Here is a question no one is asking

"JR1" (type35bugatti) 07/08/2014 at 20:39 • Filed to: Rollin coal

1

74

As someone who grew up and lives in the country "rolling coal" is not only common but encouraged. I personally never cared much for it and I still don't to this day. That being said I don't think the EPA should have made it illegal to manufacture and sell smoke stacks. I see it as an infringement of my liberties(even if I wouldn't exercise that right). Furthermore I am sure at least a few people will lose their jobs over it. How is that fair?

My big question however is what about the trucks that already have the smoke stacks? If they were modified prior to the decision are they grandfathered in and therefore safe from this new regulation? Or will I see some of my acquaintances getting tickets for doing something that has been legal for all my life? If it's grandfathered in I'm going to have to buy me a lifted truck capable of rolling coal because they are about to appreciate in my area.

Cherry_man1 > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:41

1

Its really not that stacks that are illegal (I think) but the tune/mods that make it so you can always roll coal

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:42

0

I would imagine that they will have to be removed, but it could go either way.

JR1 > Cherry_man1 07/08/2014 at 20:43

0

It a lot of cases these two things go hand in hand

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:43

1

Tampering with emissions equipment laws are not new. Selling stacks is still legal, so is having them on your truck.

JR1 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 07/08/2014 at 20:44

0

Sounds expensive. Sucks for people to have a diesel truck today!

offroadkarter > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:44

1

its not the stacks that are illegal and its not the stacks that cause smoke. when you make a diesel engine run super rich, that causes the smoke.

TheBaron2112 > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:44

1

The EPA didn't make it illegal to manufacture and sell smoke stacks. The legal question is bypassing emissions components of your car.

And it's really a matter of enforcement. No one enforces it. And if it is enforced, it's under public nuisance statutes rather than federal environmental law violations.

So there's not really an infringement here.

ranwhenparked > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:45

11

This isn't a new thing, it's always been illegal to tamper with or remove EPA-mandated emissions equipment, and states that follow CARB have biannual emissions inspections for diesel light trucks.

Besides, the other thing going on here is people tampering with their fuel injection to flood more diesel into the cylinders, creating more particulate emissions than would otherwise be the case. Basically, they're making their trucks run crappier just to blow smoke.

Cherry_man1 > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:45

1

Well maybe they can make a work around where its only the tune is illeage not the stacks?

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:47

0

Only for those few who have performed this particular modification. Diesel trucks with stock exhausts are fine.

CRider > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:48

1

I've never heard about any legislation making stacks on pickups illegal, but if you're talking about removing the particulate filters that's another thing. I don't see why tasteless redneck jackasses shouldn't be allowed to put high exit exhausts on their trucks if they want to, but there's a good argument for keeping the emissions equipment on. I do not like "rolling coal" trucks.

ranwhenparked > Cherry_man1 07/08/2014 at 20:48

2

As long as the exhaust is still passing through a catalytic convertor before it hits the stacks, they're probably OK. But if they're belching clouds of thick black smoke like a 1970s East German ferry with engine problems, then there's an issue.

Milky > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:49

1

I put an exhaust dump on my car after the CAT, because I like noise and I don't hate the environment.

Truck bro's will just have to learn to do the same.

BrianNutter > JR1 07/08/2014 at 20:49

2

stacks arent the problem....it's just an intentional poor tune. I personally think its just a political thing and isnt a real issue. Go to China and there's literally 50 milllion pos cargo trucks with 1920's tech spewing out the shit out daily.

MoFinWiley > ranwhenparked 07/08/2014 at 20:54

1

I can't star this enough...The EPA just reminded people that is was ALREADY illegal to roll coal. Everyone rolling coal knows this.

I don't condone the practice of rolling coal, but having an EPA talking head spout existing regulations isn't really the VICTORY FOR JUSTICE everyone seems to be talking about.

JR1 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 07/08/2014 at 20:57

0

This I am aware

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > Cherry_man1 07/08/2014 at 21:04

1

The tunes have been illegal, it's just easy to find someone to write custom tunes.

oldirtybootz > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:04

1

You don't need stacks to dump smoke. My "friends" are part of an Instagram group called the Soot Boys, and the ones I know don't even have stacks. They just like to sit in parking lots and dump smoke, or at stop signs, or while pulling a boat. Yeah, I could do without this rollin coal bullshit, but I'm sure people say the same about me ripping aroubd LI with my loud ass car too.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > MoFinWiley 07/08/2014 at 21:06

1

It's technically only illegal for emissions and after trucks, since pre-03(I think) just had a muffler and would smoke if prevoked.

Textured Soy Protein > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:07

6

The EPA regulates vehicle emissions. The things that were "banned," were already not legal. The EPA is just stepping up enforcement of regulations that were already on the books.

Nowhere in the constitution does it say, "citizens shall be allowed to drive whatever vehicle they so choose, regardless of its impact on the environment."

Here's a nice handy dandy map that shows US air quality improving over time.

You know why? Stricter air quality regulations and enforcement.

So unless you object to ALL emissions regulations (and really, don't you want clean air?), the EPA stepping up enforcement of an already-on-the-books regulation is hardly infringing on your liberties.

Don't be this lady.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > CRider 07/08/2014 at 21:08

2

Trucks can easily be ran without emissions equipment without smoking. In fact, it improves economy and the longevity of the engine.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > Milky 07/08/2014 at 21:09

1

Nothing was changed, and nothing will change. It is one of those things that will only be enforced in areas that were already enforced.

dogisbadob > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:10

0

They probably won't care, unless maybe the driver is black, then they might.

I'd love to see smokestacks on a Leaf or Tesla

Jeff-God-of-Biscuits > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:12

0

I would be willing to bet that each and every one of the parts involved, somewhere, have something to the effect of "for off road use only" stamped on them. Everyone that put them on their trucks did so knowing that they were bypassing the environmental protection controls on the vehicle that allowed that vehicle to be in compliance with the law. Just like everyone that runs a test pipe, and all the people that have special parts that they put in just so that they can pass an inspection, they know the law and what they needed to do to not get caught at inspection time. They rolled, they lost. Completely fair.

RussCCC > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:16

0

Smoke stacks are legal.

Textured Soy Protein > BrianNutter 07/08/2014 at 21:16

2

Just a political thing and not a real issue? You can't be serious. Do you have any idea what China's air quality is like ?

For fuck's sake.

JR1 > ranwhenparked 07/08/2014 at 21:24

0

Their choice though. If they want to waste gas I think they should be allowed to. If the EPA really wanted to tackle a big issue maybe they should try to force China into being more pollutant free. This new law is more of a political statement than a protection of our planet.

ranwhenparked > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:26

2

There isn't any new law, the regulation in question has been in effect for years. Also, I don't know how old you are, but if you haven't noticed, unlike in the 1960s and '70s, you can now breath in cities and roads and highways no longer smell like unburned hydrocarbons precisely because of those regulations.

JR1 > CRider 07/08/2014 at 21:27

0

I agree there is a good argument for it but what about the trucks that removed the emissions equipment prior to the regulation? My guess is the EPA will make them pay out of pocket to get it fixed or receive a fine. I do not think that is a just thing to do.

JR1 > Textured Soy Protein 07/08/2014 at 21:29

0

I think the point he is making is the rolling coal is a political issue more than an environmental issue. I think we can all agree however China however is another animal entirely.

lone_liberal > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:29

1

The answer is probably not. The EPA cares more about what is being sold and leaves testing to the states and areas that have those requirements. That said, your rights end at other people's noses. It is not a violation of your rights to prevent you from shooting soot at other people or filling the air they breathe with it.

JR1 > Textured Soy Protein 07/08/2014 at 21:30

0

God I am happy I don't live in a city the air pollution just looks terrible. Very cool GIF

BrianNutter > Textured Soy Protein 07/08/2014 at 21:31

0

As a person that actually LIVED IN CHINA, see my earlier posts on them sticking to antiquated 1930's diesel tech on 50 million cargo carrying vehicles because it puts their manufacturing base at a disadvantage otherwise. Don't drink your professor's kool-aid.

Textured Soy Protein > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:32

2

But it IS an environmental issue. Unless you want our air to look like the pictures I posted, we NEED air quality regulations. It's not like some politicians just up and said "we don't like these rednecks and their smoky trucks, hahaha lets ban them."

JR1 > Jeff-God-of-Biscuits 07/08/2014 at 21:33

0

I do not live in a state where they hold vehicle emissions inspections so I am wondering if rolling coal is enforced in places like California already?

JR1 > offroadkarter 07/08/2014 at 21:34

0

I know I just meant the stacks usually mean the diesel is running super rich.

JR1 > dogisbadob 07/08/2014 at 21:34

1

I would pay to see that.

Textured Soy Protein > BrianNutter 07/08/2014 at 21:34

0

I'm not drinking anyone's kool-aid. Industrial and vehicle emissions negatively affecting air quality is a very well documented phenomenon.

Where do you think that smog comes from, the farts of a billion communists?

JR1 > lone_liberal 07/08/2014 at 21:35

0

I guess a could comparison would be smoking. Can't smoke inside because most people don't want second hand smoke.

JR1 > oldirtybootz 07/08/2014 at 21:36

2

Exactly. Just live and let live

JR1 > Textured Soy Protein 07/08/2014 at 21:38

0

It is a minor one. Don't we have bigger environmental issues to worry about? Say the production of coal or the continual use of gasoline? The EPA has bigger fish to fry

lone_liberal > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:40

1

Exactly. If they were doing it out in the woods then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Nobody would have cared enough about for it to become a "thing". Instead they do it in traffic where people are captive audiences who then get pissed. Basically, it's the coal rollers own damn fault.

Textured Soy Protein > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:44

1

It's one part of the larger whole.

And really, all that happened is, rolling coal got a bunch of attention in the media, someone asked an EPA spokesperson about it, and she pointed out the corresponding regulation on the EPA website .

There are not going to be squads of EPA tailpipe testers roaming the countryside looking for diesel trucks belching too much smoke.

BrianNutter > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:52

1

I've personally done more to increase combustion efficiency in engines than anyone here and I'm seeing some awfully stupid points being made by people that are almost certainly anti-Oppo. 'Cause going Oppo wastes gas and increases Rubber particulates in our atmosphere Right?!

At what point will those same fucks feel fine being taxed after more than "X" litres of fuel usage per individual per year when business and politicians are exempt.

JR1 > ranwhenparked 07/08/2014 at 21:54

0

If it isn't new than I don't understand why it became so newsworthy? And yes I know the regulations are good and I support them but this one seems a tad extreme

ranwhenparked > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:57

1

Again, there is no NEW law involved. The EPA simply issued a clarification to remind everyone of the regulations on the books already. It's not about wasting gas, it's about the thick, black, acrid smoke coming out of their pipes and impacting everyone else around them.

Vehicle air pollution mostly stays local, cleaning up China would mostly help China, keeping the US clean is for our own benefit.

I don't even understand how politics would even begin to play into this. Which political group is behind the rolling coal fad? Which political group is going after it? There's no political ideology involved, it's just idiots doing idiot things.

offroadkarter > JR1 07/08/2014 at 21:58

1

nah it just means theirs a douche behind the wheel

JR1 > BrianNutter 07/08/2014 at 22:00

0

At what point will those same fucks feel fine being taxed after more than "X" litres of fuel usage per individual per year when business and politicians are exempt.

You just described my version of hell.

And with a political/environmental issue like this there was bound to be some heated arguments that rubbed people the wrong way.

ranwhenparked > JR1 07/08/2014 at 22:01

1

There's nothing extreme about it. Cars and light trucks have to have emissions control equipment, people that own them can't remove or bypass that emissions control equipment if they want their cars and trucks to remain legal for use on public roads.

It became newsworthy because the rolling coal fad has recently exploded online. It's been around for a while, but it's been fairly recently that videos of it have been really going viral so it suddenly became a popular topic of conversation. The EPA most likely felt it had to issue a statement because of all sorts of media people coming out of the woodwork and asking them about it, in the hopes of reducing the volume of phone calls and emails coming into their office.

Jeff-God-of-Biscuits > JR1 07/08/2014 at 22:03

0

But that's kind of like saying, " I think it's really cool to go and pour oil out into the rivers, and it's just not fair that I can't. I don't care about anything else but what I want, no matter how much harm it does." Even though your state may not conduct regular inspections, I would be pretty sure that it does have some language about not removing emission controls from a vehicle supplied with them.

JR1 > ranwhenparked 07/08/2014 at 22:03

0

I did not know this was an already existing law thank you for clarifying though. Wish Jalop would have done that on the FP

BigBlock440 > Textured Soy Protein 07/08/2014 at 22:08

0

Do you really think some jackass blowing smoke in the middle of a cornfield is going to affect air quality at all let alone look like a chinese city? Surely nobody can be that dumb.

CRider > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 07/08/2014 at 22:15

0

Yes, but it also prevents them from passing emissions in states where they test it.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > Cherry_man1 07/08/2014 at 22:16

1

And for what the dumbasses pay for smoke tunes, I wish I knew how to tune.

ttyymmnn > dogisbadob 07/08/2014 at 22:16

1

Close enough?

CRider > JR1 07/08/2014 at 22:18

1

I live in California, if your car doesn't pass the smog test, you can't register your car. You can't even put on headers on a gas engine and pass, that's how strict it is. But if you live in a state where they don't do smog tests, you'll probably be fine without the filter on the truck. As long as you don't go rollin' coal past a cop, thy won't pull you over for it.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > CRider 07/08/2014 at 22:22

0

They wouldn't have passed unless bribed, anyway.

BigBlock440 > ranwhenparked 07/08/2014 at 22:23

0

"Which political group is behind the rolling coal fad? Which political group is going after it? There's no political ideology involved, it's just idiots doing idiot things."

The one going after it is easy enough to figure out, it's the one that's claiming "conservatives" are doing it as a protest.

CRider > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 07/08/2014 at 22:25

0

Bribing the inspector is always an option, but running a truck with the stock emissions equipment would pass if everything is working properly.

dogisbadob > ttyymmnn 07/08/2014 at 22:28

0

I like it! :)

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > CRider 07/08/2014 at 22:29

0

Well I meant if it is straight piped. Not my problem in the good ole fresh Southeastern air.

CRider > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 07/08/2014 at 22:33

0

The issue isn't piping the exhaust out up behind the cab, the issue is removing the diesel particulate filters on newer trucks. Of course straight piping anything is illegal. If you can't put on stacks without removing the emissions equipment, no stacks for you. Legally, that is.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > CRider 07/08/2014 at 22:37

0

The DPF and Cat is behind the engine, but before the bed, so a stack would technically be okay. It would just be quiet, and have the white trash equivalent to a spoiler stack.

ranwhenparked > BigBlock440 07/08/2014 at 22:42

0

I just chalked that up to idiocy on both sides of the issue.

Textured Soy Protein > BigBlock440 07/08/2014 at 22:46

0

I'm talking about emissions regs in general being a good thing. Not just some jackass blowing smoke in a corn field.

CRider > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 07/08/2014 at 22:47

0

Stacks are the equivalent to spoiler stacks, and the more smoke they blow the more spoilers you have. It's standard redneck rice, more smoke = faster. Don't forget to lift it on 6" blocks and put 22" spiked wheels.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > CRider 07/08/2014 at 22:55

0

Fuck blocks. They suck. All block lifts say about you, is that you care more about your rims than your passengers.

MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s > JR1 07/08/2014 at 23:03

0

did I miss something about the epa banning stacks on pickups? If so seems kind of stupid, banning smoke stacks does nothing about rolling coal. Plus don't some people legitimately use stacks? I had always heard that they were originally for people who hauled horses and other animals so the exhaust went up and over the trailer

Milky > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 07/08/2014 at 23:08

0

Ehh we'll see, maybe they'll make an actual law out of this.

oldirtybootz > JR1 07/08/2014 at 23:12

1

Indeed. If we restrict this, how long before the rest of us can't tune our cars?

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > Milky 07/08/2014 at 23:13

0

Watch this be the uprising of the South. Oh well, the weather is better down here, sans naders.

Milky > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 07/09/2014 at 07:37

0

What about the redneck areas in the north? Every truck in my high school parking lot had a confederate flag somewhere on it. They're going to want out too.

BigBlock440 > Textured Soy Protein 07/09/2014 at 07:45

0

Well, that was the topic at hand.

"It's not like some politicians just up and said "we don't like these rednecks and their smoky trucks, hahaha lets ban them.""

And it may not have been a politician, but it was some guy who writes stuff on the internet who just up and said it.

MoFinWiley > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 07/09/2014 at 10:04

0

Nope...tampering is tampering no matter what the stock equipment was. Authorities not looking =/= legal.

I'm not on a high horse by any means, I have a twin turbo '05 GTO.