Whats the deal with non EPA conversions?

[kurt]

Hello,
I notice some shops advertising cheaper conversions because they are not EPA approved kits. I asked them about the law and they say this varies by state. That Utah for instance doesn't care. Just wondering what the real deal is on this before throwing down money? I like what they are doing as far as spreading CNG but get a little nervous if I would then be a renegade kind of like the veggie oil diesel guys...

Kurt

[canyon]

Where are these cheaper shops? I want to save some $$$.

[diesel-ongas]

Found a source for three gallons a week of wvo for free.:eek::D
I am close to be runing on wvo and propane? my goal is to lay 535 hp 1100 foot pounds to the ground on used veg and propane ,:D:confused:
I still want to change the propane to cng.I have done a lot of research on that,during that time I have found nice
conversion kit to change 4 cylinder cars to .After seeing what these kits sell for an e-bay $$$$$ I may start selling them my self??????:):rolleyes:

[John Mitton]

Non-EPA certified kits:
1. Are illegal
2. Void warranties
3. Cannot obtain tax credits (here in Utah the Div. of Air Quality is now requiring the EPA certificate before processing tax credit form TC-40V. On the federal side auditors are also going to want to see your cert if you claimed the tax credit on form 8910)
4. Subject the installer and owner to penalties of up to $10,000 per day for tampering with onboard emission diagnostics.
5. In California subject the vehicle to impound (CARB cert required)
6. Typically do not require the installer to have any training for safe installation and service

Most importantly they compete unfairly with those who spend the money to get their retrofits certified.

If you folks want to discuss in generic terms the benefits vs. risks of these kits be my guest. But we do not tolerate promoting specific illegal retrofits here.
http://cngchat.com/index.php?pid=9#furtheringillegal

[cngaz]

I showed a photo of a hummer conversion that belonged to one of our Arizona customers (Not Murphy's) on an email broadcast once and I had a rep from the EPA call me up wanting to know if I did the conversion and what my license # was. I simply told them I took the photo, didn't do the work, sorry.
They are watching.

[rtry9a]

John- not dissing you here, but how much of that last post is fact and how much assumption/opinion? Regarding 1 and 4, the EPA certification was drafted to apply to imports, to require safety and emission standards; and CARB applies to the politicians in California who think they are smarter than the scientists. Most of your other comments are irrelevant, depending on relative costing of parts/labor.

IMHO, the ONLY way CNG will ever catch on to the masses will involve a Universal conversion kit that is affordable, able to be installed by anyone safely, and can enable any vehicle to operate on cng. The EPA is concerned with emissions and safety- they tend to overregulate because they are mostly lawyers and laws are all they understand. The only kit I see at this time that seems to meet the requirements is the Galileo made in S America (where most of the worldwide cng use is).

I looked into that kit briefly and will likely buy one and experiment with it- it only "changes" the timing to work with cng and turns off the gasoline injectors exactly like all the OEM kits must- the rest of the OBD diagnostics remain operatable and unchanged. The kit learns and optomizes mixture and timing based on O2 sensor feedback- probably a better approach than the OEM setups that memorize tables of numbers that we all love so much when they run rough.

The "changes" you refer to would, by inference, also outlaw all aftermarket performance chips and exhaust/intake modifications that are common throughout the US- obviously not the case in the real world. I believe we will only need to show clean emissions with these conversion kits, to prove that they meet Fed and State/County emission standards; that should not present a problem with cng.

[Highmarker]

rtry9a,

Consider what John said as a warning. Sorry, but rules are rules (even if the EPA wrote them). If you want persue installing an illegal kit that is your decision, however, do not promote it here on CNGChat (you will be banned).

I understand your frustration with EPA certified kits. I wish the EPA was more relaxed on the requirements for certifying CNG kits too. Maybe that's were we should focus some of our energy towards them and not sit here and complain about non-EPA certified kits.

[John Mitton]

Dave is right. The EPA is watching what is happening in this market segment and the last thing I am going to do is see this public forum get caught up in the inevitable crack-down.

Galileo is a huge company. If they want to play in this market they can get their kit certified with the EPA - especially if what you say is true that the OBDII will function with full OEM features post-conversion.

[John Mitton]

Can you cite one case where someone has been prosecuted for installing an non EPA certified CNG kit? Please be specific.

I think the onus is on you to cite a specific case where someone has been caught yet let off the hook.

[j03j03]

Hey casainc, I just went to the link you posted and nothing came up. It said the link is no longer availible. So you may want to try something else to cover your butt...

[bretlott]

Who is going to catch you with a non EPA certified kit if you installed it yourself, live in a small town where you have no smog requirements and you fill up at your house with a phil unit you bought off EBay.
Go CNG.

[smartineau]

I have made checks on several units, following are some concerns I can see the EPA frowning on.
1.The OBDII system does not rreally use the oxygen sensor to make fuel choices anymore. It is more of a report card for the PCM to verify that it made the right choice. Some systems now use an air fuel monitor instead of an oxygen sensor & it works differently than on oxygen sensor which changes the calculation.
2. The system goes rich/lean not because they cannot control the fuel tighter but because the catalyst needs the infusion of air to operate. Part of the OBDII catalyst monitor is the PCM is designed to change the fuel calibration and flood the cat to verify correct operation.
3. Most non certified CNG systems maintain a steady operation which changes the oxygen reading, the short and long term fuel control, messes with the monitors, and invalidates some of the tests.
4. A non certified kit not working correctly can stress the PCM as it tries to adapt and can not effect a change so (in some cases) it will go into limp in mode dropping timing advance, raising emissions, and reducing power and economy.
5. The last one I worked on (that some well intentioned shop installed) was getting so bad that the check engine was flashing and a chime was going all the time. Emissions with limp in mode timing advance was over double the EPA specifications.
6. OBDII started in 1996. Older vehicles may not have the problems and pre computer systems can grreatly reduce emissions with almost any cng kit. The problem --- not many people want to spend the money to convert a 15 year old vehicle & anything newer than 1996 can severly compromise the emissions which will give the EPA more backking to quit cng all together -- which they are already starting to do on the federal level with many states following suit & the trickle down effect which is --- no more cng vehicles available to the public from almost all manufacturers.
7. There are others who understand the system better than I do as I am not into cng that much. I just work on a few for my old customers & I do drive one myself.
By the way Curt -- I am slowly earning my decoder ring and filling in the gaps of information available.
Stan M.

[smartineau]

You are not talking a difference of 8 grand. The tanks cost the same no matter which kit you use them on & is the biggest part of the total cost. A certified kit will be from $1500 - 2500 more & they are a bigger pain to put on.
You are correct about cutting down the footprint of emissions left. My main point is that if done incorrectly with a kit that does not play with the vehicle computer will actually raise the emissions. Even the experts will have problems hooking an "Apple to a Microsoft" system and make them work together in harmony for years and miles with very little upkeep. A non certified kit may not even try & just as you can buy whatever computer you want to network your office, it does not make a lot of sense to have several different operating systems. I would never buy a $300.00 computer because it seems to be the best deal and try and network its typing program with Word Perfect or Microsoft Word. To work correctly they need to speak the same language & work together as a unit. We are talking about complex computer systems --- the same thing. I would never just buy a kit because of the price and cross my fingers that it will actually work. People spend hours deciding on an $800.00 computer purchase and almost no time learning about an $8,000.00 vehicle computer & hardware purchase except this one costs less.
I am sorry that we are so far apart, I agree 100% with the price problem and also the reduction of harmful gasses, but I have to fix the mess someone bought when it does not run right. It can take hours to sort out (especially DIY wiring nightmares) and at times it can not and will not communicate correctly. This is one reason the EPA is up in arms about these kits.
Stan

[oseberg]

It can take hours to sort out (especially DIY wiring nightmares) and at times it can not and will not communicate correctly. This is one reason the EPA is up in arms about these kits.
Stan

How exactly do you fix these systems that don't function correctly? Do you set them up correctly and make them work? Or do you remove the system and put the vehicle back in it's original state?

[smartineau]

I agree with you.
And any DIY,r with the correct kit, who follows the installation diagrams and is careful is not a problem.
But there are a lot with poor installation. I traced out a wiring problem on a motorhome and the wire color changed 7 times betweeen the inside switch and the module! Another vehicle had a wire dropping voltage because the installer used a scotchlock (poor installation procedure). Some systems use two ground circuits for four injectors and some use four. GM for example has used two different injector ground systems on the same model the same engine and the same year, one ganged and the other SEFI. If the wrong module is used the emulated signal to the PCM will be seen as twice the injector firing as expected and when reversed half of the expected value. Most of these can be fixed, but you have to know what you are looking for and it takes time to trace it out. Is the flatline on an oxygen sensor a steady fuel mixture or a bad sensor?
The length of the connecting rod and stroke of the piston will change the timing advance curve. You use an e-bay kit from an in line 6 to run a v6, but will it be right -- They are both 6 cylinder.
Over the years the chevrolet small block V8 has come in a 262, 265, 283, 302, 305, 307, 327, 350, 400. They are all small block chevrolet V8's do they use the same timing advance, the same camshaft, the same compression?
Yes you can do it and if you check you can do it correctly just like you can rebuild a small block chevy, but you better know if you have a small journal or large journal crank, the cc of the heads etc. before you order parts The cost to build that engine by yourself is way less than having a shop do the job. Just verify everything and take your time to do it right.
I have said several times that I am not a CNG tech. I do work on a few because some of my customers own them & the nearest shop is over two hours drive with a two to three week wait for an appointment.
Stan

[utahisc]

Nice dodge but since the regulations are up for interpretation until there is a court president I don't know how you can determine they 1. Are illegal and
4. Subject the installer and owner to penalties of up to $10,000 per day for tampering with onboard emission diagnostics.
Conversion Requirements
Beginning with MY 2005 light-duty vehicles (MY 2007 for heavy-duty vehicles between 8,500 lb. and 14,000 lb. gross vehicle weight rating), all conversions must be onboard diagnostic system (OBD II) compliant when operating on the alternative fuels. No false OBD codes or false malfunction indicator light (MIL) illumination should occur. For dual-fuel vehicles, the OBD II system must not be affected by the conversion when operating the vehicle on gasoline. Testing for compliance should be conducted by inducing failures to the emission system.
http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/vehi...l#requirements


My reading of that leaves enough wiggle room to place doubt upon whether those two statements are accurate, pertaining to a dual-fuel vehicle.

Apparently there is a difference between "dual fuel" veh and "bi-fuel" veh - hence different regulations?

[Ben]

So how old of a vehicle do I have to get so that I can convert it "hoop jumping free?" Is 79 old enough?

Ben

[neongreen]

If I am understanding correctly, 1995 is old enough. It just cant be OBDII (1996 and after).

[cngaz]

Everyone needs to read this link (http://www.ngvamerica.org/pdfs/FAQs_Converting_to_NGVs.pdf), John has it posted elsewhere on this site also. There are some weird dangerous people out there, thats usually why any rule comes about, to protect everyone from the worst of us.
We are dealing with high pressure, that is also flammable under the right conditions. 2 different conditions by themselves or together can kill or maim us and those around us if not used, serviced or installed properly.

[John Mitton]

Dave, I fixed the link in your post. I hope everyone who is interested in conversions will read this NGV America document (http://www.ngvamerica.org/pdfs/FAQs_Converting_to_NGVs.pdf).

ThunderStik makes some excellent points. The EPA certification process is a challenge but certainly not something that I would label as a scam. The purpose is simple really: just show the EPA that post-conversion your system has not messed up the OBDII emissions system on the engine family.

The current list of light-duty certified retrofits (http://www.ngvamerica.org/pdfs/marketplace/MP.Analyses.NGVs-a.pdf) has only 6 companies on there. There ought to be dozens. That is why I invested in one company that will hopefully be on the list soon and why I would encourage others who understand CNG and the OEM onboard diagnostic systems to go for it too. I am going to start a new thread on how the EPA process works and would be more than happy to help others who want to go down the path.

[cngaz]

Thanks John, We need to work this, I think as we get over the 2000 member mark we can exert our influence to improve what we don't like as a group.
We're not about avoiding the rules, let's improve them! For the first time in NGV history a group of individuals are coming together to promote change, a large enough group to make a difference for us, the NGV industry and our country. We're one short of 1750 members as I write this. 2000 here we come! Spread the word, everyone can make a difference. Go to those Clean Cities Coalition meetings. Write your newspaper editor. Don't be afraid to put big NGV lettering on your vehicles! The pen is mightier than the sword...............
OK, kind of dopey, but you get the idea, if we stick together we can be a catalyst for better change.

[younkin]

I may have the wrong idea but arn't all of the fines etc for a non EPA conversion pertaining to OBD II cars? Also arn't the fines for making the car pollute more? Where are all of these NON EPA APPROVED cops at anyway? Where are all of these rules written down at? Will the real big brother please stand up? Jim

[cngaz]

I guess we live in different countries divided by the Grand Canyon.
In Arizona, the AZ Dept of Environemntel Quality will shut your business down if you get caught installing a non EPA certified conversion. I have a guy right down the street that has already been threatened by them.
So the lack of oversite in Utah does not mean its universal for everyone.
But Arizona already went through the boom once in 2000 and had conversions and conversion shops coming out our ears because there were incentives. Utah is now going though a very similar situation. If you get a bunch of crappy conversions going that don't work right, then the citizens complain about it, then the news gets a hold of it, then the politicians feel their necks are on the line and suddenly you are going to feel regulated and then some, if you have the back lash we experienced in Arizona. You then lose your state incentives and all your conversion shops close up and you won't find a politician that will risk his carreer to talk to you. Then what do you have? We've been through it. Its not fun. ( BTW, I am not involved in conversions).
We do not currently have any incentives in Arizona, so unless an OEM starts building new NGV's you still have a vehicle problem, because no one in Arizona can afford a conversion ether, so we either work on regulations to make them less costly, or we buy enough EPA conversions that the manufacturing and production costs come down or we get more assistance and incentives for everyone or all of the above.
Thats what our Chat group can do.

[younkin]

Dave, Are you saying that Just Shops got fined? Individuals weren't fined? The trouble with EPA Kits are that there are none for imports? Does anyone have a line on any kit for a 90 Accord? Jim

[cngaz]

My understanding is in CA, if its not Carb they will impound the vehicle.
In Arizona I don't think they can take much action against an individual, but I may be wrong. They may deny your license plates, you definantly would not get the AFV plates or the AFV licesne plate discount.

What manufacturer in their right mind would go through the process of designing and producing and EPA certifying a conversion for any foreign car unless they know they are going to recoup their investment by selling X
amount of conversions.
If our manufacturers could not sell enough basic Pickups & Cavaliers to make it worth their while to stay in the business, how would anyone make any money on a smaller segment for foreign cars that already get pretty good mileage?

I guarantee if you walk into any kit manufacturer and maybe some of our vehicle manufacturers with an order for say 1000 or 1500 of the same vehicle, they would get it done. Anyone here ready to step up and put their money down on that order? Thats whats needed.
Then anything they can sell past that is gravy.

[younkin]

Here in Utah County I spoke to The Utah County I/M Office and was told that non OBD II Cars only have to pass the Usual I/M Test and have all of the smog equipment still on the car. Why do people with fuel efficient cars want kits? For the same reason as anyone, the cheap NG.... An Old VW Mechanic, Jim

[John Mitton]

I think we need to bust the myth that if a vehicle is converted to run CNG it now automatically has cleaner emissions. Stan had a great post on that earlier on in this thread.
http://www.cngchat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5478&postcount=16

[cngaz]

All you need is two or three bad readings to get into the wrong hands........
In 2000, the state and ADEQ used those against us, then everyone thought they were all that way. That belief still exists with some of our state officials to this day.

[younkin]

I agree with the Stick let the CNG cars roll, no one on this board has showed me any laws yet. I don't have a CNG car yet but I do have 30 years wrenching and I have seen many poor mechanics and crooked mechanics but on the other hand I have also worked with many very good, honest, hard working mechanics. I have smog tested in Utah and California and there are always those who like to bend the rules but lets not go on a witch hunt just yet. As a mechanic I look for ways to solve promlems, thats what I do all day fix cars. The cars all by themselves will break (especially the American ones). There are dishonest people in every profession from politicians to investment bankers but I know one thing for sure and you can take this to the bank, gas will never go down in price, an old Mechanic, Jim

[cnghal]

Wholly Crap! What a bunch of mangy coyotes howling at the moon!!!!
Dave is right! It certainly is a different world north of the canyon.
You're state gives you a .63 cent Lobster dinner and your bitching because there are only so many Lobsters in the sea. How could God play such a cruel joke on you. Why didn't God make more, so that when it was your turn, you wouldn't be denied your God given right to a .63 cent Lobster. Oh, and shout at the Devil too... the drawn butter is cold.
Sorry for the rant, but you people crack me up. Less than a decade has past and you are destined to repeat our history.
If it's so damn simple, why don't you pull one of those well engineered CNG monkeys out of your butt, strap it to your engine, fill it to 3600psi and run it thru the lab in Ann Arbor and see if they salute.
I'll tell you what, this week I'll start a new thread in the conversions forum with so many facts about the actual conversion and certification process and so many "what ifs" that can go wrong, it will make your head spin. :eek:

Later....

[clean03]

Oh Kripes I couldnt have said it better. Its like there is one milk bearing cow in the township that gives milk for free and ten thousand others that have three dollar a gallon milk like the rest of the world and all these folks can do is bitch at the one cow with the free milk ;) and the folks wait in line to get some then bitch because their pail ain't full when they leave :p

Tight like a tiger:mad:

[jgw50]

Here's a question.

I have an 01 Tahoe with an EcoFuel system in it installed by AZStar. AZStar is no longer in business and I don't think the EPA had the regulations they have now as far as kits go (this is a mixer kit.)

Does anyone know if this kit is "certified"

I know that the kit uses a injector emulator, and has its own ecu tricking box that wires into the OBDII interface!

Am I illegally running my car? Can I be fined?

A while ago I bought a Bi Fuel 1998 Ford Exploder for Murphy with the check engine light on. There wasnt any documentation on the kit it was just a simple IMPCO 450 mixer with dualcurve computer trickery. Am I liable for selling that car?

I am actually seriouse here, given the current rules / regulations, where does my Tahoe stand? Where do all of the cars that were converted pre- EPA CNG regulations stand?

[cnghal]

JGW50,
Shouldn't be a problem. Conversions are held to the regs in place at the time of the conversion as they relate to that model/year.
We also used to have this thing called Option 3. It allowed the flexability that we so need now, but it was harpooned by the OEMs and EPA.
If it's in and still running, let it be. ^

[josch]

Non-EPA certified kits:
1. Are illegal
2. Void warranties
3. Cannot obtain tax credits (here in Utah the Div. of Air Quality is now requiring the EPA certificate before processing tax credit form TC-40V. On the federal side auditors are also going to want to see your cert if you claimed the tax credit on form 8910)
4. Subject the installer and owner to penalties of up to $10,000 per day for tampering with onboard emission diagnostics.
5. In California subject the vehicle to impound (CARB cert required)
6. Typically do not require the installer to have any training for safe installation and service

Most importantly they compete unfairly with those who spend the money to get their retrofits certified.

If you folks want to discuss in generic terms the benefits vs. risks of these kits be my guest. But we do not tolerate promoting specific illegal retrofits here.
http://cngchat.com/index.php?pid=9#furtheringillegal

So, if a retrofit kit is going to be used for "off road use only", then in this case discussion of retrofits is perfectly fine on this forum then, right?

That being said, I am going to put a bi-fuel kit onto my mostly street driven SUV (96 Blazer w/ OBDII), which I will only burn pure gasoline on the street-driven roads, but when I go off-road, I will switch it over to CNG fuel to save on recreation costs (since it is also a "recreational vehicle"). I'm thinking of using a {reference to illegal product removed by moderators} kit since they seem to have the most world-wide experience in retrofit kits, plus it is a closed loop system. I know that with their piggy-back system, if you run on gasoline mode, it doesn't tamper at all with factory emission controls, so are there any other people who have experience with {reference to illegal product removed by moderators} kits (for "off road use only" of course)? Disclaimer: I would never use this system on any public highway. We can discuss it this way (w/o being banned) right? Because I would never want to break the law. My government is too smart and always knows best.

I was an ASE cert. master technician for 15 years, and let it expire 3 years ago when I took on a new profession in the computer field, so I am technically not qualified to install CNG (I could blow up the shop, the car or both), but in my years, I have done tons of work on agricultural propane burning engines, and know the systems inside and out (yes I know that LPG is lower pressure liquid, not high pressure vapor like CNG), and I will install this kit in my home garage (yes I still have all my old Snap-On tools). Does this mean anything bad? I may even install CNG kits on other people's cars too (for "off road use only" of course). I will only use new tanks that wont expire for 20 years. Installation will be of very high, professional grade. And I guarantee that any car I install will burn cleaner on CNG, and there will be no check engine light on when I'm done, or I will personally remove the kit (since I don't want our off-road areas to become smoggy either - above and beyond the Government's expectation).

So is there a problem with this? Using kits "for off-road use only"? to help clean our air while we are on our recreation time?

[josch]

I agree with the Stick let the CNG cars roll, no one on this board has showed me any laws yet. I don't have a CNG car yet but I do have 30 years wrenching and I have seen many poor mechanics and crooked mechanics but on the other hand I have also worked with many very good, honest, hard working mechanics. I have smog tested in Utah and California and there are always those who like to bend the rules but lets not go on a witch hunt just yet. As a mechanic I look for ways to solve promlems, thats what I do all day fix cars. The cars all by themselves will break (especially the American ones). There are dishonest people in every profession from politicians to investment bankers but I know one thing for sure and you can take this to the bank, gas will never go down in price, an old Mechanic, Jim

Hey Mr. Younkin,

Do you remember me? I've run into you from time to time. Remember, I'm the guy who worked for your old Internet company, and sometimes run into you out and about? I live in SF

Don't worry, I'll be one of those very good, honest, hard working mechanics you speak of too, because I will only install for "off road use only" if I do them. I need to do my car first, and then see how well it turns out when I go "off-road" to test it out.

The only stick-in-the-fan I can see to a kit like {reference to illegal product removed by moderators} (where it injects fuel mainstream ahead of the TB), is with newer cars like Honda and many others for example that have many engine offerings now that use variable cylinder technology, since you can't kill the fuel to individual cylinders. Those applications I don't think will be able to use your average retrofit kit. But the {reference to illegal product removed by moderators} kit looks promising for many other applications since they run closed loop. DISCLAIMER: I speak from the tense that any kit if installed on any vehicle will only be used "for OFF-ROAD use only".

[rkcarguy]

I get a kick out of the age exemption too, vehicles older than ____ don't have to meet emissions standards. Sounds great to me. I'll pick up a old rusty bucket, drop a 454 with a pair of turbo's on it with a couple of mixers and I'm home free-mad max style!

[Aaragorn]

ok i've read the whole thread now..politics suck!

It feels like watching a senate committee try to screw in a light bulb by voting on who should do it and with which hand and at what time of day etc. etc. all the while night is falling and it's getting darker and darker in the committee chambers.

If we could focus on the relevant issues and principles rather than bash personalities that would help, but alas it's not as entertaining and that seems to be a basic human need we all share, the need to poke at something and vent our spleens occasionally. There is certainly more than enough opportunity for that with the current state of affairs and CNG no matter which side of any of these issues you are on.

But what about the light bulb? Shall we lose sight of the governing purposes of the whole thing?

can we agree on even that much?

1- We want to protect the environment.
I don't think anyone argues that do they?

2- We want the most economical solution to our transportation needs.

Here is where the arguments begin and end I think. Follow the money and you will be able to understand why different groups of people take different sides of issues. Everyone including the EPA and state governing bodies has a vested interest. We are dealing with competing financial interests. That's the only reason to debate why it matters WHO does the work and who isn't allowed to do the work. The debate isn't about whose qualified from a technical skilled standpoint as much as whose qualified from a political compliance standpoint. That's the reason the committee can't get the light bulb screwed in before it gets dark. The focus has shifted from HOW to do the job to WHO 'should' do the job.

I conclude the following:

1- It's pretty well established seems to me that the job (meaning after market conversions) CAN be done and done right.

2- A job done right benefits the environment and the economy in many ways.

3- It is possible that the job can be done right by other than rocket scientists who are 5th generational descendants of rocket scientists who all have PHD's in rocket science.

4- The issues before us are more focused on our calculators and the placement of our seats than our credentials and out titles.

That brings us back to the starting place where this all shakes out... THE MONEY MOTIVATIONS!

Being that I am a Utahan, I can talk about Utahan's driving and merging skills. I get my amusement watching Utahan's try to merge on the freeway. To say it's comical is an understatement. Don't look to Utah to resolve issues that involve sharing or merging of control issues. We can no more work this out than we can merge on an on ramp. It's not in our genes.

Personally I feel screwed by the whole thing. My family drives two Nissan's one 2001 Altima and a 2005 Pathfinder. The Pathfinder is the only one that would have warranty issues. Neither one is old enough to skirt the OBDII issues and we live in Utah County where apparently the laws keep pace with the issues at about a 50 year lag time and the laws made 50 years ago were all based in premise that everything in the world is evil and to be shunned at all cost. This doesn't make for a progressive climate or adaptive political attitude. I am always amused when I see on the news where Utah ranks high in some cities as 'best place to live, work etc." or "best business environment or entrepreneurial place". Where do the people that take these surveys get their info? I live here and I don't see the resemblance to what they describe.

My Altima gets 30 mpg approx. and we commute 60 miles a day with it. I reckon we'd save $120/month if we converted to cng just on the commute alone assuming we do nothing else with that vehicle. That's $1440/year for the commute.

On the Pathfinder which gets approx. 20 mpg on the highway that's a different matter. I do assembly and deliver work with that. Plus we do recreational stuff in the Pathfinder (and we LOVE it!) None of these miles are as regularly scheduled as the commuting miles but I figure we put almost as many miles on each vehicle month to month, that's being conservative. 300 miles a week on average. That means instead of using 10 gals/week in the pathfinder I'm using 15. That means I'm saving about $180/week on the conversion in fuel costs instead of $120. (assuming I'm using the calculator correctly) If I'm saving that much each week on fuel, maybe the warranty issues aren't so important?

So let's see, combined savings of $300/week for me to convert two vehicles. $15,600/year total. I'm motivated to find my way thru the political minefield now. Mind you I hate politics. Our common inability to focus on solutions will be the death of us all. Reminds me of Lord of the Flies. We all kill each other on an island that is otherwise perfectly capable of sustaining us all. And...scotty isn't going to get the transporter fixed, there is not going to be any beam ups. We're stuck with each other on this rollercoaster.

We have incentives on one hand and fines on the other. Yes I'll be contacting my commissioner and representative etc. etc. and in the mean time I'll be looking for someone qualified to do a good job converting my vehicles, If I can locate a kit that has good reputation and that will give a good result I can do myself I'm open to that too, at least on the Pathfinder which we take off road all the time.

Since the forum won't allow people to post specific kits here, I'd be happy to have the people who are in the know email me the specifics and I'll keep asking around at the shops until I find something I feel good about. The 'closed loop' thing sounds intriguing.

I don't see how they can be too upset with a conversion which doesn't compromise the existing system's performance and which produces acceptable results on each separate fuel in a bi-fuel arrangement. Except as I have been saying, from THE MONEY standpoint! Yea they don't get to TAX the components or TAX the kit system or TAX the installers! poor epa, poor babies, boo hoo. but hey was the epa created to be a business interest or do a public service of protecting the common interest of the environment? What IS their legitimate purpose in this?

It's all too clear. Since were talking politics here..

I think the first step is to know who your friends are. That's easy. Follow the money trail.

You may say, Well, this isn't screwing in a light bulb it's far more than that. Yea, ok, but it's not so highly evolved that it's incomprehensible unless you have a PHD. Either I'll find someone who had/has proper training or I'll get the training myself eventually. The motivation remains.

[Aaragorn]

Great statement! Great post.^

Thanks, I'm serious, if you know a quality kit please email me the specifics and relevant study info. ;)

Weather I end up doing this myself or having someone else do it I want to fully understand what is going down.

Since I'm venting about politics might as well vent the whole spleen....

There are plug in cars now which get 100 mile range per overnight charge. You know why they are not hitting the market big time? because they don't work well in Arizona or Michigan. One is too hot and the other too cold. They work ok in most of the other 48 states. They figure that capability would address 90% of the private transportation market who like myself has a regular commute of less than 50 miles one way. BUT because it doesn't address the WHOLE country and two states are not viable the manufacturers are sitting on it. Go figure!

Where is it written that ONE solution has to accommodate EVERY contingency? We're sooo d:rolleyes:med.

[chunder]

Non-EPA certified kits:
1. Are illegal
2. Void warranties
3. Cannot obtain tax credits (here in Utah the Div. of Air Quality is now requiring the EPA certificate before processing tax credit form TC-40V. On the federal side auditors are also going to want to see your cert if you claimed the tax credit on form 8910)
4. Subject the installer and owner to penalties of up to $10,000 per day for tampering with onboard emission diagnostics.
5. In California subject the vehicle to impound (CARB cert required)
6. Typically do not require the installer to have any training for safe installation and service

Most importantly they compete unfairly with those who spend the money to get their retrofits certified.

If you folks want to discuss in generic terms the benefits vs. risks of these kits be my guest. But we do not tolerate promoting specific illegal retrofits here.
http://cngchat.com/index.php?pid=9#furtheringillegal


#3 is not necessarily true: Utah Code Section 59-10-1009 (1)(c)(i)(C)(I) (Effective 01/01/09): "certification of the conversion equipment by the federal Environmental Protection Agency or by a state whose certification standards are recognized by the board;"

Just my 2 cents.

[chunder]

Non-EPA certified kits:
1. Are illegal
2. Void warranties
3. Cannot obtain tax credits (here in Utah the Div. of Air Quality is now requiring the EPA certificate before processing tax credit form TC-40V. On the federal side auditors are also going to want to see your cert if you claimed the tax credit on form 8910)
4. Subject the installer and owner to penalties of up to $10,000 per day for tampering with onboard emission diagnostics.
5. In California subject the vehicle to impound (CARB cert required)
6. Typically do not require the installer to have any training for safe installation and service

Most importantly they compete unfairly with those who spend the money to get their retrofits certified.

If you folks want to discuss in generic terms the benefits vs. risks of these kits be my guest. But we do not tolerate promoting specific illegal retrofits here.
http://cngchat.com/index.php?pid=9#furtheringillegal

As for #2: Magnuson Moss Warranty Act

US Code - Title 15, Chapter 50, Sections 2301-2312
Legally, a vehicle manufacturer cannot void the warranty on a vehicle due to an aftermarket part unless they can prove that the aftermarket part caused or contributed to the failure in the vehicle (per the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. 2302(C)) .

[chunder]

As for #1...Well that seems to be debateable. This whole issue of not being able to talk about non approved conversions being installed in road vehicles hinges around the legality. How is it illegal if it does not interfere with the emission system and in fact improves upon the emissions? Honest question. Does "tampering" with an emissions system include never fixing it if it goes bad? What if someone didnt pass their emissions test for registration and installed a viable non approved kit to fix the situation and improve their emissions problem? What about pre OBD II cars? Etc. Etc...

[chunder]

Here's a hypothetical situation....

I'm on the sidewalk in the middle of a city block that is 200 yards long. Directly across the street is an old woman getting mugged. I can help her if I get there quick. Do I jaywalk (:eek:) across the street (approx. 50 ft.) or do I go to the intersection (100 yds.), wait for the light, cross the street (50 ft.), then go help the woman (another 100 yds.)? Which do I choose? The answer will not be given here... Just do what is right. (Maybe that means different things to some of us.)

I'm done. (maybe)

[CNG MOTORS]

very interesting comparison, obviously doing the right thing will be to help the hold woman. Don't think a officer will give you a ticket for jaywalking. But funny you worded it this way, because the right thing to do would also be to get a certified kit, and unlike the officer the EPA WILL give you a ticket, more importantly they are looking for any excuse to shut CNG down permanently (that's what our government wants) So there will be a few that ruins it for the rest of us.

You know who you are, and others know who I am talking about. Someone in Utah is offering regular consumers training (in 1 day) to learn how to install their own CNG kits with not mechanical training or backgrouund for $200, this has disaster written all over it.

Would you still jaywalk to save her if she was posing as and old woman but really a suicide bomber in disguise, by the way that's not a purse.

[Yroc]

How can the EPA, 'give you a ticket'? They have no legal power, they do not make 'laws'. There is a lot of mis-information on this site. The EPA releases 'memos' with THEIR criteria for a safe conversion. There is no actual law that says you have to be epa certified. You can still convert a vehicle safely and still be epa compliant, you don't have to pay them to certify your kit unless you want to. I would say it's like being ISO9000 certified. You can pay to be certified, or you can just just be compliant

[Yroc]

I would like to see John Mitton post some proof for his claims. The research I've done makes me believe that John has a personal agenda and this whole EPA cert thing is in his best interest financially. Show me some proof of your side of the argument!! I've read memo 1A. What else is there?

[John Mitton]

Yroc, we toe the line here with regard to following the law, be it legislated or mandated by a federal agency. Believe me, if you could successfully argue and get a court to rule that that Memorandum 1A is either non-binding or even if it is binding that it does not apply to alt fuel conversions I would be the first to help reimburse your legal fees.

Seriously, I would love to see someone with some legal background start a new discussion thread here as to the legitimacy and enforceability of Memorandum 1A.

I answered your "agenda" question in another thread:
http://www.cngchat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8611&postcount=25

[CNG MOTORS]

When I said ticket and mean fine. EPA can fine you!

What's wrong with making money, do you volunteer your time to your employer? Do you think I have done more harm than good for the CNg market? Making money on high dollar stuff? so am I to understand I am responsible for $15,000 cavaliers? Why do you think this stuff is higher dollar? Me or all the Utah buyers rushing in to get these vehicles. I used to sell the same cars for $5000 when I bought them cheaper 4 years ago. As far as competing with me I just gave a public compliment on this forum to one of my competitors up there in Utah. I don't disagree a compitent person can do this safely, but what everyone else that has no mechanical background. The site that will remain unamed says anyone can do it. Well I disagree with that. I've been in this business a while and I have no business doing it.

Only speaking for myself here, but my vested interest is CNG is long term. I have been selling CNG cars from day one going back 4 1/2 years before CNGChat and before anyone in Utah knew what CNG was. I am not looking for the short gain here, where most people trying to get around the system are. My interest is to keep CNG going long term, because long term it benifits my business, yes. But for someone trying to make a quick buck through illegal means does nothing for this CNG market. I have no hidden agenda, I even pulled all my cars off this site that were for sale because a customer of mine that was frustrated over how fast I was selling cars complained to the forum. Every time he was interested in a car he would move too slow and I sold it.

CNG is making news big in Utah, what if the next story was, "MAN TRYING TO CONVERT HIS OWN VEHICLES KILLS HIMSELF AND BLOWS UP HIS HOUSE" what do you think that would do to the market?

I sincerely don't want CNG to end up with a bad wrap because of a few bad eggs. One because I believe CNG is the future and two my lively hood does depend on it.

[Yroc]

I guess what I want to know is this. Where are these 'laws' written? Who is enforcing them? I don't know anyone that knows anything about these 'laws'. My first NGV was a 2000 escalade from Pheonix. From what I've read here, it's an illegal vehicle. How was I to know this? Why didn't anyone do anything about it? I registered it, I claimed the tax credit and I passed my emissions and inspections.

I am now converting vehicles that exceed EPA requirements. They pass emissions (only requirement of the memo 1A) they meet or exceed all of the NAFTC safety requirements, they ore OBDII compatible. What's the EPA going to fine me for? tampering with emission controls?? I don't think so, I didn't touch any of that and I have documented before and after emissions for these vehicles and they are lightyears cleaner.

I wouldn't even know anything about any of these so called laws if they weren't promoted so heavily on this site. I'd still just be minding my own business happy that we could all be driving cleaner, cheaper vehicles someday.

Why would a ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY want to keep cleaner, safer vehicles off the road? (yeah, that will make them look good in court). Even if they tried to enforce anything here, they have a poor, weak case. I would hope the day the EPA tries to bully any of us. We will ALL stand together.

It really pisses me off that everyone on this board doesn't support each other. This will be the downfall of this industry. We are small, all combined we are small, so we need to be united in making change!!! let's do it!!

We need to remember that there is billions and billions of dollars out there for everyone in this industry. Those who get EPA certs, will have their edge, those that convert will have different issues. I think that there is enough here for everyone. There is not much competition in this industry, but for some reason everyone thinks they have to be the only one

[CNGcruiser]

Lots of discussion on the certification issue.
this is crazy.
If I install a kit that was "certified" in 2003, on a 2001 F-150 in 2003 then i'm legal. Then if the supplier does not re-new the certification in 2004 and I put the same kit on a 2001 F-150 I'm ilegal....becasue they didn't pay the EPA $35K to re-new the certification.

So when did you really put that kit on your vehicle???

The conversion kit manufactureres are sick and tired of handing about $35K to the EPA each and every year to re-certify the same kits for every make and model of vehicle, even though they use the same engine. ,,,, yes, re-certify the same kit year after year. So if Ford has 7 models of trucks (crew cab, standard cab, club cab, short bed, long bed etc, all with 5.4L ) each model is about $35K. so 7 models x $35K each year.... now do dodge chevy ford,..... Is the EPA really a bank???

The EPA needs to find the commen sense trough and take a big long drink.

Why is the EPA worried about folks running on CNG?? that is the issue.

Most all the kits i have seen have no trouble, when installed correctly - to pass smog. THe EPA should only go after the kits that can't pass because they don't have a feed back loop and can't continuoulsy monitor the exhuast gases.

A SMOG check can expose bad kits or installations. The Conversion kit folks shoudl only have to certify a kit 1 time and have the cert last, then we all save money having conversion done on our vehicles. Peaple will conform if they can do it for a reasonable price.

Oh, and what about the EPA getting caught running non-certified kits on their own EPA fleet cars....

We need to get together and help the EPA find a common sense, environmentally sound solution.

[chunder]

So there we go, they are NOT illegal. There is no law banning them. The EPA has not regulated that brands like {banned by an otherwise invested moderator} are illegal. They have just approved a hand full of installers/kits, not excluded the rest. And if you follow their regulations and come out with an exceptionally safe and cleaner vehicle....No harm, No Foul. In fact...Less harm, No foul.

Just because your vehicle doesnt qualify for tax breaks doesnt mean its illegal.

[chunder]

Here's what should happen....

All vehicles should be openly allowed to convert at will. Those vehicles that are converted should be designated as such for registration purposes. All designated vehicles should be required to have emissions testing on a yearly basis that the EPA (not just the state) should have access to. The EPA could openly monitor all converted vehicles. The EPA could enforce changes to vehicles/kits/installers that are not in compliance with safety and emissions. Everyone wins. The end.

[Adrian]

Here's what should happen....

All vehicles should be openly allowed to convert at will. Those vehicles that are converted should be designated as such for registration purposes. All designated vehicles should be required to have emissions testing on a yearly basis that the EPA (not just the state) should have access to. The EPA could openly monitor all converted vehicles. The EPA could enforce changes to vehicles/kits/installers that are not in compliance with safety and emissions. Everyone wins. The end.

That is way too logical and the EPA looses money! It would be nice though.

[Adrian]

So easy even a caveman can do it.:D

(No offence to cavemen)

Apparently cavemen would be more logical than our wonderful EPA!

[irage]

Kurt,

I am with you. I am willing to take the risk. If the EPA wants to come after me, then knock yourself out. I am seeing more an more CNG vehicles everyday and I stop people and ask them how it is working and where they got it installed. The asnwers vary, but the majority have been kits. There may be rules, but I am tired of our government being the only onea allowed to break the rules.

I see USPS trucks, UPS trucks and other large vehicles that don't meet the EPA certification with CNG. It's time we take the power back. My gas bill has tripled in less than a year and now there is talk about 6.00 a/gal by end of summer. If this keeps up I won't have to worry about the EPA or the IRS, because I won't be working anymore.

I am also sick of forums that regulate free speech. This should be an open discussion and free exchange of ideas. Since when has that been grounds for censorship? Installing an "illegal" kit is no worse than installing a performance chip or installing glass packs.

Drastic times call for drastic measures. No one is looking out for us.

[jdfriberg]

I am too new to take sides regarding "legal" or "illegal" kits or conversions. I do notice that one of the strict interpreters of the law has an illegal copyright infringement on his signature line. Is that affected by our terms of service?

Thank you

[bretlott]

With gas prices going over $4.00 you are going to see this CNG thing explode. Just hold on for the ride and watch as Many backyard mechanics are going to try their hand at CNG conversions. Not even the EPA is going to be able to stop it. It is going to be very interesting to watch this unfold. Only time will tell if people start blowing up at the pump.

[CraziFuzzy]

With gas prices going over $4.00 you are going to see this CNG thing explode. Just hold on for the ride and watch as Many backyard mechanics are going to try their hand at CNG conversions. Not even the EPA is going to be able to stop it. It is going to be very interesting to watch this unfold. Only time will tell if people start blowing up at the pump.

That is exactly what this forum's rules are trying to avoid. Well, at least avoid any culpability when said 'mechanics' blow themselves up. Look what happened to the SuperShuttle driver in Carson that didn't have his van properly inspected following an accident, because, how would he have known to have it done?

[chunder]

This SuperShuttle driver was not a "backyard mechanic" and with over 7 million natural gas vehicles worldwide... Wouldn't it be strange if there wasnt an accident every once in a while? I think the main idea is that they are not any less safe than gasoline vehicles. I mean, do you always worry about static ignition when fueling with regular unleaded? I don't, but I know that it is a risk and it doesnt keep me from driving my car. I think that the real issue in this specific case is the lack of a safety inspection on the CNG equipment after an accident. This has nothing to do with the topic.

[CraziFuzzy]

My point was to illustrate what happens when the "backyard mechanics" are not fully educated on the proper methods in working with CNG. I was not saying the SuperShuttle driver was the cause, but that it was the body shop not knowing that extra precautions needed to be taken when dealing with CNG. Currently, working with gasoline is 'common knoledge' for anyone who would be willing to do some work. Working with CNG is not.

[CNG MOTORS]

Maybe illegalcngchat.com is in order then, You would be the right person for it, because you believe in it so much. Just as John, Hal, I, and the other moderators don't believe in it here. Regardless if we like it or not EPA set rules, granted it's all political, but non the less rules. Those that choose to play by the rules this is the place to get help, those that don't this forum is not the place, for many reasons, first and foremost in my opinion is the liability of allowing an open discussion and someone were to get injured. We are sue happy nation and some one would come after this forum in an instent if something like that were to happen. We've got a guy sueing my go-kart club right now because he didn't know how to use the soap dispenser in the bathroom and soap got in his eyes, he's sueing for $125,000 NO JOKE it's in litigation now.

EPA's a pain in the ass I do not disagree, could we prmote this thing faster and further without them, YES. I had a vehicle once that was set up improperly (by whom I don't now) when I ran the car through emmissions it blew so bad on CNG that it failed the smog test, but on gasoline it passed with flying colors. Example of a bad setup. People are going to go around EPA no matter what, yes we know this is going to happen we just don't want to be part of it or have a hand in it. But appears you are ok with it, that's why I recommend a different forum for you or your own forum, these are not difficult to set up.

Using an anology here. Say a person was walking down the street in front of you and drops a $100 bill, do you pick it up and return it or do you pocket it? You didn't steal it from the person? (Moderators of this forum are doing what we think is right)

[CNG MOTORS]

The statement was meant to show that a conversion put together improperly can do more harm than good. I have no business installing kits and I have been doing this for 4 years. That's why I have people much smarter than me and certified, work on them for me.

If you understand the litigation, do you then not see why we don't want something like this promoted on here.

The locksmith analogy, I would honestly say I would give it back. Although I am not currently in this situation I have been and would still do the same. I believe my returning it my payback will come in different ways. Starving and all these are my grounded beliefs.

We are trying to help people that's why I got into this business, that's why this site was create. Another anology if you help somebody with instructions to build a bomb are you truly helping them? I love anologies don't you :p

This is an open discussion don't know why you think we are arguing, we just have a different opinion on how to help people. Another thing that make OUR country great by the way. If I didn't like what you have to say or didn;t feel like putting up with it anymore, I could have closed the thread or remove just your comments. That's not what we do here or what we are about, as you can see everyone can read this entire thread and take what they want from it.

[Perthandover]

CNG motors, I have talked to you several times over the years about vehicles you were selling and they did not have EPA kits on them. We talked about specific kits that I cannot mention by name here and how they worked with the different auto makers, vehicles etc. on your lot. How come all the sudden the self rightoues attitude that they are illegal now? You don't seem to have a problem selling them. Just trying to understand?

[CNG MOTORS]

A used 2000 Suburban that I buy and resell that was converted in 2000 under an EPA cert is still OK. Just because it doesn't have one today doesn;t mean it never did. My concern is really not illegal vs. legal, right or wrong, cert or no cert. My concerns are safety and the potential back lash we could get from EPA.

[mwbare]

Sorry to change gears here folks, but why doesn't the EPA just get some legislation to halt the import of any kit that doesn't have approval? This would seem to stop all the trouble with these kits & then they could let all the domestic kit manufacturers just fight it out. May the strongest survive. This could also encourage more competition between brands that may lead to lower prices. If it's made in the USA it's got to be a quality product. Or maybe it will allow the strongest to monopolize the industry & charge even higher prices. Truthfully I'm more scared of imported CNG tanks than any kit thats out there. If a kit doesn't work, it just doesn't work. If a tank doesn't work.....:) Smiles, MB

[CraziFuzzy]

Sorry to change gears here folks, but why doesn't the EPA just get some legislation to halt the import of any kit that doesn't have approval? This would seem to stop all the trouble with these kits & then they could let all the domestic kit manufacturers just fight it out. May the strongest survive. This could also encourage more competition between brands that may lead to lower prices. If it's made in the USA it's got to be a quality product. Or maybe it will allow the strongest to monopolize the industry & charge even higher prices. Truthfully I'm more scared of imported CNG tanks than any kit thats out there. If a kit doesn't work, it just doesn't work. If a tank doesn't work.....:) Smiles, MB

it wouldn't fly, the kits themselves are not illegal.. using them on the road is. They technically could be used off-road only, or in stationary applications, or boats, etc... however, because the majority of probable used would be the illicit on0road use, the discussion is limited here.

[chunder]

:confused: Still waiting to see it in print that they are illegal on the road. Anyone? Anyone?

[CraziFuzzy]

:confused: Still waiting to see it in print that they are illegal on the road. Anyone? Anyone?

I can't speak for Utah's rules, but in California, it is illegal to drive your vehicle without current registration. To obtain said registration, you ahve to have routine inspections, part of which is verifying that the vehicle has not been 'tampered' with, by EPA's and CARB's definitions.

I'd be pretty certain that all states at least abide by the EPA's version of tampering.

[CraziFuzzy]

I have seen you post this document/flyer before, it was scanned in 1994, and unfortunately, it does not apply. They basically struck the 'reasonable basis' clause with the "Addendum to Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A (http://www.epa.gov/Compliance/resources/policies/civil/caa/mobile/admem1a.pdf)" dated September 4, 1997. It basically says that the 'reasonable basis' is limited to their certification process. It did provide some methods to show system compliance through 'option 3' which involved some testing, and using a deteriation factor to ensure that it would still perform over it's lifetime. This loophole expired on August 29, 2002, restricting approval to either Option 1 (EPA Certification) or Option 2 (CARB Certification).

Not that I mind the little time that Option 3 existed.. that's when my wifes vehicle was converted, so I can't complain... well I could complain that it doens't still apply...

[cngmech]

"This loophole expired on August 29, 2002, restricting approval to either Option 1 (EPA Certification) or Option 2 (CARB Certification).", Where is this found and how does it apply to an owner installed kit in Utah? Isn't CARB California?

[IndyRonbo]

Wow. I just took the time to read all the threads on this topic and it reads like a political presidential debate.
I live in Indiana we don't have anyone to convert any vehicle. I have built cars for a hobby and it looks to be easier to convert my '32 deuce than my 2002 chevy S-10. I commute 425 miles each week and my s-10 gets 26mpg which (yes I can do math) $106 / week or $424 / month. That was more than my truck payment when it was new. I have my own natural gas well and I do know something about how to safely manage the gas. I as others have looked into kits to convert my vehicles at a reasonable cost but I want to do it legal, safe and effective. So what do I do? Just keep watching this forum for any advice and information on how to accomplish this task. Teach me to fish so I can teach others...

Educate me please on what to do.

Farmer in Indiana who has to work off the farm because there is no profit in farming due to the $5.00 diesel fuel.

:confused:

[CraziFuzzy]

"This loophole expired on August 29, 2002, restricting approval to either Option 1 (EPA Certification) or Option 2 (CARB Certification).", Where is this found and how does it apply to an owner installed kit in Utah? Isn't CARB California?

This is an EPA ruling, meaning it applies nationwide. The CARB options was because the EPA recognized that CARB's more stringent requirements trumped their own, so a manufacturer would only have to get CARB certification, and it would be legal in all 50 states, instead of having to get EPA for 49 and CARB for 1.

The revision that basically removed option 3 can be found here:

Revision to Addendum to Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A (http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/civil/caa/mobile/98revadmem1a.pdf)

[mark_]

I want to thank all those who posted here. This is a very informative thread!

I just got interested in CNG. Given the way gas has risen in price over the last few months, I'm surprised there isn't more news on CNG. After reading this topic, I can see that the EPA's regulations (for better or worse) have stifled hopes of wide spread CNG use as a gasoline alternative. Based on what I've read here and on the web, it seems the 'unapproved' conversions have a 'real cost' of about $3000 installed. For those with safety and technician training concerns, let's say the 'real cost' is $4000. This suggests a $3000 to $5000 regulatory burden per CNG conversion.

Don't get me wrong. Maybe the regulatory burden is wise. A lot of people think that every significant carbon emitter, and cars are significant emitters, should be monitored, and only draconian regulations will keep people from cheating.

This aside, it doesn't sound like CNG is a viable option. My wife wants a VW Golf for hauling our dogs to shows. (She really wants a SUV, but I refuse to get a gas guzzler. The Golf is a working compromise). There are no OEM Golfs or Golf like vehicles. The only way to get one is via conversion, and there are no 'approved' Golf conversions.

[CraziFuzzy]

Me and my wife also wanted to get an SUV, but didn't want to pay for the gas for an SUV. We needed something that could haul at LEAST 5 people and cargo (prefferably more) and tow our boat on trips. This would be fine, if that's all we used it for, but it needed to be her daily driver. We used CNG as a way to get all of these things in one vehicle. We ended up buying a 2000 Expedition, with a small set of CNG tanks (about 7 gge) underneath. This let it still have the cargo room and the third row seat. It can tow our boat (though, we end up on gasoline for those trips, but that would have been true for any tow vehicle). Other than that, for around town as her daily driver, it is cheaper to drive (on CNG) than the 2005 Impala that we are getting rid of.

[mrpsycho1]

I have read this entire thread and only IndyRonbo has asked the right question... "So what do I do?" You will not likely get a perfect answer here. I came to cngchat to learn about CNG too, like most members. No luck! So I want to try to answer your question. You have 4 choices in politically correct order. 1. Get on the list and get an overpriced new Honda GX (you might find a used one, but it will be overpriced too.) 2. Call TGT in Tulsa and talk to Tom or Charlie about converting a "newer" car (the fed and state incentives might be better than you think). 3. Keep waiting for the Pickens Plan to save the US economy. Don't get me wrong... I support the Pickens Plan, and I am an active plan member, but don't hold your breath. 4. Do whatever you want to do and don't talk about it. I know if I was sitting on free natural gas, I would have a PHIL or some kind of FM and at least one NGV. I won't go into detail about plan 4, but it works best for me. Other than that, the best information on this thread is BE CAREFUL. These systems are HIGH pressure and use instrument grade stainless steel fittings and tubing with very specific installation techniques. Then, getting the system to run at a stoichometric ratio is obviously misunderstood and frightening to some. So, if the moderators allow this post to fly, you have your answer... Buy the Honda and get a PHIL :) If you are like me, a working class broke a$$, you can’t afford the first 3 choices.

Wow. I just took the time to read all the threads on this topic and it reads like a political presidential debate.
I live in Indiana we don't have anyone to convert any vehicle. I have built cars for a hobby and it looks to be easier to convert my '32 deuce than my 2002 chevy S-10. I commute 425 miles each week and my s-10 gets 26mpg which (yes I can do math) $106 / week or $424 / month. That was more than my truck payment when it was new. I have my own natural gas well and I do know something about how to safely manage the gas. I as others have looked into kits to convert my vehicles at a reasonable cost but I want to do it legal, safe and effective. So what do I do? Just keep watching this forum for any advice and information on how to accomplish this task. Teach me to fish so I can teach others...

Educate me please on what to do.

Farmer in Indiana who has to work off the farm because there is no profit in farming due to the $5.00 diesel fuel.

:confused:

[Franz]

One of the biggest reasons the EPA has cracked down on conversions is "us", meaning you and me. For many years, conversions were allowed, just simply because they were cleaner or presumed cleaner than the original vehicles emissions. While the OEM vehicles improved in technology every year and especially since the mid 90's, CNG technology has not necessarily done so. Just hanging a CNG system on a vehicle does not make it super clean although properly done, it can be.

When I got started in this business in the 80's, I saw conversions with scrap nitrogen bottles, welding pressure regulators, household Fisher regulators for low pressure, carburetion made from everything including PVC, plywood, bondo, sheet metal, and high pressure fuel lines from brake line tubing. Emissions? Who cared, or who new.

During the early 90's, the EPA began testing converted vehicles and found that in a random sampling, a huge number failed the test, something like 90%. The EPA gave the industry a couple of years, until OBD-II in 1996, to clean the emissions to at least OEM standard, then a couple more years, then one more extension until 2004, when all exemptions were pulled. This includes Memo 1-A, and Option 3.

Now, any converted vehicle MUST at least equal the OEM vehicle, and preferrably be cleaner than the OEM, or it simply cannot be converted. That is just plain common sense, good environmental logic, and anything else violates the EPA clean air mandate. Economical fuel is one thing, messing up the air with Carbon Monoxide, unburned Hydrocarbons, or high NOx is another.

For safety, many states have safety codes imbedded in their laws. They are there to protect the public and keep people from being just plain stupid.

Who do we have to blame for the tight restrictions? All the EPA does is to enforce them through inspections. Why are they in place? Just look at the air quality in most large cities around the world and we can see what unregulated technology, or the lack of same, does.

Franz