To "delete" or not to "delete"

6.6 Oilburner wrote:

Glad to see another guy with half a clue.

Really? So does that mean that I don't have half a clue?

Let me ask you. How many diesel engine manufacturers have you worked for? How many diesel truck manufacturers have you worked for? How many diesel engines have you seen in a test cell to know that just because you raise the combustion temps to create more power (and the engine is not blowing out black smoke) DOES NOT mean it isn't blowing out carcinogenic diesel particulates in high volumes. Or that raising the combustion temps creates A LOT of NOx that turns into acid when it reacts with the moisture in the atmosphere or your lungs. So, how much experience do you have with this in order to say that those that do not agree with your assumptions do not have half a clue?

6.6 Oilburner wrote:
You're grasping at straws if you think the boobs rolling coal for fun have any substantial impact on respiratory health. I'm quite confident the trucking industry dwarfs whatever particulate matter output these idiots drawing attention to "diesel motorsports" is.

Yes, they do, and I have data to back that up. Do you have data backing up your assumptions or are you only saying this so you can downplay it just to make yourself feel better about purposely (and illegally) taking off your emissions device increasing other people's health risks only for your own selfish benefit?

6.6 Oilburner wrote:
I'm not saying forward movement isn't good. But at what cost? These systems were implemented before the technology was ready, and the technology has just about caught up with the requirements as they continue to advance.

So what about the health cost of the elderly man who doesn't have a "deleted" diesel? Or the parents of the little boy with asthma and breathing problems? What about their costs? Why should they have to pay just because some selfish "coal roller" doesn't want to pay for his own choices in getting a diesel.

6.6 Oilburner wrote:
So you are worried about the tax dollars you think you spent treating a cancer patient that lived near a freeway, and I am more worried about the dollars I KNOW every consumer indirectly spent on tow bills, repairs and downtime for many of trucking compnanies moving goods we consumer every day.

What? You are more worried about downtime of freight companies (which can be attributed to lots of things) over increasing people's chances of cancer. That is just a poor example. The difference here is that YOU CHOSE to buy a diesel and chose to purposely make it emit more DP. Those with the increased chances of lung issues did not make that choice. YOU DID, so why should they have to pay for it or be negatively affected by it? Why should someone else pay for your choices?