|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|03-21-2019 12:35 AM|
You are thankful that the lawsuit, and the appeal that CARB filed and fought for after losing the first time around, didn't go in CARB's favor?
Why are you so thankful?
Because it's CARB? And CARB lost?
You may not realize this, but when CARB lost, the everyday hardworking Joe lost. Small businesses lost. And California consumers lost too, because the prices of every good and service delivered or facilitated by a heavy duty diesel truck, which is every thing we buy, and every road it is delivered on... lost.
CARB fought that lawsuit for US, not for them. Back in 2010, when the heavy duty diesel regulations were originally enacted, the regulators did not fully comprehend how financially difficult it would be for small business to migrate their fleets to the adoption of new trucks by 2020. The folks at CARB are very smart, so they worked out all the math to prove that small business could afford it. But that math was based on the new trucks actually WORKING, not breaking down on the side of the road. And that math was based on long haul, line haul trucking, not 3 mile round trips between repaving a city street and the asphalt plant, where the emissions equipment never gets hot enough to function, and thus clogs up.
It took about 3 years for the CARB to finally realize that they had demanded a standard that was physically, financially, and functionally impossible to achieve. So in 2014, the CARB relaxed the rules.
For example, as initially defined beginning in 2010, the low use exemption was originally limited to 1,000 miles per year in California, and 5,000 miles per year total, where the rest of those miles had to be out of state, with fuel receipts, deliveries of laden paperwork, log books, and scale tickets to prove out of state usage. Compliance reporting began phasing in, based on fleet size and other particulars, in 2011, and by 2013, most fleets had to have begun reporting. At the same time, diesel emissions systems of the costly new trucks that California businesses were being required to convert to were breaking down during those initial years between 2010-2013, costing millions of dollars, due to construction projects being hamstrung by failing trucking equipment.
In keeping with the narrow focus of this one example, CARB relaxed the compliance rules in 2014, by removing the out of state requirement for the remaining 4,000 miles of the 5,000 mile low use limit, and thus permitting all 5,000 miles to be driven within California. This enabled businesses to continue to use very short haul dump trucks and crane haulers and concrete trucks and pump trucks... all of which are not driven very far, fast, or long... and all of which must idle a lot as they pump concrete, dump into paving machines, etc. CARB's relaxation of the rules in 2014 enabled small business to continue to meet California's need to maintain streets and roads and parking lots and driveways in both the public and private sector. It would otherwise cost $175,000 per dump truck, and more sophisticated concrete pump trucks can run up to a half million dollars each. That kind of equipment can't be amortized over the short few years the state initially required businesses to replace it by.
CARB saw the problems, and tried to fix it.
But one big well heeled conglomerate trucking company got jealous, and cried foul. This giant trucking fleet, that operates thousands of vehicles, and who had the resources to replace their fleet per the original replacement schedule (this schedule is not shown on the first page of this thread as it applies to trucks 26,000 GVWR and over, and my original post on this issue was only directed toward TDS members with Ford diesel light truck in the 14,000 to 19,500 GVWR range) because this company replaces their fleet regularly anyway... felt that CARB relaxing the rules midway through the game was unfair to them, because they had hoped to gain economic advantage over their competitors who couldn't afford to replace an aging, and soon to be non compliant fleet.
If the smaller businesses aging fleet falls out of compliance, that leaves more business to be picked up by the big giant fleet that has all new trucks which are in compliance. The CARB's relaxation of the rules in 2014 upset the large company's plan to usurp the smaller businesses clients, by virtue of the smaller business not being able to afford to replace their fleet at the same rate that the large company could do. So the large company sued CARB, to force CARB to reenact the more rigorous regulations that were originally brought into effect in 2010. CARB fought back, realizing that the greater good for the state was in the relaxation of the rules that were originally too aggressively implemented, given the cost and abysmal failure rate of the emissions technology.
CARB lost. CARB appealed to a higher court. CARB lost again.
It took four years to resolve this matter. By spring of 2018, the matter was final, and effective January 1, 2019, the original fleet compliance schedule defined in 2010, was reenacted. Please keep in mind, that 99% of what I'm discussing involves rules and regulations that I haven't discussed, because they do not pertain to vehicles under 26,000 GVWR. The only exception is the low use exemption, which CAN apply to F-450 and F-550 commercial vehicles with diesel engines, that fall within the years identified on the original post on page one of this thread.
Before CARB was sued, it would have been possible for a commercial operator of an F-450/550 service truck or tow truck or flat bed or utility bucket truck which had a diesel engine older than 2010... to be able to continue to operate that truck in California under the low use exemption, for up to 5,000 miles per year. There are quite a few folks with drill rigs and other types of equipment that doesn't get used that much, but is necessary to have on the few occasions where it is needed, and yet would be unaffordable to replace. When CARB lost, these folks lost too. Now the in state mileage restriction to qualify for a low use exemption is back down to just 1,000 in state miles per year. Thanks to one big business suing CARB.
I can see the big business argument... not fair changing the rules in the middle of the game. The "game" was the 10 year gradual phase in period between 2010 and 2020, or really, between 2011 and 2023. But I can also see CARB's argument... which was essentially an admission that they over reached at the outset, and based on the feedback of the affected parties, wanted to scale back the requirements just a little bit in order to help everyone fall into compliance, which really helps discourage people from ignoring the laws altogether and rolling the dice by cheating.
Only now, they can't cheat so easily, due to the database matrix matching that all branches of state government have been coalescing and sharing since 2015. It will soon not be possible to register a non compliant truck. This is already happening for owners of trucks that are scheduled to be repowered or retired by January 1, 2020. The notices are already going out now... "Not eligible for registration renewal".
Yes, the regs detailed on page 1 of this thread are still accurate, and for that you may or may not want to "Thank God", because it was thanks to CARB losing the lawsuit brought against them by one big trucking firm that any hope for changing that original schedule, and any hope for gaining a reasonably viable exemption from that original schedule... vanished.
If you are an effected owner of a 1988 through 1997 F-SuperDuty (aka OBS F-450), then you already got the letter and had to repower or retire that truck.
If you are an effected owner of a 1999 through 2003 F-450/F-550 7.3L, then you are getting letters right now, along with notices that your registration will not be renewed without a new engine that is 2010 or newer. For the fleet I advised to buy no later than 2003 F-550's while the 7.3L could still be ordered, to avoid the 6.0L, which I was warned in 2001 would be a disaster (and the insider who warned me was right)... the 2000-2003 trucks are still running without problems. But they will all be sold (outside of CA) this fall, as we have just this week taken delivery of 2019 replacement F-550s. I just now went over and drove a naked cab chassis around the back lot, as it awaits a special service body being built for it. The replacement of these under 26K trucks had to wait until the very last year (this year), because the previous several years (and all available funds for financing) have been spend on replacing the over 26K trucks, which had a much earlier compliance schedule.
Likewise, if you do happen to have a 6.0L, or a 6.4L, your time will also come, with only one more year (January 1, 2021) for model years up to 2007, and three more years (January 1, 2023) for model years 2008 and 2009.
It will hit the fan by within this year, as the folks who ignored all the notices from CARB over the last 10 years will suddenly find that they can no longer register their 2000 through 2003 diesel trucks that are over 14,000 GVWR in the state of California unless they repower with a 2010 or newer engine and emissions system. This regulation does not apply to pickup trucks.
|03-21-2019 12:04 AM|
[QUOTE=mattt;4639774]Old thread resurrection.....is there any way possible now or coming in the future from Ford or anyone else to retrofit a "2010 or newer engine" in my 2006 F450 6.0 diesel?
These overpaid, lazy, arrogant CARB bureaucRATS are dreaming Lucy in the sky with diamonds. They are ON DRUGS, or their Momma dropped them on their head as a baby, or most likely BOTH. Any FOOL who would vote for a DemoncRAT needs to kill themselves! This nonsense with DemonRAT CA has got to stop! Those of us decent Americans in CA have had enough. Not business friendly regulation...not even a law.[/
Is this a pickup?
What is the GVWR?
What is your use of the vehicle?
|03-20-2019 08:16 PM|
Anyone been following recent developments on this front? It appears there may have been a lawsuit that didn't go in CARB's favor. Thank God for that. Are the regs that are detailed on page 1 of this thread still accurate or is updating necessary in this thread?
Thanks in advance.
|09-20-2018 08:07 AM|
|RT||I'd be impressed to see a Ford 6.7 with a million miles on the original motor. The Cummins 6.7 through 2012 apparently avoided the DEF/DPF setup. If you read any of the Cummins forums, the issues started in 2013 when that headache was added. I suspect that is why Destroked cut their swap kits off with the 2012 Cummins engines.|
|09-19-2018 09:33 PM|
Used to be......
Currently heard of more 6.7 psd's at/over a mill vs 6.7 cumminGs.
And the early 6.7's were nowhere near as bad as a 6.4.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
|09-19-2018 08:39 PM|
If I had a billion dollars in the bank and had the choice between the Cummins in a Ford body or a Ford 6.7, I’d pick the Cummins. That would be even more important if I didn’t have the throwaway money to do the job twice. The Cummins is a million mile motor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|09-19-2018 04:33 PM|
Originally Posted by RT View Post
Thank you. Yes the 6.4 I would avoid like the plague. However, I thought I had heard okay things about the newer 6.7? I may also consider just getting a newer truck that is 2010 or later. Been looking on and off and found a 2015 with the 6.7. I am very familiar with my current 6.0 and how to deal with all it's shortcomings. Does the 6.7 have it's own list of problems with relevant solutions? Am I reading your reply correctly that a complete Ford motor would set you back more than a complete Cummins motor.....if the Cummins is a better engine, then why is it available for less coin? Seems counter intuitive.
If the choice was wide open, would you opt for Cummins retrofit into an 06-07 chassis or go for the new Ford 6.7?
|09-19-2018 02:50 PM|
|RT||Not really. There are no companies that support the upgrade of the International 6.4 or the Ford 6.7 into your chassis. Plus, you'd have to be a special kind of masochist to want either of those two motors in the first place. The 6.4 is a time bomb waiting to go off and the early 6.7 motors are just about as bad. The later 6.7 motors look better, but a complete motor would probably set you back more than you'd want to spend and you'd still be nowhere near the reliability of the Cummins.|
|09-19-2018 02:45 PM|
|mattt||Thank you both. Are there any Ford options to meet the CARB Nazi requirement of 2010 and newer engine?|
|09-19-2018 01:22 PM|
|RT||Right. Destroked supports Cummins motors up to 2012 including the Cummins 6.7 engine.|
|09-19-2018 10:50 AM|
|09-18-2018 08:36 PM|
|mattt||Thank you. Are any of the Cummins considered a 2010 model year or newer engine? Does that company offer the engine itself too or is that up to the buyer to find? Most everything I saw on the link was for 98-02 if I remember correctly. To be "legal" in CA after 2021, a 2006 truck needs to have a 2010 or newer engine installed.|
|09-18-2018 07:56 PM|
Absolutely - you can put a Cummins in there with a kit from several places. Here is one - http://www.destroked.com/pdfs/Conver...o-12-08-17.pdf
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
|09-18-2018 05:39 PM|
Old thread resurrection.....is there any way possible now or coming in the future from Ford or anyone else to retrofit a "2010 or newer engine" in my 2006 F450 6.0 diesel?
These overpaid, lazy, arrogant CARB bureaucRATS are dreaming Lucy in the sky with diamonds. They are ON DRUGS, or their Momma dropped them on their head as a baby, or most likely BOTH. Any FOOL who would vote for a DemoncRAT needs to kill themselves! This nonsense with DemonRAT CA has got to stop! Those of us decent Americans in CA have had enough. Not business friendly regulation...not even a law.
|07-07-2016 11:53 AM|
Originally Posted by NYB View Post
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|