RPM Act.

Status
Not open for further replies.

motorheadmike

Geezer
Nov 18, 2009
8,976
27,522
113
Saskatchewan, Truckistan
Technically political. But, a bipartisan effort. Aimed at the core of this hobby. And the crap that happens down there flows up here - so you need to get on this.



Why am I raising an issue that is common knowledge, but probably sitting low on your radar?

Because EPA enforcement, of valid laws, is kicking into overdrive. Over the last two years they were focused on the diesel tuners and defeat devices. Good. The brodozer movement was horrible and brought unwanted attention. The problem is they opened Pandora's Box and now the EPA is gunning for the whole industry. An industry that is ratting each other out- litigation and financial losses will do that to people's character.

Companies are doing what they can to align themselves with the spirit of the law. Which is good... except where it isn't.

Like the right to repair.

In response to this we are seeing people taking public action to preserve the progress the hobby has made in the last 20 years. Specifically tuning. Folks have started archiving older versions of HPTuners to preserve its functionality as it relates to turning off DTCs in swaps where emissions control devices aren't required. I am a firm believer that you should maintain the emissions control devices your car came with... however there seems to be an over reach. And the fines are serious, and being administered by ill informed public servants.

This is just the tip of the iceberg.

What I am stressing here is: that if there was something you wanted to do that this issue touches, do it now - because getting access to those options down the line may be drying up fast.

These laws existed long before the last two US administrations - so lay off that side of it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

GP403

Administrator
Site Admin
Moderator
Feb 25, 2005
4,515
4,938
113
Rolla, MO
I'll allow it, provided it does NOT go into the usual territory, if it does I'll shut it down with extreme prejudice.

This seems to be a response to that proposed rule/act/law/whatever from a few years ago that SEMA got their panties all in a wad over. Yeah, it was a terrible proposal, obviously written by someone who obviously didn't even know that motorsports or "the aftermarket" existed. And they rightfully campaigned to get it retracted. Looks like this RPM act has been floating around for a couple of years now, maybe covid slowed the process or forced it to be shelved, I have no idea.

But we can talk about the merits or lack thereof in this like functioning adults and without the usual nonsense, correct?
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

blk7gxn

Royal Smart Person
Feb 7, 2019
1,390
1,886
113
EPA.....CLC.....I find it a little humorous and yet detestable. When I posted up two weeks ago about an informative article about the CLC and their plans for our beloved ICE, no politics mentioned in my post, yet it was deleted within 5 minutes after Mike's 3...2...1...yet this EPA article is allowed? "Technically political. But, a bipartisan effort." ??? The first sentence within itself is an admission that the article is political, rules are rules, unless they have changed?
 

motorheadmike

Geezer
Nov 18, 2009
8,976
27,522
113
Saskatchewan, Truckistan
EPA.....CLC.....I find it a little humorous and yet detestable. When I posted up two weeks ago about an informative article about the CLC and their plans for our beloved ICE, no politics mentioned in my post, yet it was deleted within 5 minutes after Mike's 3...2...1...yet this EPA article is allowed? "Technically political. But, a bipartisan effort." ??? The first sentence within itself is an admission that the article is political, rules are rules, unless they have changed?

It's how I framed it: Take a hard look at specific things impacted by the enforcement of legislation. If it effects you, take action.

Buy the stuff or do the thing that may be gone soon.

Personally, I am spending money I wouldn't have otherwise spent to get the things I wanted in 2026.

Be forward-thinking.

Must be the military strategist in me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

81cutlass

Comic Book Super Hero
Feb 16, 2009
4,654
13,596
113
Western MN
I did the submit a request thing.

Name, email, address, only mildly painful representative follow up emails in my burner email.

Worth a shot.

I saw Stainless Works basically said we aren't doing any cat-less headers and Pypes won't offer their G body kit without cats now soooo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

GP403

Administrator
Site Admin
Moderator
Feb 25, 2005
4,515
4,938
113
Rolla, MO
EPA.....CLC.....I find it a little humorous and detestable. When I posted up two weeks ago about an informative article about the CLC and their plans for our beloved ICE, no politics mentioned in my post, yet it was deleted within 5 minutes after Mike's 3...2...1...yet this EPA article is allowed? "Technically political. But, a bipartisan effort." ??? The first sentence within itself is an admission that the article is political, rules are rules, unless they have changed?

OK. *cracks knuckles*

#1 I was literally getting on a plane at the time, saw a headline that read:

And You Thought Fuel Prices Were High Now!?..... U.S. CARBON TAX Here We Come!​

and yeah, that subject is simply bitching about taxes and fuel prices bc of taxes. red flag #1

I just now took the time to read the article linked, and I can find no correlation, the whole thing read (and still does) like a manifesto. I give you...

#2

statements like this:

It seems contradictory that they would support such a scheme while at the same time planning to significantly increase their oil output. So why would they do so?

emphasis *yours*

or this:

As an ending thought, has anyone addressed or mentioned the amount of environmental pollutants caused by the production AND THE disposal OF solar Panels!???? Of coarse not, like I stated prior, its a dirty money laundering Scheme! P.E.R.I.O.D!


again, emphasis yours.

or even

this scheme these environmental nut jobs are imposing on us

The formatting made it appear to be a copy-pasta from said article (I see now that it wasn't), and I had neither the time nor ability (airplane mode engage) to moderate the ensuing storm that was about to happen. And in the moments before I deleted it, there was one comment about "greedy politicians" and another going off the rails about animal cruelty and cheeseburgers (wtf). Lets not even address the "global warming is fake"

So yeah, it disappeared when I had the chance. I'll challenge you to spot the differences.

Seeing as this post has much more relevancy to the reason we are all here in the first place, and it *didn't* go off the rails, yeah, I'm allowing it. Maybe next time keep the "the sky is falling! they're all out to get you!" pearl-clutching rhetoric to a minimum. SEMA went down that road with their initial response to whatever that stupid act was that was proposed, and tbh it turned me off of them permanently.

Am I for cleaner reenable energy, YES! Am I for cleaner burning internal combustion engines (ICE) YES! More MPG? YES! NOT A BAN on ICE!

Yeah, me too. But *I* don't believe for one second that anyone's going to come knocking on my door demanding to confiscate my cars, neither do I think a blanket nation-wide ban on the ICE will happen any time soon. Common sense will (should) prevail, and we can either adapt and survive or die mad about it. 🤷

Also see...

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

blk7gxn

Royal Smart Person
Feb 7, 2019
1,390
1,886
113
Its all good, apparently its who you are on this site, coat it with as much frosting as you like, its still sh*t
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 1 user

GP403

Administrator
Site Admin
Moderator
Feb 25, 2005
4,515
4,938
113
Rolla, MO
A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down, they say.

or the TL;DR version:

This thread is about a completely non-partisan (and quite small) bill that would simply add an exemption to the clean air act for motorsports/hobbyist/racing purposes and I'm 99% sure everyone here is on board with that. You, me, pretty much everyone. If someone isn't I'd be glad to hear why.

It doesn't involve taxes, gas prices, global warming, "overreach," banning the ICE, or any number of hot-potato topics that do nothing but stir up sh*t and get everyone's BP up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

1 RARE T

Master Mechanic
Jul 14, 2015
282
434
63
God forbid anyone state public facts which people have campaigned on.

Those would be considered an opinion and thus the hammer would fall.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

ssn696

Living in the Past
Supporting Member
Jul 19, 2009
5,551
6,701
113
Permanent Temporary
It's how I framed it: Take a hard look at specific things impacted by the enforcement of legislation. If it effects you, take action.

Buy the stuff or do the thing that may be gone soon.

Personally, I am spending money I wouldn't have otherwise spent to get the things I wanted in 2026.

Be forward-thinking.

Must be the military strategist in me.
What he said. Except in my case it has been to hoard Gbody parts when I find them. One day I’ll assemble all the bits into each car and actually drive one around. I may have to set up my fuel system for E100, and buy a cornfield in Iowa, but I will get some seat time eventually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Status
Not open for further replies.

GBodyForum is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com. Amazon, the Amazon logo, AmazonSupply, and the AmazonSupply logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.

Please support GBodyForum Sponsors

Classic Truck Consoles Dixie Restoration Depot UMI Performance

Contact [email protected] for info on becoming a sponsor