So I joined a "White Volvo" club...

That's not how the EPA looks at it driver. It doesn't matter that they are the same engine. You can't put a 1999 engine into a 2003 truck like that. What the truck manufacturer did was in compliance with EPA regulations. What you did is not. Do what you want it's not my authority so I don't care. Just don't be surprised when the DOT is not impressed by your 1999 engine and writes you a ticket for not being in compliance with the EOBR mandate. Never mind trying to explain why you have a tagged 1999 motor in a 2003 truck in some communist state. If you had hired a dealer type shop to install a new engine in your truck I can guarantee you it would not have had anything tagged older than 2002 installed in it. Most likely it would have had a 2003 or newer installed. They won't touch that kind of job with a 40 foot pole otherwise. They know the fines are serious.

 

I stopped by the shop that did my tunes here in Phoenix couple weeks ago, he had 3 Petes in there getting a "repower".
Pulling out tired ISX engines and replacing them with mid 90's 3406E engines, to the tune of about $34K.
These were car carrier trucks-the name escapes me right now.

 

I never said people don't do it I just say don't get caught. By not complying with the EOBR mandate it is drawing attention to the fact that he has a 1999 motor in a 2003 truck. The EOBR ordeal puts a blemish on his authority when they write him a ticket for it. Maybe he can fight that and win or maybe not. Who has time for these kind of things when they happen? And that's if no-one presses the issue of his motor not being legal emissions wise. I'm not a tree hugger and I'm the last one to tell somebody newer emissions are awesome. Just sayin.

 

While they are basically the exact same engine one is a 1999 and the other is a 2002. You're thinking like a truck stop lawyer and that #### doesn't ever fly. To a bureaucrat you're clearly breaking the rules. I just think you're asking for trouble by not using the EOBR. You could run EOBR and no-one would ever notice the 99 engine. It might become an expensive lesson otherwise. Might not. It's a gamble. I wouldn't risk my business on it.

 

Can EOBR work with that engine? If so, that's his safest solution.

 

What he did seems innocent, compared to what I heard about some brave and bold who swapped even newer emission engines with pre 1999 manufactured ones, with the sole purpose of circumventing ELD mandate. The premise is that EPA has its own turf about which DOT don't care. In California, the DOT never cared (for as long as I was going there) about the CARB staff, but I saw a few times CARB crews at CA scales camping or rest areas not too far. I, myself, would never want to do it just for the purpose of having or not having to use the ELD. Not worth it IMO.

 

That's most likely true the DOT doesn't care about EPA regulations but the idea this is going to skirt DOT regs is crazy. Never gonna happen.