| Author | Message | ||
| Bill White (Nc_newbie)
New member Username: Nc_newbie Post Number: 44 Registered: 2-2003 |
Sounds like mixture to me. My Mondial 3.2 was HC 100ppm and CO at 3% at idle until I adjusted the mixture. Now HC 100 and CO at 0.9% post cat. It was amazing to turn the mixture screw and watch how the numbers would change... For a while I had the CO at 0.0% post cat until I richened it up. I bet you could get it as low as you wanted... | ||
| Steve Magnusson (91tr)
Intermediate Member Username: 91tr Post Number: 1526 Registered: 1-2001 |
From the '78 US OM (150/78): <start> Air injection system The functional principle of the system is to convey air into the exhaust manifolds so that the oxigen [sic] of the air reacts with the hot exhaust gases causing further combustio in the exhaust system. <end> | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 803 Registered: 5-2001 |
Could someone please explain what an air pump does. | ||
| BLUE308 (Davidlewis)
Junior Member Username: Davidlewis Post Number: 60 Registered: 2-2002 |
Thank you Mike, finally some advice I can actually use to reduce my CO's! I will look into my air injection system to see if all is working properly. I don't understand how my HC's can be so very good while the CO's are so very bad. I almost don't believe my HC number but my cats are only 2 years old. You are correct - The data in my owners manual is different than the data plate in the engine compartment. | ||
| Mike Procopio (Pupz308)
Junior Member Username: Pupz308 Post Number: 157 Registered: 10-2002 |
Blue308, 39ppm Hyrocarbon (HCs)? That is pretty amazing--I was nowhere near that, even with the cats on. I don't believe that my car (78, Carbed, US spec) could ever get that low--what RPM was that at? My understanding is that the presence and condition of the cats heavily affects your HC count, and the presence of the air injector pump heavily affects CO%. I assume you've checked the condition of the pump? Have you confirmed that the air pump leads are intact and run into the exhaust system? The pump can be retrofit with a standard GM part. Also, I'm not sure, but I believe that there may be some subtle differences in the emissions rating (on the metal plate and in the owners manual) between 76/77 cars, and 78/79 cars. (Their stock carb jetting is definitely different, apparently to have better emissions.) | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
Member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 391 Registered: 4-2002 |
Sounds like another reason not to live in california. | ||
| JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member Username: Jrvall Post Number: 1133 Registered: 11-2002 |
>>1.5% CO --- MAX HC300ppm..<< at the tailpipe I took those numbers directly off the engine tag of a USA 77 B before I posted them earlier. | ||
| Steve Magnusson (91tr)
Intermediate Member Username: 91tr Post Number: 1513 Registered: 1-2001 |
Thanks for the pre-cat HC/CO plaque data Gordon. Not that it's necessarily the "right" number to shoot for -- I think if you've got to hit <1% CO in the emission test then you've got to go much lower pre-cat (no air injection) as JRV suggested and then hope that your cats are still somewhat effective (but I like to know the facts). | ||
| Gordon Hollingsworth (Gordonh)
New member Username: Gordonh Post Number: 11 Registered: 5-2002 |
Steve, this is a follow up to my post of 3/11 @ 10:13 p.m. The engine compartment sticker says pre-cat and w/o air injection CO 6% +/- 1%; HC 300 ppm. This seems way too rich, but that is what it says. The greatest problem with the new Calif. dyno test isn't getting the car to run cleanly, but to stay within the narrow RPM range required during the test cycle. Starting this year most of Calif. motorists must use this test system. Before it was only used in smog non-attainment areas of the state. | ||
| Robert W. Garven Jr. (Robertgarven)
Junior Member Username: Robertgarven Post Number: 111 Registered: 2-2002 |
Did you guys see my other post they are trying to cahnge the CA smog law to go back 45 years!!!! SB708 Call or write your reps, my car will be exempt next year if this does not pass. I have a carb gt4 no cats passed smog fine, i set points 2 functioning air pumps, it runs very rich | ||
| Matt Lemus (Mlemus)
Advanced Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 2928 Registered: 8-2002 |
Mine passed. What's the problem? It is possible to pass Cali emmissions tests with a carb 308. I just had to do it in Nov. | ||
| Hans E. Hansen (4re_gt4)
Member Username: 4re_gt4 Post Number: 942 Registered: 4-2002 |
I think what is often overlooked here is that the original emission tests were done at idle. Now they are done on a dyno at speed. The car wasn't originally designed to meet the new emission test, not that it can't be done. It just wasn't originally supposed to be that way. | ||
| Steve Magnusson (91tr)
Intermediate Member Username: 91tr Post Number: 1507 Registered: 1-2001 |
Gordon -- What are the "before cat" idle HC/CO numbers? | ||
| Gordon Hollingsworth (Gordonh)
New member Username: Gordonh Post Number: 10 Registered: 5-2002 |
I would like to shed a little light on this subject without any more bad feelings. I have a '79 308 that is also a "California" car. The current test procedure is tougher than when the car was new. First, the sticker affixed to the car says 1% CO & 200 PPM HC after the cats with the air injection working, tested at idle. In '79 there was no test for NOX, now there is. The current test procedure requires the emissions to be tested first at 15 mph, then at 25 mph, but the engine rpm's may not exceed 3,000. The maximum levels are as follows: 15 mph: HC 218, CO 1.3%, NOX 1878 25 mph: HC 168, CO 1.10%, NOX 1678 No one wants to drive a "gross polluter", but these new standards are tough to meet! | ||
| JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member Username: Jrvall Post Number: 1127 Registered: 11-2002 |
Blue are you dense?? Constructive...the man asked a question about alcohol in a FI car and I answered it for him...!!! The other comments "from a different thread" ARE OUT OF CONTEXT !!! | ||
| BLUE308 (Davidlewis)
Junior Member Username: Davidlewis Post Number: 59 Registered: 2-2002 |
((that was a different thread and out of context to you and your situation... )) Sorry, that "different" thread was actually me and my situation. That is my thread asking the very same questions - check it out. Since it was archived, I had to link it. Got anything constructive to say? I know you know you're a pro, so why all this BS? | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 720 Registered: 5-2001 |
I always thought that your car had to pass the emissions requirements for the year of manufacture of that car. My 1984 308 must meet the legal emission limits for 1984 only, not 2003. Is this not true? Keep in mind I do not live in a state that inflicts this revenue producing torture on it's citizens so I am basically unfamiliar with the details. | ||
| JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member Username: Jrvall Post Number: 1125 Registered: 11-2002 |
>> Please pay attention<< Yo Blue...same applies for you! that was a different thread and out of context to you and your situation... If I had wanted to advise you I would have have addressed you and your situation... | ||
| BLUE308 (Davidlewis)
Junior Member Username: Davidlewis Post Number: 58 Registered: 2-2002 |
JRV - What makes you think I was talking to you? ...but I am talking to you now. Please pay attention - I said: "my 308 is stone stock Calif. SMOG equiped and tuned to factory spec". You previously stated that an engine in decent condition is "3%-3.5%co & 3-400ppm" but above that needs more direct attention to correct. I am at your low end on CO (3%) and way lower on HC (39ppm), so it appears by your own criteria I am already in good tune and am not polluting. I intend to return to proper tune after I pass this damn test and thereby will not be polluting in the future. But again, I guess you were not still talking to me. Since you say I better read the tag on my engine compartment ledge, I will. But I'm not sure why since I don't have the equipment to read these concentrations. What do I do after I read it? Since the test here involves a tailpipe sniffer, it seems that tailpipe concentrations are applicable to passing, not pre-cat. I will look at my SMOG data plate and let you all know what it says. I think it's a fact that Calif. concentrations are more stringent than other states. I'm beginning to suspect that they may also be more stringent than the factory specs - need to verify. To pass this test it seems that I have to temporarilly deviate from proper tune or find some other way to scam the equipment. Anyone have any constructive ideas how to change the state of tune to reduce CO's? | ||
| '75 308 GT4 (Peter)
Advanced Member Username: Peter Post Number: 2584 Registered: 12-2000 |
I should add, that sometimes emulsion tubes need to be changed as well when running alcohol. Ones that allow more fuel and less air to be mixed (less holes, smaller holes, holes that are higher up the tube, smaller tube diameters, etc...). | ||
| '75 308 GT4 (Peter)
Advanced Member Username: Peter Post Number: 2583 Registered: 12-2000 |
Hans, I think running alcohol for an hour or two to go through smog would do little damage to rubber components. If the car had the original hoses, I wouldn't do it at all! Modern, nitrile hoses should hold up. In respect to running alcohol in a carb car (actually, this relates to any gasoline-powered car), the Pierce Weber manual suggests to run larger jets because of the low "calorific" value of alcohol fuels (ie: needs less air mix for the proper stoichiometric ratio). Here's some recipies: -60% methyl alcohol, 20% gasoline and 20% benzene (by volume) requires a 15% increase in main, idle, accel pump jets and needle valve. -94% methyl alcohol, 6% acetone and traces of oil (by vol.) increase the above by 45%. Now, I'm not sure if using benzene and acetone will give you "clean" results out the pipes, so maybe those can be reduced in proportion to the other (cleaner?) ingredients... | ||
| JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member Username: Jrvall Post Number: 1124 Registered: 11-2002 |
>>It's Magic!<< You'd think so. GIVE A HOOT -- DON'T POLUTE Gross Polluters are not healthy for children & other living things. | ||
| Hans E. Hansen (4re_gt4)
Member Username: 4re_gt4 Post Number: 940 Registered: 4-2002 |
Just wondering out loud about alcohol. Perhaps someone can answer: 1. Would the type of alcohol make a difference as to degradation of the fuel system? Ethanol (which is sometimes used in 'oxygenated' gasoline), isopropanol, or methanol (which I hear is really corrosive). 2. Would a more dilute mixture than the below mentioned 40% prevent fuel system damage, but still spoof the emission check? | ||
| Steve Magnusson (91tr)
Intermediate Member Username: 91tr Post Number: 1503 Registered: 1-2001 |
BLUE308 -- Just for clarification, the "before cats" measurement is made with the air injection system disabled while the "after cats" (tailpipe) measurement would be done with everything functioning -- what does the emission plaque in the engine compartment state? (Actually, anyone with a US '78-'79 B/S please post the plaque numbers.) | ||
| Matt Lemus (Mlemus)
Advanced Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 2910 Registered: 8-2002 |
 It's Magic! | ||
| JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member Username: Jrvall Post Number: 1121 Registered: 11-2002 |
Hey Blue...I wasn't answering your question/questions or talking to you sport!!! But FYI..ya better read the tag on your engine compartment ledge...says right on it what the specs are ...1.5% MAX 300ppm..BEFORE THE CAT!!! Proper Tune Sport!!! | ||
| BLUE308 (Davidlewis)
Junior Member Username: Davidlewis Post Number: 57 Registered: 2-2002 |
"Proper tune" may pass in most places, but Kalifornia is a different game. By the way, my 308 is stone stock Calif. SMOG equiped and tuned to factory spec. It has about 50K miles. JVR, you previously advised that: ((1.50-2.00 CO. when firing properly on all 8 HC's will be between 125-200 ppm.)) ((Even a 308 engine in generally decent condition should produce numbers about 3%-3.5%co & 3-400ppm HC's..above that something likely needs more direct attention to correct.)) I am sure this is very valid, but these acceptable numbers would actually fail SMOG here. I am reading from my SMOG test print out, 25mph on the load dyno: >MAX Allowed HC's are 168ppm >MAX allowed CO's are 1.10% My HC's were very good at 39ppm but my CO's were way over at 3.06%. So my question is, what adjustments bring down CO's without jacking something else out of range? I am also seriously considering the isopropyl alcohol stunt. While I can believe it may have long term damaging effects, can anyone see a problem with running a 40% mix just for the duration of the test? OK-I was just kidding about the P-car, but maybe not about the QV. Thanks | ||
| JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member Username: Jrvall Post Number: 1120 Registered: 11-2002 |
>>What adverse effects might one anticipate on mechanical injectors? << The injectors are metal, however there are plenty of important rubber parts inside the Fuel Distributors... A proper tune will not only pass...but reward you with a nice running engine with no bad side effects... | ||
| James Selevan (Jselevan)
Member Username: Jselevan Post Number: 441 Registered: 6-2002 |
Can someone provide an answer to Byron's question concerning Isopropyl alcohol in fuel injected cars? What adverse effects might one anticipate on mechanical injectors? Jim S. | ||
| Philip Airey (Pma1010)
Junior Member Username: Pma1010 Post Number: 174 Registered: 7-2002 |
Byron, all I may be missing it here. I know Ferrari engines run "hot" (temperature). However, I am not aware that their EGTs are any higher than Fords or anything else. If you are running close to stoich, EGTs are going to be what 1200 - 1500 degrees. I can't see that the internal engine design, cooling system etc will change this dramatically. In that case, I can't see what difference one brand of cat makes to another (exempting flow). If I am not correct, please educate me. Philip | ||
| Steve Magnusson (91tr)
Intermediate Member Username: 91tr Post Number: 1502 Registered: 1-2001 |
mike 308 -- I've (sort of unintentionally) acquired a pair of the Hyper-flow polished stainless steel bypass pipes (for later 308qv, TR, etc. that I'd still like to sell -- see FerrariAds -- someone make me a near offer!), and the quality seems first-rate to me. Have you also checked the Hyper-flow website for information? http://www.hyper-flow.com As others have mentioned, a reasonably-sized cat off something like a late model US V8 (with the proper F flanges added) can be, and is, a very workable solution for the few~4~5 hundred $ price range. Hyper-flow is a step up from that (just for the case/flange material and finishing alone), and, if the alternative is the stock part for a usual $1K+ gouge, going with the Hyper-flow cat is a no-brainer IMO. | ||
| Matt Lemus (Mlemus)
Advanced Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 2901 Registered: 8-2002 |
I was referring to rebuilt cats. not repacks. DOH! | ||
| mike 308 (Concorde)
Junior Member Username: Concorde Post Number: 133 Registered: 8-2002 |
Any experience with a "hyper-flow" cat, like offerred at Sodacoms? http://shop.auctionwatch.com/sodacom/category/5192/ | ||
| Ben Lobenstein 90 TR (Benjet)
Intermediate Member Username: Benjet Post Number: 1051 Registered: 1-2001 |
Alcohol instantly does nasty things to: 1. Fuel Pumps 2. Fuel Injectors 3. ANYHING rubber that it comes into contact with do a google search on alcohol injection (commonly used to cool wash cylinders - much like NOS), to see what others do to avoid such damage. -Ben P.S. Have to agree with Byron, it's about $3-500 to replace the "cat guts", per cat. | ||
| Byron (Bmyth)
Member Username: Bmyth Post Number: 412 Registered: 10-2002 |
Matt, it's not a typo.... what I meant, though, was that re-packing your cats would cost you about 350-400 apiece. Not buying rebuilt cats. Philip, independents do carry generic cats, but they are generally not packed with enough element. These cars run so hot, it's hard to imagine any generic catalytic converter lasting more than 1-2 years. Unless you've had personal luck doing this (and I could be wrong on this)... I would recommend only OEM cats or re-packed. Only... at $1200-1500 for a new cat from Ferrari, you might as well re-pack it for $350. | ||
| Philip Airey (Pma1010)
Junior Member Username: Pma1010 Post Number: 173 Registered: 7-2002 |
While not doubting what you've been quoted, that seems an absurd amount of money for a catalytic converter. Many independents carry "generic" cats and could probably fab you something up of the right dimensions for much less than that. | ||
| Matt Lemus (Mlemus)
Advanced Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 2888 Registered: 8-2002 |
Byron, you have a typo. Rebuilt Cats are 700 to 900 each for your car. | ||
| Byron (Bmyth)
Member Username: Bmyth Post Number: 411 Registered: 10-2002 |
Re-built cats will run you about $350-400 apiece. As you mentioned, as long as you don't run your engine too rich, you won't run the risk of burning through them - they should be able to last at least 5 years with normal use (from what I've been told). If you have modified ECU's that allow exhaust temperatures to be higher, I would suggest switching them out. I guess Matt's right on this one... you DO have to pay to play. One way or another, you always pay. Don't give up on the car just yet! Definitely don't go thinking about P-cars! | ||
| Matt Lemus (Mlemus)
Advanced Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 2885 Registered: 8-2002 |
The trick is... Do what you can to make them legal and then not worry about it. My 308 passed the first time in Nov. It needed new cat's but you have to pay to play. | ||
| Matt Lemus (Mlemus)
Advanced Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 2873 Registered: 8-2002 |
Go Honda Go!!! | ||
| Byron (Bmyth)
Member Username: Bmyth Post Number: 407 Registered: 10-2002 |
Tazio, what does that do to the fuel injection system on a non-carbed car? Dr. Cosgrove... too funny... my thoughts exactly. We, in the know, call that the "$300 smog"  | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 710 Registered: 5-2001 |
Have you tried a handfull of dead presidents? | ||
| DJParks (Djparks)
Junior Member Username: Djparks Post Number: 57 Registered: 2-2003 |
Tazio, When you say 99% alcohol do you mean Isopropyl? otherwise known as rubbing alcohol? DJ | ||
| Tazio Nuvolari (Nuvolari)
Junior Member Username: Nuvolari Post Number: 158 Registered: 9-2002 |
Last month I passed smog in a heavily modified BMW 325 race car that would not have had a ghost of a chance to pass using conventional means. As it turned out, the car (with a gutted cat, cams, exhaust, headders, chip, etc.) pased beautifully. What did I do? I used one of the tips for the previous thread and added about 40% alcohol I picked up from the drugstore to the gas tank. I bought the 99% pure stuff and as soon as the test was over I topped up the tank with regular gas. Make sure the car is almost empty and try and calculate your fuel mixture to about 40% alcohol. I also failed on my first try but after the alcohol I was buring cleaner than a Honda Civic. Good luck. | ||
| John Pray (Juanito308)
New member Username: Juanito308 Post Number: 6 Registered: 3-2003 |
My deepest condolences. Like California, Colorado is trying everything in its power to outlaw carbureted engines. The only real way to pass in Colorado is to do pre and post test adjustments. Pre-test calls for leaning to the point of zero drivability but yields the coveted passing grade. Once this is obtained, tune the car to run like it was meant to. On a sidebar, does California have a collector�s designation? In Colorado, once a vehicle reaches the age of 25, it is eligible for collector status good for five years and I believe the dreaded emissions test is gone for good. My �79 308 may be eligible when I renew�. yippee. | ||
| Steve Magnusson (91tr)
Intermediate Member Username: 91tr Post Number: 1499 Registered: 1-2001 |
Is your air injection system intact and functional? Are the CA test limits now even lower than what's on the plaque in the engine compartment? (And could you refresh my memory by listing the "before cats" and "after cats" HC/CO values on the plaque?) | ||
| BLUE308 (Davidlewis)
Junior Member Username: Davidlewis Post Number: 56 Registered: 2-2002 |
http://www.ferrarichat.com/discus/messages/112/192809.html?1047332027 OK, let me rejuvinate this thread. My day of reckoning has come and I failed the So.Cal SMOG test miserably. Due to a way too busy life, I didn't do anything to prep for this test except to lean it out a 1/4 turn and add a bottle of 104+ to the gas. I was rewarded with the title of "Gross Polluter" for high CO's (>3.00). Every other test catagory passed with good margin. One reason I didn't mess with the timing or other "tricks" was that when I failed SMOG 2 years ago, I had the carbs professionally rebuilt, timing set and put new CAT's on to pass. I thought that all this should serve me well 2 years latter->WRONG! Now I am faced with having my F-mech set it up to pass vs trying to adjust it myself and retest it. I talked to my mech who said the high CO's are most likely due to an over-rich mixture (in spite of my 1/4 turn to the good), but if that is the case I've probably fouled my new CAT's with fuel. New or rebuilt CAT's aren't cheap! I've owned this car almost 12 years and every 2 years I FAIL SMOG. This pisses me off so much I'm thinking of trading in for a QV. I am so despondent, that I have even cast a wayward thought in the direction of (horrors) a P-car! ;( Help! - I need to know what to do next this time and how to get out of this SMOG rut next time in 2 years. Advice and condolences much appreciated! |