Hooooo boy. Now this feels like the late 60s, when it all just changed.
https://www.thedrive.com/cars-101/41...tune-flash-faq
and
https://www.motortrend.com/news/cali...modifications/

 

Oh California!
Yet another reason to move there.

 

That was one of the reasons I left there and moved to florida.

 

I am fortunate in two ways, I don't live in the US let alone California and there are no "smog tests" or anything like it where I am.
That said, it seems there is a massive problem with the relevant legislation as it applies to ECU tunes in general.
According to the "The Drive" article the enforcement is part of California's Vehicle Code and is based especially on Section 27156, parts (C) and (D) of that code quote:

"(c) No person shall install, sell, offer for sale, or advertise any device, apparatus, or mechanism intended for use with, or as a part of, a required motor vehicle pollution control device or system that alters or modifies the original design or performance of the motor vehicle pollution control device or system.

(d) If the court finds that a person has willfully violated this section, the court shall impose the maximum fine that may be imposed in the case, and no part of the fine may be suspended."

Putting aside the fact that no rational person could consider CO2 to be "pollution" in any sense of the word (despite what the EPA says, but I did say rational!), I suggest the key phrase is "pollution control device or system".
If an ECU tune does nothing but increase engine power and/or torque and it does not effect or alter any "pollution control device or system" such as a catalytic converter, a particulate filter, an EGR system or a PCV system etc, and it does not effect or alter the emission of actual pollutants such as SO2, NOx, particulates etc then all it is doing "emissions" wise is (theoretically and only sometimes) increasing the amount of CO2 "emitted" and it is NOT in breach of this statute. Also, even if CO2 was considered to be a pollutant I struggle to think of any actual "pollution control device or system" that effects the CO2 output of an ICE.
I am not a lawyer (although I dealt with and enforced and interpreted and even wrote some laws for nearly 35 years) but I think it would be interesting if someone with legal knowledge and/or advice challenged any enforcement of this statute.

 

My understanding is the VAP tune can be reverted back to the factory setting for trips to the dealer service department (or state emission testing sites). Then re-installed when you return home. Must have a fully charged battery when doing this to avoid issues.

 

See the last few posts in this thread: https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/f...8s-v8r-158091/
Not sure yet if that will work for this purpose.

 

My question is why would California fail any car with the original factory tune? Regardless of how many times the ECU was flashed! (Yes I had a performance tune, but reverted back to the factory tune so my car will be compliant with the new emissions requirement!). In that scenario any previously tuned car would never be able to pass emission test,

 

Q. How fast do you want to go?
A. How much do you want to spend?

The price just went up $800.00 in California to go faster.
https://parts.jaguarraleigh.com/oem-...CABEgJdnfD_BwE

 

An Ecu takes inputs from fuel pressure atmospheric conditions, engine load, rpm, o2 sensors, etc., and outputs an ignition timing, fuel injector pulse etc.

so an ECU with its fuel maps and timing maps and other engine control parameters is part of a pollution control.

the car/engine was sold to the public after jaguar submitted the data representing the various pollution related emissions and the EpA approved the results. The EPA says yay or nay depending if the car meets its requirements. Those results that allowed the car to be sold are dependent on the car being built to a specified recipe. If you change anything that is not approved or allowed that changes anything that affects emissions then youve broken the law

 

nb: California is just ahead of what's going to happen for everyone, so it's a bit short sighted to take angry swings at a single state. CA car decisions move the needle for the entire industry, and with all the weather events around us, it's obvious this would have happened eventually, everywhere. Hey, we should be sorta proud we completely decimated the planet in about 5 greedy generations. At least we're gonna try and save ourselves now. However, we're sorta threading the needle on the "humans can innovate ourselves of the problems we created" trope. It'll be real, real interesting to watch the next decade of this planet. Probably not fun tho.

 

I think it's a stretch to say "we've completely decimated the planet"...
If anything, we're in better shape now than 50 years ago, at least in the US. Back then, you couldn't breathe in LA, Lake Erie was dead an littering was a social norm. I'm surprised that a lot of other, less affluent countries seem to be ahead of us when it comes to respecting the environment - Costa Rica is a model for responsible land management.
point taken though - we can always do better...

 

Nothing California or the United States do will make much of an impact if the rest of the world's gross polluters don't step up. And if anybody thinks CARB is actually implementing this for the good of the environment, and not as yet another way to bilk the residents of CA...I just don't know what to tell you. Either that or its part of their long-game of punishing anybody who still owns a gasoline powered car and forcing everyone into electrics. Then we'll see how well the power grid holds up and how much electricity prices will skyrocket.

Whatever will they replace all that wonderful gas tax revenue with?

 

I believe Texas is concerned those pesky Tesla owners aren't contributing anything to them ICE funded roads so the politocos are planning an EV tax supplement to vehicle registration annually...

 

Seems to me Uncle Fishbits got it right with 5 generations, not decades...so looking back to the heart of the early Industrial Revolution is on point. Fully agree that the US' pollution was more severe in the 60's or so in the US. . And I spent some quality time in the 60's in Blighty as well, when coal was the primary heating and energy source and that stuff's residue coated everything. But isn't that the point, despite XJ8JR's pessimism? We've proven we can fix this. I'm all for having lots of horsepower, but also am all in for doing so with a rational eye on taking care of our home. I want my politicians to give a damn about the environment, but also want them to pursue meaningful solutions...not sure slapping car enthusiasts around is worth the effort.

 

$1200 - $1500 for earlier models depending on vin.

https://parts.jaguarraleigh.com/oem-...UtMGwtdjgtZ2Fz

 

Is an ECU replacement drop in? Meaning I could buy one and easily swap it out for one that was tuned before warranty repairs or emissions testing?

 

So it's okay for Bosch to modify all of those diesel engine ECU's.

I was talking to a early 2000s BMW 3 series diesel owner, his car's system gets modified all the time to bring the car into compliance, it's cost him MPG over the last few years which is why he bought the diesel to begin with......

 

well spoke!

 

There's a new solar grid tax to compensate for the solar users not using the grid energy, or putting it back into the grid, etc. I don't have solar, but my pop was telling me about it. Number crunchers will always weigh where the taxes are lost with where they need to go. But man... instead of *US*, wouldn't mind seeing our taxes offset by less shell companies and a higher corporate tax rate. =/ I love when they're all like "PAY YOUR TAXES, DON'T LITTER OR POLLUTE, SUPPORT YOUR COMMUNITY, USE LESS WATER" when the companies don't pay taxes, litter and pollute, use all the water, especially from municipal wells to sell in bottles...

 

It makes no sense to me why compliance isn't 100% based on the emissions output and nothing else. Why does it matter what the car is doing under the hood as long as the stuff coming out the tailpipe passes the standards for emissions? Seems like another case of CA trying to control people and tax them "just because they can", trying to drum up more tax revenue from their residents. I don't see how this kind of "law" helps to actually reduce any emissions, but rather seems meant to control and limit what people are allowed to do with the cars they own.