EPA National Compliance Initiative - Stopping Aftermarket Defeat Devices

  • Welcome to EcoDieselRam.com We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.

    Your truck knowledge is missing!
    • Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
    • We have tons of knowledge here for your EcoDiesel truck!
    • Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
    • We believe in quality OVER quantity, and a family friendly place for your #EcoDiesel home!
    CLICK HERE TO REGISTER! Problems registering? Click here to contact us!

    Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!

BoostN

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Jul 27, 2013
3,347
833
113
Tennessee
www.ecodieselram.com
Truck Year
Not Listed
  • Like
Reactions: John

Pekozip93

New Member
Feb 24, 2019
14
1
3
Truck Year
Not Listed
Source: https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/national-compliance-initiative-stopping-aftermarket-defeat-devices-vehicles-and-engines

This is the backstory to companies that have stop selling "off road" tuning and other parts for the EcoDiesels, and other diesel engines out there. It seems they are coming in full force to stop all companies that are doing this.
Boost
Thanks for this info BoostN. Perhaps this is noted elsewhere but haven’t seen it, is this relevant only to Stage 2 “Full delete” kits? Or are they also after the “stage 1” on-road kits ? Thanks
 

Goatmann

New Member
Sep 19, 2016
2
2
3
Truck Year
2015
Boost
Thanks for this info BoostN. Perhaps this is noted elsewhere but haven’t seen it, is this relevant only to Stage 2 “Full delete” kits? Or are they also after the “stage 1” on-road kits ? Thanks
This NCI will focus on stopping the manufacture, sale, and installation of defeat devices on vehicles and engines used on public roads as well as on nonroad vehicles and engines.

looks like all defeat devices, period
 

Pekozip93

New Member
Feb 24, 2019
14
1
3
Truck Year
Not Listed
This NCI will focus on stopping the manufacture, sale, and installation of defeat devices on vehicles and engines used on public roads as well as on nonroad vehicles and engines.

looks like all defeat devices, period
Yeah..seems as such.
 
Dec 14, 2015
55
20
8
Butler County Pa.
Truck Year
2015
For some reason U.S.A. seems determined to discourage diesel engine ownership. Our fuel supply is low quality and the taxes are high.
A large portion of vehicles in Europe are diesel powered because of the higher mpg. Maybe the gasoline producers there don't have a choke hold on the regulators.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaryleAttebery

Pekozip93

New Member
Feb 24, 2019
14
1
3
Truck Year
Not Listed
so disappointing. so many factors and influences that us ground level folk are out of the loop..Like you, We/I just want our vehicles to run efficiently. How could a reduction in fuel consumption be a bad thing? As you suggest perhaps there is more to the story.
 

Arkie 16

Member
Apr 3, 2018
48
16
8
Truck Year
2016
The EPA first mandated low sulfur then ultra low sulfur fuel as a way to reduce pollutants which drove the cost up to double the price.That is our NEW superior fuel.
 

Ram For Life

Member
May 25, 2019
166
21
18
60
Wetumpka ,Al
Truck Year
2016
Source: https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/national-compliance-initiative-stopping-aftermarket-defeat-devices-vehicles-and-engines

This is the backstory to companies that have stop selling "off road" tuning and other parts for the EcoDiesels, and other diesel engines out there. It seems they are coming in full force to stop all companies that are doing this.
Thanks, I emailed GDE this morning but their responses to my e-mail was that their site was at idle for now. That they would respond back to my email as soon as they get some issues worked out.
 

cds13ca

Active Member
Jun 19, 2019
213
69
28
Truck Year
2016
Thanks, I emailed GDE this morning but their responses to my e-mail was that their site was at idle for now. That they would respond back to my email as soon as they get some issues worked out.
I'm so glad to hear that they responded, I guess we really have to be very cautious what we post, EPA is are probably trolling these forums and other places, pretending to be an ecodiesel owner and looking for a place where they can get tuned (or their 'options' for tuners) and of course, out of kindness, we give them all the info they are looking for. Next thing you know, they show up at their doorsteps with a surprise inspection. Looks like the nazi days are back. Gone are the days when one ecodiesel owner is just trying to help out a fellow ecodiesel owner. Time to start laying low...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pekozip93

1shadowsabre

Active Member
Oct 18, 2015
263
76
28
Washington State
Truck Year
2015
I'm so glad to hear that they responded, I guess we really have to be very cautious what we post, EPA is are probably trolling these forums and other places, pretending to be an ecodiesel owner and looking for a place where they can get tuned (or their 'options' for tuners) and of course, out of kindness, we give them all the info they are looking for. Next thing you know, they show up at their doorsteps with a surprise inspection. Looks like the nazi days are back. Gone are the days when one ecodiesel owner is just trying to help out a fellow ecodiesel owner. Time to start laying low...

The nazi days are back? sounding a little paranoid
 

EvilDiesel_15

New Member
Jan 8, 2019
12
1
3
Truck Year
2015
Thanks, I emailed GDE this morning but their responses to my e-mail was that their site was at idle for now. That they would respond back to my email as soon as they get some issues worked out.
Man at least you got a reply back, I’ve emailed them twice with no answer at all
 

Danlmosher

New Member
Jul 11, 2019
1
0
1
Truck Year
2015
The nazi days are back? sounding a little paranoid
It may not be nazism but it sure doesn’t respect our personal property rights.
I think a better description is Eco-fascism.
They are brainwashing the kids to think we destroying our planet. Not So!!
 

cds13ca

Active Member
Jun 19, 2019
213
69
28
Truck Year
2016
It may not be nazism but it sure doesn’t respect our personal property rights.
I think a better description is Eco-fascism.
They are brainwashing the kids to think we destroying our planet. Not So!!
I would have no issue with all this emission stuff, IF, #1, the egr design was actually property made so that all the soot would was cleaned out PRE going back into the intake to prevent #1 soot contamination of the intake, #2 soot plugging up the egr cooler fins, #3 soot plugging up the swirl valves, #4 soot plugging up the egr valve from operating property.

However, FCA seems to take the "it's not our problem" stance regarding accepting any responsibility for all the ecodiesel fires. They design a shitty system that is prone to egr valve sticking, swirl valve sticking, and hence, huge destructive intake FIRES from oily soot and extreme heat and tonnes of plastic parts.

So EPA is sitting here saying, everyone needs to have a functional EGR valve to reduce NOx emissions, YET they fail to give a crap that the EGR design on these trucks is causing more and more trucks to burst out in flames.

REALISTICALLY, if everyone were to follow EPA's mandate, then we would have a lot more environmental issues! #1 these stock trucks are prone to catastrophic fires creating a hell of a lot of terrible emissions for the environment with all the black smoke they make when burning to the ground (totally unnecessary), and #2 what happens to the trucks after they are written off from fires (more pollution in our landfills as these trucks are scraped)?

If some 500,000 trucks were produced and more and more catch fire, that's a hell of a lot of garbage in our scrap yards. So how is all the EPA nonsence mandating egr functionality really helping the environment on a truck that is prone to failure?

Leave the tuning companies alone, these tunes are preventing catastrophic failure, keep more trucks on the road instead of in the garbage dumps, preventing major fires which pollute the environment, and in the end, actually helping our environment.

Someone at FCA or EPA really needs a wakeup call to redesign this egr system so that it's not destroying itself, and then I'd support EPA's stance. I have absolutely no issues protecting our air, but at what cost? Having to buy a new truck every 2-3 years cause these burst into flames? Or replacing all these emission parts every 2-3 years cause they are so shitty they don't last?

Instead of going after the tuning companies, EPA should be starting at the TOP, go after FCA, and force them to build a product that is compliant, and also LASTS and doesn't catch fire! Not only for the new 2020 models, but make them be accountable, starting years back from 2014 when they first came out and recall all the diesel trucks and fix the mess they created!

Unfortunately, it's our problem, we bought it, and FCA refuses to stand behind their product. It doesn't leave owners much choice but to tune the truck in an effort to keep it running and prevent it from blowing up in flames!

It's all a cash grab, like you said, young people are being brainwashed by government-mandated rules, they get jobs for EPA without a real reality check and we all suffer...
 

GearHead

Active Member
Sep 13, 2016
190
66
28
Truck Year
2014
I would have no issue with all this emission stuff, IF, #1, the egr design was actually property made so that all the soot would was cleaned out PRE going back into the intake to prevent #1 soot contamination of the intake, #2 soot plugging up the egr cooler fins, #3 soot plugging up the swirl valves, #4 soot plugging up the egr valve from operating property.

However, FCA seems to take the "it's not our problem" stance regarding accepting any responsibility for all the ecodiesel fires. They design a shitty system that is prone to egr valve sticking, swirl valve sticking, and hence, huge destructive intake FIRES from oily soot and extreme heat and tonnes of plastic parts.

So EPA is sitting here saying, everyone needs to have a functional EGR valve to reduce NOx emissions, YET they fail to give a crap that the EGR design on these trucks is causing more and more trucks to burst out in flames.

REALISTICALLY, if everyone were to follow EPA's mandate, then we would have a lot more environmental issues! #1 these stock trucks are prone to catastrophic fires creating a hell of a lot of terrible emissions for the environment with all the black smoke they make when burning to the ground (totally unnecessary), and #2 what happens to the trucks after they are written off from fires (more pollution in our landfills as these trucks are scraped)?

If some 500,000 trucks were produced and more and more catch fire, that's a hell of a lot of garbage in our scrap yards. So how is all the EPA nonsence mandating egr functionality really helping the environment on a truck that is prone to failure?

Leave the tuning companies alone, these tunes are preventing catastrophic failure, keep more trucks on the road instead of in the garbage dumps, preventing major fires which pollute the environment, and in the end, actually helping our environment.

Someone at FCA or EPA really needs a wakeup call to redesign this egr system so that it's not destroying itself, and then I'd support EPA's stance. I have absolutely no issues protecting our air, but at what cost? Having to buy a new truck every 2-3 years cause these burst into flames? Or replacing all these emission parts every 2-3 years cause they are so shitty they don't last?

Instead of going after the tuning companies, EPA should be starting at the TOP, go after FCA, and force them to build a product that is compliant, and also LASTS and doesn't catch fire! Not only for the new 2020 models, but make them be accountable, starting years back from 2014 when they first came out and recall all the diesel trucks and fix the mess they created!

Unfortunately, it's our problem, we bought it, and FCA refuses to stand behind their product. It doesn't leave owners much choice but to tune the truck in an effort to keep it running and prevent it from blowing up in flames!

It's all a cash grab, like you said, young people are being brainwashed by government-mandated rules, they get jobs for EPA without a real reality check and we all suffer...
Well, this whole mess starts with the EPA. The Mandated EGR solved a problem 30 years ago, today creates more problems than it solves. The scientific evidence is present that with current SCR converters that NOX reduction does not need EGR. EPA claims that it uses only scientific based solutions yet it appears more and more that the EPA is being used by the embedded Environmental Activists to hasten the demise of the internal combustion engine, no matter the detriment.

Although with that being said it is notable that the Banks, piggyback, system has EPA and CARB approval. I didn't go that route but I did research it and it is a plausible tune.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cds13ca

cds13ca

Active Member
Jun 19, 2019
213
69
28
Truck Year
2016
Well, this whole mess starts with the EPA. The Mandated EGR solved a problem 30 years ago, today creates more problems than it solves. The scientific evidence is present that with current SCR converters that NOX reduction does not need EGR. EPA claims that it uses only scientific based solutions yet it appears more and more that the EPA is being used by the embedded Environmental Activists to hasten the demise of the internal combustion engine, no matter the detriment.

Although with that being said it is notable that the Banks, piggyback, system has EPA and CARB approval. I didn't go that route but I did research it and it is a plausible tune.
Agreed. Pretty soon it'll be all electric no more gas motors. Would love to see heavy haulers travel across the country with electric. They'd have to keep stopping to recharge. That'll add hours and hours of wasted time...
 

Arkie 16

Member
Apr 3, 2018
48
16
8
Truck Year
2016
The department of transportation requires a 10 hour break before being able to drive up to 11 hours within a 14 hour period. There is the charge time. Now the problem is battery life and weight. Some rigs are running hydrogen for mostly local runs.
 

GearHead

Active Member
Sep 13, 2016
190
66
28
Truck Year
2014
The department of transportation requires a 10 hour break before being able to drive up to 11 hours within a 14 hour period. There is the charge time. Now the problem is battery life and weight. Some rigs are running hydrogen for mostly local runs.
At present time the charge time is more like 14hrs+, however the hydrogen technology will be the savior and hopefully will develop fast enough that battery will not be considered. The environmental impact of mining and disposal of Lithium Ion batteries is far worse than hydrocarbon fuels. As well the electric grid infrastructure is presently running at 100% capacity and adding several million charge stations would collapse the system as we know it. No you can't just plug your car into the wall, like the environmentalists like to portray, it involves an additional transformer and $4500.00 charging station.There is very little hope that infrastructure will be fortified as a recent wind farm in Oklahoma was cancelled when a group of land owners sued to stop the transmission lines, and won. There are also additional economic hurdles to solar and wind energy in comparison to natural gas. Hydroelectric has fallen out of favor due to environmental concerns of natural fish populations and habitat.
 

Arkie 16

Member
Apr 3, 2018
48
16
8
Truck Year
2016
Back to the bicycle. No pollution and it gets you in shape. Sorry northerners no creature comforts. You have to peddle faster for heater to work.
 

1shadowsabre

Active Member
Oct 18, 2015
263
76
28
Washington State
Truck Year
2015
At present time the charge time is more like 14hrs+, however the hydrogen technology will be the savior and hopefully will develop fast enough that battery will not be considered. The environmental impact of mining and disposal of Lithium Ion batteries is far worse than hydrocarbon fuels. As well the electric grid infrastructure is presently running at 100% capacity and adding several million charge stations would collapse the system as we know it. No you can't just plug your car into the wall, like the environmentalists like to portray, it involves an additional transformer and $4500.00 charging station.There is very little hope that infrastructure will be fortified as a recent wind farm in Oklahoma was cancelled when a group of land owners sued to stop the transmission lines, and won. There are also additional economic hurdles to solar and wind energy in comparison to natural gas. Hydroelectric has fallen out of favor due to environmental concerns of natural fish populations and habitat.
Sorry but it requires a 30 amp breaker and a dryer plug to charge an electric vehicle quickly. $90.00 max