KenJax Tree
Terraphobic
What is the difference between a CARB compliant saw and one that isn't? Less power,more power,equal,more choked up....
What is the difference between a CARB compliant saw and one that isn't? Less power,more power,equal,more choked up....
I know what it means. I guess my question is how are they different? is a CARB compliant saw more choked up (different muffler? CAT?) or have less power and will it need more work done to it when modding it versus one that isn't CARB compliant.
As I understand it, CARB regulations are stricly about emissions and no consideration is made regarding how well the engine will run or last. It is just bureacratic regulations. Here is a long read on The EPA and CARB regs on chainsaws and water pumps. It appears some products are just being discontinued due to regs.
EPA and CARB Emission Standards To Control Nonroad Exhaust Emissions of Fire Pumps and Chain Saws
This is troubling:
Tampering with an Emission-Certified Engine
Tampering with an emission-certified engine may reduce the life span and performance of the engine. Tampering, which is against the law and subject to a civil penalty/fine, includes the following:
Knowingly disabling an emission control component of a certified saw,
Adjusting the fuel or exhaust system,
Changing the engine’s performance so it no longer meets the engine specifications,
Improperly venting crankcase emissions,
Installing a replacement part of a different configuration, or
Adding a part that was not originally certified with the engine.
Some manufacturers have equipped engines with special caps or plugs that limit or prevent adjusting the fuel mixture or engine timing. Removal of these special plugs and adjustments beyond the manufacturers’ specified limits is considered tampering.
In servicing an engine that has been tampered with, the EPA encourages repair technicians to restore the engine to the original certified configuration. This is required only if the repair is specific to the tampered with component/system.
Which is exactly how it should be - emissions standards should be just that and only that. It is the job of the manufacturer to make sure they sell quality products that work and last, or if they don't then they deserve to go out of business. So don't blame the regulations for things like carbs adjusted too lean and screws covered with epoxy, and choked up cat mufflers - that's just a flashing neon sign that says "We didn't spend squat on product development, but thanks for the money sucker".As I understand it, CARB regulations are stricly about emissions and no consideration is made regarding how well the engine will run or last. It is just bureacratic regulations.
Which is exactly how it should be - emissions standards should be just that and only that. It is the job of the manufacturer to make sure they sell quality products that work and last, or if they don't then they deserve to go out of business. So don't blame the regulations for things like carbs adjusted too lean and screws covered with epoxy, and choked up cat mufflers - that's just a flashing neon sign that says "We didn't spend squat on product development, but thanks for the money sucker".
Bull. Corporations have never fixed or done anything that did not make them a profit. If polluting the air we breathe is profitable then they will do that.regulations suck have never fixed anything only hurts end user .
Bull. Corporations have never fixed or done anything that did not make them a profit. If polluting the air we breathe is profitable then they will do that.
Traditional 2 stroke engines pump a significant portion of the fuel out the exhaust unburned. Chainsaw carbs run so rich that they misfire with even a slight reduction of load, to the point that at WOT no load they won't rev any higher. This was fine with chainsaw manufacturers, so they had to be forced into doing product development to fix it, and they cried big crocodile tears about it. But low and behold, it turns out it was quite possible to fix these problems after all, and we have better products now because of it. The manufacturers would never have developed that otherwise, they would have given the money to managers as bonuses for the fantastic job they were doing.
The exact same scenario played out in the automobile industry over and over, with both emissions and safety regulations. Heck, how many saws would have chain brakes or A/V systems if regulations somewhere had not required their development?
The EPA did not make your truck. You gave good money to a company in return for a truck you are not satisfied with (3 times?). I'd be pi$$ed at the company that ripped me off.I'm a victim or their tampering ok truth is the epa's regulations cost me many thousands of dollars your not supposed to choke a diesel truck to the point they don't run. I wish I had known they did it prior to buying the 3 50k pos's but now they are sold and I went back to old fashioned work horses. My 1965 is five times the truck in dependability. and my 372 xpw will be continuously rebuilt till I die and I ain't drinking the koolaid regulations have ruined the Automobiles and small engines .
The EPA did not make your truck. You gave good money to a company in return for a truck you are not satisfied with (3 times?). I'd be pi$$ed at the company that ripped me off.
It's perfectly reasonable for a country to limit how much crap a company's products can pump into the air. Of course some companies that have not spent any money on product development will whine and cry, and then produce garbage. And hopefully lose their business and go under. Other companies will do a better job and get that business making better products. That's a good thing. It's a good reason to buy on the merits of the product rather than brand loyalty.Well that same company made perfect vehicles before government control and if I could buy this brand new just as they were made i would be doing so but regulations ruined dependability period I'm sorry if you can't accept that some witnessed the decline since 65!
Enter your email address to join: