One dirty little engine!!
JD@af
03-25-2002, 08:25 PM
Listed below are my mods. I took my Teg to the Emissions Testing Station today, and while I did pass, it was a close one. Here in Connecticut, they test your emissions for hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and NO. Below are my results:
HYDROCARBONS (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 141.0
Test Reading: 116.6
CO (percent)
Maximum Limit: 0.79
Test Reading: 0.79
NO (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 1,026.0
Test Reading: 599.9
Particularly surprising is that if I had had even one hundredth of a percent additional carbon monoxide emissions, may car would have failed! I was shocked :eek:
Anyway, I was thinking about what would cause it, and I think it is related to one of three things, or a combination of the three:
1) The fact that my car is not yet tuned. I am making usually about 5 psi of boost right about now, and with a Cartech 20007 adding to the fuel pressure, I am naturally running quite a bit rich. This is most likely the culprit right here.
2) The fact that I have a Catco high flow catalytic converter. It's internal surface area is much smaller than the stock unit, and upon installation, I was warned that the boost I was running would shorten its lifespan. Still, it's been in my exhaust system for only about 20 months.
3) The fact that my B16A is a JDM motor. I doubt that's the problem, but I suppse it's not impossible that it has something to so with it. JDM motors certainly were rumored to cause problems with emissions testing (but I haven't heard much about this in quite some time).
Any opinions, please share. I'm interested in what you think. Thanks-
-JD
HYDROCARBONS (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 141.0
Test Reading: 116.6
CO (percent)
Maximum Limit: 0.79
Test Reading: 0.79
NO (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 1,026.0
Test Reading: 599.9
Particularly surprising is that if I had had even one hundredth of a percent additional carbon monoxide emissions, may car would have failed! I was shocked :eek:
Anyway, I was thinking about what would cause it, and I think it is related to one of three things, or a combination of the three:
1) The fact that my car is not yet tuned. I am making usually about 5 psi of boost right about now, and with a Cartech 20007 adding to the fuel pressure, I am naturally running quite a bit rich. This is most likely the culprit right here.
2) The fact that I have a Catco high flow catalytic converter. It's internal surface area is much smaller than the stock unit, and upon installation, I was warned that the boost I was running would shorten its lifespan. Still, it's been in my exhaust system for only about 20 months.
3) The fact that my B16A is a JDM motor. I doubt that's the problem, but I suppse it's not impossible that it has something to so with it. JDM motors certainly were rumored to cause problems with emissions testing (but I haven't heard much about this in quite some time).
Any opinions, please share. I'm interested in what you think. Thanks-
-JD
casperGSR
03-25-2002, 08:33 PM
hey did they do any type of inspection under the hood when you went for emmissions? just curious because I have a turbonetics turbo strapped on to my engine with an external wastegate that bleeds directly within the engine bay and I'm just wondering if by a freak chance that I actually pass the emmissions whether or not they'll look under the hood and fail me. thanx.
JD@af
03-25-2002, 09:51 PM
Originally posted by casperGSR
hey did they do any type of inspection under the hood when you went for emmissions? just curious because I have a turbonetics turbo strapped on to my engine with an external wastegate that bleeds directly within the engine bay and I'm just wondering if by a freak chance that I actually pass the emmissions whether or not they'll look under the hood and fail me. thanx. They didn't check me in that manner. Lucky for me the guy didn't have a clue as to what a boost gauge is for. He was all confused as to why my A/F gauge was oscillating so much.
hey did they do any type of inspection under the hood when you went for emmissions? just curious because I have a turbonetics turbo strapped on to my engine with an external wastegate that bleeds directly within the engine bay and I'm just wondering if by a freak chance that I actually pass the emmissions whether or not they'll look under the hood and fail me. thanx. They didn't check me in that manner. Lucky for me the guy didn't have a clue as to what a boost gauge is for. He was all confused as to why my A/F gauge was oscillating so much.
JD@af
04-20-2002, 05:43 PM
I took my other car, my 1985 Mercury Marquis, to the Emissions Testing Station today. It failed:
HYDROCARBONS (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 162.0
Test Reading: 57.3
CO (percent)
Maximum Limit: 1.04
Test Reading: 0.23
NO (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 1,163.0
Test Reading: 1,1487.7
I have some ideas to what to do to the car to get the engine (3.8 liter V6) running cleaner. But it's still too bad. And interesting to see as a comparison to my other car.
HYDROCARBONS (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 162.0
Test Reading: 57.3
CO (percent)
Maximum Limit: 1.04
Test Reading: 0.23
NO (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 1,163.0
Test Reading: 1,1487.7
I have some ideas to what to do to the car to get the engine (3.8 liter V6) running cleaner. But it's still too bad. And interesting to see as a comparison to my other car.
JD@af
04-27-2002, 02:54 PM
Today I took my '85 Mercury Marquis back to the Emissions Testing Station today for a free retest. Prior to taking the car over there, I had the tank mostly empty, added a 15 oz. bottle of Berryman Emissions Passing Additive and filled her to about 3/4 tank with Sunoco Ultra 94, and drove the car exactly 100 miles (almost all highway). I then took it right over to the emissions testing station:
HYDROCARBONS (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 162.0
Test Reading: 160.5
CO (percent)
Maximum Limit: 1.04
Test Reading: 0.33
NO (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 1,163.0
Test Reading: 137.2
First and foremost, it's good that I passed. But interesting to note that while the additive was able to dramatically cut the nitrous oxide emissions (today's NOS emissions were less than 10% of what they were a week ago), both of my other forms of monitored emissions increased in concentration (as you can see, the car almost failed for hydrocarbons.. which I attribute to using the high octane fuel: in theory, there is little benefit to using such high octane fuel with this engine, as it doesn't create enough cylinder pressure to fully ignite fuel with such a high overall combustion temperature). Nevertheless, the huge drop in NOS shows that the stuff works, and works well.
HYDROCARBONS (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 162.0
Test Reading: 160.5
CO (percent)
Maximum Limit: 1.04
Test Reading: 0.33
NO (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 1,163.0
Test Reading: 137.2
First and foremost, it's good that I passed. But interesting to note that while the additive was able to dramatically cut the nitrous oxide emissions (today's NOS emissions were less than 10% of what they were a week ago), both of my other forms of monitored emissions increased in concentration (as you can see, the car almost failed for hydrocarbons.. which I attribute to using the high octane fuel: in theory, there is little benefit to using such high octane fuel with this engine, as it doesn't create enough cylinder pressure to fully ignite fuel with such a high overall combustion temperature). Nevertheless, the huge drop in NOS shows that the stuff works, and works well.
GSteg
05-04-2002, 10:27 AM
Originally posted by JD@af
Today I took my '85 Mercury Marquis back to the Emissions Testing Station today for a free retest. Prior to taking the car over there, I had the tank mostly empty, added a 15 oz. bottle of Berryman Emissions Passing Additive and filled her to about 3/4 tank with Sunoco Ultra 94, and drove the car exactly 100 miles (almost all highway). I then took it right over to the emissions testing station:
HYDROCARBONS (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 162.0
Test Reading: 160.5
CO (percent)
Maximum Limit: 1.04
Test Reading: 0.33
NO (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 1,163.0
Test Reading: 137.2
First and foremost, it's good that I passed. But interesting to note that while the additive was able to dramatically cut the nitrous oxide emissions (today's NOS emissions were less than 10% of what they were a week ago), both of my other forms of monitored emissions increased in concentration (as you can see, the car almost failed for hydrocarbons.. which I attribute to using the high octane fuel: in theory, there is little benefit to using such high octane fuel with this engine, as it doesn't create enough cylinder pressure to fully ignite fuel with such a high overall combustion temperature). Nevertheless, the huge drop in NOS shows that the stuff works, and works well.
so that bottle thing actually works?:D interesting...what if i have a custom turbo'd H22? i want to do the swap to my future car but i'm afraid it might not pass:(
Today I took my '85 Mercury Marquis back to the Emissions Testing Station today for a free retest. Prior to taking the car over there, I had the tank mostly empty, added a 15 oz. bottle of Berryman Emissions Passing Additive and filled her to about 3/4 tank with Sunoco Ultra 94, and drove the car exactly 100 miles (almost all highway). I then took it right over to the emissions testing station:
HYDROCARBONS (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 162.0
Test Reading: 160.5
CO (percent)
Maximum Limit: 1.04
Test Reading: 0.33
NO (ppm)
Maximum Limit: 1,163.0
Test Reading: 137.2
First and foremost, it's good that I passed. But interesting to note that while the additive was able to dramatically cut the nitrous oxide emissions (today's NOS emissions were less than 10% of what they were a week ago), both of my other forms of monitored emissions increased in concentration (as you can see, the car almost failed for hydrocarbons.. which I attribute to using the high octane fuel: in theory, there is little benefit to using such high octane fuel with this engine, as it doesn't create enough cylinder pressure to fully ignite fuel with such a high overall combustion temperature). Nevertheless, the huge drop in NOS shows that the stuff works, and works well.
so that bottle thing actually works?:D interesting...what if i have a custom turbo'd H22? i want to do the swap to my future car but i'm afraid it might not pass:(
95cvccvx
05-05-2002, 01:19 PM
i had a catco cat in my hatch and had a hard time passing smog. I have i/h/e with msd upgrade. The first time i took the test fail it then a second time pass barely. Then two yrs later i failed twiced and when i show someone the results they told me they bet it was the cat not operating correctly. They said to me 1 of 3 options, first being cat is burn out, second being the cat is not getting hot enough for smog more lean then rich, third was that some people do not realize if you ask for a high flow cat make sure its a three way cat not just a two way cat. The two way cat does not burn as much as the three way cat plus it doesnt help with nox. I hope this help:sun:
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025