Fail emissions test

Topic: Fail emissions test (Read 3199 times) previous topic - next topic

Fail emissions test

Reply #15 – March 27, 2008, 08:41:25 PM

Its TX. And really, a bunch of smog in SA comes in from Mexico. >>Cough..wheeze<<

Fail emissions test

Reply #16 – March 27, 2008, 09:12:46 PM

Move to texas or out of the state your in.

Fail emissions test

Reply #17 – March 28, 2008, 01:10:14 AM

Quote from: FordTruckFreeek;203731

Trust Haystack to come up with totally off-the-wall "ideas" lol...
I don't see how GUTTING the cats will make it "cleaner"...???
?

that was just rediculously uncalled for.

what he means is,,,,,,,,
gut the pre cats because they may be clogged. since they are clogged, they will allow more deposits to collect on the o2's which will signal the map and run richer conditions.

after the pre's are gutted and a new intermediate is installed, it may make the difference.

however,,,,,,,,,,,,, i dont think so since you described it was running real well.

anyway tbirdsps,, i agree that CA is running a mafia with permission but when someone makes a suggestion, sarcasm gets you real far.

besides, it doesnt sound like you work on your own cars anyway so how would you even know what was meant by gutting the pre cats. You dont,, so learn.

Another thing you aught to learn is your car can only be held liable for emissions rating of the year the car was made. CA never got the new regulation passed forcing older vehicles to comply with 2008 regulations,, but i suppose you'd have to do some reading to find out where you stand on that.

Im very curious about which vac line was broken, as in where was the far end termination?

Fail emissions test

Reply #18 – March 28, 2008, 09:44:42 AM

Quote from: jcassity;211297

that was just rediculously uncalled for.

what he means is,,,,,,,,
gut the pre cats because they may be clogged. since they are clogged, they will allow more deposits to collect on the o2's which will signal the map and run richer conditions.

after the pre's are gutted and a new intermediate is installed, it may make the difference.

however,,,,,,,,,,,,, i dont think so since you described it was running real well.

anyway tbirdsps,, i agree that CA is running a mafia with permission but when someone makes a suggestion, sarcasm gets you real far.

besides, it doesnt sound like you work on your own cars anyway so how would you even know what was meant by gutting the pre cats. You dont,, so learn.

Another thing you aught to learn is your car can only be held liable for emissions rating of the year the car was made. CA never got the new regulation passed forcing older vehicles to comply with 2008 regulations,, but i suppose you'd have to do some reading to find out where you stand on that.

Im very curious about which vac line was broken, as in where was the far end termination?

I didn't look at it. However, it runs really well. That vacuum line probably fixed a leak that caused the computer to slightly richen the mixture thus the final reduced HC. Along with the thermostat which was stuck open not allowing the engine to heat up properly. Temps a big thing in lowering emissions. My biggest point was after being labeled a "gross polluter" it passed at another station without doing anything to the car. It's quite obvious that the first station either ripped me off or his equipment was not good. I don't know much about the equipment but I don't think the computer can be manipulated to report high emissions. I was present for the test and the tester didn't do anything to the car to "make" it fail. It's still and probably remain a mystery but I did file a complaint with the state requesting that they check his equipment and processes. I would be curious to know whether he had an unusually high failure rate in February.

One the law that would require older cars to pass 2008 standards. That would cause hundreds of thousands of cars to fail. It's physically impossible to make a 1986 car pass 2008 standards. Although my daughters car actually passed standards for a 2000 model.

Currently all 1976 and newer cars must pass an emissions test every two years. There is a bill before the legislature that would require 1976 and older cars to pass emissions testing when being registered by a new owner in the 8 counties in the San Juaquin Valley( I'm sure I misspelled that). This is a very rediculous bill. It's estimated that 1976 and older cars contrubute less than 1% of the auto related pollution in the whole state.

The California emissions puppies's have spread their thoughts to 26 other states and some provinces in Canada. I'm in favor of reducing pollution of all kinds. But it has to be reasonably carried out. My lesson on this is that I took the car back to the same place three times. What a dummy. I'll never do that again nor will I use that facility again.

Fail emissions test

Reply #19 – March 28, 2008, 02:52:08 PM

I am all for emissions on newer vehicles. The reason is, If i can afford a new vehicle, then it shouldn't be belching smoke into the air. I think the older vehicles always get hit because the people making the rules typically have newer vehicles. Afterall, when is the last time you saw a state governor driving around an older vehicle.

However, I think I should be able to reg my 88 Coug and 92 SC without emissions because i drive them less than 1000 miles a year. Also, I am dying to build a StalkerV6 (linky goodness) but I have read the TX emissions laws and it states that a vehicle must pass emissions standards of the year it was manufactured. I have read, however, that as long as I use a Pre-Emission engine with receipts it will be OK. This seems like kinda a big risk.

Fail emissions test

Reply #20 – March 28, 2008, 03:35:09 PM

Still glad I live in NY. 4 more years I can yank the cats off