Vanagon EuroVan
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (September 1996)Back to main VANAGON pageJoin or leave VANAGON (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Sun, 8 Sep 1996 17:40:46 -0400
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         EdBuzz@aol.com
Subject:      Re: 1984 Dennis' opinion of emmision mods/Ed"s Soapboxing(long)

In a message dated 96-09-07 01:18:30 EDT, you write:

<< The O2 sensor system uses a three way cat to control Hydrocarbons, Carbon monoxide, and oxides of nitrogen. The NOX is the real culprit in smog formation and is the most damageing of the exhaust emissions. This can only be tested under load and is why the EPA tried to get states to go to centralized emissions and dyno testing. Increasing the ignition timing also increases the production of NOX as it increases the peak flame temparatures of combustion. By setting the engines the way VW did, they were able to eliminate a lot of emmission parts such as Air pumps(allows richer mixtures) and EGR valves(that NOX thing). >>

Dennis, Thank you for the information but I once was a certified Ca. smog license holder.I am well schooled in the intracacies of emission control....I am also a believer in freedom and less gov. restriction. All the crap spewed by the gov re: auto smog is a pittance compared to the damage done by industry world wide. For instance, while Calif. kept a hangman's noose on auto enthusiats in the state and wouldnt allow engine swaps or accessories as innate as a spare gas tank to be sold w/o CARB certification, we routinely dealt with junker ....if you prefer GROSS POLLUTER Mexican junkers coming across the border daily running on 2 cylinders, Ahh NAFTA.... Figures or not, Im not convinced that the controls need to be as stringent as they are.1.5 to 2.0 % CO is not a gross polluter by any standards, and 75ppm HC is efficient...Ok I agree NOX will increase with a cooler burn, but ....will Uncle sam compensate me for my premature engine wear?????I can just see that government tow truck stopping by the side of the freeway on the grapevine as I sit with my GROSSLY OVERHEATED 1.9 vanagon complete with environmentally correct melted heads..delivering me a free long block to replace mine(oh yes, and a free mechanic as well).

<<By removing this stuff, you contribute to alot more polution than you think and you justify the governments desire to regulate your ability to work on your own car. >>

The Government will have to pry the wrench from my cold dead hand first(This is a joke for you serious types out there)

<<This is actualy tampering with the Emission control systems and believe it or not is actually a Federal offense(who's looking anyway).>>

Dennis, just remember the Boston Tea Party.Dissent is all american. I prefer to call it enhancing, rather than tampering.

<< I also have to ask how you pass emissions testing with 2.0%CO. In New York, anything 81 and later has to be at 1.2 % or lower,(and idle at 100 rpm or lower). As much as California is known for strict emissions requirements, this limit seems very liberal. If you consider that your van should run at under .5%CO, your settings produce 4 times the pollution per mile than it should. >>

First Dennis, My vehicle does indeed pass Ca. stringent standards at every test for the last 12 years. Who can say what happens later?Im industrious. Secondly, Dennis, CO% is not directly proportional to Gr per mi. in pollutants. Lets take, for instance, that at idle you are @ 2.0% but at 2500 rpm(avg. cruising) you are @ .7% due to the greater efficiency(check your infrared if you dont believe me, this is not 4 times , nor is it a per mi. measure.It merely is a figure which indicates the exhaust gas content,out of 100%, of CO.

<<Although this is a 70's era standard, newer cars should be cleaner and that difference is one reason we are facing the clunker laws. The government wants the old cars off the road. Believe it or not, 80% of automotive air pollution is caused by only 20% of the cars on the road. These cars are referred to as gross polluters. The gross polluters are the targets of emission control programs, junker programs etc. >> Dennis, the gov. wants the cars off the road because it is some starry eyed idiot in Washington who has sat in the Ca. sun too long and thinks this will cure smog....B.S. .... senator... get a life.This is the same stupid rhetoric spinning out there which is causing the overregulation of: lawnmowers,weedwackers,blowers,boats and jet skis. Come on...25 years ago they said the 1968 smog laws would cure air pollution.Now we are going after old cars and putting cat converters on your favorite lawnboy...EEEEK.Im all for clean air but at what cost.If this is the case lets outlaw all cars as we now have them and go electric....Then I can put those super high power ACME capacitors on my vanagon electric motor and blow those other battery cars off the road.........Just a thought.

"Will the mojo with the computer mouse in his hand please get down from that soapbox..............."

Ed


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main VANAGON page

Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!


Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com


The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.

Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.