[AT] OT modern computer controlls

[Dennis Johnson]

Back in my college days at Kansas State about 46 or 47 years ago, one of the projects for my Internal Combustion engines class was to evaluate engine sensor responses when I force feed manual values to the engine controller. This was very early for engine controllers. Test engine was a VW with just a few sensors was hooked to a dyno.  Result was there were some interesting engine responses as we force feed values to the ECM. Been too long to remember details.
Point is that I have a clue about how some of this works. I do not have a complete understanding of it, and not sure many do.

I agree that there have been some great advances in cleaning up emissions, which was needed. I also agree that we have passed the point of reliability with this technology, and also passed the point of increased benefits from stricter regulations. Maybe in the future when the reliability has improved there could be another round of emission improvements, but not till then.

I agree that bypassing emission controls is one thing several people are wanting. With poor reliability, spending $2000 per year to replace emission stuff at a dealer is not what  most people want to do. I know many people's answer is do not drive, or drive a Prius and contract a trucking company to haul your baggage, tools, supplies, tractors, etc. This may be fine for people whose hobby is reading books, or watching birds. I am taking my ECO diesel with a 20 foot trailer to Oklahoma hauling a hospital bed to someone who needs it. While there I plan to get an old MM model U if all goes well.

The regulations should somehow need to balance fuel efficiency and emissions at the same time. Right now the regulations are disconnected. There should be some allowances for slightly higher emissions levels for a vehicle getting 40 MPG than the same vehicle getting 15 MPG as an example.

Dennis

Sent from my iPad

> On Mar 23, 2017, at 11:35 AM, Dean VP <deanvp at att.net> wrote:
> 
> Stephen,
> 
> The EPA has done some good things to help clean up the air but IMHO have
> gone way overboard in over regulating causing excessive cost increases for
> manufactures.  There has to be some kind of reasonable balance.   We are not
> at that point right now.
> 
> Dean VP
> Apache junction, AZ
> 
> It's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
> [mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of Stephen Offiler
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 7:20 AM
> To: Antique tractor email discussion group <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
> Subject: Re: [AT] OT modern computer controlls
> 
> I don't intended to sound like I'm disagreeing with Thomas.  I think his EPA
> comment does in fact apply to the basic history of modern engine complexity.
> But as usual the story is a lot more complex than that.  I lifted the
> following from Wikipedia because I agree and so it saves me a bunch of time
> trying to summarize what I know about Right To Repair legislation and
> controversy (I work in the automotive aftermarket, and occasionally some of
> this stuff touches me professionally)
> 
> "...The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments required all vehicles built after
> 1994 to include on-board computer systems to monitor vehicle emissions. The
> bill also required automakers to provide independent repairers the same
> emissions service information as provided to franchised new car dealers.
> California further passed legislation requiring that all emissions related
> service information and tools be made available to independent shops.
> Unlike the Clean Air Act, the California bill also required the car
> companies to maintain web sites which contained all of their service
> information and which was accessible on a subscription basis to repair shops
> and car owners.
> 
> As automotive technology advanced, computers came to control the vital
> systems of every vehicle, including brakes, ignition keys, air bags,
> steering mechanisms and more.[3] Repairing motor vehicles became a high-tech
> operation, with computer diagnostic tools replacing a mechanic's observation
> and experience.[4] These developments eventually made manufacturers the
> "gatekeepers" of advanced information necessary to repair or supply parts to
> motor vehicles..."
> 
> Link:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Vehicle_Owners'_Right_to_Repair_Act
> 
> 
> SO
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Thomas O Mehrkam <tmehrkam at sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> 
>> I am aware most to the complexity you find in modern engines is the 
>> result of EPA regulations. I was not aware the EPA would go after the 
>> manufacture for modifications made by a third party.  That is insane.
>> 
>>> On 3/22/2017 9:19 PM, Henry Miller wrote:
>>> I'm an employee of John deere, but I don't speak for them.
>>> 
>>> This article is misrepresenting the situation. People claim they 
>>> just want to fix things, but when you really press then in it they 
>>> will admit what they really want is to disable all the emissions 
>>> controls and/or get more power. Of course John deere isn't going to 
>>> agree to that, nor will any competitor. The way the law is written 
>>> the EPA will be after deere for anyone who modifies their tractor
>>> 
>>> If you want to work on your tractor, all the codes are in a book 
>>> that you can order.  Any heavy duty scan tool which your autoparts 
>>> store will sell you will read the codes. That is enough to do most 
>>> repairs.  It isn't enough to replace an ecu, but since that only 
>>> comes from deere, the dealer should provide the programming.
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> AT mailing list
>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at