Legal implications of removing cats

[madman]

On my recent visit to my cali home I was talking to a friend - attorney - about enviromental protection /human rights laws in US vs. Europe with respect to a terrible air quality in all over Europe due to majority of cars burning diesel (don't ever let diesels go mainstream in US! Cancer from particles and that smell!). We also run across the cats removal question and here is what he had to say:

'Ok, you bought $100k car. You drive it screaming out loud 'I got money'. Now you remove your cats and let everyone smell it. Next thing you know is that you have subpoena to appear as defendant accused from deliberate poisoning. And if you want things ugly your entire neighborough is on the list as plaintiffs...'

yadayada... you get the picture what he was saying. I am thinking that things are not always black and white.... any thoughts?

 

[viperbob]

Even though we have lots of stupid rules this is the US and you can get around removing the cats, even in California. I doubt there will ever be a lawsuit against any of us cat-less Viper owners!

 

[SylvanSRT]

who cares if the state you live in does not have emissions sniffer testing, just save them in case you need them to put back on.

 

[zorroespanol]

Except my old RT/10, all my cars that I had before passed emissions test without cats. I don;t know about the SRT because we don't have emissions testing anymore.

My point, modern cars run very efficient, it is the older clunckers that pollute as much as 300 times more than a regular car, I read an article about this once.

And yes, Diesel smoke is disgusting... one of the reasons why I don't live in Madrid anymore.

 

[AviP]

I don't there are any legal implications at this time. Just moral ones!

 

[SylvanSRT]

actually the most recently developed diesel engines are not too bad the Mercedes and VW for example

 

[kcobean]

To me, the civil lawsuit potential is laughable because proving in a court of law that your car is responsible for any health related issues a person may have would be near impossible.

However, it is DEFINITELY a violation of federal law. In fact, hi-flow cats are a clear violation of federal law as laid out in this document:

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/factshts/catcvrts.pdf

which states that a converter may be replaced "if the vehicle is more than 5 years old or has more than 50,000 miles* (8 years/80,000 miles for 1995 and newer vehicles) and a legitimate need for replacement has been established and appropriately documented (e.g., a plugged converter or unrepairable exhaust leaks)."

and

"Aftermarket converters subject to the enforcement policy requirements cannot be used for
replacement if:
(1) the existing converter is present and functioning properly; or
(2) the replacement is under recall or warranty; or
(3) the vehicle is returning from overseas use."

 

[madman]

I thought he exaggerated the issue but he was pulling this federal law mandating all engines over 20hp being equipped with 3 way converter and also named CO as poisonous gas and NOx as gas irritating mucus membrane while cats are supposed catch these.

As for diesels - even the cleanest diesel will get worn and after couple tens of thousands of miles will produce odor and particles. Euro car companies only want to steal US market share luring consumers on higher MPG and hiding or downplaying diesel issues. Come to any euro city and walk the streets...

 

[Tom F&L GoR]

Some of you guys need to study the issue more. Modern diesels using low sulfur fuels are some of the cleanest, most efficient and highest torque engines produced. They are easily turbocharged for added performance. While you may complain about a little odor, realize that CO from a diesel is extremely low, and extremely high from a gasoline engine. It is quite toxic but does not smell. Pick your poison.

I'm afraid many of your perceptions have been polluted by the lame attempt by GM to produce a V-8 diesel. If that and a belching garbage truck are your examples, then that is the same as comparing modern gasoline engines to those smelly carbureted engines of the '60s.

And finally, you should want to have diesels in the US. Gasoline engines are high producers of CO and HC, diesels are high in NOx and particulates. Emissions regulations are designed to control air quality; so the fewer gasoline engines (i.e. more diesels) the less pressure there is on future gasolines engines to have even more of the emissions controls you are complaining about.

The only other option is CO2 requirements, which is only accomplished by one way - less fuel consumption. Ummm, I think that is the last thing a Viper owner would want.

 

[jtupper]

I agree, it would be absurd to see a lawsuit against someone for the "health risks" involved with not having a cat installed. If there happened to be such a lawsuit, I would start taking names of each and every person who was ever smoking on the sidewalk and sue all of them. Second hand smoke is proven to cause serious illness and even yet cities are having a difficult time banning smoking from public places.

 

[Back-In-Black]

The you asked for "Thoughts"...

We are always slipping down that slippery slope and sooner or later some left wing trial attorney is going to be successful at prosecuting some unfortunate soul for manslaughter for poisoning some loser who dropped dead from inhaling no-cat Viper exhaust...

Until then, as long as Al Gore and the Hollywood left are burning 1000 gallons an hour in thier private jets, heating and cooling thier 20,000 s.f. Mansions, wearing million dollar gold chains obtained by strip mining and traveling in stretch Hummer limousines getting 5 MPG... I am going to burn as much gas as possible without cats and STILL be comparitively considered an "environmentalist" because I am so much more efficent than those two faced brainwashed, guilt mongering hypocrites.

SMOKE EM WHILE YOU GOT EM!

 

[Billy The Kidd]

WELL SAID!!!!!!

 

[SylvanSRT]

pretty much "do as i say not as i do" Mr. Gore


and dont take that tag off your matressess either

 

[jtupper]

This just in...Mr. Environmentalist just recieved a $2,439 bill for utilities. Holy $hit, now that's what I call an Inconvenient Truth!!! I love irony.

 

[Bobpantax]

It is a bit off topic but the following exchange of words is useful. I have used them more than once. Neighbor: " Don;t those fast cars you have burn alot of gas?" Viper owner: "Before I answer that, how many miles a year do you drive in your two ton plus SUV?" Neighbor: "About 15,000." Viper owner: " I probably only drive a total of about 11,000 miles including all my cars. So, given the fact that your SUV gets equal or worse gas mileage than my performance vehicles,you are hurting the environment far more than I might be. So, your point is?"

PS. As stated above, the removal of OEM cats, with the exceptions also noted above, is a violation of federal law. No reputable dealer will do so. Every once in a while there is an enforcement action against a custom car or bike builder who removes or alters the cats. It is inevitable that this will someday also happen to a tuner. It is only a matter of time. When it does, a seizure of vehicles on the premises could be involved if they are found catless. An arrest is also not beyond the scope of possibilities. Minimally, there will be an attempt to levy a substantial fine against the tuner and possibly a request for injunctive action. Regardless of what enforcement action occurs, the legal fees to defend will be significant and the tuner's business will be disrupted.