Nice. I have a 90's Trek hybrid that I've been pondering doing the same to. It'd be much cheaper than the Giant e-bikes my uncle bought last year.
See? The EPA has succeeded. It's the best way to meet the EPA's goals.
Wow, that's quite a ride!But, the effort is the best part!
Not bull****. NOx, soot, carbon monoxide, and unburned hydrocarbons directly damage human lungs when breathed in. For asthma sufferers the increased Smog from these pollutants can mean death. Increased CO2 output does not hurt human lungs.
Many environmentalists don’t realize that an electric or gasoline-powered bicycle is faaaar more efficient than human-powered. It burns less energy than the human body does (which does a lousy job converting food to work, and makes solid pollution). It’s basically the same reason we stopped using horses, which used to leave giant piles of crap in the cities
I'd love to see a caloric breakdown of man vs. machine. The guy on his two stroke bicycle is obviously polluting the air far, far more than the guy pedalling. And there is still a person sitting on the powered bicycle consuming energy, just not as much.
Wow. Sounds like GDE might be facing fines based on the number of tunes out in the wild. I having a feeling most customers won't be responding to the letter.
Read your manual. There is a key hole it is just covered and not used the majority of the time. Only for emergencies like a dead battery. But if you are caring for your car this doesn't happen.
I used the Lunacycle conversion kit. Perfect for my rail trail riding at age 67.
Ehhh, maybe. My brother is living in CA, but resident in another state because he is employed by the DOD (enlisted military, E8).
They clearly mention reimbursement for retuning the vehicle to stock but say nothing about refund for the original cost of tune. I suspect they'll pay out to anyone who gripes loud enough. For most CA residents, they get screwed unless they complain, I guess?This was our email discussion around a marked-up GDE letter: } said:https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByfEll8W7ewvUHdBeklBMHZxU3FiRExVRXJ3aDFucExRbGRF/view?usp=sharing"]Full letter here.
Marked up:
It's really hard to say what CARB would try to do to you, except if they *know* you currently reside in CA, **I think** they will likely try to force you to follow the letter's intent which is driven by this EPA enforcement action: flash your ECU back to stock at the dealer and provide proof of it to GDE. I quote the letter here:
image.png
In the yellow highlight, they say 'including but not limited to'. I interpret this to mean that *IFF* CARB has the funds and manpower, they will probably send a request or referral to *undisclosed state* DMV and 'tattle' on you as a threat, or they may send YOU a letter threatening such to scare you into submission. But if they do not have time/money, they may prioritize it lower than the easy 'low hanging fruit' of CA-registered GDE customers.
If it were me facing this, I would gamble that the following series of actions is likely:
1. CARB knows that GDE sent the letter to you, along with the survey
2. CARB knows that your vehicle is not registered in CA
3. CARB *probably* send you a threat letter *iff* they know where you reside physically--this is the critical question. Which CA databases do you show up on?
4. CARB, *iff* they have a database record from some CA agency, *probably* will refer your vehicle's VIN to 'x'DMV, but it will probably be 6-9 months from now, and 'x'DMV or *Undisclosed* County and/or *undisclosed state* Air Resources Board will probably send out similar threat/demand letter to your *undisclosed state* address of record with the 'x'DMV. Ultimately, they will have to enforce this, if they have manpower and budget for it; but it's likely they are 'gearing up' with the legislature to get additional funds released to enforce.
(BTW the survey is linked to you. I can't even see the questions beyond page 1 where you confirm it's YOU.)
All good points, but you missed my point. GDE isn't saying they will reimburse users for the cost of the non-compliant tune, which they knowingly (though *wink *wink) sold to him. Either they are being intentionally vague to minimize losses, or the letter review process was rushed in haste internally at GDE.
Yes the customer is at fault as much as GDE is. They both entered into a situation in which they both knew was illegal and that getting caught has its consequences. The customer should be aware there may be more coming their way as well, especially if they don't retune to stock.
