Date:         Wed, 12 Apr 1995 08:58:46 -0700
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         wabbott@townshend.Corp.Megatest.COM (William Abbott)
Subject:      Cal smog, Mexico City, catalysts

Ron Lussier wrote, in response to Paul Uusitalo's original:

>>Amen to the gripes about smog checks.
>>
>>Why Mexico City has jumped so far ahead of California in the air pollution
>>race - because of all these hair brained smog checks and pollution control
>>garbage they make you use - that unless emergecy measures are enacted,
>>you'll never catch back up.
>>
>>:-(
>
>What *are* you talking about?  That we're in a race with Mexico to see who
>can produce the most polution?
>
>Ron, hoping he's confused.


	I second that- Paul, if Mexico City has jumped ahead in air polution,
other than in the bad sense of 'ahead', its news to me and I'd love
to hear more! I recall reading that they had one-day-a-week-you-don't-drive,
which I can see as a good thing, but aren't the majority of vehicles non-
catalyized?

	California smog laws are about half common sense (tail pipe tests
are a good start) and half baloney (You have to have whatever the oem
installed, regardless of tail pipe results). So people glue vaccuum
advance diaphram housings to Bosch 009 distributors... keep a smog
engine in the garage and swap for a week every 2 years... 

	Having driven a 914 with a missing charcoal canister
and head vent system, and had it pass smog with no questions twice,
I must say that I'm not impressed with the quality of the oem inspection
stuff and I'm sure anyone who wants their slightly modified vehicle to
pass can find a way, provided that the tail-pipe numbers work. Especially
if its old, or wierd, or both.

	Having also seen the tail pipe numbers on my 71 914, with
type IV FI engine, compared to my 77 Rabbit with catalyst, I have
to say I'm a complete believer in catalysts. Could the 71's limits
really have been 700ppm unburned hydrocarbons and 6% carbon monoxide?
I think so, and my 914 ran within 10% of the limits both times it
was tested. The Rabbit, at 200,000+ miles, had less than 100ppm
hydrocarbons and 0.5% or something like that CO. My late wife's
85 Golf has unmeasurable CO most of the time.

	Once I've got the obvious stuff done on my bus, I'm going
to look into a catalyst retrofit. Of course, the aircooled engine
runs richer than watercooled, so the catalyst will have to
burn-off that fuel, and the CO produced by the rich mixture too.
Maybe it won't be practical, maybe I'll lose horsepower, but
I read once of someone trying to commit suicide with a catalyst
equipped car, and after 2 hours they gave up and decided to live!
I've got the typical header system now- that might give me short enough
pipes on cylenders 2 and 4 to get the catalyst hot enough to work.

	Like I said, something for the future.

				------------------------------
				|######\     _==_     /######|	
	cheers!			|#######\   = \/ =   /#######|
	Bill Abbott		|########\  =\/\/=  /########|
	'70 single cab		|#########\  -__-  /#########|
	'93 Corrado		|##########\      /##########|
				------------------------------
				|  N E T S U R F N U G E N   |
				| vanagon@lenti.med.umn.edu  |
				------------------------------