EPA Seeks to Prohibit Race Cars

[70 copo]

The latest from the UK NO more ICE vehicles in only 15 years.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/32084/...ngines-to-2035

[Burd]

So you mean the "slippery slope" is a real thing? Who'd a thunk it.

What?

[70 copo]

Well it is a bit more complex than "water is wet"

If you say "we are going to ban your antique or classic cars" Ban your tow vehicle, ban your race car, ban parts for your engine, and so on - then that has an immediate polarizing effect and removes any room you have to shape opinion or perceptions because you are immediately messing with private property use and ownership.

So the tactic of late is to nudge and cloak the real objective while wrapping the entire issue in layers of media and social distraction while you employ generational shift as a tactic. This is the "we have the save the environment movement" which targets our kids and ironically only attacks the rights of free countries while developing countries and the authoritarian mega polluters (china) are selectively 100% ignored. The absence of any concentrated focus on the real modern day source of pollution will indicate to open minded people what the real intent behind this "movement" really is, and by the way this is not at all new - the very same fear mongering was employed 45 years ago about the dangers of Tetraethyl lead (TEL) and we all know how that worked out for the domestic auto industry in the 1970's.

This thread originally started as educational commentary on potential rule making by the EPA with the potential to negatively impact our hobby. I have chosen to continue to update it to report on the progress being made world wide in what at this point is undeniably a blatant effort to restrict the future ability for anyone to enjoy, restore and keep any internal combustion automobile.

It is clear now what the end game is so I will operate within the rules set by the forum and simply continue to update this information as changes are announced.

Take a Kid to a car show, a race, take them for a ride in your muscle car, Your hobby and our automotive heritage depends on it.

[Lynn]

I have still not seen ONE proposal by any Country, State, Province or municipality that makes OWNING an internal combustion engine (ICE) car illegal, OR occasionally driving an ICE car illegal, even after 2035 or 2040 (or 2050 for that matter…. in which case, like Charley says, I don’t know that it matters to me). The only ban involving a collector car was driving downtown Paris, not something I am planning to do any time soon.

However, soon after its initial implementation, banning cars manufactured prior to 1997, an exception was made (June 2016) for classic cars. What they are targeting are cars that are old (but not REALLY old like our collector cars) and dirty and driven daily.

Norway has maybe the most progressive policy towards all electric vehicles. Even in Norway, the collector cars will be exempt.

You can’t just read the headline that says: “All ICE Cars Banned by 2025 (or 2030, 2035 or 2040) and ignore the actual article, which obviously contains much more detail than the headline.

All of the proposals purport to bans the sale of a NEW car with ICE. While many also aim to speed up the switch to all electric vehicles by various means; however, not one actual proposal suggests taking all the Duesenbergs or muscle cars away. They are not banning cars already on the road. Do you seriously believe a consumer could purchase an ICE car in 2029, and then be forced to send it to the crusher in 2030? He or she will just not be able to buy another ICE in 2030.

Is the internal combustion engine on the way out? Absolutely; although, IF (a big “if” I know) someone develops an engine control system that is virtually emission free, there would be no more argument against the ICE. Necessity is the mother of invention. If you had told me in 1974 that cars in 2020 burn as clean as they do now AND that those cars would incredibly more efficient and powerful, I would have laughed. Of course, I was wrong.

Post #68 implies that the State of NY wants to go to war against the car. Clearly they are trying to figure out ways to reduce the number of cars on the road on a daily basis. Again, I have seen nothing to indicate the State wants to go after collector cars. The implication is that the Gov is considering compulsory helmet laws for auto drivers. First, if it is applied across the board (and no reason to believe it won’t be) then it would ALSO apply to EVs. Second, it isn’t like there is an actual movement for compulsory helmet laws for automobiles. The ENTIRE part of the story that suggest so is as follows:

Streetsblog NYC’s Gersh Kuntzman then asked Cuomo if he might consider helmet compulsion for car drivers, given that vast numbers of car drivers involved in fatal crashes die as a result of head trauma.
After a long pause, the governor said: “I’m thinking.”
He then followed up with: “I don’t know enough. I’d like to see the data.”

That’s it.

While the ICE cars in their current iterations clearly have a bulls eye on them; muscle cars do not.

This thread started with an article about the EPA wanting to ban any race car that started life as a street car. That proposal was made in Feb. 2016. While someone may have posted the UPDATE on this thread, I did not see it. Five and one half months later, the proposal was withdrawn, as cooler heads prevailed.

“Update 7/28/16: While the EPA has withdrawn the proposal, the agency continues to assert authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate the modification of vehicles used for competition. As a result, the Recognizing the Protection of Motorsports (RPM) Act was created, a bipartisan bill in Congress that will guarantee that street vehicles can continue to be modified into race cars used exclusively for the track.”

Maybe the sky will start falling in on our hobby at some point. For now, it is not. This is just my opinion. You are free to read the same stories and draw different conclusions. I don’t have a crystal ball.

[70 copo]

Ok Lynn,

I get what you are saying.

Tell you what lets just take what is being proposed literally world wide at face value and then hindsight will be 20-20 within this thread.

You obviously have an opinion that you have voiced here very clearly within this thread previously, so debating you on the merits will get us exactly no place fast and since I do not want this thread to go the way of the collector car fraud thread, lets keep it nice shall we?

[Lynn]

I agree. You know, I remember watching an interview of Ruth Graham (wife of Billy Graham) back in the 70's.
The interviewer was obviously trying to stir some controversy (which I do NOT believe either of us are trying to do) and asked her if she agreed with everything her husband said.

Her response was perfect: "I learned a long time ago, if two people agree on everything, one of them isn't necessary."

I can appreciate different points of view. No need to be anything other than nice.

[70 copo]

This was an OP-Ed across the pond just two years ago:

"As the Judges force the Government to ban the sale of even new petrol cars, classic car auction price falls of unknown depths are very likely in the short term."

"As local authorities ban old cars from even urban areas, fossil fuels are in very real danger of disappearing from what will be a dwindling number of forecourts."

"If the politicians prevent you from driving your classic car where you want to go and you are unable to refuel it when you get there, unless you have a motor museum, then there would appear to be little point in ownership."

Here: https://drivetribe.com/p/the-2040-pe...RNevyo7JUlWBww

[70 copo]

The EPA is back at it again:

EPA Declares War Against Makers of Emissions Defeat Devices

This spells trouble for the aftermarket industry and tuning community alike.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/31848/...defeat-devices

[70 copo]

And the Diesel Bros got the winning ticket.... Joel Rosen has the original T-Shirt from way back in 1975.


https://www.thedrive.com/news/32533/...ruck-emissions

[70 copo]

Sorry I cannot resist.