Street Clinton On N0M1L0 address anytime

That's our Carl

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

30AV8 wrote:
I know flatblack doesnt like to hear stories and wants proof, but just because someone heard from someone doesnt make them false. Most of the signatures I received from the petition, the guys said they dont even have a computer, so it they were ticketed, they wont be telling their story let alone know didnt know about the petition or the MOE clampdown until they got their ticket.
So first one happened in Cayuga, guy was racing his car on the track, no problem. He drove it home afterwards, got pulled over, opened his hood and his pcv valve popped off from his racing, placed it back on, and was given $500 ticket. Best one was in Smithville, guy bought a GM crate engine, put emissions on, not all though, went to get it e-tested, passed, later got pulled over, fined(not sure of the amount) for not having an EGR valve. MOE guy said he doesnt care if you passed e-test. So there you have it, MOE doesnt care about the enviornment as much as we do, they just care about money and keeping their supervisor happy.

What yr & model of vehicle was the crate engine installed in??? I've been in touch with MPP J O'Toole again & passed this on to him aswell as a few other things. Hoping to have a meeting but his secretary couldn't confirm this when I spoke to her last week on phone!!!

30AV8 · BURLINGTON, ONT

dualquadpete wrote:

What yr & model of vehicle was the crate engine installed in??? I've been in touch with MPP J O'Toole again & passed this on to him aswell as a few other things. Hoping to have a meeting but his secretary couldn't confirm this when I spoke to her last week on phone!!!

I'll go back to the guys shop on the weekend and get better details.

I read in the May 21st printing of old autos that P.A.V.E. has a scheduled meeting with the Director of the sector compliance branch of the minustry of the enviornment(wow what a title) on Nov 15th. Does that meeting match with all these petitions we are gathering as far as when discussions are going to take place with the ministry, just wouldn't want to see different groups doing different things at different times, might be better if it was all presented at once.

30AV8 · BURLINGTON, ONT

crap, just got off the phone talking to Dean Renwick P.A.V.E president and the Nov 15th meeting was held last year, they were just reporting about the results of their general conference. Now where did I put my glasses confuse

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Think Mr. Renwick is worried that the old cars will be "legislated off the road [rightly so too be worried] as that will kill the appraisel business + insurance industry!!!! They can't seem to get a straight answer from the Moe either!!! If enough "FLAK" comes at the GOV. from all sides, Mc GOOFY & his "FLUNKIE'S" might listen, [ but I doubt it] He has a "agenda" all of his own & still doesn't realize he is in a MINORITY Gov!!!! Going to call John's office to see if Fern got my last corresondence?? Thanks 30AV8 I'll pass the info on when you post it or P/M me. Pete

Seeker1056 · DOURO, ONT

Did some digging. I printed off the entire Hot Rod section of Regulation 361/98, including the approved short order fines.

All Reg 361/98 fines as applicable to our cars are $300 a shot plus the criminal surcharge applicable to all fines in Ontario.

So, $300 per cat, $300 for non functional emmisions plus the surcharges and you just busted $1000 without trying.

Now - what the actual Regulation says

The 1999 and older is the key issue.

If you have a bill of sale for your motor or donor car that is pre 1999 then you have to do nothing in regards to emmissions and a Drive clean if required is for 1980 standards. So pretty easy to accomplish.

Installation after 1999 and the car is older than 1999 you must meet visible emmisions, must meet the the original emmissions of the original motor, and must have functioning CC and ECE that may have been included on the replacement motor.

Here is where every one falls down - most are assuming you must have both the year of car and the year of motor emmissions attached to the new motor.

That is not correct and it is not what it says in Section 4.(2)

It says - "One must meet the "Emissions" of the original motor with said motor in its original emissions trim, and the new motor must have all of its own emmisions equipment installed, and when tested - at least meet the older emmisions standard for the year of the car and original motor".

So as I understand it - using my own car for an example.

1972 Chevelle - needs a charcoal canister, closed air filter assembly with heat stove, and a sealed gas cap. There are no emmisions standards to meet as there werent any back then.
The proposed motor to be installed is a 2005 8.1l (496 ci) big block. It came with cats, and an EGR, sealed gas cap and four O2's
So - so long as all of the 2005 equipment is in place after the motor swap - its all good as there are no emmisions to meet other than the 1980 standard if forced by a roadside inspector to have an E-Test.

It is getting even easier after 2013 - where all dyno testing is gone, and the drive clean is conducted by interfacing with your OBDII port for your 96 and newer motors - if there are no codes present, you pass.

All you guys with older stuff - get a Bill of Sale for your motor with a 1999 or older date on it and put it in your glovebox

At this point I dont see any issues - put your donor motor Emmisions controls on in a functioning manner, and happy driving.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Got my old autos today & a few more letters in there about this,1 from SVAO which I don't agrree with. if they are fighting against this,then why is he advocating the retro fits for emm. on newer engines in older cars??? We run cleaner than the org. non emm. engines that were in out cars, likely can pass the test [if need be] but they still fine us without testing & don't care that the car will pass the test, Guilty no matter what!! It's just plain WRONG

hemi43 · ONTARIO

Nice to see Bob McJannett's article in the latest issue of "Performance in Motion", titled "Summer & the MOE".
It's great that we're all talking and educating others about this issue, but there's still lots of car guys out there that are still in the dark.
It seems that when I go to a car show or cruise night now, most of my time is spent looking at whether or not these cars are emission compliant . I still shake my head at the amount of mid 70s and 80s cars out there that have absolutetly zero emission equipment attached.
These are the guys we need to educate, because as long as they are out there with these non-compliant cars, the MOE will be there also.
The problem with the MOE being out there is that some of us with the older cars will get caught in the crossfire, even though we're compliant. We don't need the hassle !!

Here's what I feel needs to happen;

-If you get nailed for not having emission controls on your emission controlled vehicle (1972 up aprox.), then pay the fine because you're guilty !!

-As has been said here numerous times, get after your MP to have the law changed so that they go by the year of the car and not the engine. This would clarify things hugely, and allow us to build future projects using newer crate engines that are a lot better for fuel economy, or donor engines from newer cars.

-If someone get fined, but falls in a gray area, He/She should be able to get legal advice (a lawyer) with the help of the aftermarket industry. We as individuals cannot fight this on our own at the court level, we will need some kind of legal aid.

The aftermarket industry has a lot to lose if we don't band together and fight this. Now that SEMA is expanding up here, maybe they can sit down with the big boys and come to a compromise, but that won't be for a few years down the road.

Let's all try and make our hobby not as attractive to the MOE, by making our cars compliant and fighting some of their unjust in the courts. Maybe then they will move on to important issues like our environment !!

Rusty Nuts · ONTARIO

RacerRick wrote:
They were at the local car show here in toronto giving out $365 fines for not having the heat stove connected on aircleaners. They obviously don't care that the heat stove is inactive during the warmer monthes anyways. Watched them do it to at least three people, but by then everyone else was closing their hood and leaving the show.

Curious .. what show was this and where exactly?

Any specifics on the cars being ticketed? (approx year of cars, tunnel ram, headers/open element cleaner etc)

I've always wondered if a missing heat stove pipe was a ticketable offence as far as emissions equipment goes, I was told "no" by a performance shop owner ... guess I know the truth now. I'll have one installed before Sunday.

Thanks a ton for mentioning this.

-- Edited by Rusty Nuts on Thursday 21st of June 2012 02:45:53 PM

Rusty Nuts · ONTARIO

I personally HATE electric chokes ... not at all reliable as far as my experiences have taught me. I have manual chokes on two of my cars, the third still has an electric and you should see that thing "chug" in the morning. I passed the visual inspection at the drive clean test center with a manual choke installed (several years ago ... my cars are too old for the required testing now) and PASSED the sniffer test too.

I was out in the old car today (with my manual choke I might add). Drove the wife out from Ajax to Whitby for a visit to the Dr's (then dropped off a load at the dump in Oshawa while she was at her appointment). Before I left the house today, this emissions stuff actually crossed my mind ... here's what I was thinking. Let's say I am on my way to something important (Dr's appt, Wedding, court etc), I am driving my old car and one of these MOE clowns decides to stop me (keep in mind, this is hypothetical). My car does not smoke or the exhaust even smell funny, I have timed my trip (mentally) allowing for a little traffic etc ... but did NOT take into account one of these clowns pulling me over. What happens if I am late for whatever I was headed to? Are these MOE people going to pay my "missed visit fine" that the doctor or dentist charges? Why was I subjected to this "targeting" when I have given them NO REASON to even think I am breaking the law being that I have a closed hood/can't see my engine, dual exhaust the full length of the car, no "cam" thump, not even Flowmasters?

Now it's sounding like they hang out at car shows and visually inspect while the hoods are up for display purposes ... nice.

I am trying to be legal, although it now sounds like I am not there yet ... wonder what the hell else I need in their eyes to be legal. Guess I'll be finding out on the side of the road soon (or maybe a parking lot).

Even though I am trying to "do the right thing" and be legal, I still think the lack of information released by the MOE is absolutely total BS. They seem to have the info regarding what is required when it comes to handing out fines, why aren't we allowed access to that same info? God damn, I need a beer (and wings).

-- Edited by Rusty Nuts on Thursday 21st of June 2012 04:09:28 PM

hemi43 · ONTARIO

Fight your tickets if it's BS or not!! Hopefully the businesses that will be affected if we disappear will supply us with a Lawyer !!

-- Edited by hemi43 on Thursday 21st of June 2012 06:59:22 PM

RacerRick · TORONTO, ONT

They were at the local car show here in toronto giving out $365 fines for not having the heat stove connected on aircleaners. They obviously don't care that the heat stove is inactive during the warmer monthes anyways. Watched them do it to at least three people, but by then everyone else was closing their hood and leaving the show.

Modfather · VICTORIA HARBOUR, ONT

Rusty Nuts wrote:
RacerRick wrote:
They were at the local car show here in toronto giving out $365 fines for not having the heat stove connected on aircleaners. They obviously don't care that the heat stove is inactive during the warmer monthes anyways. Watched them do it to at least three people, but by then everyone else was closing their hood and leaving the show.

Curious .. what show was this and where exactly?
Any specifics on the cars being ticketed? (approx year of cars, tunnel ram, headers/open element cleaner etc)

I've always wondered if a missing heat stove pipe was a ticketable offence as far as emissions equipment goes, I was told "no" by a performance shop owner ... guess I know the truth now. I'll have one installed before Sunday.

Thanks a ton for mentioning this.
Well now how about a manual choke
how about an electric choke ? I have one on my 49 and one on my 50. Or do they still want to see something that does nothing?
-- Edited by Rusty Nuts on Thursday 21st of June 2012 02:45:53 PM

Sniper · WATFORD, ONT

Rusty Nuts wrote:

Even though I am trying to "do the right thing" and be legal, I still think the lack of information released by the MOE is absolutely total BS. They seem to have the info regarding what is required when it comes to handing out fines, why aren't we allowed access to that same info?

I wouldn't be so sure that they do have all this extensive information that they pretend to have. Makes it pretty easy to "baffle with bull****" when the other side has even less to work with. Could be why they aren't real eager to share, it not really a law yet. I have lost a lot of respect for various arms of law inforcment in the last few years. Provincial police aren't much different. How many people were stopped and ticketed for warning oncoming traffic of a police speed trap over by Hamilton a year or so ago. (Flashing their headlights to warn of a radar trap ahead.) The ones that just paid the bogus ticket got screwed, pure and simple. THERE IS NO LAW FOR FLASHING YOUR LIGHTS AS A WARNING. The ones that were charged and took it to court had the charge thrown out....because there is no law saying you can't do it. What gets me is, who's watching the law enforcers that push the bogus pretend laws? And what is being done about it. The bottom line is, is it even a law that the MOE are ticketing people for? And since they aren't sharing any information, how do we know? Ignorance of the law is one thing, but hiding it from the public is quite another.

123pugsy · MARKHAM, ONT

That vid of the Aussie MOE's and/or cops was showing how they could make up an infraction at whim. The guy with his air breather cap above the hood line was funny as heck. They told the guy it was dangerous because after he ran someone over, killing him or maiming him for life, the victim could get cut on the sharp air breather lid.

Fight your tickets guys if it sounds like total BS.

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

It's Friday, so I will be at the Bradford Back Alley Cruisers Cruise Night, since I'm a member. We are out EVERY FRIDAY NIGHT year round. If the weather is less than perfect we are just down the road at WENDY's Hamburgers. I will have copies of the petition for you to sign or pickup copies of to get signed. I'm trying to get copies out to every Back Alley Cruise Night as quickly as I can.
FYI our Cruise Nights are in Bradford Friday, Woodbridge Monday, Midland Sunday, Niagara Falls Sunday, Scarborough Tuesday. I have also sent petition stuff to many more Cruise Nights, hopefully the petition is wherever you go as soon as possible. Remember only sign one time. If you are collecting signatures you can drop completed petitions off at ANY Performance Improvements store, or Bring them to Bradford, I'll drop them off.
This is a serious matter, let's do a good job!

Grumpy · COLDSPRINGS, ONT

Just Talked To A Young Guy From Cobourg Who Was pulled Over And Fine.I Told Him About Our Site And Told Him We Would like To See His Story On Here. Hopeful He Will Join Today,If Not I'll Be Talking To Him Again On Tuesday. I Seen His Ticket So It Might Make Flatblack Happy(JK) Ed.

flatblack55delivery · PORT HOPE, ONT

Hey Grumpy Call me about the show tomorrow .I P.M. you with my number. Ed

30AV8 · BURLINGTON, ONT

dualquadpete wrote:
Think Mr. Renwick is worried that the old cars will be "legislated off the road [rightly so too be worried] as that will kill the appraisel business + insurance industry!!!! They can't seem to get a straight answer from the Moe either!!! If enough "FLAK" comes at the GOV. from all sides, Mc GOOFY & his "FLUNKIE'S" might listen, [ but I doubt it] He has a "agenda" all of his own & still doesn't realize he is in a MINORITY Gov!!!! Going to call John's office to see if Fern got my last corresondence?? Thanks 30AV8 I'll pass the info on when you post it or P/M me. Pete

Hi Pete, the person that mentioned this infraction to me is a personal friend of Bob McJannett and said he will talk to Bob about it directly as he didn't have all the specifics you were looking for today when I met him. He also knows the person who was ticketed.

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

I did pretty well Friday night in Bradford. Got about 40 signatures and lots of questions.
One guy told me he got pulled over last year with his car (I believe a mid 60's Ford) that had an engine that required emission stuff. No ticket, but a list "As long as my arm to correct on the car, then have it re-inspected". He yanked the engine, put in an older engine and is driving that now. He did not say whether he went for re-inspection. By his tone of voice I would say not. He was happy to sign the petition.

I mentioned before that we require names and incidents and dates. There is a story being told in Barrie about "2 nice street rods that were inspected for about 1 3/4 hours before being towed away". OPP, MTO & MOE were supposed to be involved. Supposedly within the last month.

Unfortunately there are no names, makes, models, colours and obviously no reason given for the cars being towed away. This is not really an asset story because without something solid to go on it approaches "URBAN LEGEND" status.

IF you know anything about this please post it.

By the way, Urban Legend stuff is the story of the car somebody died in and it could not be sold, or driven, because the new owners could not get the smell out. I read an account of this stating that it was a Corvette that stunk so bad the dealership involved had to park it on the roof in the open air. The guy that recalled this story said his father owned the dealership and this happened in 1970.

I heard this story when I was a kid in Petrolia Ont. about 1964, 6 years BEFORE it supposedly happened. Since then I have heard it many more times, various locations, types of cars and prices it sold for. I am sure you have heard it as well.

I mention this because we do NOT need urban legends as examples of what is going on. If you hear something get all the details you can. Facts will help us, not legends.

Please download petition and get signatures.

the Kid

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

Here is something I got this morning. posted as received

Ministry of Environment Gets More Aggressive on Enforcement for 2012

By: Patrick Smith

I last wrote about the Ministry of Environment's program of emissions compliance back in 2008. At the time, the MOE was staking out certain venues such as the Prescott Car Show held every summer just outside of Brockville, Ontario. The MOE basically secured a section of two lane highway approaching the show grounds. Similar tactics were used at events near Toronto such as the Dark Knights car shows for tuners and sport compact cars.
It appears from thelatest rumblings from various concerned members of the hobby that the MOE is stepping up their game. Here is a summary of what's been heard going down and the latest efforts to protect our basic right to drive vehicles without interference from officials enforcing laws without proper respect to procedure or legal compliance at time the vehicle was manufactured. This is a problem that is cropping up. One reason it happens is the reliance on American produced literature when examining Canadian market cars. A good example of this situation is the 1968 Chevrolet Nova L79. In America, this car was equipped with an air pump and the block is coded as such in the suffix code. The Canadian produced Nova L79 does not have an air pump. It never came with one. Can you see a problem approaching when it comes to an inspector looking over this car?

It gets worse as time goes by. The 1970s was a decade of emission control band aids, with make shift solutions used one or two year then dropped for something completely different. Sometimes, the manufacturers would add a new system on top of an existing one making the car a one off for parts. Imagine trying to locate some of these long expired pieces to bring your mid 1970s car to compliance. I have manuals three feet thick for emission controls and this is just for one car company.
Here is a rundown of what to expect from the MOE if you encounter a team. There is a rumor the team may be working with the OPP and Ministry of Transportation (MTO) in roadside inspections. The OPP would be checking driver licencing and insurance issues. The MTO would be in charge of vehicle safety issues and MOE would be checking for emissions and compliance. Mr. Andrew Dominski, Director of MOE Compliance Branch met with Dean Renwick from PAVE to discuss the situation and the idea that was dreamed up involves a petition and letter writing campaign from constituents to their local MPPs.One point they stressed was the fact that resources were being used to detect less than half of one percent of the cars registered for use on Ontario roads. They also happen to be on the roads about half a year. This is true if you are considering collector cars. However, I don't believe the program will focus exclusively on hobby cars. Too much manpower being utilised for that if the numbers are accurate. There are a lot of newer cars with disabled pollution controls and safety issues. You only have to remember those safety blitzes the OPP did with MTO during Labor Day Weekends to see why they're getting involved.
The trouble areas and what to do about them.
Year of Manufacture for an engine. It is rumored the MOE will asking for proof of the year of manufacture for an engine as well as the year it was installed in the car. This obviously refers to street rods and the classic 1950s era street machine customs. It also impacts Kit Cars and HomeBuilt cars. Some owners may have improper registration for a kit car declaring it homebuilt. This opens them to a host of issues including annual emissions testing and mandatory emissions compliance. The kicker here is because homebuilt cars are built from components and no manufacturer shell, there is no VIN number. Therefore, the year the car was constructed becomes the model year for that car and also the year used for emission controls content! A few Bucket Ts and nice VW custom fiberglass machines have been pulled off the road because of that snafu. I suggest strongly if your car is titled incorrectly that you settle that issue quickly.
Year of Manufacture for Engines: This is easily confirmed for most US makes but the problem lies in the long history of engine swapping with cars. A lot of them are no longer original. It remains to be seen how strict they will be in enforcing this matter. A Mustang with an aftermarket WORLD block and stroker assembly is going to pose some interesting problems. A straight forward stock engine swap can pose problems any good lawyer can have the case bounced out of court.

Headers: Simply put, having these on a car will get you ticketed. If you have removed catalytic converters, that's also an instant fine. Likely without cats the car would be unplated on the spot.You'll be fighting a losing battle on this front.
EGR Valve: Simple enough in theory, pre 1973 the car doesn't have an EGR. 1973 and up, cars start using them. It gets complex fast however. The variations in EGR valve equipment is staggering. Ford alone issued several variants with different open and close rates and some were ported with passages under the carburetor with a spacer plate. You see this combo often in two barrel V8s such as vans and two barrel cars. These systems were notorious for failure and most have been dumped. No one makes reproductions of these ported EGR valves. Is a simpler Edelbrock manifold with plain EGR valve going to satisfy the MOE crew or are they going to create problems by demanding original parts that must be secured from a donor car?
Air Pumps: Some engines used them, others had clean enough cam profiles that they didn't need them. Again, major variations exist Stateside. Canadian buit cars usually have 49 state emissions tier equipment, but some have been built with even looser tolerances than the US spec emissions. Another interesting problem for enforcement if they use only US books.

Computer Control Modules: ECMs started appearing in late 1970s cars and by 1981 GM had a number of ECMs in popular models. The American market Trans Ams used ECMs but the Canadian market 305 Trans Am did not. These were automatic transmission spec cars unlike the US which were four speeds. Again, if the inspectors rely on US guides, they might argue the car is modified with a transmission swap and no ECM module. This deviation is well documented in owners's manuals and brochures so if you are armed, you are OK.

Ported Vacuum Switches and OSAC valves: These devices are often removed during the hot rod phase of a car's life. Seldom are they replaced during restorations. You may find a few with shells of OSAC valves ansd dummied PVS's in place. Some of these are still available from jobbers so its worth looking into if you do a lot of driving.

Fuel Vapor Return Lines and Charcoal Canistors: This is another easy item to be nabbed on. Some of these aren't being reproduced yet so you may need to do some scrounging. The charcoal canisters aren't too hard to find. For GM cars, any good Astro Van or early pick up truck should have a core.

PCV Valve: Leave it in and make sure it's working.

Transmission Control Switch: TCS units usually found screwed into cylinder head with lines leading to transmission on automatics while four speeds have the item mounted on trans case with line to distributor. It controls amount of advance your engine gets at different operating temperatures. Early ones fromn 1969-1972 were prone to failure and poor operation. Many were discarded.

There were many other devices made and you should consult a manual for your year car or truck. The bottom line is make an effort to get somewhat close to spec and it shouldn't be a big issue for getting the final details right. Driving a modified car straight from the track without the basic hardware is asking for trouble.
Lastly, a petition is being circulated from Performance Improvements and SVAO. You should be seeing one at a cruise night near you. Sign it and stand up for your rights. Don't let a faceless government tell you what to do. They work for us, not the other way around.
Posted 3 weeks ago by Patrick Smith

Patrick Smith's blog
http://phscollectorcarworld.blogspot.com/2012/06/ministry-of-environment-gets-more.html

RacerRick · TORONTO, ONT

I personally think that the OBD2 port scanning is stupid.

I know my truck has an O2 sensor code (one of the 4 sensors is flakey) but I just had it E-tested in may and it passed with all zero's and a 2ppm on HC. At nearly 400,000km on the original motor. So even though my trucks exhaust is practically unicorn farts, it would have failed.

And some of the information in the article above is incorrect. You can have headers as long as they do not interfere with the factory emissions - usually they looks for ones that have the emissions fittings, and that they are hooked up and operating. A lot of emissions legal tuner cars came with headers and certain ones are factory certified. Also, if they are certified by the manufacturer to not change the emissions equipment (Usually with a CARB certification) they are also legal. Any emissions legal headers will come with the certification sticker which you have to stick under the hood somewhere on the car and the sticker has all the certification information.

As far as I know there are no emissions certified long tube headers, so if you have those, you are kinda SOL.

30AV8 · BURLINGTON, ONT

So RacerRick and GwillyvilleKid, in my avitar you can see my lake pipe headers, you are saying my headers are illegal? I have the stove pipe attached to the air cleaner assembly and an air pump attached before the cats

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

I did not say headers were illegal! Read the first line of the posting that you question! POSTED AS RECEIVED! by Patrick Smith. He is a collector car journalist on the web. I know some Fox bodied Mustangs came with headers from Ford. Early Astros/Safaris cam with headers from GM. I had a V8 SBC factory header in my hands. It was in a V8 S10, which was not a factory install but they were factory headers. So stop talking foolishly.

You also missed the point in his writing. here it is "Lastly, a petition is being circulated from Performance Improvements and SVAO. You should be seeing one at a cruise night near you. Sign it and stand up for your rights. Don't let a faceless government tell you what to do. They work for us, not the other way around".

There seems to be a lot of postings here that are either trying to start unnecessary arguments or trying to one's self up to be the person that can say "See I told you it wouldn't work". Well, keep up the bickering and the myopia and you will be right. Transfer that wasted energy toward the cause and we will be successful.

Somebody said "This is a serious matter and is worth standing up for." and "This is a serious matter, let's do a good job!"

Oh Yeah, That was me. I still stand by both of those statements.

It is time to re-evaluate you priorities before the Government does that for you.

the Kid

hemi43 · ONTARIO

30AV8 wrote:
So RacerRick and GwillyvilleKid, in my avitar you can see my lake pipe headers, you are saying my headers are illegal? I have the stove pipe attached to the air cleaner assembly and an air pump attached before the cats

I don't see a problem with your setup. The only issue I can see by using headers is that you have no provisions for the heat valve that produces more restriction on one side of your exhaust. I haven't heard anyone getting busted for that yet, but I'm sure someone will eventually.

Having cats installed will satisfy the MOE, but if they are located too far away from the cylinder head, they will never work properly. This is probably why the author above mentioned that long tube headers were illegal.

Rusty Nuts · ONTARIO

Tensions seem to be running a little high (with some people on here) regarding this stuff ...

This is how I am trying to handle the emissions snafu. I am trying to make my car comply/be legal based on my understanding of the law as it is written today. Based on the wording of the petition, I (very highly) doubt that it will be accepted by the gov't due to the fact that it does not take the environment into account, it is asking for the laws (as they are written today) to not be applied to "old cars" which does nothing as far as helping the environment.
Now, that being said ... I can promise you, I WILL be signing the petition. Whether or not the petition passes really doesn't matter (just my opinion), but what it will (hopefully) do is show that we are a large number of people (assuming we get the 10,000 sigs) that are unhappy with the way things are and are looking for change.

As far as full length headers ... I see no reason why they can't be used with cats. I understand that cats need to be (somewhat) close to the engine to function BUT being mounted at the end of full length headers would place the cats very close to the same spot (if not closer to the engine) than my original cat is installed in my 86 Cutlass Supreme (the end of the Y-pipe). Also, the MOE looks under the car for cats ... (I lookie, I see, you're good) but I don't think there are any written rules regarding exactly how far (or how close) to an engine they must be mounted. Basically, I am saying this, mount the cats after the collectors and I am willing to bet not a single MOE dude will be out there with a tape measure saying "they're too far away from the engine".

The part that burns my a$$ (other than a waist high flame) is the "they started taking stuff off my engine". I have a few thoughts (that I will not share on the internet or in print) regarding how to handle that situation :)
I am also unhappy with the fact that my engine would surely pass the "sniffer test" which would PROVE that it is "good" for the environment, yet I might still be fined for some part that "roadside Ronny" decides I am missing (for example a smog pump which my engine was never equipped with yet their "emissions Bible" might claim it should have).

With the (soon to be?) new method of emission testing not requiring a dyno, I wonder if the emission clowns will be at the side of the road with a portable sniffer ... if that is the case, then (again, my opinion) as long as the car passes the "sniff", the visual shouldn't matter one damn bit.

-- Edited by Rusty Nuts on Tuesday 26th of June 2012 11:17:42 AM

80GMC · New Member

When I had my 350 rebuilt we checked the numbers and it turns out it is a 68 engine. When the moe pulled me over they threatened me with pollution pumps but never fined me for it. Would this be because they knew the age of it and figured I didn't?

The moe, mto and revenue of canada all work together here in cobourg and every month they pick different people to target. Last month it was all small business owners but this month it's all antique vehicles. I won't even drive my truck most days now because I am sick of the hassle I get each time.

Remember if you smoke those indian cigarrettes they are looking for those too, $5 fine per smoke. I seen a guy who was infront of me at the last check get $1800 in fines half of which was for smokes.

fatstax · COBOURG, ONT

that sounds funny the way you phrased your comment, they threatened me with pollution pumps, it sounds like when all else had failed they whipped out a couple of pollution pumps like they were severed heads and swung them by the hoses like a weapon.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Just wondering, what's the availability on these old & out od date pieces. Most AIR pumps seized up if left to sit,tubing & valves were thrown out "eons" ago, or cut off & crimped . I'm thinking "if" you could find these pcs. your going to pay through the nose, + you need all the vac. valves,vac. hoses,thermal switches etc. & will it make any diff. to the enviroment ?, doubt it!! Can't believe were up to 8 pgs. since I started this but it's got the "BALL' rolling

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

I've said this b-4 & I'll say it again, go back to the yr. of the car PROBLEM SOLVED!!! The newer engines run cleaner than the Old ones back in 60's & 50's & earlier, the visual check is a "JOKE" as nothing has to function, so the point is MOOT!!! Just a Hassle & Money GRAB & MOE trying to justify their jobs on a poorly written "ACT" If your smokin then thats a diff. story, modified or stock!!!!!

hemi43 · ONTARIO

The only way to make changes is through our MP !! If enough of us put weight on John Otoole, something WILL be done especially if his job is on the line. If he can't/ won't do anything about this stupid idiotic law, then we will have to find someone that can. Period!!
I also mentioned last week that the aftermarket industry (i.e.Performance Improvements, Karbelt, etc) will have to pool their resources and help us fight this in court by supplying legal aid. I never heard a response on that one !!!

I will tell you one thing for sure !! If I get pulled over and get charged with something I'm not guilty of because the MOE has some sort of quota, I will fight this tooth and nail and hopefully someone will back me up because this is too large for individuals to fight.

Every cruise or car show generates mega bucks for charity every year, including helping to build a cancer center in Oshawa. It pisses me off that when I attend these events and donate my money to help make our society a better place, I have to look over my shoulder when I go home because I drive an older car.

Seeker1056 · DOURO, ONT

well I think that we should be chasing the "discrimination aspect"

Any 86 and newer car can fail the sniffer test grossly, and still get a pass because the owner spent $450 trying to make it legit. They can do this adnauseum, or test after test as it were. According to sources, this happens almost dailey at every test facility. The $450 repair clause is right in the Act and regulations.

So my question is why cant we spend $450 trying to comply, and carry around the receipts, and be done with it? Never mind we are not even offered a sniffer test as a means of compliance

Fair is fair. It is outright discrimination to not allow a sniffer test, or the repair clause and they can not say otherwise

I absolutely guarantee that You will get much further with your MP or other elected officials chasing after Discrimination under the Charter of Rights And Freedoms, than you ever will chaising environmentalists with an axe to grind or politcal points to make, when the world is on a tree hugging kick.

.03

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Just got back from the Port Perry cruise and a Long line up to sign petition, got even longer after disc jockey announced that 40+ cars were pulled over after or before show in Orillia area on wknd. Any body "confirm" this?????

atomsplitter · NEWCASTLE, ONT

Seeker,
Have the rules changed again?
That $450 repair used to get you a 2 years grace period.
When the next test came it MUST pass or you will not be able to get a new tag for your plate. I did this once with a piece of crap Mazda just to get by till I found another car a year and a half later.

Rusty Nuts · ONTARIO

That's an interesting point of view ... "regular" cars are given the opportunity to drive for two years KNOWING it wasn't able to pass an emission test (side note: The $450 is a price cap. If the quote to repair in order to pass is over the $450 cap, for example a carb for $600, the repair work does NOT need to be done and the car can continue to be driven just as it is for 2 more years. Having used this loophole myself, I know this for a fact). When I take my parents car into an emission test center, they take a casual glance under the hood (and test the gas cap) ... all that matters to the tester is whether or not it passes the test, they don't remove airbreathers and test vac lines for plugs/routing etc. Shouldn't that attitude also apply to our cars?

My engine was (and is) a carbed 1985 305 ... I am absolutely confident that my car would pass a sniff test as it is presently equipped ... if the real worry is the environment, why isn't that good enough?

I heard a rumour today that some arm of the gov't attended a car show and any modified vehicles running historic plates (which apparently IS a no-no) had their plates instantly removed at the show. Seems old cars (and their owners) really are under attack from all angles.

I have a dashboard camera in one of my cars and will be installing one in my old car too (possibly tomorrow). I will definitely be videoing the MOE peeps if and when I get pulled over.

hemi43 · ONTARIO

Rusty Nuts wrote:
I have a dashboard camera in one of my cars and will be installing one in my old car too (possibly tomorrow). I will definitely be videoing the MOE peeps if and when I get pulled over.

Ha !! Funny you mention that !! I've had a camera installed for about a month now.

Did any of you guys ever dream that our hobby would ever come to this? What a load of CRAP !!!!

You work hard all your life, and pay an exorbitant amount in taxes, try to be an upstanding citizen, and this is how we get repayed by this FILTHY Government !!

I try to ignore the waste and corruption of these "elected" individuals, (Bev Oda comes to mind), but this BS with the MOE has sent me over the top !!

What ticks me off the most is that there's NO justification for it, it will NOT help the environment, it is just an attack on us because we are an easy prey, and because we're Canadian we will just take our lumps,pay our fines and smile about it.

I would love to see the MOE try their antics in one of the Southern States !! They wouldn't last too long !!

-- Edited by hemi43 on Wednesday 27th of June 2012 09:53:31 AM

Seeker1056 · DOURO, ONT

for those of you who do wish to get on with things, and be compliant - and need an air pump for thier motor,but dont want one hanging off thier motor, there are 12v electric air pumps made by GM, that can be hidden anywhere, for around $90 US on Ebay

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Air-Pump-Ford-And-GM-1995-2005-Dorman-306-020-/390425948468?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item5ae7333134&vxp=mtr

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-OEM-Secondary-Air-Injection-Pump-ACDelco-215-425-GM-12568324-/400301673812?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item5d33d6cd54&vxp=mtr

Same for EGR valves - there are more than a few remote types out there that could be plumbed very easily and hidden down low on the downpipe or behind the intake. The 5.0 Ford type comes to mind as one easy to modify and use as it connects with a pipe and a very small flange. I am sure that a quick Ebay search would turn up other workable alternatives. Either of these examples, bolted to one of the down pipes like the 8.1l GM's do, with a tube plumbed and tapped into the intake crossover, and all you would see is the 1/2" pipe

http://www.ebay.com/itm/EGV620-EGR-Valve-/260750526240?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item3cb5f14720&vxp=mtr

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Delphi-EG10240-EGR-VALVE-/140500714399?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item20b67ec39f&vxp=mtr