Legal issues with tuning

[Boost]

I don't think there has ever been a thread like this but here it goes:

Obviously EFILive, HPTuners and LS1edit's (etc and the list goes on) butt is covered legally thanks to the disclaimer right before flashing and the fine print in the owners' manuals. What about those of us that flash vehicles for friends and friends of friends? It is not at all an issue 99% of the time but some of my paranoid and possibly misinformed associates have brought up that there might be legal implications with altering the emissions of vehicles (and top speed and traction control).

I could care less because those who do not take risks never achieve anything and there are a million arguments that would counter any point against tuning (seriously a lot).

I guess I am just looking for points to counter my friends' stupid arguments about not letting the incredible power of unlimited tuning get out of hand.

Any thoughts? This may start a very interesting and informative conversation.

[Black02SS]

Anything I tune is for off-road use only and they sign a disclaimer stating so.

[joecar]

Yes, this whole forum is for off-road use where emissions controls are not required or are otherwise waived.

Everyone using these tools is purely involved in legal off-road activities and understands all implications.

[joecar]

So, basically, there are no legal issues for the reasons stated in posts #2 and #3.

[ScarabEpic22]

I havent done any tuning for anyone but myself, but if/when I do start tuning I will make everyone sign a waiver for so Im covered.

[GMPX]

Any thoughts? This may start a very interesting and informative conversation.

LMM DPF removal is a bit of a conundrum with regards to this very topic.

I have always taken the view that a modified engine running a factory tune will probably run worse (emissions etc) than a modified engine with a modified tune to suit the engine. Until they make cam swaps and the like illegal, engines will need to be retuned.

Cheers,
Ross

[Boost]

Thanks for all the input. That's pretty much in line with what I thought. A waiver is definitely a good idea. I think a regular tune is on the same level with say a performance exhaust or a colder thermostat.

On the other hand some good tuning can actually increase the efficiency of the engine, improving fuel economy which in turn reduces overall emissions.

When I get my dream LMM I'm definitely yanking the DPF. I think driving a diesel and keeping it in good shape should compensate somewhat for the extra tailpipe stink. I heard that MPG improves dramatically, it would be interesting if someone did the math on actual yearly emissions between a straightpiped gasser that gets 15 mpg or a diesel that gets 25...

Just my 2 cents...

[GMPX]

Well, the old debate in the LS1 world is the Lean Cruise function. This is illegal in the USA (EPA rules).
There is some issues with emissions during lean cruise, but of course you use less fuel. I guess they decided less emissions and more fuel useage is better!

Cheers,
Ross

[Dale]

I have read that removing the resonator (sp?) on the w-body increases mpg. But puts alot of noise in the cab like when you do a strait dump on a truck.

The "farting" sound that it creates at the rear of the car is nasty sounding IMO.

So, GM is costing mpg to correct ride comfort and sound.

[kbracing96]

Well, the old debate in the LS1 world is the Lean Cruise function. This is illegal in the USA (EPA rules).
There is some issues with emissions during lean cruise, but of course you use less fuel. I guess they decided less emissions and more fuel useage is better!

Cheers,
Ross
It a win, win for the government, less emissions keeps the tree huggers happy, shittier fuel mileage keeps the oil companies happy.:D:muahaha:



PS, I like offroading!:D

[joecar]

HC/CO emissions (high AFR) are inversely related to NO emissions (low AFR)...
you can reduce one very low but the other goes up very high.

HC=hydrocarbons
CO=carbon monoxide
NO=nitrous oxides

Still, everyone except the consumer wins... :bash: