6.0 mcss

Does any one know if Dual exhaust is legal in california? I've got several different anwsers and wonder if anyone knew the correct answer?

BrandonDrecksage

iTrader: (1)

dual exhaust on what? i'm pretty sure that the law is anything different from the original style is not allowed...for example...putting a true dual system on a 4th gen fbody.

StickSS

We had a discussion about this a while back. The way I interpret it is to be 49 state legal you would have to run a single cat with a y pipe in the stock location. California is different you have to make the car fully ODBII compliant which would require 2 stock converters and 4 O2 sensors. you can't run high flow aftermarket cats in Cali because they are not Carb certfied. The cat back doesn't matter so from what I hear you could run duals. You have to hook up all the other computer sensors to make it compatible, AC fuel pump pressure, evap sensors etc. wheather you need them or not. Your out of luck with the 6.0 truck motor in Cali. beacuse it will not pass a technical inspection. It is illegal to put a truck motor in a car because it was never certified for use in a passenger car. Your better off to get a 2001 up F- body motor and run the air pump, manifolds and cats off of it. Check with a refferee station before you start the swap. Better yet register your car in Nevada. Good Luck.

ducaT

That's not true.
You can't do engine change from different classes of vehicles.
Cutoff is at 7200#s for 79 and later vehicles, so there are lots of truck motors that can be used for swaps.
8599#s and under for 03 and 04 motors.
As per the local BAR office as well as the reference that they use for determination of swap compliance, MOTOR.


Manual is also legit for the 4.8, 5.3 and 6.0.
Just FYI.

Anything that is downstream of the converter is legal to change as long as it is in compliance with local noise regulations etc.

There are no OBDII sensors and no emissions equipment after the converters, so it's fair game.

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

Actually, that is not entirely correct. I spent 10 years enforcing the laws of California and there is a Vehicle Code section or 2 that states that you cannot alter, modify, change or otherwise **** with the stock exhaust in any way shape or form (unless it has a C.A.R.B. #). Altering the stock exhaust is a fix-it ticket with the minor addition that it has to be signed off by a smog referee.......there is no "legal" way to run duals on any car in Cali that didn't come with them stock.

And yes, by definition, removing the stock catback for a Borla, or Flowmaster or SLP or GMMG is illegal.

For example:

CVC 27151 - Exhaust systems, modified to amplify or increase noise. - Basically means if it is 1 decibel louder then stock, you CAN be hosed......

CVC 27150.1 - Exhaust system, sale, offering for sale, or installing system, including non-original exhaust equipment, not in compliance with CHP regulation.

Exhaust system, sale, offering for sale, or installing system, including non-original exhaust equipment, not in compliance with regulations and standards - Which means that ANYTHING that isn't stock, doesn't fly.

Now before I don my flame suit, I am merely telling you that these laws exist, not that I agree with them or believe in them.....but they are a VERY common ticket to be written. These are just a couple of the MANY different violations in that big fat book that is the California Vehicle Code.

BTW, the last 2 are misdemeanors as well..........which means technically you COULD go to jail for it.

This info is copied straight off the DMV Website: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/vc.htm

Oscar Will

Rottluver is on target, I have researched this stuff too. He's right.

ducaT

That's good info, especially since it references the vehicle code.
In practice, is this law even remotely enforced?

Certainly not in my area. Every other truck on the road has aftermarket exhaust, and I know that they aren't fabricating and installing it themselves.


Any year restrictions? As in, volume requirements in dB based on year of manufacture etc?

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

It is fairly uniformly enforced.......but as with anything else, it is at the Officer's discretion........I only used it on dirtbag gang bangers, dope dealers etc.......but then again, i didn't work an area where there were nice, modded cars either.........no year restrictions that I am aware of, but I can tell ya that EVERY Harley I have ever run across is in violation of this section and many others.

The db limits are an across the board kinda thing........x number at a certain RPM IIRC.......I am not 100% positive on this, so if you had something specific in mind, I would research it if I were you.

ducaT

Actually, now that I've read the CVC, there are some stipulations about the exhaust of the car, mostly concerning noise and flames/leaks/smoke/whistle tip(which has it's own code!!) etc, but nowhere does it state that alterations beyond the emissions systems are in violation unless CARB certificate is supplied.

So I don't really see how this prohibits the aforementioned Borla/flowmaster/etc mufflers or duals as long as they meet the other noise/leak/whistle tip requirements....?>?

In fact 27150.1 details that a retailer is in violation if he sells installs etc, any "motor vehicle exhaust system" that is not in compliance with the rest of 27150 he's in violation. Then it goes on the outline that a "motor vehicle exhaust system" is .......Motor vehicle exhaust systems or parts thereof include, but are not limited to, nonoriginal exhaust equipment.

So they EXPECT non-original exhaust equipment as long as it complies with the 95dB and all the other crap.

It does state that cutouts are explicitly in violation though....

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

The phrase, "Non-original exhaust equipment" is a catch-all.......a catback is exhaust equipment..........

ducaT

Right......

It includes but is not limited to non-original exhaust equipment.(catback)

Which is to say that the state expects catback exhaust as long as it's in compliance with the rest of 27150.

Duals and cat backs in compliance of 27150 are legit.


I'd like to see the fuzz write me up for this one.

StickSS

This is interesting info in this tread. If you are correct about the truck engines being legit and in the book then he is OK to run the 6.0 motor in Cali. NJ where I live has adopted the CARB standards but they are not as stringent to swaps as you guys in Cali. 95 and earlier years are exempt from ODBII testing and it only has to meet the tailpipe standards/Dyno test for an 86 car in this case. Federal EPA law states you can not put an engine that was not originally intended for use in the vehicle. I interpret this as not being able to put a truck engine in a car. Also since the Monte Carlo never came with a 350 or 5.7 engine from the factory wouldn't all off these swaps be illegal under Federal EPA guide lines? You need to be a lawyer to interpret all these things. In any case CALI. laws in his state would take precedence over federal. TO answer the person original question to make the 6.0 motor legal wouldn't he have to run both cats and all 4, O2 sensors off the truck and run a Y-Pipe to a stock or 50 state legal cat back? What about mixing and matching car and truck parts. If you put 5.3 heads on a 5.7 car motor or put an Ls6 intake on a truck motor wouldn't these also be illegal because all the part numbers don't match. Same with the computers you would have to run a truck computer with a truck motor and a car motor with a car computer to be pollitically correct. Then you couldn't run a truck motor off an fbody computer and wiring harness. Interesting stuff.

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

Your 1st 2 sentances are confusing........and as the fuzz (formerly) I would and did and could easily write tickets for people who had altered their exhaust at all. 10 years worth of doing that and never once did an attorney, judge or any of my bosses say it was wrong...........not arguing, just saying that the Statute is VERY vague and I imagine was written that way on purpose.

BTW, moving the cats AT ALL (from the stock/factory location), or replacing them with NON C.A.R.B. style ones or replacing them before 50k AND when they are not NEEDING to be replaced is also a violation........duals will relocate your cats unless you keep the stock exhaust manifolds, which is a waste of money IMHO (the duals) as you are still constricted by the manifolds. Also, by adding duals (even with stock manifolds) you are removing the factory Y-pipe which is in violation of the CVC as well.........no matter how you look at it, you CAN be screwed and smog check stations are getting worse and worse to deal with in Cali........

ducaT

That first sentence was taken directly from the code. It seems very straight forward to me.

Not to be a dick here, but just because you wrote the ticket, doesn't mean it was correct.

Changing obdII cats before 50k miles, or replacing with non obdII cats is a nice fact, but hardly applicable to the discussion at hand.

Any exhaust piece after the final 2 converters is not part of the emissions equipment and is legal. Exactly which part of the code prohibits that?

Suppose I wanted to replace the manifolds with Gibson shorty headers?
There is a CARB EO number with them, which makes them legal.
Then after the cats, I decide to go to duals all the way to the tailpipe.
As long as that is all in compliance with 27150, it's legal. But you would (or could) have written me a ticket because of "any" alteration, which is incorrect.


Whether dual exhaust holds any advantage over the single is a separate topic, and not the original poster's question.

He wants to know the legality of dual exhaust in california. As stated in my original post, it's legal as long as all the noise/smoke/etc in CVC27150 is met.

We are, or use to be, in a free society where anything is legal unless specifically prohibited by the law. It's the burden of the representatives of the system(police/state attorney's office) to prove infraction.

So I stand by my post that duals are legal as long as noise etc regs are satisfied.

According to you, as soon as the ticket is written, due process is just a minor formality. It's unfortunate that there are so many people who share this attitude.

StickSS

This is the most confussing part of the smog laws you guys have to deal with. I think you need a ruling from the director of CARB on this one? Federal law states you can not move the cat from the original location on the chassis and it also states you cannot but dual cats on a car that originally had a single cat it doesn't say anything about dual cat back systems. Calif. law trumps federal because you have to run 4, O2 sensors so you need 2 cats. so right there you are in violation of the federal law not allowing 2 cats on a car witch only had 1 to begin with also you are moving the cats closer to the engine so you are in violation of that federal standard. I would argue also that you could run true duals beacuse the MCSS, 442 and Regal Grand National had dual mufflers and tailpipes from the factory? The only way I see to make the car truely legal from a federal and CARB stand point would be to run a y pipe with a single cat to the stock cat back with only 2 O2 sensors one in front of the cat and one in back? This would probably require a lot of reprograming on your ECM. Obviouslly the people the wrote your stupid laws were not engineers or car guys? Anyone else have any thoughts on this?.

01WS6/tamu

iTrader: (37)

It's much esier to swap stuff here in tex just move here away from the smog ****'s and don't worry about it. Good luck though I did a 6.0 in my monte and it was a street sleeper and no one suspected it.

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

So when did this go from us discussing the law (which I have a fair amount of knowledge of & experience with) to you suggesting that I like to toss due process out the window? I never said anything of the sort nor do I feel that way.

You can read the code, but I was trained to understand it and enforce it. You can do whatever u want and you may or may not get in trouble for it. I really don't care. You may never get into trouble and that is just fine......I was merely answering the question asked here, not trying to argue or get into a pissing contest with someone.

ducaT

I've read and understood the code.

Too bad we don't have any sponsors in this side of the forum to refute your original comments about Borla, GMMG, Flowmaster and SLPand their "illegality" for installation on street legal vehicles.


The original poster wanted to know about whether dual exhaust is legal or not in California.

Your answer? No. Anything but stock is illegal.


My Answer? Yes, after all emissions controls, as pursuant to CVC 27150.

Your implication ..........."and as the fuzz (formerly) I would and did and could easily write tickets for people who had altered their exhaust at all. 10 years worth of doing that and never once did an attorney, judge or any of my bosses say it was wrong."
is that as long as the ticket is written, in your experience, is that no one has contested it successfully.

I've been swimming in the ocean for the past 25 years of my life and have never been bitten by a shark, therefore I'm sharkproof is an equally absurd proposition.
From 5 minutes of dogpile.com search............
JJ1169 info:
http://www.austinburg.com/exhaust_noise_testing.htm
http://www.sae.org/servlets/productD...D=J1169_199805

Inaccuracy of the law info:
http://www.enjoythedrive.com/content/?id=8132

http://www.enjoythedrive.com/content/?id=8135

http://www.motortrend.com/features/n...s040210_noise/

Because the CHP has proven how "adept" they are at properly enforcing the law by getting it right only 10% of the time............ha....

So whether you get a ticket or not, it doesn't mean that you are necessarily in violation. The police are making mistakes as everyone does, but it means that citizens are required to prove their innocence to the court, sounds like a breach of the constitution to me, something that (these days) would only take place in Kalifornia.


Don't tell the guy he can't make modifications to his exhaust, because the data points out that you've (CHP if that applies) only been right 1 out of 10 times.

Not trying to flame, just pointing out the info so the reader can make his own informed decision.


As an aside, j1169 is a **** poor method of testing light vehicle exhaust because it takes measurements at steady state, which is only valuable at idle and constant cruise like on a freeway.
How does that apply to ensuring <95 decibels at all other times when the car is accelerating or decelerating?

Kalifornia...........

I have nothing against you Rott, but the state of automotive affairs in CA is getting completely out of control. I just hate to see questionable data/info floating around.

Rottluver

iTrader: (3)

First off I want to say that I have nothing against you nor am I looking for trouble. If my responses seem that way, it is most likely due to the difficulty in "reading" a person's feelings thru the written word.........Now....

Do you believe everything you read? Apparently so if you believe every piece of info on every website you list......as for me, I wasn't CHP, but that is not relevant. That "enjoy the drive" website is seemingly showing someones opinions with partial facts mixed in.......Is the Govt 100% right all the time? Of course not. But is that website 100% perfect? I highly doubt it. I am not going to waste my time going over it.........it reminds me of the "How to get out of any ticket" books that were pimped in the 80's & 90's. I used to enjoy watching some poor bastard come into court with that book in his briefcase and go page by page, line by line, trying to get his ticket thrown out with useless and incorrect info written by a guy just trying to make a buck......

The original poster asked if they were legal, I offered up a considerably informed opinion on the subject that you don't like so you wanna make a huge deal out of this. Fine, enjoy. I couldn't care less what you think or believe when it comes to this arena since I DO know the law and you THINK you do...HUGE difference my friend. The poster can choose for himself to believe you, someone who it would seem has no legal or law enforcement background, or someone who had a career in enforcing the law. Or he can do more research and find out on his own.......but when it comes to smog & exhaust laws, California is not the place I would wanna be guessing or relying on uninformed information from someone who did "5 minutes of dogpile.com searching".

As for your "sharkproof" example, that is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard......no one was talking about absolutes, even I mentioned (more then once) that it WAS POSSIBLE to get by without any trouble, but you/he/whoever would TECHNICALLY be in violation of the law. You are apparently not from California or you have an extreme dislike for the State you are in if you are there...........but let's stop this pointless back & forth as you aren't going to listen to what I have to say regardless and I think arguiing on the internet is as useful as an open sunroof in a downpour.

Oh, one last thing........in California, if a part does NOT have a CARB certification or an E.O.# (Executive Order) then it is pretty much NOT legal here, period. You may be able to get by with it with no trouble whatsoever, but that doesn't make it legal......just cuz you don't get caught doing something doesn't make it legal.........food for thought.

ducaT

Here's the list of CARB Exemption orders for exhaust products.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/aftermk...rmktdevice.php

As you'll see, they include 0/ZERO orders for mufflers.
Certainly, some of the largest exhaust manufacturers are listed, so they have the resources to submit for CARB EO, but they convienietly omitted to submit their mufflers.
An EO is not required because they are not part of the emission control system of any vehicle since 1974 when emission requirements were tightened.

You can dunk a horse's head under water, but you just can't make him drink.