Another 3.2 Fails CA Smog
 

My 84 Cab just failed bad. Like most of us in CA and elsewhere that a cat is required, every 2 years I get the original cat out of the cabinet, run it for a few weeks and it usually passes with lots of margin.

Not this year..... Have you noticed we all get sent to the test only station because we are tagged as a "High Emitter Profile" WTF! Check out the .pdf on thread #18 where at the top of the page as Inspection Reason it has listed "High Emitter Profile". Thats right, CA has our number and it's called FU CA wants you off the road.


The car has the original Cat so I guess it was time. 26 yers is not bad for an original part to still almost work. I also was hoping someone could educate me why a cat that passed in '06 with NOx levels ~200 ppm, went up to ~600 ppm in '08 and 1000 ppm in '10?? Did the cat get oxidized or something like that sitting in my inside garage? Why did the NOx level go up?

They did drop the max limits from '08 to '10. In '08 the NOx limits were 1148 ppm at 15 mph and 978 at 25 mpr they decreased them in '10 to 804/685 ppm. Thats a 40% reduction........

So it was either pay the mechanic $500, that's right $100 for his time plus $400 for the bogus smog or buy the aftermarket job from Pelican for $600. The factory part is $1400 and I think takes a few weeks to get in from Germany. So now that I have a new $600 cat that helped pass smog off the car again I'm concerned that just sitting in my dry garage it will go bad after few years.

Should I vacuum bag it or pressurize it with dry nitrogen??

- then they aren't paying attention

the smog limits cannot change w/o a rule-making and public involvement

the shops may not pay attn, but the info has to be out there and published for those that care to look

Here's another data point for the discussion:

89 3.2 with 100k mi. stock and in proper state of tune but worn valve guides and uses some oil. I live just outside Sacramento in a rural "non enhanced" area so I'm not required to put the car on rollers for the test and NOx is not measured.

Here's the results as of 6/2010:

idle: HC: Max 120, Avg 29, measured 7
CO: Max 1.0, Avg .10, measured .05

2500 RPM: HC: Max 140, Avg 20, measured 6
CO: Max 1.0, Avg .10, measured .02

Obviously WELL BELOW the average values let alone the max values. These motronic 3.2's are very clean running engines when they are working properly.

Even better, show me WHERE it specifies in CA State law the exact criteria which defines a "Gross Poluter"

My '77 with an '84 3.2 just failed :(
HC max was 126 @15mph/ 101 @ 25mph - Mine measured 125/35
CO max was .79 " " / .59 " " - Mine measured .31/.02
NO max was 1097 " " / 927 " " - Mine measured 385/1262

So I made it by one point on the HC and failed the NO max @ 25mph.
I'm going to try a good used cat and then take it back, I think my old cat is toast.
What do you think??

you guys are fuched, Here in the clean state of Washington in Whatcom county....no smog testing at all, none, ever, not a chance in the next 10 years, can't afford it. So, why are you guys/girls running polluter cars in Kali? Isn't that the state that has ONLY hybrids in it?

V.C. Section 27156 - Gross Polluter: Air Pollution Control Device

-and-

Health and Safety Code Section 39032.5 - Gross Polluter

-and-

http://www.imreview.ca.gov/archives/archived_presentation/arb_obdII_m.mccarthy_1.24.06.pdf

-and-

http://www.bar.ca.gov/pubwebquery/APE/APE.aspx

-whew-

http://www.autorepair.ca.gov/80_BARResources/05_Legislative/RegulatoryActions/BAR_Laws_and_Regulations.pdf

No where in any of the links is the term "Gross polluter" actually defined to an actual set of standards or criteria.

This is as close as it gets:

CA BAR 39032.5. "Gross polluter" means a vehicle with excess hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, or oxides of nitrogen emissions as established by the department in consultation with the state board.

My question, what are the CRITERIA for establishing "Gross polluter" status by the state board? They go on to state:

CA BAR Article 8, sec 44080 (d) "These gross polluters are primarily vehicles in which the emission control equipment has been disconnected or which are very poorly maintained"

Really? Is there any evidence that my emission control equipment has ever been disconnected? How do they know how I maintain my vehicle? Then we jump to:

CA BAR Article 8, sec 44080 (g4) "Procedures requiring owners of vehicles confirmed as gross polluters..."

Wait, WHAT?! That's it? sec 44080 (d) is as close as it gets to defining a "Gross polluter". If the CA BAR wants to define "Gross polluter" with specific years, makes, models that are causing problems that is one thing but to have it defined by some beaurocratic nonsense with NO basis then i call BS.

Thats absolute BS. Sorry but Kalifornia is wacko in so many ways but this one takes the cake.

Glad you passed but how you guys can put up with this is beyond me.

As close an answer as you will get from the state is this: "The emission level at which a vehicle fails as a Gross Polluter varies according the vehicle type and year." I guess if you contact the BAR and ask them for the exact specs for a specific car in a specific geographical location, you might get an answer. Ha. Who am I kidding?

JB

If it is not in a published regulation, then use the Calif. Public Records Act

Umm...how long have you lived in Kalifornia? Isn't this SOP? :confused:

That won't exempt you from smog testing.....:(

It would appear that "gross polluter" simply means any vehicle that fails its emission test. My guess is this choice of words has two purposes: 1. it is shorter to write than "a vehicle which has failed smog testing," and 2. it is a purposefully inflammatory choice of phrasing to make their law sound cool.

"Yeah, we're getting all those gross polluters off the road." Rather than, "Yeah, we're getting all those vehicles that failed their smog tests off the road."

As discussed, the failure criteria appear to be in flux. I don't know how the emissions limits are set per vehicle. I'd like to see how that is done.

Brett

Probably a valid take Brett. Reverse marketing by a bunch of corpulent hack bureaucrats.

California is run by activists. They can and will talk themselves into believing that any regulation is a good regulation by definition, and if not for government action, we would all be that much farther from Utopia.

My '88 just failed on the new "evap" test. They pressurize the fuel tank system and return lines to see if there is a leak where a precious 6 molecules could escape. Replaced every rubber line to and fro and it passed...more make work projects for legislators and smog shops.

Just Passed after I failed a few weeks ago. Just some food for thought...
Removed and replaced with a used (working Cat)
removed the Steve W chip and installed a borrowed stock chip (thanks Ed H.) and ran a bottle of techrolene for about 30 miles of spirited driving.
NO came down from the 1200's to 640, that's the one I failed.
YMMV..just glad to be done for a couple of years :)

One idea is to get a "pretest" before the real test to avoid getting the gross polluter label on your car. Keep getting the pretest until it passes and then have the place test for the record immediately.

no - read it again -- it means that the other agencies set the definition