MOE meeting with SVAO Nov.24th

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

MOE meeting with SVAO Nov.24th

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

I see theres a SVAO meeting adv. in Old Autos for SAT. NOV. 24th at the legion in Claremont Ont. Says the Gov. officals have "been" invited to update us on the rules & regulations inforce?? Also theres a letter to editor in the latest edition from a Andy Dominskyfrom the Moe saying they are not 'targeting' car shows & events,nor will they give a ticket for "multiple pcs missing, he says the ticket is $365 for missing equipment???? Addr. for Legion is 4937 Old Brock Rd. Claremont & more infp at 905 649 2664 or www.svao.org Think I will go, just to see & maybe ask some questions?? If they show up???

hemi43 · ONTARIO

Pint and a Pound wrote:
Interesting. Not too far for me to drive. SVAO and the MOE ... what if you aren't a member of either of those groups, wonder if a person can still get in? If the roads are dry I just might be tempted to attend with my heap and offer to allow the MOE reps to go over my car ... can't see them handing out a ticket (if it were to fail, which I don't think it would) with a parking lot full of enthusiasts. I "think" my car is ok, be comforting to know for sure though.

Oooops, just clicked on the link provided for the SVAO and it clearly states ALL WELCOME .... good to know.

Hmmm, $10 to join the SVAO. That's affordable.

-- Edited by Pint and a Pound on Tuesday 6th of November 2012 07:41:32 PM

-- Edited by Pint and a Pound on Tuesday 6th of November 2012 07:44:47 PM

I had a meeting with a couple of MOE officers last year. The one guy was bragging that he and his partner were "invited" to a Corvette club because the members wanted to know if their cars were compliant or not. There was 7-8 cars there, and the first one that they looked at would not pass. Guess what ?? The owner got a ticket !! Out of the goodness of their hearts, they didn't fine anyone else. This is fact, and was told to me by an MOE officer.

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

Son of a B_____. Those F_______ C___ S______ers .... well, that puts an end to that idea. Might still drive it there though, just not bring it to their attention. Good to know. Thanks Hemi43.

TIME TRAVELLER · NIAGARA REGION, ONT

According to the SVAO people, Andy Dominsky (Director) as well as Rick Lalonde (Supervisor) from MOE will attend the meeting. I know they’re going to claim they are not targeting specialty vehicles and they don’t hand out multiple tickets so if you have any issues with that be prepared with actual, verifiable FACTS, not wild rumours or “my neighbour’s third cousin’s best friend’s boyfriend got 10 tickets from MOE” type stuff. (HEMI43’s experience should get them thinking!) SVAO is trying very hard to help their members and they have to walk a very thin line in order to keep working with, not against, government agencies like MOE. So far I think they’ve done a pretty good job.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Walking a thin line doesn;t mean "agreeing" with everything the MOE & Mc Goofy's Gov comes up with!! one of the SVAO letters in O/Auto's didn't seem to be on our side,just said we had to comply!!! Too me this is all "stacked' on their[Gov] side, right down to wanting a "bill of sale for engine & garage labour bill for installation of engine b-4 1999!! They must know most of us do our own work, & who gets a bill for an engine bought privately or from a parts car & keeps it 13 or 14 yrs. or more????? So they know it's a hopeless route to prove that aspect!!! Will be interesting to hear what they have to say???

Modfather · VICTORIA HARBOUR, ONT

I sincerly hope that there are educated and well spoken and well versed enthuisiast reps representing the enthusiasts. They need to hear our point of view The last thing we need is a bitch fest and a finger pointing deal.. We need to work with them and keep them onside without them walking away with a chip on their shoulder and a bad taste for our hobby. Sometimes all we need is good communication and a point of view.

fatchuk · ST MARYS, ONTARIO

The modpaw says..

I sincerly hope that there are educated and well spoken and well versed enthuisiast reps representing the enthusiasts. They need to hear our point of view The last thing we need is a bitch fest and a finger pointing deal.. We need to work with them and keep them onside without them walking away with a chip on their shoulder and a bad taste for our hobby. Sometimes all we need is good communication and a point of view.

I agree..A shouting match will not win any points..Things get done with respect and co-operation..not bull-****..And I agree with others that make the comment about my third uncles sisters boyfriends cousin got 4 tickets for oil fill cap and disconnected pcv valve..and no egr....that is all just hersay and has no value without proven documented evidence if yah got post it otherwise it ain't worth nothing..I go to quite a few different events, and I sure know a lot of guys running modified cars and I personaly do not know one person who has ever been pulled over or ticketed for any emission related offence with thier rod.. Except for Wayne Rochon...(Rochie) I live in the London/Stratford area..Don't know if that makes a difference to the emission police ..The one thing I have often seen that troubles me is the number of muscle cars from the late sixties and seventies that are unable to resist leaving cruises and shows without showing off and doing burnouts as they leave or pull into traffic ..I can't help but think they bring a lot of the wrong kind of attention to the rest of us ( middle class working stiffs) that are just trying to enjoy the hobby...Some-times I believe if we were to police ourselves and each other and not be afraid to reproof each other this may not be as big an issue as it is....This is just a non issue in my area of the province but it could be, I am sure if I am looking for trouble I could find it.. I drive my car all the time and I never ,never, every give this a second thought ..SO I hope you guys in the GTA keep the problem there and I will scoot around the GTA when I am on an tour Eastwards..quietly and not cause any attention.. smile blankstare

Jazz · THUNDER BAY, ONT

I hope the minutes of the meeting are recorded and published...I have heard of this "emission testing" don't like the sound of that or compulsory vehicle inspections.. Gov't inspectors are going to go tooth 'n nail after hobbyists, that's the only way they can justify their jobs.. and those jobs get scarce after elections

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

It would be nice if the MOE had an "amnesty" day where car owners could bring their cars in to a specified spot and have them checked for compliance WITHOUT the risk of fines. The idea would be that people interested in complying, yet aren't sure whether or not they presently comply (due to the apparent fact that the MOE refuses to allow "common folk" access to the documents detailing what IS needed to comply) can have their cars checked and not risk a fine ... if you fail you can still drive it home without fear of a ticket ... it is then up to you to fix it or risk a ticket or tickets if you are caught driving without the needed equipment installed. Yeah, the more I think about it, the more that makes sense ... doesn't have a chance in hell of happening ... there's no revenue in failing a car and not handing out a ticket.

Modfather · VICTORIA HARBOUR, ONT

Jazz The inspectors are not going after us tooth and nail they are doing thier job. Their main target are the every day drivers that do not conform to standards. Including trucks and buses. As for driving a safe vehiclal Im all for it and so is my family. Don't get me wrong I like open headers and fenderless cars, rat rods and street rods, kustoms, and even teaker cars. As long as they are safe to drive. As for the emmisons ahh not so much as long as I am not leaving a trail of blue smoke behind me I am ok..lol

Jazz · THUNDER BAY, ONT

why not mandatory annual inspections for all motor vehicles..that would make the roads safer....

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Jazz wrote:
why not mandatory annual inspections for all motor vehicles..that would make the roads safer....

Jazz, i think it's going to come to this sometime soon. Ont. is one of the few prov. that doesn't have it!! Just look how many cars get hauled off the road on a holiday wknd. by the OPP & MTO on their "Blitz" Two weeks ago they were in Port Perry on a week day & set up on the road to local scrap dealer, newspaper said they stopped something like 28 vehicles, 30 fines written for ,bad paper work, ie.lic. insurance etc. 5 over weight fines & 12 VEHICLES had their plates removed for SAFETY REGULATIONS & UNFIT for the road!!! That tell you anything??? They are going to catch on soon & do it, just as the MOE is out patrolling the roads now, never saw that till awhile ago. $$$$ Talks B/S walks!!!! I plan to attend the meeting & speak if I can, & theres no sense getting all Huffy as that won't work.

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

I have one of those remote control fart machines .... maybe I could sneak in a little early and mount it under the podium ... when the MOE peeps finish answering a question I can "let er rip" ... would be good for a laugh even if it doesn't accomplish anything :)

30AV8 · BURLINGTON, ONT

For the meeting next week, whoever is going, would it be possible to ask these questions as I think they will affect a lot of us down the road. Here is the scenario, its 2013, the owner’s ride is compliant or feels they have done enough to be compliant. He gets pulled over and proves in one way or another he is compliant, and MOE guy says yes ok, but I still want you to have a 2 speed idle test done.

1) Owner ahead of time voluntarily had the 2 speed idle test done and passed and shows this to him. Does this pass change the MOE’s view and lets him on his way?

2) He is sent to an e-test facility and passes, and shows this in court or wherever he needs to prove he passed. Who has to pay for this test? I don’t see why the owner should.

3) He is sent to an e-test facility and fails. Does the owner now have to pay up to $400?? to pass or get a conditional pass that lasts for 2 years like the newer vehicles have done to them?

4) A roadside inspection was done right there. He fails the test. Then what, is he sent to an e-test facility like in point #3?

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

30AV8 wrote:

1) Owner ahead of time voluntarily had the 2 speed idle test done and passed and shows this to him. Does this pass change the MOE’s view and lets him on his way?

My understanding regarding the above question is this .... the MOE is NOT interested in whether your car passed or can pass an emission test, they are interested in equipment violations where the infractions are ticketable. That's the truth right there. I just finished reading a letter in Old Autos by Andy Dominsky where he claims equipment violation checks are for the betterment of the environment for us, our children, and future generations. He also claims that cars with faulty or missing emission equipment can create up to 150 times more polution and 30% worse fuel mileage than a car in good tune and with properly operating emissions equipment. Unfortunately they are full of BS ... if they really and truly are interested in the environment, then an emissions test that shows your car blows clean should be all that is required to send them on their merry way in search of real "gross polluters".

Andy also claims they do NOT target car shows (yet Pugsy was pulled over 1/2 km from the Saturday evening cruise in Ajax ... get this ... ON A LONG WEEKEND ... wonder if "we" the general public paid them double-time for that shift?).

One other point Andy made was that THE fine is $365 for missing equipment ... not $365 per missing item, that does not agree with what some others have posted (someone in Fenelon Falls getting something like $2,000 in fines) but unless someone comes forward with proof, it is all heresay.

Picture this, MOST of the cars on the road are required to be tested every two years, you are hired to find cars driving around that are older than 1987 in hopes of finding some poor sap that can be ticketed ... you are making double-time on a long weekend and feel the need to hand out tickets to justify your job ... common sense dictates that you locate an area where there are going to be a large number of old cars and focus on ticketing some of them. Just because Andy Dominsky "claims" they don't target cruises and shows does NOT make it true.

Here's the best part ... I actually HAVE equipped my car with what I think are the required emissions components in hopes of being legal and therefore helping the enviroment however ... if I do get pulled over and fail their visual test and then ticketed (regardless of whether or not my car has blown clean during a legit sniffer test), I am going to remove the engine I have (it's a 1985 305 SBC) and build and install one of my early blocks (1969 350) which means several things ... I will get worse gas mileage with the 350 I intend to install than with the present 305 (which ends up being bad for the enviroment) ... I will REMOVE the previously installed emissions equipment because I no longer legally need it (which is bad for the environment) and I will then be legally able to drive around in a "gross polluter" when previously I tried to do the "right thing" by drivng a cleaner running car, and failed. The entire point is this, they (the MOE) DO NOT GIVE A RATS ASS ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT ... they are there to write tickets and collect fines PERIOD. No, I do not HAVE to remove the previously installed emission equipment but I will, just so I can show them that I am now legal AND polluting MORE than I was before so it proves your "system" of saving the environment is FLAWED.

This meeting (just like the poorly worded petition) is going to be a waste of time ... of course I could be wrong.

workin class · FINCH, ONT

The be all and end all for me is its getting to a point where some people cant afford a newer compliant vehicle. I a have close friend divorced living in the country her truck did not pass she lost her job no way to get to work now on welfare. I think its doing its job by keeping cars off the road. I believe that's what this is all about politics back in the day cars that were blowing smoke were pulled off the road. GREEN B.S. I DO NOT believe in man made global warming its all taxes and we are all paying more .

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Who all is going & maybe we should meet up before the meeting?? I'm planing on going????

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

dualquadpete wrote:
Who all is going & maybe we should meet up before the meeting?? I'm planing on going????

How about saying who's going!!!!Everybody is "bitchin" about this but they want others to stand up & ask their questions. I can see this for members far away,but theres alot of us in the area. If you don't get involved then don't "whine' when this goes for a $HIT & the Gov puts us off the road!!!! NOW WHOSE GOING other than me????

-- Edited by dualquadpete on Monday 19th of November 2012 02:26:36 PM

workin class · FINCH, ONT

Any one going ask the question to the MOE guy if he was a vintage car guy would he buy a older modified car today. If he says yes ask how would he go about getting it on the road legally. If he says no be careful we may be doomed to the scrap yard. Also can a stone stock vintage car still be sold and driven without a test ? I am way to confused with this crap now.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Depends on what yr. car & if it "had" emm. controls, are they still there?? No tests on what? 88 & down?? I saw on one sight the MOE had it stated that it was "ILLEGAL" to sell a car in Ont. that was not emm compliant. either certified or not!!! Lets see them enforce that one!!!!! I hope this meeting doesn't become a shouting match or people "losing it" on the officals!! That will just make things worse for US!!!!

workin class · FINCH, ONT

SO can a stock pre emm vehicle be licensed for road use in Ontario as of January 1. This simple question needs to be cleared up. Then we need to attack the modified question.I bet there will not be enough time to deal with all issues. And the legal mumbo jumbo will be ridiculous . Next year might be fun thank god we are going to have a election and we need to stand up to these green bullies. Please get the names of all involved with the M.O.E. and post them.

chevyboy · TORONTO, ONTARIO

How about everyone take the time to post 1 or 2 questions here they would like answered by the "officals" and we nominated a cool, level headed person to speak on behalf of us.. Just a though to make it run smooth. also would help to have a good turnout of compliant hot rods for them to crawl over..

hemi43 · ONTARIO

chevyboy wrote:
we nominated a cool, level headed person to speak on behalf of us

Rules me out !!

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

I have to work til 2pm, but will be heading directly to meeting. Leave the door unlocked.

If we are compiling a list of questions, here's mine;

1) Ontario Government supplied information indicates that if all the vintage vehicles in Ontario were parked tomorrow there would be NO measurable difference in the Ontario air quality readings.Therefore, if the actual number of vehicles that no longer require Drive Clean Testing is as diminutive as the Government reports, and the average number of kilometers driven is as little as reported, then why is the equipment still required and the inspections and testing being done?

2) The officers performing the inspections on these vehicles have either received erroneous information as to what is required to be on vehicles or are making their own interpretations of the equipment required. At the same time the public, who want the correct information, are left with vague responses, or a "you should know" position to inquiries. How is accurate information going to available to Ontario Taxpayers?

3) Until accurate access to correct information is made readily available to Ontario Taxpayers is there going to be any amnesty to whatever equipment will be required, to allow Ontarians to comply?

See you Saturday,
the Kid

DaveM · ONTARIO

workin class wrote:
SO can a stock pre emm vehicle be licensed for road use in Ontario as of January 1.

Absolutely!

I'm penciled in for Saturday. I want some more first hand info and clarification.

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

I'm going to flip a coin that day ... might go, might not.

I believe I understand the GENERAL rules regarding emission control compliance (using info gleaned directly from their website and the examples given). I also understand the MOE reps that will be attending this meeting (if they show up) are NOT in any position to change the rules of the game, they were hired to enforce what is presently law, these are not the people we need to have contact with in order to attempt to have laws changed.

My one concern (that comes to mind at the moment) is this ... Why are we not allowed access to the same information SPECIFIC TO EACH ENGINE that they access when doing a roadside inspection? For example, if we buy an engine on its own, without intake or exhaust manifolds, how are we supposed to determine not only what equipment it came with from the factory but also what equipment the MOE believes or see's as being a required emission control component? For example, installing a carb on an engine that left the factory with fuel injection ... does the removal of the knock sensor, due to it not being needed in a carbed application, constitute removal of an emission control component? If the MOE "handbook" states that block is required to be equipped with a knock sensor, then I'm screwed, if their "handbook" does not see a knock sensor as an emission component, then I am legal ... I do NOT want to find out at the side of the road, while being handed a $365 ticket that they actually DO consider a knock sensor an emission component!!! GIVE ME ACCESS TO THE INFO NEEDED IN ORDER TO COMPLY.

Sadly, it is actually in their best interest NOT to allow us access ... if all (or most of us) complied (either by installation of components or installation of early non-emission era engines) they would lose the revenue stream they presently have from handing out tickets and their jobs would no longer be justified.

As my first comment states ... might go, might not. I can get a little "hot under the collar and therefore somewhat vocal at elevated levels" at times and that probably won't be helping this situation at all ....

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

I have 2 more questions, if someone is going to compile a list.

1) When Ontario was first considering a drive clean program they contacted California and British Columbia. Both jurisdictions recommended Ontario avoid this type of program because they would spend far more taxpayers money than they estimated and would not see the results they expected. Both of those results have happened. Why did Ontario ignore the experience of the province and state that had the experience in this matter?

2) As long as vehicles have been built cars have had the engines changed. If it was a used engine, you got what was available. If it was a rebuilt unit, you got what the machine shop sent. If it was a new engine from the dealer, you got what the manufacturer said was the replacement engine. I have an General Motors Performance Parts Catalogue that lists a 350 Chevrolet engine (290 hp) as the replacement engine for a 1940 Ford. Example a 1972 engine in a 1967 car done in 1972? (emissions engine in non-emissions car) I don't think I have to ask who would have that receipt. What consideration is being afforded to vehicles that had what was believed to be the correct replacement for that vehicle from ANY of the stated sources as long as 50 years ago?

I am not trying to dominate the questions asked, and I hope someone is compling a list because I know I will be late and it is not fair to ask the same question 2 or 3 times. If someone else has phrased these better please use that one.

SOMEONE please ask if the thing can be recorded then record it. Organize who will record. Video cameras can be used to record the whole thing (I know you know that). After transcribing recordings the whole thing can be put on someone's web site.

See you Saturday.
the Kid

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

My only question/comment to them is this ...

I understand that I may be required (according to present laws/regulations) to have certain emission control equipment installed on my vehicle, depending on the year of the vehicle, the year of the engine, and the year the engine was installed ... I want access to the information that you (the MOE) use to determine compliance. The answer of "whatever the engine originally came with" is not good enough ...YOU (the MOE) have access to that very specific information, so why are we (the general public) not allowed access. In order for us to comply we need to know EXACTLY what you believe we are required to have.

Roadside scenario: Let's see, catalytic converters? ... check. EGR valve? ... check. PCV valve? ... check. Charcoal can and sealed filler neck? ... check. Hose from the valve cover to the air breather? ... check. Then something the vehicle owner did not believe was emission related isn't present (for reasons I just outlined) and BOOM, $365 fine. Clearly, this person attempted to comply based on all the equipment that was installed but due to the fact that he/she did not have access to EXACTLY what the MOE requires, they failed and were fined.

An answer of "contact the Manufacturer" is not always an option ... who do I contact if I just installed a 1985 AMC 258 six cylinder in my 53 Chev?

Modfather · VICTORIA HARBOUR, ONT

It is with regret I personally will not be there as I have a course I have to attend. However in saying that there will be good representation from our club we have several members that are going to be there. From what I am reading here this could turn out to be a real shat show. Pint and a pound you are correct in what you are saying when you want to flip the coin. The guys you need to lobby will not be there. On the other hand the guys that will be there are reps from the government and more than likely on their own time and if not they are giving a Saturday to meet with us. All I am saying here fellas is please show them some respect they have taken their time to spend with us. If there is a question and answer period please think about what you would like to say before you say it. We all want to see positive results and un known questions we have answered to the best of their ability. They also may not have all of the answers to our questions but the may be able to get them with a little time. I think we have to be understanding if they don't have an immediate answer not telling them they are fools for not knowing. Lets keep it positive and hopefully we can all walk away happy. biggrin biggrin biggrin

-- Edited by Modfather on Thursday 22nd of November 2012 09:10:46 PM

TIME TRAVELLER · NIAGARA REGION, ONT

Some time ago MOE told SVAO that their officers use the MOTOR Emission Control Systems Application manual for their on-road enforcement program, to determine the equipment required for individual vehicles. Mitchell has a similar manual (Emission Control Application Guide). These manuals are available although they're not cheap, but older issues go for about $25 or so on e/Bay. I intend to raise this issue at the meeting as well as the accuracy of these manuals for Canadian cars and engine. Does anyone have any experience with these manuals?

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

"Some time ago MOE told SVAO that their officers use the MOTOR Emission Control Systems Application manual for their on-road enforcement program, to determine the equipment required for individual vehicles. Mitchell has a similar manual (Emission Control Application Guide). These manuals are available although they're not cheap, but older issues go for about $25 or so on e/Bay."

Hopefully we will find out the answer on Sat ... if the above is correct, I'll have to keep an eye on eBay for one.

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

Just took a peek on eBay and there are a lot of books available. Looks to be about $50 or less delivered to your door. Now the big question (which I am sure can be answered through Google) is, does each years new edition include everything prior or just info for the year it was issued. If I need to, I will buy one for 1985 (for my engine) if they do indeed only go by the year on the cover.

Easy to get one of these books, sure hope it is what they use. I'll wait till after the meeting, just incase they don't use these books anymore.

Thanks for the info

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

I've just been informed by the "powers that be" that I'm not going!!!!! Wife has a Christmas singing concert with the Sweet Adalines Chorus 1 to 4 pm Tomorrow in Oshawa!! DAM, oh well "Happy Wife Happy Life"!

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Just got home from wifes Christmas concert at 5:06, waiting to hear what happened, sorry I couldn't go, forgot all about it till I mentioned i was going to Claremont, & got the "evil" eye. OK 8:05 & thinking now that "maybe" most people had the same thoughts as pint &pound & weren't interested in spending some time finding out some answers. I'm really sorry I screwed up on the date as I was looking forward to being there & was "INTERESTED enough to go!!! Crying in your beer later on this isn't the answer.

-- Edited by dualquadpete on Saturday 24th of November 2012 08:07:08 PM

-- Edited by dualquadpete on Saturday 24th of November 2012 08:08:44 PM

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

A few of things before today's SVAO meeting with the M.O.E. guys in Claremont.
Did anyone contact MPP John O'Toole to invite or inquire as to whether he will be attending today's meeting?
Is someone bringing petitions for anyone who has NOT signed yet?
Did anyone compile a list of questions to ask? This would stop from having the same question asked several times, which will frustrate everyone.
Gentlemen, Decorum! We may find ourselves very frustrated today, but exercise restraint. Having everyone angry will serve no-one well and get us going the wrong direction. Patience Grasshopper.
Make sure your question is to the point of what you are asking. DO NOT RAMBLE! DO NOT assume they will understand what you are infuring or what you think you mean. Speak clearly and to the point. They will not ESP what you really meant. Do not use words you do not normally use. Make sure you ask a question that can be answered. I really doubt this will be completely resolved today, but it is a step in the right direction. AND as was previously stated, "a guy I know his brother's wife's neighbour's son" will only waste time and frustrate everyone. I sure hope some of the people with FIRST HAND experience are in attendance and speak up.
REMEMBER! Thank the guys from the M.O.E. after it is over. It was their Saturday too. They did not have to be there and they probably have families.Thank the SVAO guys for hosting this meeting, no matter how it goes. You only need 10 bucks to join and support SVAO.
See you this afternoon.
the Kid

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

I still haven't "flipped the coin" yet as far as whether or not I go. I really only have one question for them and after some poking around on the internet, found that I could actually send the MOE an email with my question ... which I have just done. To be honest I am not really interested in sitting around inside for three hours on a beautiful day like today.

I will post the answer to my question if/when it arrives.

workin class · FINCH, ONT

So same as the have you been pulled over thread.We have no problems with modified vehicles? We are just paranoid? Same as ever no new issues? If I wasn't four hours away each I would have gone.

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

hemi43 wrote:

In all seriousness, I never planned on attending because my car is compliant, but I would have have wanted clarification on a few items. Specifically the "crate" engine laws. I'm still young enough that I plan on building a few more cars in my life, but not if I have to use dinosaur engines from the 60's. The way the law is written today, prevents us from using today's technology offered by the big 3. This really grinds my gears !!!

As far as I know, my car is also compliant. I just want to know their source of info so I can verify that I truly am compliant and to also be a source of information (assuming I purchase the same books they use) for others interested in complying.

Hemi, I am heading out shortly (in the old car to Toronto) or I would look up the exact wording regarding crate engines, but it was something along the lines of "crate engines were never equipped with emission controls so they are not required to have them". This is NOT an exact quote (just going off of memory ... which admittedly could be wrong) ... I would suggest going to the Ministry of the Environment for Ontario website ... clicking on "hot rods" ... then locating the "send us a question" link found on that page and ask them directly. That is what I used when I sent off my question to them.

Bottoms up biggrin

-- Edited by Pint and a Pound on Sunday 25th of November 2012 10:54:25 AM

-- Edited by Pint and a Pound on Sunday 25th of November 2012 10:55:13 AM

123pugsy · MARKHAM, ONT

DaveM wrote:
Alot of LS engines don't have EGR valves or AIR. What is you block ID #'s.
The plot thickens.

No serial #. Its been decked.

Its a 7.4 from a 1998 3/4 ton pickup.

It came with the EGR and the exhaust manifolds had no AIR tubes or bungs.

No AIR sounds great to me. I did check Rock Auto for a listing for a pump for this motor and it didn't show one.

-- Edited by 123pugsy on Sunday 25th of November 2012 12:35:57 PM

hemi43 · ONTARIO

123pugsy wrote:
fatchuk wrote:
Hemi said..
The way the law is written today, prevents us from using today's technology offered by the big 3. This really grinds my gears !!!
Not sure I understood that ..If your using a to-days fuel injected technology engine and your are running all the correct sensors and control module with converters from what I understand that would be in complaince with the current emission regulations ..you would not have to use "dinosaur tech engines from the 60s" I think the way I understand it is they are trying to get us to comply with emission regulations whether we agree or or not with the law..but if your up to date and speed with using new technology you should not have any issue..I think the problem is more troublesome for rat rods and low budget builds and many of the muscle car guys..

This is what I will be building towards. New technology.
Fuel injection, EVAP cannister, cats, EGR valve,PCV valve, no AIR until I get busted, but I will install bungs with plugs in them on the bottoms of my header tubes just to be ready. Engine management will be an LSx ECM.
So I guess its time to order up some cats so I can cut into my X pipe, OUCH!

The new technology is absolutely the way to go, not only for emissions but also for better drivability and economy.

The problem is that it is very difficult to use a donor engine from todays vehicles and use all of the original equipment that came with the car/truck. What I'm talking about is stuff like the engine management. Todays cars not only need the ECM, but they also need the body computer. Another issue is the theft deterent system. If all these components aren't "speaking" to each other, the engine won't run. A way around this is to use an aftermarket computer, but by doing this the engine will not meet the original emission controls.

Take a look at the link below !! I should be able to go to GM and buy that engine and install it in any pre-emission vehicle. This is my problem with this law !!

http://store.chevroletperformance.com/store/SelectProd.do?prodId=7644&redir=true&manufacturer=GM&category=Crate%20Engines&name=ZZ502%20Deluxe%20&model=

-- Edited by hemi43 on Sunday 25th of November 2012 01:22:09 PM

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

I hear ya Pete, this is Pathedic, everybody wanted their questions asked & answers relayed back here, but no one was "INTERESTED" enough to make the effort by the looks of this!! Have to wait a bit longer & see if the Gwillykid made it?? I still feel foolish for getting the dates screwed up as I fully intended to go. I would hope that the SVAO will publish the meetings outcome in Old Autos in a couple of issues from now!! This is typical, want to find out the answers, but won't make the effort to go, "let somebody else do it" It's too "nice" of a day!!!! Pete

DaveM · ONTARIO

They also had a pretty goofy look on their faces when we showed them the engines that are available from GM, that were never available in any GM vehicle.

No emmissions equipement was removed from the ZZ454 engine that I installed. No emmissions parts or specs are available for that engine for 2005. However if you take an engine out of a '91 pick-up truck, that uses the same block, you need to retain all emmissions equipement. (goes for '98 GenVI 7.4L Vortec mentioned recently as well)

I can't find it right now but there was a post and maybe a link of the upcoming revisions. At the top there was a flow chart that addressed a bunch of senarios. Crate motors were addressed.

I agree that interpretation of the regs leads to alot of confusion. (but I'm right! biggrin )

-- Edited by DaveM on Sunday 25th of November 2012 03:24:05 PM

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

dualquadpete wrote:
I hear ya Pete, this is Pathedic, everybody wanted their questions asked & answers relayed back here, but no one was "INTERESTED" enough to make the effort by the looks of this!! Have to wait a bit longer & see if the Gwillykid made it?? I still feel foolish for getting the dates screwed up as I fully intended to go. I would hope that the SVAO will publish the meetings outcome in Old Autos in a couple of issues from now!! This is typical, want to find out the answers, but won't make the effort to go, "let somebody else do it" It's too "nice" of a day!!!! Pete

Wow, that's an un"fricken"believably harsh attitude for someone to take when they themselves clearly couldn't be bothered to attend.

It is quite clear to me that you don't realize this so let try to enlighten you ... YOU YOURSELF are guilty of (and I quote) "wanting to find out answers, but won't make the effort to go, let someone else do it". Oh, and your "excuse" ... THAT might just be the true definition of "pathetic".

Yes, I am the person who said "it was too nice a day" ... and as I also stated that I sent my ONE SINGLE question directly to the MOE in email form. The end result ... a better use for my time AND I still get my question answered.

You would have every right to "spout off" IF you had been in attendance ... but YOU WEREN'T there either now were you ...

I repeat .... UN"FRICKEN"BELIEVABLE .......

DaveM · ONTARIO

hemi43 wrote:

I'm always willing to share my beer !! Just ask DaveM !!

Hey now!!! I've been keeping track. My records show that we are even. smile

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. wink

-- Edited by DaveM on Sunday 25th of November 2012 04:17:22 PM

DaveM · ONTARIO

workin class wrote:
So same as the have you been pulled over thread.We have no problems with modified vehicles? We are just paranoid? Same as ever no new issues? If I wasn't four hours away each I would have gone.

So your thinking that if no one on Ontario Rodder was pulled over, then it didn't happen?

All of the vehicles that I personally know of that have been fined, have been '80's vehicles. All quilty by the regs. All fixed-up, back on the road.

The problem is the wording of and the interpretation of the regulations does catch-up pre emmissions vehicles, customs, modded cars and Hot Rods.

If it is just left to it's own device, then it can't possibly go in our favor.

I planned to go, I didn't, shame on me. I wanted clarification on casting numbers being used as the holly grail to ID moddified engines. That's just not fair.

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

dualquadpete wrote:

Everybody is "bitchin" about this but they want others to stand up & ask their questions. I can see this for members far away,but theres alot of us in the area. If you don't get involved then don't "whine' when this goes for a $HIT & the Gov puts us off the road!!!! NOW WHOSE GOING other than me????

Apparently no one ... including yourself confuse

hemi43 · ONTARIO

123pugsy wrote:

Q: The owner of a 2005 Chevrolet vehicle installed a 2011 crate motor. (The 2011 crate motor was not designed or equipped with any emission components). What are the emission requirements?
A: This vehicle must:
meet the visible emission standards
meet the emission standards set for the original motor (2005).
have all emissions control equipment normallyincluded with the replacement motor (2011), or its equivalent, attached and functioning. Since the crate motor did not come with any emission components, none are required.
meet or exceed the 2005 standards for that original motor if a provincial officer asks for a Drive Clean test. Although emissions control equipment is not required, without it, the car would likely fail the Drive Clean test.

Pugsy; In all of my research, I have never seen that wording I've highlighted above !! Where was this taken from? If this is from a Government site, then that changes a lot of things !! I sure hope it is, because it contradicts what the MOE officers told DaveM and myself.

-- Edited by hemi43 on Sunday 25th of November 2012 04:57:19 PM

Pint and a Pound · AJAX, ONT

HEMI43 ...

That was taken directly off of the Ministry of the Environment for Ontario website.

If an engine was sold to the public with E controls, it needs to keep em ... if the engine was sold to the public without E controls ... it does NOT need them UNLESS it is installed in a vehicle that originally was sold to the public with E controls.

Go to the ministry of the environment site ... go to the bottom of the page and click "hot rods" .... that page will give you everything you need.

-- Edited by Pint and a Pound on Sunday 25th of November 2012 05:20:27 PM

123pugsy · MARKHAM, ONT

hemi43 wrote:
123pugsy wrote:

Q: The owner of a 2005 Chevrolet vehicle installed a 2011 crate motor. (The 2011 crate motor was not designed or equipped with any emission components). What are the emission requirements?
A: This vehicle must:
meet the visible emission standards
meet the emission standards set for the original motor (2005).
have all emissions control equipment normallyincluded with the replacement motor (2011), or its equivalent, attached and functioning. Since the crate motor did not come with any emission components, none are required.
meet or exceed the 2005 standards for that original motor if a provincial officer asks for a Drive Clean test. Although emissions control equipment is not required, without it, the car would likely fail the Drive Clean test.

Pugsy; In all of my research, I have never seen that wording I've highlighted above !! Where was this taken from? If this is from a Government site, then that changes a lot of things !! I sure hope it is, because it contradicts what the MOE officers told DaveM and myself.

-- Edited by hemi43 on Sunday 25th of November 2012 04:57:19 PM

Yep, right off their site. http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/environment/en/category/drive_clean/STDPROD_098206.html

-- Edited by 123pugsy on Sunday 25th of November 2012 05:27:08 PM