2013 Columbia spec'ing

"Word is out" is just that.... rumor. If I didn't do anything in life because of a rumor that it was a bad move, then I wouldn't even leave the house. True, they could "level" some standards, but the lead time to get the millions of pre-egr trucks either replaced or retrofitted will be a nightmare that will take a long, long time. California had the luxury in that it is only one state. Nationwide is a whole different can of worms. and refusing to plate the truck? Ok. Then they better warm up to a court challenge about plating all those 1960's muscle cars and other collectables that are allowed to operate on the highways. Oh..... they meet the emissions for the year they were built.

As for plating of truck not being compliant with current law, the current law is that the engine, in a glider truck or original truck, must meet the emissions for the year the engine was built. The 12.7 in a glider I ordered does just that... it meets the emissions standards for the year it was built. The truck is only a parts kit, some of which is pre-assembled by the factory, using both new and rebuilt components. It is not a new production truck that uses all new components, therefore, it is not under the same regulations as a new production truck. It is ordered thru the parts division of Freightliner and not new truck division. And what of a 2010 new production truck that legally has an engine built in 2009? 2010 brought about SCR and DEF, yet the 2010 trucks that were built with engines having already been produced in 2009 are not required to have SCR and DEF. The emissions is tied to the manufacture date of the engine.

You mention they have EGR standards now, exhaust systems with sensors, and catalytic converters that will be hard to overcome. On which engines? Obviously post '02 diesel engines. No pre '02 diesel engine has that standard except maybe in Europe. The 12.7 in my glider will meet '98 emission standards that it was built under.

In my state, Iowa, they don't even do emissions tests on regular autos and pickups. They will not be looking to do anything with commercial truck engines any time soon. And a lot of states are the same way. It is really only the coastal states with smog and other problems that seem to be either implementing or leaning that direction. And since the bulk of what I do is from I25 to I71 north of I70, I don't fall into the coastal areas.

If someone has a large paranoia gland, then it might not be a good choice. I am not going to waste a lot of time worrying about what government might do in the future.

 

I did some numbers running and did change what I was using for a tranny. The truck will have an 18 speed tied to 2.79 rear ends, mostly running in direct (16th). The 18 has better deeper reduction than a 10 or 13 and even deep reduction in reverse. There were a few that mentioned considering this way, and after running numbers on spreadsheet on road speeds and rpm's, I went that way. Nice thing is that I will have the benefit of direct drive efficiency most of the time, can move up a gear when on flat ground, light , and no winds, and I will have all the splits down into the basement for harder pulls.

 

I also spec'd Meritor 14X aluminum housing axles with dualtrac option. Will be using 22.5 wide based on the drives. The Dualtrac option has special set bearings so that it is designed to use wide track or regular duals. Alcoa durabrites all the way around.

Yeah, it will be nice when on something like I80 in Nebraska. 1400 rpm in 17th equates to 70 mph. 1350 in 18th is 75 mph. Most of my running will be in areas that will keep me in the 60-65 mph range most of the time. 16th direct perfect for that. 1400 is 58 mph with 1600 is 66 mph. Lots of rolling hills with some heavy loads. When things on the lighter side, 1350 in 17th is 65 mph.

Will have plenty to work with up and down the spectrum by using that 18. Nice thing, is that the factory rebuilt 18 was the same price as a 13 and only slightly higher than a 10. Truck is coming in almost 2000 lb lighter than my present truck.

 

Yes they did..... for NEW PRODUCTION CARS! Not for that classic older car! Even then, California has always had emissions requirements higher than everyone else. And it is not the same thing. True, cars in the other states had to meet emissions stuff, but only the new production cars. I still have yet to see a 1970 Chevelle, complete with 396 big block, with EGR or a catalytic converter on it. Or that naturally aspirated 80's diesel pickup needing a DPF on it. Only California had taken it to a whole new level by mandating that all the older trucks be retrofitted or scrapped. Areas like the midwest aren't that mentally challenged, and know that a wave of farmers would show up on the capitol with pitchforks and torches. They are not as wimpy as those is California. Even today, most states will allow what is called a Kit Car.... basically you build your own chassis and body and throw a motor in it. And it only has to meet the emissions of the year the engine was originally built and certain safety standards and features like seat belts.

Again.... a glider truck is NOT a new production truck so it doesn't fall into the EPA emission regulations except that the engine put in has to meet the EPA emissions of the year it was originally produced.

 

And dropping to 15th is only a split instead of a complete shift. It should be much easier overall.

To add to other comments, I decided against the Evans coolant. I ran into a lot of threads on different forums of people having troubles with using Evans and higher thermostats. I am sure it works for some, but I am not going to chance it. ELC is just fine.

 

Are you sure they were glider trucks or just regular production trucks that you couldn't throw in an older engine? We can't legally throw in older engines in a regular production truck either. But a glider is thru the parts stream and not regular production. But Canada could already be onto the glider thing up there and messed it up for everyone.