Interesting thread on the DOO FORUM.. sled emmision 2012, and global warming.. Thanks China !! Options

[Hoacha]

http://www.dootalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=336095

[in-mn]

Hijacking with a little: freaking democrats and jibberish. more efficient is good, but unreasonable standards is assinine

Oh no, carbon. Were going to destroy our trees that need carbon for photosynthesis!

Oh no, global warming. Let me sell you a movie for $25 that shows how people abuse energy, while my house uses 5-10x more watts per square foot than others in the immediate area.




freaking hoaxes engineered by people selling shit. Why the freak cant we have a common sense party

Back on topic. AC Will be compliant using a ton of the t and z credits combined with slightly better engines. I still dont think they can get that kind of mileage out of an efi + sensor combo. Perhaps they will use the patent with bombadier and get both machines damn near perfect and try to squeeze out polaris and their new sled platform

[Cat-o-tonic]

I noticed the cap and trade bill was mentioned in that thread. If this thing passes, it'll essentially ban 2 strokes. But that'll be the least of the problems. Imagine the govt coming in your house and telling you you can't have this appliance or that hot tub or your insulation is insufficient and you have to pay for new energy efficient widows cuz your 10 year old ones anen't efficient enough for them, or your heating system NEEDS to be upgraded or they'll fine you. Or when you go to sell your place, you have to have it audited and if it doesn't meet THEIR efficiency guidelines, you'll have to shell out thousands of dollars to "fix" it. And that's just a few things, it goes on and on.

Anyway, I'll bet Cat and Suzuki have this 2012 thing figured out. But if they don't, better get your 2 stroke sled in 2011.

[A G]

China and other 'technologically developing' countries are only emulating what the western countries have been doing since the industrial revolution.

Can anyone blame them for wanting all the shiny material posessions we take for granted as well as the improved standard of living that comes along with that package?

Problem is, they are going through the same learning curve concerning materialism + environmental pollution + wealth as western countries have... But they'll have a much larger damage impact because their populations are multitudes larger. Same thing as us (the west), just more of it going on and still increasing.

...better get your 2 stroke sled in 2011.

2 strokes aren't going to die off... 'Dirty' 2 strokes will be eventualy replaced by DFI 2 strokes (direct-injected) that are on par or cleaner than 4 strokes.

DFI technology has existed since the late 80's in a very primitive form (mechanical) and over time is becoming refined and better. Doo's DFI E-Tec 2 stroke 600 is just the beginning of the 4 stroke sled engine being displaced by a DFI 2 stroke.

Just wait and see, almost all brands have DFI 2 strokes on the R&D drawing boards. Smokey 2 strokes with short lifespan? Thing of the past as soon as carbed & EFI two stroke production has ceased.

Notice how DFI 2 strokes earned BRP the status of being the ONLY manufacturer to recieve EPA's Clean Air Excellence Award in the outboard world when other manufacturer's 4 strokes didn't receive such an award! EVER!!!

http://www.propellermagazine.co.nz/feature.php?feaid=28

Pollution Comparison

So overall, how do direct-injected 2-strokes compare with 4-strokes in their exhaust pollutants?

The answer is that they compare exceedingly well. So well that in fact BRP was the first and remains the only outboard manufacturer to be given a Clean Air Excellence Award by the EPA for its E-TEC line of outboards.

A fact not widely known is that neither the EPA nor the CARB, nor even the EU, have yet begun to regulate the emissions of carbon monoxide, which is far more harmful to human health than the pollutants that are currently regulated, namely nitrous oxides and sulphur dioxide. A fact also not widely known is that direct-injected 2-strokes emit much lower levels of deadly carbon monoxide than do 4-strokes.

[kopeck]

I think A G is right on.

Here's the thing, I'm pretty sure that most of us would agree that cleaner, less fuel hungry machines are better then old smokers (remember 30 to 1) . IMHO, a lot of these companies simply wouldn't have invested to cleaner machines if they didn't have to, so a nudge (more or less, right now a little more) from the Government is necessary to get these companies to invest in new technologies.

Yeah, the evolution isn't always pretty but I suspect in the end we will get 2-Strokes that not only provide us the power we need to have fun (don't forget, most of us don't *need* a snowmobile) and will do it in a package that's more friendly to the environment.

The biggest down side is cost, no way to candy coat that one. New technology almost always costs more then the old standbys.

K

[Houleigan]

Read the latest SnowTech mag, there is a article in it explaining how humans have only put 0.0004% of the CO2 into the atmosphere. More and more sicentists are getting on board with the fact that "global warming" is not happening, in fact the earth has been cooling off for the past 10 years!

[dogthehunter]

Yes it is quite interesting that Global Warming has had a name change. They now call it Climate Change. Records indicate that the earth's temperature has actually cooled over the last 10 years and the report from the EPA last March that the administration went to a lot of trouble to hide shows that the EPA expects global cooling to continue for the next 30 years.

The other side of that is what was mentioned above with Al Gore. The man is a lawyer and politician. Yet he is making millions of dollars off of what is supposed to be a science. I don't know about you but that has all the markings of a scam to me! Dog

[taperk600]

Never was a believer in Global Warming. I used to argue it all the time. Wrote a paper in college on the hole in the Ozone layer and the effects we (humans) have had in causing and/or increasing it in respect to the release of CFCs from spray cans, etc........ tried to argue it then but Professors didn't want to hear it as it wasn't the "popular and expected view"........... funny how the founder of The Weather Channel didn't believe in it either...and what his research showed is what is happening right now with us entering a cool-down period (anywhere between 30-50 yrs he expects).
Anyone know who is one of the major players at the company that sells businesses these "carbon credits" for pollutants and wasteful energy use ??? I was told (but haven't researched it) that our friend MR GORE was one of the major players. No wonder he wanted everyone to believe in the falsehood of global warming....how else could he get rich off these "credits"....and book......and movie ??????

[Blaine]

I think A G is right on.

Here's the thing, I'm pretty sure that most of us would agree that cleaner, less fuel hungry machines are better then old smokers (remember 30 to 1) . IMHO, a lot of these companies simply wouldn't have invested to cleaner machines if they didn't have to, so a nudge (more or less, right now a little more) from the Government is necessary to get these companies to invest in new technologies.

Yeah, the evolution isn't always pretty but I suspect in the end we will get 2-Strokes that not only provide us the power we need to have fun (don't forget, most of us don't *need* a snowmobile) and will do it in a package that's more friendly to the environment.

The biggest down side is cost, no way to candy coat that one. New technology almost always costs more then the old standbys.

K

Nudges turn into pushing. Just look at the progression of sleds even before the Feds got their nose deep up the manufactures rears. They were getting lighter, more powerful, better handling, better gas milleage, less smokey ect....just doing what the market wanted. Pretty soon sleds will be like cars and we won't be able to replace a spark plug without some sort of manual and special tool.

[Oldcrow]

I think A G is right on.

Here's the thing, I'm pretty sure that most of us would agree that cleaner, less fuel hungry machines are better then old smokers (remember 30 to 1) . IMHO, a lot of these companies simply wouldn't have invested to cleaner machines if they didn't have to, so a nudge (more or less, right now a little more) from the Government is necessary to get these companies to invest in new technologies.

Yeah, the evolution isn't always pretty but I suspect in the end we will get 2-Strokes that not only provide us the power we need to have fun (don't forget, most of us don't *need* a snowmobile) and will do it in a package that's more friendly to the environment.

The biggest down side is cost, no way to candy coat that one. New technology almost always costs more then the old standbys.

K

I read this and you make it sound like the government deserves a little pat on the back for "nudging" the manufactures.

I don't agree, the government is nudging us, the manufactures are in it to sell snowmobiles, they guess at what we want.

Let’s go back before all the emission standard started to take effect. If you had a choice which would you buy a $5000/130hp sled that was a little dirtier or a $7000/130hp sled that was a little cleaner. My guess is everone would have bought the $5000 machine

I paid 4808 for my 95 ZR580 and 9700 for my 10 Crossfire

[Oldcrow]

China and other 'technologically developing' countries are only emulating what the western countries have been doing since the industrial revolution.

Can anyone blame them for wanting all the shiny material posessions we take for granted as well as the improved standard of living that comes along with that package?

Problem is, they are going through the same learning curve concerning materialism + environmental pollution + wealth as western countries have... But they'll have a much larger damage impact because their populations are multitudes larger. Same thing as us (the west), just more of it going on and still increasing.

...better get your 2 stroke sled in 2011.

2 strokes aren't going to die off... 'Dirty' 2 strokes will be eventualy replaced by DFI 2 strokes (direct-injected) that are on par or cleaner than 4 strokes.

DFI technology has existed since the late 80's in a very primitive form (mechanical) and over time is becoming refined and better. Doo's DFI E-Tec 2 stroke 600 is just the beginning of the 4 stroke sled engine being displaced by a DFI 2 stroke.

Just wait and see, almost all brands have DFI 2 strokes on the R&D drawing boards. Smokey 2 strokes with short lifespan? Thing of the past as soon as carbed & EFI two stroke production has ceased.

Notice how DFI 2 strokes earned BRP the status of being the ONLY manufacturer to recieve EPA's Clean Air Excellence Award in the outboard world when other manufacturer's 4 strokes didn't receive such an award! EVER!!!

http://www.propellermagazine.co.nz/feature.php?feaid=28

Pollution Comparison

So overall, how do direct-injected 2-strokes compare with 4-strokes in their exhaust pollutants?

The answer is that they compare exceedingly well. So well that in fact BRP was the first and remains the only outboard manufacturer to be given a Clean Air Excellence Award by the EPA for its E-TEC line of outboards.

A fact not widely known is that neither the EPA nor the CARB, nor even the EU, have yet begun to regulate the emissions of carbon monoxide, which is far more harmful to human health than the pollutants that are currently regulated, namely nitrous oxides and sulphur dioxide. A fact also not widely known is that direct-injected 2-strokes emit much lower levels of deadly carbon monoxide than do 4-strokes.

This is comparing 4 strokes in the current form.

DFI are capable to be cleaner than a 4 stroke today. When the EPA says to clean it up more a 4 stroke can do so very easily and a 2 stroke will not be able to keep up. It's all about valve overlap with a 4 stroke, clean it up and power goes down.

As long as 2 strokes burn their lubricating oil they are heading down a dead end street

[A G]

This is comparing 4 strokes in the current form.

DFI are capable to be cleaner than a 4 stroke today. When the EPA says to clean it up more a 4 stroke can do so very easily and a 2 stroke will not be able to keep up. It's all about valve overlap with a 4 stroke, clean it up and power goes down.

As long as 2 strokes burn their lubricating oil they are heading down a dead end street

Maybe there's a hidden opening at the dead end street?

G-Oil breaks down in the environment. It isn't mainstream, but might be the direction 2 stroke oil ends up going even if it means new chemistries if petroleum is to remain the raw resource. G-oil is only one example among the early contenders of 'environmentally friendly' oils in a long chain of more to come. (2 & 4 stroke oil)

4 stroke oil pollutes too... A lot, but indirectly, not necessarily by the engines that use it.

When 4 stroke crankcase oil is changed out, it gets recycled. This means re-refining, which consumes energy again (and again) for which emissions end up going into the environment in one way or another regardless of if the engergy is supplied by coal-fired power plants or spent nuclear fuel rods to recycle it.

Also consider, 4 strokes burn oil in the form of blow-by (small quantities). Not all the oil is re-captured by the rings and 'peeled' off the cylinder walls at every downstroke, some always ends up getting burned during the combustion stroke. At every oil change, there is less oil in the engine than was put in.

Consider this unlikely scenario: If there was a fixed amount of 4 stroke engine oil available and if oil was re-cycled endlessly to be used in a 4 stroke engine repeatedly, it all eventually gets through the engines via blow-by and all of it eventually ends up in the environment... The world would run out of this fixed amount of oil.

But it isn't all recycled into engine oil (small amount is), it gets recycled into other products. Greases maybe? More plastics? What happens to recycled 4 stroke engine oil? Bet it ends up in the environment sooner or later, whatever form. And every time it is re-refined, the refinery's energy consumption pollutes vast quantities more on top of the amount of recycled oil would getting burned away in engines. Re-refining used oil creates more pollution, but saves the oil to pollute again another day in another way.

I don't know what products are made from recycled 4 stroke engine oil... But whatever it is, eventually ends up in the environment no matter how it ends up there. Secondary plastic products made from recycled engine oil releases all the harmful compounds that are in hydrocarbon petroleum as engines do but it just takes longer to end up in the environment. If petroleum is pumped out of the ground, it ends up on the surface environment in one way or another, even if it was originally used in a 4 stroke.

Only sure-bet way to stop petroleum pollutants from getting into the environment isn't to replace one engine type with another... It would be to stop pumping it from the ground but that's not going to happen.

One way either 2 or 4 stroke engine oil can avoid any long term persistant environmental damage is if oil was made in such a way that both 2 & 4 stroke oils and secondary plastics (from recycled oil) can break down into harmless components without damaging the envrionment. The oil companies are spending large R&D dollars on developing new oil forumulations that will break down harmlessley but that is still far into the future. When (or if) these new-age 'clean' oil chemistries becomes mainstream, oil can finally be removed from the battle between 2 & 4 stroke engines and how both engine types of oils pollute the environment.

I have doubts 2 strokes will ever be gone as long as piston engines exist. Also consider wet sump 2 strokes (oil in crankcase), they've existed for years... One of the huge forklifts at the construction company I used to work for in the 70's & 80's was a diesel 2 stroke with wet sump crank case that was designed in the 50's! The 2 stroke DFI engine Chrisler R&D dept was developing for use in the Dodge Neon was a wet-sump 2 stroke as well, many of you might know about this engine.

I'd say we all just wait and see before writing off any engine type. The ever-advancing technologies may yet offer many variables that completely change the picture from the engines we've had in our era and what we think we know about them.

What we believe about engines today... What we think we know about right now may not apply in the future... The picture might be completely different when the future arrives. We can guess, but we can't accurately predict.

[Oldcrow]

This is comparing 4 strokes in the current form.

DFI are capable to be cleaner than a 4 stroke today. When the EPA says to clean it up more a 4 stroke can do so very easily and a 2 stroke will not be able to keep up. It's all about valve overlap with a 4 stroke, clean it up and power goes down.

As long as 2 strokes burn their lubricating oil they are heading down a dead end street

Maybe there's a hidden opening at the dead end street?

G-Oil breaks down in the environment. It isn't mainstream, but might be the direction 2 stroke oil ends up going even if it means new chemistries if petroleum is to remain the raw resource. G-oil is only one example among the early contenders of 'environmentally friendly' oils in a long chain of more to come. (2 & 4 stroke oil)

4 stroke oil pollutes too... A lot, but indirectly, not necessarily by the engines that use it.

When 4 stroke crankcase oil is changed out, it gets recycled. This means re-refining, which consumes energy again (and again) for which emissions end up going into the environment in one way or another regardless of if the engergy is supplied by coal-fired power plants or spent nuclear fuel rods to recycle it.

Also consider, 4 strokes burn oil in the form of blow-by (small quantities). Not all the oil is re-captured by the rings and 'peeled' off the cylinder walls at every downstroke, some always ends up getting burned during the combustion stroke. At every oil change, there is less oil in the engine than was put in.

Consider this unlikely scenario: If there was a fixed amount of 4 stroke engine oil available and if oil was re-cycled endlessly to be used in a 4 stroke engine repeatedly, it all eventually gets through the engines via blow-by and all of it eventually ends up in the environment... The world would run out of this fixed amount of oil.

But it isn't all recycled into engine oil (small amount is), it gets recycled into other products. Greases maybe? More plastics? What happens to recycled 4 stroke engine oil? Bet it ends up in the environment sooner or later, whatever form. And every time it is re-refined, the refinery's energy consumption pollutes vast quantities more on top of the amount of recycled oil would getting burned away in engines. Re-refining used oil creates more pollution, but saves the oil to pollute again another day in another way.

I don't know what products are made from recycled 4 stroke engine oil... But whatever it is, eventually ends up in the environment no matter how it ends up there. Secondary plastic products made from recycled engine oil releases all the harmful compounds that are in hydrocarbon petroleum as engines do but it just takes longer to end up in the environment. If petroleum is pumped out of the ground, it ends up on the surface environment in one way or another, even if it was originally used in a 4 stroke.

Only sure-bet way to stop petroleum pollutants from getting into the environment isn't to replace one engine type with another... It would be to stop pumping it from the ground but that's not going to happen.

One way either 2 or 4 stroke engine oil can avoid any long term persistant environmental damage is if oil was made in such a way that both 2 & 4 stroke oils and secondary plastics (from recycled oil) can break down into harmless components without damaging the envrionment. The oil companies are spending large R&D dollars on developing new oil forumulations that will break down harmlessley but that is still far into the future. When (or if) these new-age 'clean' oil chemistries becomes mainstream, oil can finally be removed from the battle between 2 & 4 stroke engines and how both engine types of oils pollute the environment.

I have doubts 2 strokes will ever be gone as long as piston engines exist. Also consider wet sump 2 strokes (oil in crankcase), they've existed for years... One of the huge forklifts at the construction company I used to work for in the 70's & 80's was a diesel 2 stroke with wet sump crank case that was designed in the 50's! The 2 stroke DFI engine Chrisler R&D dept was developing for use in the Dodge Neon was a wet-sump 2 stroke as well, many of you might know about this engine.

I'd say we all just wait and see before writing off any engine type. The ever-advancing technologies may yet offer many variables that completely change the picture from the engines we've had in our era and what we think we know about them.

What we believe about engines today... What we think we know about right now may not apply in the future... The picture might be completely different when the future arrives. We can guess, but we can't accurately predict.

This is where we as torque loving, light weight loving, performance minded people need to hope the industry heads