Diesel Tuner Jailed

[DukeCanBuildit]

It was an absolute shitbox, but thanks for trying to make me feel good about it!

But, but, but, those honeycomb hubcaps!

Sponsored

 

[dtech]

It was an absolute shitbox, but thanks for trying to make me feel good about it!

1st new car I ever owned was a 1980 Datsun b210 wagon , put over 100k miles on it, tipped the scales at 1800 lbs, powered by I think a 80hp 1.4 ltr engine, only problem I had with it was head gasket, common with Japanese makes but so simple to replace , 3 hr job. I gave that car to my brother and it went another 100k . Arguably a better car than the stuff out of Detroit

 

[Chris M]

But, but, but, those honeycomb hubcaps!

Yep! I had them. The car itself was mustard yellow. It was a hideous piece of crap.

 

[Big Blue]

Many Rangers in here have a tune on their vehicles, Ford Performance even has their own tune on many of their vehicles, the difference is he was doing it on Diesel trucks and not gasoline engines and ends up in jail is nuts.

Two different things. He wasn't just tuning the trucks, he was disabling/tampering with emissions controls on over the road vehicles. Most of the available tunes being run on the ranger are emissions certified, and are simply software changes. They are not removing/modifying any factory equipment. And he was doing it as a commercial for profit business.

Actually some of the things individuals are doing to their trucks, if they lived in a emissions testing state, would disqualify them from being licensed for use on the road. But, being an individual and not a business they need to get caught first. Then about the most that can happen is they need to put it back to stock and get it inspected/tested, maybe a small fine.

He got caught doing it as a business to multiple vehicles involved in interstate commerce. That makes it a federal crime.

Hate me if you want. If you do the crime, do the time.m

 

[awd.nv]

Two different things. He wasn't just tuning the trucks, he was disabling/tampering with emissions controls on over the road vehicles. Most of the available tunes being run on the ranger are emissions certified, and are simply software changes. They are not removing/modifying any factory equipment. And he was doing it as a commercial for profit business.

Actually some of the things individuals are doing to their trucks, if they lived in a emissions testing state, would disqualify them from being licensed for use on the road. But, being an individual and not a business they need to get caught first. Then about the most that can happen is they need to put it back to stock and get it inspected/tested, maybe a small fine.

He got caught doing it as a business to multiple vehicles involved in interstate commerce. That makes it a federal crime.

Hate me if you want. If you do the crime, do the time.m

So it would be like a Ranger with high flow CAT on a California registered vehicle getting fined and then CA going after the CAT manufacturer. Shoot lets add in the exhaust companies as many of them are not CA legal either despite many of them having warehouses in CA.

 

[Big Blue]

So it would be like a Ranger with high flow CAT on a California registered vehicle getting fined and then CA going after the CAT manufacturer. Shoot lets add in the exhaust companies as many of them are not CA legal either despite many of them having warehouses in CA.

OK, I do not live in CA and do not know all the laws out there. (I will refrain from commenting of what I think of the ones I do know about.) Other than if it is an emissions related part and does not have a CAFE certification it can not be sold to an address in CA. I do not believe it can't be manufactured or shipped FROM CA to a state where it is legal. If you have such a part on your vehicle and move to CA you will be denied a CA license until you replace it and your vehicle passes inspection.

Again the issue with the person in the article was, he was modifying/tampering with/defeating federally mandated emissions related devices on multiple vehicles used on interstate commerce as a business. Clearly a violation of current federal law.

 

[awd.nv]

OK, I do not live in CA and do not know all the laws out there. (I will refrain from commenting of what I think of the ones I do know about.) Other than if it is an emissions related part and does not have a CAFE certification it can not be sold to an address in CA. I do not believe it can't be manufactured or shipped FROM CA to a state where it is legal. If you have such a part on your vehicle and move to CA you will be denied a CA license until you replace it and your vehicle passes inspection.

Again the issue with the person in the article was, he was modifying/tampering with/defeating federally mandated emissions related devices on multiple vehicles used on interstate commerce as a business. Clearly a violation of current federal law.

Right, and I do not know if he had this disclaimer but basically every aftermarket part I have purchased over the years while I lived in CA would mention "Intended for off-road use" be it cams, heads, etc. I would assume he had some sort of disclaimer on his work in the fine print.

If he did, and they still went after him, that is my problem with this.

What would the difference be in CA if you lived in CA, had parts installed in Nevada and then drove it back to CA where you live. You would have issues during smog inspection but it would be like CA suing the shop out of state for installing the parts.

You can't even get certain shower heads shipped to CA because of their flow rate but people often ship things to friends out of state and then they ship them into CA.

When we have states ok with public drug use and even providing clean needles for the drug users, we are going to send this guy to jail? Weed is still federally illegal but weed shops are ok in certain states? The Feds just pick their winners and losers.

 

[Big Blue]

Right, and I do not know if he had this disclaimer but basically every aftermarket part I have purchased over the years while I lived in CA would mention "Intended for off-road use" be it cams, heads, etc. I would assume he had some sort of disclaimer on his work in the fine print.

If he did, and they still went after him, that is my problem with this.

What would the difference be in CA if you lived in CA, had parts installed in Nevada and then drove it back to CA where you live. You would have issues during smog inspection but it would be like CA suing the shop out of state for installing the parts.

You can't even get certain shower heads shipped to CA because of their flow rate but people often ship things to friends out of state and then they ship them into CA.

When we have states ok with public drug use and even providing clean needles for the drug users, we are going to send this guy to jail? Weed is still federally illegal but weed shops are ok in certain states? The Feds just pick their winners and losers.

Way off topic!

I am not going to continue a debate of various individual state laws.

While we will probably never know all the details of this case. The facts are he made a business of making illegal modifications, for a profit, for other people to vehicles used in a federally controlled industry. I would suspect that the people that he did them for probably also got in trouble.

I'm out of here.

 

[JohnnyO]

It’s a trade off. More fuel for better emissions. It’s no different than it was with gas engines in the mid to late 70’s. The cars were pigs, gutless and got worse mileage but polluted less. At that time many cities had big smog problems which although not perfect aren’t near as bad. It had to happen. Today’s population combined with those old cars would be a disaster today.

What?

In 1973 my dad traded our 1968 Chevy Impala on a new Pontiac Catalina. The Catalina had a 400 2bbl and got 9 mpg going downhill with a tailwind. We had some bad winters in the mid-70's and every morning before I went to school I had to take the air cleaner lid off, spray some Quick Start, and warm it up so it would start for my mom later. My dad usually drove our second car, a 1964 Impala, with zero emissions equipment, and it would start right up in below-zero temps no problem and got much better gas mileage.

 

[dtech]

In 1973 my dad traded our 1968 Chevy Impala on a new Pontiac Catalina. The Catalina had a 400 2bbl and got 9 mpg going downhill with a tailwind. We had some bad winters in the mid-70's and every morning before I went to school I had to take the air cleaner lid off, spray some Quick Start, and warm it up so it would start for my mom later. My dad usually drove our second car, a 1964 Impala, with zero emissions equipment, and it would start right up in below-zero temps no problem and got much better gas mileage.

Well difficult to start is one thing but the true measure of 70 vehicles did it run on after shutdown, or to keep on topic aka dieseling.

 

[DukeCanBuildit]

In 1973 my dad traded our 1968 Chevy Impala on a new Pontiac Catalina. The Catalina had a 400 2bbl and got 9 mpg going downhill with a tailwind. We had some bad winters in the mid-70's and every morning before I went to school I had to take the air cleaner lid off, spray some Quick Start, and warm it up so it would start for my mom later. My dad usually drove our second car, a 1964 Impala, with zero emissions equipment, and it would start right up in below-zero temps no problem and got much better gas mileage.

If I recall correctly, the directions on the can said to spray it in the breather opening for 1-2 seconds - or something of that nature.

Yeah, that ain’t gonna work! These are the proper instructions…

Remove the breather cover and spray generously right into the carburetor - continue spraying until your finger is frost bitten - hold the choke open with a screwdriver if needed - step back and tell your friend to crank it over - when it doesn’t start, lean in and continue spraying directly into the carburetor while yelling to your friend, “KEEP CRANKIN’ IT”! - after it starts and your friend floors it and and starts revving the pants off it, making your screwdriver dance around the carburetor, yell at him “STOP! WHAT THE F**K ARE YOU DOING?” Then, tell him how stupid he is and that you told him not to touch the gas pedal - remove screwdriver if one was used - leave the breather cover off so you don’t have to remove it later - toss breather cover in the back seat - slam the hood shut.

But I guess they didn’t have room for all of that on the can.

 

[got3fords]

If I recall correctly, the directions on the can said to spray it in the breather opening for 1-2 seconds - or something of that nature.

Yeah, that ain’t gonna work! These are the proper instructions…

Remove the breather cover and spray generously right into the carburetor - continue spraying until your finger is frost bitten - hold the choke open with a screwdriver if needed - step back and tell your friend to crank it over - when it doesn’t start, lean in and continue spraying directly into the carburetor while yelling to your friend, “KEEP CRANKIN’ IT”! - after it starts and your friend floors it and and starts revving the pants off it, making your screwdriver dance around the carburetor, yell at him “STOP! WHAT THE F**K ARE YOU DOING?” Then, tell him how stupid he is and that you told him not to touch the gas pedal - remove screwdriver if one was used - leave the breather cover off so you don’t have to remove it later - toss breather cover in the back seat - slam the hood shut.

But I guess they didn’t have room for all of that on the can.

OMG, I can visualize that clear as day! Been there, done that.

 

[got3fords]

In 1973 my dad traded our 1968 Chevy Impala on a new Pontiac Catalina. The Catalina had a 400 2bbl and got 9 mpg going downhill with a tailwind. We had some bad winters in the mid-70's and every morning before I went to school I had to take the air cleaner lid off, spray some Quick Start, and warm it up so it would start for my mom later. My dad usually drove our second car, a 1964 Impala, with zero emissions equipment, and it would start right up in below-zero temps no problem and got much better gas mileage.

We had a '68 Impala for while, drove it for a couple of years. Loved that smooth 2 speed tranny.

 

[DukeCanBuildit]

Yep! I had them. The car itself was mustard yellow. It was a hideous piece of crap.

Sure, but look what you’re driving today…

Admit it, you wish you had it right now.

 

[Chris M]

Sure, but look what you’re driving today…

Admit it, you wish you had it right now.

I forget the year model of mine, but that looks close. And that's actually probably the only one of my previous cars that I wouldn't want to have back. I hated it pretty much from day one.

Sponsored