Date:         Thu, 28 Mar 2002 19:55:59 EST
Reply-To:     FrankGRUN@AOL.COM
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Frank Grunthaner <FrankGRUN@AOL.COM>
Subject:      On CARB, TIICO and Vitriol
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Gentlemen and Ladies too,

Oh, an onerous task is this! Defending CARB regulations, aargh, aargh. Now I
enjoy denigrating bureaucrats almost as much as I do dissing on lawyers,
insurance agents and other non-sentient possibly parasitic beings, but some
reason must prevail. It is clear that a strong lust of anti-establishmentism
pervades our listees, but the recently vented comments about the CARB
regulations go beyond the pale.

The CARB inspection includes a set of on site measurements, a visual
compliance inspection and a database lookup/confirmation. Several of you have
suggested that cleanliness at the pipe should suffice. Well, intentioned but
sadly inadequate. I've tried to make this point in a previous missive on the
TIICO emissions issue, so more details, look to the archives. The actual
qualification (both CA and Federal) is based on complex conditions and
cycles, carefully monitored and reproduced with significantly higher quality
equipment than that found in your neighborhood CARB test station. To get a
flavor of what was required in the 80's look at the design and test data for
the Audi 2.2 and 2.3 L engines on Alistair Bell's web site. The program is
far more stringent now. These procedures lead to the qualification of a
powertrain. From these results come a set of minimal measurements to
determine that the state of health of the powertrain in question is within
tolerance limits for the original system.

It is trivially easy to modify the system (intake, exhaust, engine
management, etc) and significantly modify the emissions profile.

Frankly, it is absurd to place the burden of serious compliance in these
issues with the test station operator. Rather, the vendor of such aftermarket
systems has the burden of proving that the original system performance has
not been compromised.

As to the burden of superstition and witchcraft in the 21st century, I note
that many here shrink from wiring harness mods - why some would even
debilitate the superb TDi engine by using an all mechanically controlled vers
ion. I say, let Rube sleep and enjoy his just reward. Sadly, some feel that
technology is the enemy of progress, but I refrain.

In this case the evolving technology of emission control has resulted in the
most significant advances in automotive technology in the past 60 years. Fuel
economy, performance, longevity and emissions control have all resulted from
this often misguided effort. Of course there are still those who think
carburetors are superior to fuel injection.

As for myself, I'm looking forward to electrically operated valves, direct
gasoline injection compression/plasma ignition and ceramic engines.

Oh, yeh, the CARB approach to powertrain qualification is quite reasonable
(IMHO).

Frank Grunthaner

PS: Remember, what's here today will be with you tomorrow!