RE: FW: need to pass smog test

From: Holloway,Frank T (Frank.T.Holloway@KP.ORG)
Date: Fri Jul 24 1998 - 18:34:03 EDT


Again, this in not to make anyone paranoid, Systems can be modified and
still be in FULL compliance with EPA and CARB standards. Talk to people
like
Dave Hughes @ Hughes Engines, Superchips, JET etc. Plan a strategy to
modify your engines, and make sure that the computer is modified for
YOUR
specific needs and requirements. Its very easy to get a Dak into the
high 12's or low 13's and still be in full compliance and streetable.
The outlay OUT of
wallet will be a lot less at smog time......

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Bridges [SMTP:bbridges@alarismed.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 24, 1998 2:54 PM
> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> Subject: RE: DML: FW: need to pass smog test
>
> Man,
> I knew I was paranoid, but now I have a good reason. Sounds like the
> gauntlet has been thrown down. Maybe Ill stick to the big mods on my
> 1974
> and older rides to avoid the heart ache of being a "gross polluter".
> Will
> they throw me in jail if I light up the MIL more than 3 times?
> BKB
> At 02:13 PM 7/24/98 -0700, you wrote:
> >The purpose of this comment is just to inform..........
> >My advise to you would be to try and comply with the Calif. smog
> >inspection, below is an EPA document published in 1996 outlining
> >requirements for
> >all states in the U.S. It won't be long before it is implemented in
> all
> >states (most states are ahead of the requirements) Calif. and
> Colorado
> >are already
> >using the new test procedures.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > EPA Establishes Requirements For OBD
> >Inspection In I/M Programs
> >
> > Washington, D.C., Aug. 14, 1996 -- The
> U.S.
> >Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a final regulation
> > establishing the minimum requirements for
> >inspecting vehicles equipped with on-board diagnostic (OBD) systems
> as
> > part of the inspections required in basic
> >and enhanced Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) programs.
> >
> > EPA's action establishes the test
> procedures
> >for the OBD computer test portion of the I/M test. OBD testing of all
> > 1996 and newer model vehicles will be
> >required in all I/M programs beginning Jan. 1, 1998. Areas in the
> >Northeast
> > Ozone Transport Region eligible to
> implement
> >a low enhanced I/M program must begin OBD testing by Jan. 1, 1999.
> >
> > Automotive Service Association (ASA)
> >Washington Representative Bob Redding said, "Failure of the OBD test
> >will
> > not result in mandatory repair until Jan.
> 1,
> >2000. During this two-year test-only period, EPA, in cooperation with
> >states
> > and motor vehicle manufacturers, hopes to
> >gather data on the effectiveness of OBD."
> >
> > According to EPA, the I/M test will
> include
> >the following OBD test standards: Beginning Jan. 1, 2000, failure of
> the
> > OBD test shall be a basis for failure of
> the
> >I/M test; a vehicle shall fail the OBD test if it is a 1996 or newer
> >vehicle and
> > the vehicle connector is missing, has
> been
> >tampered with, or is otherwise inoperable; a vehicle shall fail the
> OBD
> >test if
> > the malfunction indicator light (MIL) is
> >commanded to be illuminated and is not visually illuminated according
> to
> >visual
> > inspection; a vehicle shall fail the OBD
> >diagnostic test if the MIL is commanded to be illuminated and
> specified
> >codes
> > are present.
> >
> > EPA concluded that because OBD technology
> is
> >new, the two-year period of study was warranted. From Jan.1,
> > 1998, to Dec. 31, 1999, vehicles that
> fail
> >the OBD test will not automatically fail the I/M test or be required
> to
> >obtain
> > repairs.
> >
> > EPA believes that there will be no lost
> >emission reductions as a result of the study period because most
> >vehicles will
> > still have to undergo tailpipe emission
> and
> >evaporative tests. The agency reasons that since OBD testing is only
> > required on 1996 and newer vehicles,
> these
> >vehicles will still be new and clean in 1998 and 1999 and would
> likely
> >not
> > fail the I/M test.
> >
> > The Automotive Service Association is the
> >largest not-for-profit trade association of its kind serving more
> than
> >12,000
> > businesses and approximately 55,000
> >professionals from all segments of the automotive service industry.
> ASA
> > advances the professionalism and
> excellence
> >in the automotive repair industry through education, representation
> and
> > member services.
> >
> > News Bulletin 96.52
> >
> >Below is a list of additional requirements for state smog checks.
> >
> >OBD-II Incorporation Into Smog Check
> >
> > Verify that MIL is not illuminated (light and computer
> indication)
> > Verify that the I/M Readiness Code is fully set
> > Verify that no fault codes are stored (even though the MIL in
> not
> >illuminated, codes are still stored)
> > Verity that "proper" calibration is installed
> >
> >On-Board Diagnostics II Key Monitoring Requirements
> >
> > Primary Emission Control Systems/Components
> > Catalyst
> > Misfire
> > Evaporative System
> > Fuel System
> > Oxygen Sensor
> > Exhaust Gas Recirculation System
> > Secondary Air Injection System
> > Heated Catalyst System
> > Comprehensive Components
> >
> >And at last the effects of engine modifications as it relates to
> OBDII:
> >
> >
> >
> > THE EFFECT OF
> MODIFICATIONS
> >
> >
> >Higher fuel pressure or larger injectors:
> > A potential problem with a fuel trim diagnostic failure exists
> when
> >changes are make to the flow rate of the injectors or the fuel
> pressure.
> >The criteria that
> > are needed or, in other words, the amount of correction that is
> >allowed, will determine the success of this modification. In all
> >fairness, on a totally stock
> > vehicle there's no reason to change either one of the
> >above-mentioned areas. A highly modified engine would probably evoke
> >trouble codes in other
> > areas first.
> >Cat-back Exhausts:
> > There should be no problem with cat-back exhaust systems since
> >their improvement to airflow is not monitored. There may be a
> possible
> >problem area
> > in EGR function if mufflers are not used.
> >Increased Rocker Arm Geometry:
> > There is no interference with OBD-II functioning by increasing
> lift
> >with rocker arms of a different ratio. Even though increased lift
> >through rocker arm
> > geometry has a slight effect on duration, its more dominant are
> is
> >in valve moment.
> >Camshafts:
> > This is major area of concern with possible problems all over
> the
> >map. Valve event timing will have a drastic effect on hydrocarbon
> >generation, which
> > will affect both HO2s time to activate and response time. It may
> >also have an effect on converter efficiency due to the increased
> >hydrocarbon load
> > placed on the converter. Another area of concern is in idle
> >stability and misfire detection. The roughness that we all like in a
> >cammed engine most likely
> > will be interpreted as a misfire, which will be confirmed by the
> >lack of converter conversion efficiency. Camshafts with slightly
> >increased durations and
> > lobe separations angles of at least 112 degrees will most likely
> be
> >tolerated.
> >Cooler Thermostats:
> > Without letting the engine reach normal operating coolant
> >temperatures, the drive cycle will not be completed.
> >Cylinder Heads:
> > It appears that increased volumetric efficiency through
> >better-flowing heads and a slight raising of the fuel pressure to
> keep
> >the fuel trim in check should
> > go totally undetected.
> >Headers:
> > Emissions-legal headers will have no effect on OBD-II.
> >Superchargers:
> > In theory, since WOT is not monitored, the only possible problem
> >arises with fuel trim under closed loop boost and idle stability with
> >the air being
> > forced into the throttle body. Even though superchargers do not
> >affect idle quality, there will be fewer counts of the IAC to achieve
> >the same idle. This
> > should not pose a problem. The increased volume of air passing
> >through the MAF will most likely be detected and recorded. Since it
> will
> >only be for a
> > short period of time, the system should respond like Ford's
> EEC-IV
> >by seeing an uncalculated amount of air and illuminate an MIL.
> >Nitrous:
> > It looks as if nitrous is the safest be for adding performance
> on
> >OBD-II vehicles. This is almost a contradiction in itself; since
> nitrous
> >is only operated at
> > WOT, the ECU will not care (see Fig. 11).
> >
> >
> >
> >Comming to a city or state near you.....
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Boog318@aol.com [SMTP:Boog318@aol.com]
> >> Sent: Friday, July 24, 1998 6:12 AM
> >> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> >> Subject: Re: DML: FW: need to pass smog test
> >>
> >> Other options? Get the hell out of CA. :o)
> >
> >



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:09:09 EDT