Salt Lake County in Utah requires that kind of testing, IIRC.
Still a drive, but worth it?

YMMV,

Mr. BZ-go north & turn left

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:10 PM, OlRivrRat <OlRivrRat@comcast.net> wrote:

>               Dennis
>
>       Thanks for that info ~ I was actually suspecting that something like
> that
>
> might be the case. I had just pulled out my report from the
> ABQSmogTester to
>
> see what the numbers might be indicating & had noticed that there are
> not any
>
> results for NOx. It does say " Catalytic Converter - passed" but as
> you pointed
>
> out it is a "no load" test so not necessarily the whole truth. I am
> running dual
>
> O2Sensors ~ 1 up' & 1 downstream ~ and the ECU is not complaining
> about the
>
> work that the Cat' is doing but again I suspect that may not be the
> whole truth
>
> & probably not good enough to make everybody happy.
>
>       Does anyone know if there are any places around NM that require the
> Dyno
>
> SmogTest? If I ever I get to someplace that does I might just get the
> test done
>
> as long as it is not outrageously priced.
>
>                                                       ORR ~ DeanB
>
> On 20 Mar , 2012, at 6:19 PM, Dennis Haynes wrote:
>
>  I looked up the information on the Albuquerque NM emissions test
>> program.
>> They are only looking for visible smoke, carbon monoxide and unburned
>> hydrocarbons. The emissions are checked at high and low speed but
>> not under
>> actual load. CO is mixture related and a properly working O2 sensor
>> system
>> will keep that near .5% before the Catalyst. Unburned HC would only
>> exist if
>> you have a miss fire, valve, or other engine problem.  Again should
>> be well
>> under 50 ppm even before the cat. So your nonpolluting test results
>> do not
>> confirm your cat is actually working. You would need to check before
>> and
>> after the cat to see if you are getting any reduction. Now where we
>> need to
>> get the cats to really work is under load, changing loads where the
>> engine
>> management can't always provide perfect mixture. Also, a major job
>> of the 3
>> way catalyst is to reduce the oxides of nitrogen, (NOx). NOx is
>> produced
>> mostly at the pressure temperature peak of the combustion cycle and
>> mostly
>> happens under load. The higher the load, pressure, peak flame
>> temperature
>> the more NOx produced. In order to test this part of the catalyst or
>> other
>> factors (ignition timing, EGR).that affect or control this the test
>> has to
>> be done with the engine loaded.  This is why many emissions programs
>> required the dynamometer testing, (IM240). This is where the cheap
>> cats
>> fail.
>> Since we had this test in NY until recently factors that often
>> caused test
>> failures were bad cats, oversized tires, especially on automatics,
>> over
>> advanced ignition timing, and on the air cooled engines the missing
>> EGR
>> systems.
>>
>> BTW the EPA requires replacement Cats to be warrantied for 5 years
>> or 50K
>> also. Keep the paperwork. The real issue will be to prove the
>> failure was
>> not caused by something else.
>>
>> Dennis
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.**com<vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>]
>> On
>> Behalf Of
>> OlRivrRat
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 10:57 AM
>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>
>>               Jeff
>>
>>       I'm very proud of you that you have an important job to do &
>> are
>> trying to do it well, but again ~ according to a recent Albuquerque,
>> NM smog
>> test (which, by the way, I had done voluntarily as I'm not required
>> to have
>> one in the county where I live) & my EJ25s ECU ~ My VDUBARUs EJ25 &
>> its
>> attached ExhaustSystem are not polluting.
>>       Having said that ~ being the InfoHaulic that I am ~ I would
>> like to
>> be informed about what pollutants my cars might be spewing into the
>> environment that the ABQ SmogGuys don't seem to care about so any
>> wisdom
>> that you might have & would care to share in that regard would be
>> appreciated.
>>
>>                                                       ORR ~ DeanB
>>
>> On 20 Mar , 2012, at 1:13 AM, Jeff wrote:
>>
>>  Well. sit right back and I'll tell you a little story.  Perhaps my
>>> "ABSURD" feeling, as you like to call it, comes from a little bit
>>> (perhaps a lot) more experience than yours?  I happen to be a
>>> Registered Importer and part of my job is to make imported vehicles
>>> legal for the USA.  Your "$100 Cat" will not pass any of the EPA lab
>>> tests even when new.  The $200 cats will not pass the EPA lab tests
>>> when new.  Only the OE $500 cat will pass the EPA lab test.  The most
>>> glaring failure of the "non-ABSURD" cats is that they do not come up
>>> to operating temperature quickly enough to be effective for short
>>> drives.  Other problems have to do with comparison testing and how
>>> quickly they lose their effectiveness.
>>>
>>> Now let's just forget about the whole fancy EPA lab testing stuff and
>>> concentrate on everyday experience with plenty of customer's cars
>>> here
>>> in California.  I can't keep track of the number of 2 year old "$100
>>> Cats" that failed their 2nd smog test.  It sort of became a running
>>> joke in CA Vanagon land about replacing your cat every two years to
>>> pass smog.  Lots of people bitched and moaned when CA put in their
>>> new
>>> cat replacement laws a few years back, but it sure got rid of the 2
>>> year cat syndrome.
>>>
>>> So. I'm sorry if the facts seems "ABSURD" to you, but in reality, you
>>> do get what you pay for when it comes to a catalytic converter.
>>>
>>> Happy smogging.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>> From: OlRivrRat [mailto:OlRivrRat@comcast.net]
>>> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 7:56 PM
>>> To: Jeff Schwaia
>>> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>>
>>>                       Jeff
>>>
>>>           My "$100 Cat" (which actually only cost me $87.95 back in
>>> '07) is 5yrs old & has 62000mis on it
>>>
>>> ( 2yrs8mos/26Kmis+H2OBxr & 2yrs4mos/36Kmis+EJ25 ) & according to a
>>> recent smog test & my EJ25
>>>
>>> ECU, it is doing a darn fine job. So it would seem to me that an
>>> "ABSURD" might be in order in regards
>>>
>>> to feelings about your need to spend $500 on a OE Cat. Here again is
>>> the link to the one I use & highly
>>>
>>> recommend.
>>>
>>> http://www.summitracing.com/**parts/MPE-22918/<http://www.summitracing.com/parts/MPE-22918/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>  ORR  ~ DeanB
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19 Mar , 2012, at 7:14 PM, Jeff Schwaia wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> A $100 cat is effective for less than 2 years and is nowhere near as
>>> efficient as an OE cat.
>>>
>>> If you really want to do it right, buy a cat that meets OE specs...
>>> about
>>> $500.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.**com<vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>]
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of den jolliffe
>>> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 5:46 PM
>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>>
>>> Aren't we talking about a $100 part that helps emissions and the air
>>> we all breath. Say it lasts as long as the original or less (20
>>> years)...that's $5 a year...less than a pack of smokes or a gallon of
>>> gas A YEAR.
>>>
>>> It's a no brainer for me...NAPA has them.
>>>
>>> Dennis2
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**__
>>> From: Dave Mcneely <mcneely4@COX.NET>
>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 6:38:50 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>>
>>> David, that is true.  Some folks try to do something about, others
>>> rail that it is too much to bear to clean up the act.
>>>
>>>
>>> It is true that transportation is the single largest polluter,
>>> however, and the only way to control that is to make sure that each
>>> vehicle complies with standard.
>>>
>>>
>>> We all pay, but then we all should.
>>>
>>> mcneely
>>>
>>> ---- David M <covrambles@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>>> Meanwhile US industry pumps out millions of tons of pollutants every
>>> year while us poor suckers pay over $1000 to get thru the emissions
>>> test (happened to me twice).
>>>
>>> If you look at the statistics you will be shocked at what goes into
>>> the air every year.
>>>
>>>
>>> -David, 1987 Wolfsburg
>>>
>>> --- On Sun, 3/18/12, Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM>
>>> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Date: Sunday, March 18, 2012, 6:14 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> Luckily for many the federal government relies on the states for
>>> enforcement. However the general requirements start at the federal
>>> level (EPA),especially for the design, maintenance, and operation of
>>> motor vehicles.  Disabling or removing parts of the emission control
>>> system are federal violations. Engine upgrades are also regulated
>>> with
>>> the major requirements being that the replacement be same year or
>>> later and all of the emissions equipment that goes with that engine
>>> goes with it. This can include all the controls, exhaust after
>>> treatment, and fuel tank vapor recovery systems and maybe even the
>>> transmission/drivelien. All the state emissions programs require that
>>> all the original equipment is there. Keep in mind that depending on
>>> use, (load, time under load, accelerating curves, etc.), a more
>>> efficient engine may not mean a cleaner engine. Some states actually
>>> operate these programs as private shops can both look the other way
>>> or
>>> take advantage and abuse customers. As for just relying on tailpipe
>>> tests, they are just too limited in scope and function. They can only
>>> look at percentages or parts per million (ppm), not actual pollutants
>>> per mile especially under different conditions. Again they are
>>> designed to identify "gross" polluters, not certify your vehicle
>>> works
>>> perfectly.
>>>
>>>
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.**com<vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>]
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of Scott Daniel - Turbovans
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 3:27 PM
>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>>
>>> what does that mean 'move issue up to the Fed level ' ?
>>> there are no Fed smog stations.
>>> I'm sure there is conflict between state's rights to set there own
>>> emissions requirements and what the Feds want.
>>>
>>> I think it's interesting that where smog is not an issue locally ..
>>> say where ocean air blows emissions inland ..
>>> ( not talking about Ca. )
>>> there can be no local smog checks at all, yet the cars are still
>>> emitting, it's just blowing somewhere else.
>>>
>>> fortunately for many of us smogs checks are not required.
>>> I would be in favor of basic tail pipe checks..
>>>
>>> and an example of how silly the whole thing is ..
>>> in Ca ...
>>> officially, they will not allow people to put newer more fuel
>>> efficient, less polluting engines into their older vans.
>>> Pretty stupid.
>>> They could/should PAY people for putting in a late model less
>>> polluting and more fuel efficient engine into our old beaties.
>>> But then anyway  ...'logical/practical' and 'government' have never
>>> been known to coincide.  Durn shame.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/18/2012 9:36 AM, Dennis Haynes wrote:
>>> It will run just fine with the guts removed. There may be a very
>>> slight performance penalty as the gasses bounce around in the hollow
>>> cat. Not having a local emissions testing/enforcement program just
>>> moves the issue up to the federal level.
>>>
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.**com<vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>]
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of marc rose
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 11:54 AM
>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Subject: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>>
>>> I went to change out my worn out and rusted muffler on my 90 Carat
>>> "Rosie"
>>>
>>> yesterday and noticed that the converter was all busted up and the
>>> ceramic is all but gone.  I live in an area that has no enforced
>>> emission tests or anything like that. My question is can i can safely
>>> run without the convertor.  I was going to just bust out the rest of
>>> the ceramic and reinstall but was not sure how it would affect the
>>> overall operation of the engine.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts??
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Marc
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> David McNeely
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

--
Tom Buese