Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
914World.com _ 914World Garage _ F-You Colorado! more emission headaches
Posted by: newto914s Jun 29 2009, 02:07 PM
With the help of some of the great Colorado 914 guys(notably Mike and Chris W) i got my car to pass the e-check. Read about it http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=90508&hl=.
I thought everything was fine and dandy. With my 5 year collector plates on it I never have to worry about emissions again(bring on the SBC).
But in Colorado they have these white child molester looking vans that sit on the highway entrance ramps. They use a laser to measure the emission of all the car entering. I drove by one and got a letter in the mail. Now I have to bring my car to a state inspector for another evaluation or my registration will be revoked and a $100 fine imposed. Their's no way I'm going to pass now, with no Cat an no smog pump.
The irony is my car runs better than it ever has. F-U CO
Posted by: Derek Seymour Jun 29 2009, 02:24 PM
I have a CAT that will need a little fabrication to conect an EGR to (the tube out of cat is there but the mounting plate where the bolts attach is gone) and a SMOG pump that works but is very weak. I would let them go for a reasonable price.
Posted by: Gint Jun 29 2009, 03:24 PM
Put it back together and take in in Samson. That does seriously suck though. I steer well clear of those vans when I'm in the 914. One of them is parked at 287 and 36 every day.
Posted by: jhadler Jun 29 2009, 03:29 PM
waitaminute...
I thought the collector plates released you from emissions requirements?!?!
What's the deal?
-Josh2
Posted by: Gint Jun 29 2009, 03:40 PM
Roadside sniffer... I'd heard that they would give you a fix it ticket of some sort if they sniffed you wrong.
Gotta head up the hill now. 
Posted by: jhadler Jun 29 2009, 03:59 PM
Okay, I just did a quick check on-line, and I don't see how the mobile emissions vans can do anything at all for older cars. It specifically states that the mobile vans are ONLY for cars 1982 and newer, and that all pre-82 cars must be checked annually at an aircare station.
And since pre-82 cars are idle-only specifications, there is no way that they can take your acceleration measurements to mean anything. That, and you already ahve collector plates (right?) which means you did your job to pass emissions and were allowed to register the car as a collector vehicle.
I'd hazard a guess that only one of two things made this happen...
1) The person operating the system (wherever that was) mistyped some information and the age and status of the car were not entered properly.
2) The really high HC readings flagged them to alert you. Thing is, there is nothing I've found so far that says they'd do that.
I think some phone calls are in order... Something doesn't seem right here...
-Josh2
Posted by: newto914s Jun 29 2009, 04:05 PM
http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/highpolluter.html
I don't think I'm going to bother putting it back together. I'm assuming a trained member of the Colorado Department of health is going to have a book opened detailing all the required components of a 76 914. I hope I'm wrong. I'm going to change my MPS again and cross my fingers.
waitaminute...
I thought the collector plates released you from emissions requirements?!?!
What's the deal?
-Josh2
Posted by: mharrison Jun 29 2009, 04:06 PM
It would seem that Cap & Trade has caught up with you. Buy some green credits and go on your way..... 
Posted by: ArtechnikA Jun 29 2009, 08:50 PM
I thought the collector plates released you from emissions requirements?!?!
Disclaimer: i donno nothin' 'bout Colorado...
But most collector plate requirements I am aware of exempt you from INSPECTIONS - not requirements, which are a Federal matter and do not change.
Just because you are not required to have periodic inspections does not relieve you from the responsibility of meeting the original REQUIREMENTS. Few places have had the technology to close that loophole. Looks like CO may be a pioneer. Oh boy.
Posted by: r_towle Jun 29 2009, 08:57 PM
1/8 of a tank of gas.
4-6 bottles of fuel line de-icer...
Advance your timing a few degrees.
After the test, go immediately to a gas station and fill the tank.
Reset your timing to stock.
Rich
Posted by: newto914s Jun 29 2009, 09:51 PM
1/8 of a tank of gas.
4-6 bottles of fuel line de-icer...
Advance your timing a few degrees.
After the test, go immediately to a gas station and fill the tank.
Reset your timing to stock.
Rich
Advance my timing? On the last thread I started about this topic most of the guys said to retard my timing a few degrees. Which is it?
Also I de-icer is basically alcohol right, I put a few gallons of E-85 last time on the recommendation of another.
Posted by: craig downs Jun 29 2009, 10:42 PM
Bummer I thought California was the only ones that had the road side sniffers. I've seen a couple of them including a portable dyno tester on the side of the road with cars getting waved in.
I've seen them at the bottom of a clover leaf ramp and wondered if you get enough speed then coast through them with the engine off if that would work.
Posted by: GeorgeRud Jun 29 2009, 10:46 PM
Isn't government great! Do you have a friend in another state where you can register the car? Years ago, people used to get Vermont plates to avoid paying sales tax on the car, but I don't know if you can get plates from them as well.
Here in Illinois, we don't have to bother with emissions for antique vehicles, so I'm exempt from testing, and so far, the green nazis haven't invaded!
Posted by: orthobiz Jun 29 2009, 10:53 PM
I heard all about it at Scotty's tonite. I'm here from Michigan for the Parade.
Move to Michigan:
Lots of water for fishing.
No sun to crack your dash or fade your paint.
You only need to have the car out from May through October.
No front license plates.
No requirements for emissions, no sniffers, no inspections, no nothing!
I could use some more 914 friends at home!
Paul
Posted by: newto914s Jun 29 2009, 11:38 PM
That's one of the many things that bother me about this situation, I could have registered it in Ohio. I have friends there, it's exempt there, but it passed on the last try and I thought I was good. Paid $200 to register for 5 years, now what's going to happen to that if it doesn't pass, or I pay a mechanic(that certainly will no nothing about 914s) to "fix" it, and once I reach the $715 mark I'm exempt again.
Anyone want a super solid(rust wise) 914. 
Posted by: r_towle Jun 29 2009, 11:40 PM
advancing timing makes the car run lean.
Ice shield is pure alcohol...4-5 bottles in very little fuel makes it close to pure alcohol.
E85 has alot of additives.
Brew your own.
Rich
Posted by: scottb Jun 30 2009, 05:10 AM
register it out in elbert county!
when i lived there, there were no emissions requirements. now granted, that was about 7 years ago but it may still be the case.
if elbert county is now on emissions, go check out kiowa!
good luck...
scott
Posted by: Cap'n Krusty Jun 30 2009, 09:01 AM
advancing timing makes the car run lean.
Ice shield is pure alcohol...4-5 bottles in very little fuel makes it close to pure alcohol.
E85 has alot of additives.
Brew your own.
Rich
"Lean"? I doubt it. What it does is make the HC readings go through the roof. BAD idea. It also increases the CH temps dramatically, so NOX readings go up, too.
The answers? First, get a pretest to determine what you have and what you have to correct. Then do the following:
In a near empty tank, add 1/2 tank of low octane fuel
Set the valves to .016"
Set the timing to precisely where it's supposed to be, or maybe a degree or 2 retarded (after making sure the retard function of the vacuum can works properly)
Set the idle speed to 1000 RPM
Get another pretest and report back to us for further advice.
The Cap'n
Posted by: EyeTrip Jun 30 2009, 02:21 PM
advancing timing makes the car run lean.
Ice shield is pure alcohol...4-5 bottles in very little fuel makes it close to pure alcohol.
E85 has alot of additives.
Brew your own.
Rich
"Lean"? I doubt it. What it does is make the HC readings go through the roof. BAD idea. It also increases the CH temps dramatically, so NOX readings go up, too.
The answers? First, get a pretest to determine what you have and what you have to correct. Then do the following:
In a near empty tank, add 1/2 tank of low octane fuel
Set the valves to .016"
Set the timing to precisely where it's supposed to be, or maybe a degree or 2 retarded (after making sure the retard function of the vacuum can works properly)
Set the idle speed to 1000 RPM
Get another pretest and report back to us for further advice.
The Cap'n
He's on target.
Posted by: Gint Jun 30 2009, 02:31 PM
You could, but not legally. If you live and work in the state for 30 or 60 days (I don't remember which) you have to register your car in Colorado. They don't enforce it much, but I'm pretty damn sure there is a state statute.
Posted by: MBowman325 Jun 30 2009, 04:20 PM
That about got me fired here, but then again, I work for a certain state agency.
(Texas tags on vehicles in OK - officially I was still under the 60 day limit, but was told it didn't matter for me.)
Posted by: r_towle Jun 30 2009, 06:19 PM
advancing timing makes the car run lean.
Ice shield is pure alcohol...4-5 bottles in very little fuel makes it close to pure alcohol.
E85 has alot of additives.
Brew your own.
Rich
"Lean"? I doubt it. What it does is make the HC readings go through the roof. BAD idea. It also increases the CH temps dramatically, so NOX readings go up, too.
The answers? First, get a pretest to determine what you have and what you have to correct. Then do the following:
In a near empty tank, add 1/2 tank of low octane fuel
Set the valves to .016"
Set the timing to precisely where it's supposed to be, or maybe a degree or 2 retarded (after making sure the retard function of the vacuum can works properly)
Set the idle speed to 1000 RPM
Get another pretest and report back to us for further advice.
The Cap'n
Without being an ass....please explain.
Just the timing piece...I got the rest (though I dont agree with the fuel mix...)
Seriously...why would it run lean retarded?
Rich
Posted by: SUNAB914 Jul 1 2009, 10:33 AM
You'll can keep that stuff. Here in NC if your car is 35 years or older it doesn't even require a safety inspection. Heck, SC doesn't have it at all last I heard. Send your cars east once their not legal anymore. Man, that is rough. I guess I'll get busted one day for removing my 928 cats..
good luck, pretty soon all our cars will be going to the scrapper. Good gosh.
Posted by: Shade Tree Jul 1 2009, 11:26 AM
Is this a show car? If not, why not put on older vin plates? 
Isn't a '74 and older exempt? In Oregon, there are only certain counties that have these laws. You can register your car in a different county and get away with it. You just need a trusted friend/relative to let you use their address.
Posted by: banger Jul 1 2009, 11:45 AM
Does the "No Nothing!" include jobs as well? 
Move to Michigan:
Lots of water for fishing.
No sun to crack your dash or fade your paint.
You only need to have the car out from May through October.
No front license plates.
No requirements for emissions, no sniffers, no inspections, no nothing!
Paul
Posted by: DBCooper Jul 1 2009, 11:47 AM
It would seem that Cap & Trade has caught up with you. Buy some green credits and go on your way.....
What on earth are you talking about? Cap and Trade is still being debated.... oh, I get it, that's a POLITICAL comment so it doesn't HAVE to make sense. Nevermind.
Anyone want a super solid(rust wise) 914.
Yes. How much?
Posted by: A&PGirl Jul 1 2009, 12:41 PM
I don't think this has been said yet, but don't mess with your emissions on the car until you call the guys up and explain to them that your car is exempt from this nonsense.
They'll probably give you some cock 'n' bull story about how it doesn't matter, etc. Give them a second call a day or two later and talk to someone else. If it still comes out to be, "well because we say so" inform them that "your sorry it had to come to this because (fill in with conversion details)" and hang up. Go get a lawyer and explain to them exactly what has transpired and inquire what would it take to get this mess caused by some lowly bureaucrat cleaned up in your favor. Heck, it might just be a simple letter typed on a lawyers letterhead that makes it go away.
It's not your fault, it's some departments fault in the government.
You don't have to put up with this attempt because your CAR IS OLD (and exempt)!
My $.02
Posted by: Zundfolge Jul 1 2009, 01:00 PM
I'm glad that down here in El Paso county we're not in the stupid AIR program anymore ... however if it comes back I'll have to just sell the Porsche, no way I'm getting it to pass easily or cheaply.
I've already decided that if my fellow Coloradoans are stupid enough to re-elect Ritter, I'm leaving ... you can enjoy your Californicated Colorado without me.
I'd start out trying A&PGirl's idea first.
But most collector plate requirements I am aware of exempt you from INSPECTIONS - not requirements, which are a Federal matter and do not change.
Nothing "federal" about any of this. The Federal government only sets standards for the manufacturers ... this is all Colorado nonsense.
Posted by: Elliot Cannon Jul 1 2009, 01:14 PM
If I thought these laws really did any good I would feel different about them BUT there a so few older cars on the road now, passing more draconian emissions laws only serves to make politicians look good.
Cheers, Elliot
Posted by: ghuff Jul 1 2009, 01:23 PM
You really need to fight this. More than likely it is some private company being contracted to do this for the state, and they will say you have to pay it because they probably get a cut.
Like red light cameras, follow the money.
More than likely, you will find you are in the right and you just have to waste your time to fight it.
Posted by: Mikey914 Jul 1 2009, 01:37 PM
This is BS. You should be able to fight it. What is the accuracy of the system used, was the system properly callibrated, was the technicial certified to operatethe system?
Given all these questions, it was not a controlled environment, who's to say that a 1970 caddy wasn't blasting down the freeway and the winds picked up some if it's exhaust and blew it into the path of the laser and your car?
It is a freeway and your not the only car around.
Automated law enforcement you got to love it. What happend to the good old days when a offer of the law would ust pull you over and give you a ticket. I can respect that.
well, enough rambling, I would fight it.
Posted by: Zundfolge Jul 1 2009, 02:54 PM
I gotta wonder about the accuracy of these things as well.
If this roadside truck is good enough, than why should we have to take half a day off work to take the car down to some Jiffy Lube where some high school dropout can put grease stains on the carpet when all we should have to do is whiz by one of these trucks at 60mph and get our reading instantly?
Another thought on this ... most of us here keep our 914s as toys. What if you relied on an old car to get to work every day?
More government elite pricks making life harder on the poor [insert various Jefferson and de Tocqueville quotes here]
Posted by: mharrison Jul 1 2009, 02:58 PM
It would seem that Cap & Trade has caught up with you. Buy some green credits and go on your way.....
What on earth are you talking about? Cap and Trade is still being debated.... oh, I get it, that's a POLITICAL comment so it doesn't HAVE to make sense. Nevermind.
joke (noun)
1. Something said, written, or done to evoke laughter or amusement, especially an amusing story with a punch line.
2. An amusing or ludicrous incident or situation.
Your comment was pretty close though. Very little about politics (on either side of the aisle) does make sense!
++++++++++++
I agree with the comments on fighting this. I would work first to determine if I HAD to make changes to my car to pass this test.
Posted by: newto914s Jul 1 2009, 04:29 PM
Anyone want a super solid(rust wise) 914.
Yes. How much?
I'd only consider selling it if it doesn't pass. I'd like $3k for it, it would come with all my spare parts(the state would effectively end my affair with 914s) and I'd even drive it to you in TX, for the cost of gas(it runs that good)
I have no intention of fighting this. I'd end up spending way more money on a lawyer than I would buying parts and I'd still end up loosing the case.
My appointment is set for the july 13th. I'm going to do the same thing I did the last time. Different MPS, some e-85, and a few degree retarded timing. If I fail, I get another free retest, I can get the car through the sniff test(i did it before). It's the guy looking for my smog pump and cat that will dam me.
the letter from the state read as such
IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING: Make/Year/License/VIN
Dear Motorist,
A vehicle registered to you recently was identified as potentially high-polluting by roadside emissions testing
equipment. Roadside testing units located along Denver-metropolitan area roadways measure pollutants from vehicles
as they are driven. Pursuant to 5 CCR 1001-13, Part G, Section IV.A, a vehicle’s emissions as measured by roadside
testing units shall not exceed 3.0% carbon monoxide or 550 parts per million (ppm) hydrocarbons as hexane (1,075
ppm hydrocarbons as propane). The identified vehicle exceeded one or both of these limits within the past 30 days.
Documentation of these test results is enclosed with this notice.
DO NOT DISREGARD THIS LETTER - it is legal notification of your responsibilities under Colorado Law.
Failure to comply with these instructions WILL result in suspension of this vehicle’s registration and a $100
fine, pursuant to 5 CCR 1001-13, Part G, Section VIII.A; and 1 CCR 204-11, Rule X, Section 1001.0(
(1).This letter is to inform you that you MUST contact the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to
schedule a free emissions compliance inspection. If you fail to do so within 30 days of the date listed above, the
vehicle’s registration will be suspended and you will be subject to a monetary fine pursuant to 5 CCR 1001-13, Part
G, Section VIII.A; and 1 CCR 204-11, Rule X, Section 1001.0(
(1).Call 303-692-xxxx immediately to schedule an appointment for a free compliance inspection. Do not take this vehicle
to an Air Care Colorado station. This vehicle must be inspected by state of Colorado personnel.
If you no longer own the identified vehicle, you still must contact the state of Colorado at 303-692-xxxx to provide
information on this vehicle’s status. This is a mandatory program. If you do not comply with the requirements of
the program, you will be subject to penalties.
Compliance is simple – just follow these steps:
1) CALL: State Hotline at 303-692-xxxx. We will help you set up an appointment.
2) TEST: Receive a FREE inspection at a state Emissions Technical Center.
3) REPAIR: If repairs are needed, you may be eligible for financial assistance.
4) PASS: RECEIVE and PASS a FREE final emissions compliance inspection.
Call now to schedule a free compliance inspection. To learn more about the program and the technology used to
identify this vehicle, go to http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/highpolluter.html .
Posted by: Scott Schroeder Jul 1 2009, 04:36 PM
Hmm.... I think I need to find out what Ritter's wifes license plate number is, order a replica on line, and then go search out those road side emissions testing stations in my neigbors early 70's station wagon - that is running a 950 CFM carb, headers and smokes "just a little" .....
Posted by: Gint Jul 1 2009, 04:59 PM
Here's a thought...
Why not call the number and explain that the car is a 1976 model year vehicle with collector plates? That may end the situation. Especially given the fact that I'm pretty sure the limits listed in that letter are *more* restrictive than the limits for a 1988 Jeep Cherokee, let alone a 1976 model year vehicle.
Posted by: jhadler Jul 1 2009, 05:02 PM
with Gint.
It would seem to me that someone didn't notice that the car was running collector tags. There is NO specification for the 914 under load at rpm. So there is NO way to confirm that the car isn't running as it was designed...
-Josh2
Posted by: Gint Jul 1 2009, 05:13 PM
Although I just looked at the bottom of the pic and the numbers you're blowing are sky high. But it's worth a phone call.
Posted by: Scott Schroeder Jul 1 2009, 05:22 PM
I just called - the year does not matter.
First of all, this is a state program, with state employees (no subcontractors). The inspection guys that will be looking at your car are master techs. The guy I spoke to was a Lotus and flat head V8 specialist. The guy who does the air cooled stuff has supposably been a PCA guy "forever" - he even asked me if this conversation came up while we were at the Parade. The limits set are passable by any correctly running car - at any RPM - from any era as far back as you can go. What they are doing is trying to keep us from doing what alot of us do - get the classic plate and then modify the motor into what they deem a gross polluter. If anyone falls outside of these limits, they must go get an inspection. If anything has been modified from stock - including the removal of airpumps and cats, we could be screwed. I asked him how he was sure that these inspectors know what they are looking at. He said they "we are not the minimum wage employees that work for the usual emissions testing stations". I did forget to ask about unobtainable/obsolete parts (like the airpumps). He was nice enough - but it was like talking to a cop.
Gints philosophy is what I will be adopting - turn around and go the other way. I am running a euro rear plate with my real one in the rear window. I may just pull it down if I ever get trapped.
I did ask him when they were going to start putting these testing stations at the entrances of car shows, that way they could both kill the hobby and make a pile of money all at once. He didn't find it funny.
One last thing, these machines are taking readings in a way that if you have a lawn mower or a gas can in the bed of a truck, or if your missing your gas cap (or even have a poorly sealing one) you will most likely get that letter. He said he has seen that on several occasions - but you will still need to get the inspection.
Posted by: ghuff Jul 1 2009, 05:30 PM
I just called - the year does not matter.
First of all, this is a state program, with state employees (no subcontractors). The inspection guys that will be looking at your car are master techs. The guy I spoke to was a Lotus and flat head V8 specialists. The guy who does the air cooled stuff has supposably been a PCA guy "forever" - he even asked me if this conversation came up while we were at the Parade. The limits set are passable by any correctly running car - at any RPM - from any era as far back as you can go. What they are doing is trying to keep us from doing what alot of us do - get the classic plate and then modify the motor into what they deem a gross polluter. If anyone falls outside of these limits, they must go get an inspection. If anything has been modified from stock - including the removal of airpumps and cats, we could be screwed. I asked him how he was sure that these inspectors know what they are looking at. He said they "we are not the minimum wage employees that work for the usual emissions testing stations). I did forget to ask about unobtainable/obsolete parts (like the airpumps). He was nice enough - but it was like talking to a cop.
Gints philosophy is what I will be adopting - turn around and go the other way. I am running a euro rear plate with my real one in the rear window. I may just pull it down if I ever get trapped.
I did ask him when they were going to start putting these testing stations at the entrances of car shows, that way they could both kill the hobby and make a pile of money all at once. He didn't find it funny.
One last thing, these machines are taking readings in a way that if you have a lown mower or a gas can in the bed of a truck, or if your missing you gas cap (or even have a poorly sealing one) you will most likely get that letter. He said he has seen that on several occasions - but you will still need to get the inspection.
The simple solution is to poison them all in their sleep.
Posted by: Gint Jul 1 2009, 05:55 PM
First of all, this is a state program, with state employees (no subcontractors). The inspection guys that will be looking at your car are master techs. The guy I spoke to was a Lotus and flat head V8 specialist. The guy who does the air cooled stuff has supposably been a PCA guy "forever" - he even asked me if this conversation came up while we were at the Parade. The limits set are passable by any correctly running car - at any RPM - from any era as far back as you can go. What they are doing is trying to keep us from doing what alot of us do - get the classic plate and then modify the motor into what they deem a gross polluter. If anyone falls outside of these limits, they must go get an inspection. If anything has been modified from stock - including the removal of airpumps and cats, we could be screwed. I asked him how he was sure that these inspectors know what they are looking at. He said they "we are not the minimum wage employees that work for the usual emissions testing stations". I did forget to ask about unobtainable/obsolete parts (like the airpumps). He was nice enough - but it was like talking to a cop.
Gints philosophy is what I will be adopting - turn around and go the other way. I am running a euro rear plate with my real one in the rear window. I may just pull it down if I ever get trapped.
I did ask him when they were going to start putting these testing stations at the entrances of car shows, that way they could both kill the hobby and make a pile of money all at once. He didn't find it funny.
One last thing, these machines are taking readings in a way that if you have a lawn mower or a gas can in the bed of a truck, or if your missing your gas cap (or even have a poorly sealing one) you will most likely get that letter. He said he has seen that on several occasions - but you will still need to get the inspection.
I figured that was going to be the deal. I do believe my 914 as rich as it runs will pass the roadside sniffer because I've gone by one before. But if I see the truck when I'm driving the 914 I go the other way and avoid it completely.
Posted by: banger Jul 1 2009, 09:17 PM
You could always raise the compression, and run E-85. That would keep you clean and legal.
Posted by: Zundfolge Jul 2 2009, 06:36 PM
So I'm left with a couple of questions.
Assuming you live and work OUTSIDE the Denver Metro area, in an area where testing is not required, will we still get letters? If so can we ignore them?
Also, what would happen if you saw the truck, slammed down on the clutch and just coasted by him at an idle?
Be interesting to see if they make "admin edit-political link removed" an annual report and if so where we are in the next few years.
Posted by: Gint Jul 2 2009, 07:33 PM
I realize that it's difficult to discuss this without mentioning politics at all. But Mike you seem to quite frequently have to add some extremely political crap in your posts. I'm going to edit your last post and remove it. It's against the rules. Please cease and desist.
As for your question, why not call them and ask?
Posted by: Gint Jul 4 2009, 01:49 PM
I knew this didn't sound right so I dug out some old emission testing reports.
From the letter Samson received:
The test limits printed on the inspection sheet from my 1970 914/6 are:
CO% Limit 5.50 - Tested 3.55 at idle 8.66 at 2500 - This limit that my car passed is already above the spec in the letter, and not even performed on a dyno. It would no doubt fail the roadside test.
HC PPM Limit 1000 - Tested 397 at idle 535 at 2500 - The test measurement that the car ran and passed at testing is almost as high as the roadside letter limit indicated. And it was run at a standstill, not a dyno or on the road under load.
I have similar specs for my 72 Chevy truck and the 67 truck. The pass/fail limits for 67 or much higher than the 70 or 72 model year limits. I can't seem to find the report for my 74 914/4. But it passed testing as well... with carbs installed. But it would undoubtedly fail the roadside sniffer at the limits listed in Samson's letter. Not by much perhaps, but it would probably fail. So I amend my previous statement in an earlier post. But I remember going by the tuck at least once and I didn't get a letter. Maybe there is a tolerance or something built in.
Posted by: orthobiz Jul 4 2009, 01:57 PM
Please explain: how does some roadside sniffer detect your emissions with a ?laser? And doesn't have to pull you over to go right to the tailpipe? How far away can they accurately do this?
Just seems beyond high tech.
Too bad that govt guy Scott met wasn't at the BBQ. We coulda swayed him over to the collector's side of things!
Paul
Posted by: Gint Jul 4 2009, 01:58 PM
Something I dug up. I haven't even read it myself yet.
http://www.motorists.org/emissions/home/how-remote-sensing-works/
Posted by: orthobiz Jul 4 2009, 05:46 PM
Something I dug up. I haven't even read it myself yet.
http://www.motorists.org/emissions/home/how-remote-sensing-works/
Thanks, Mike. Dang, this thing was even invented by someone in Colorado!!!
Paul
Posted by: ArtechnikA Jul 4 2009, 07:01 PM
Something I dug up. I haven't even read it myself yet.
http://www.motorists.org/emissions/home/how-remote-sensing-works/
I read most of it.
Salient points are - they claim they can test a car a second.
With "better than 10% accuracy." (The way I read that, it means it's right 10% of the time. maybe they mean each reading is within 10% of its actual value - but that's not what they say.) Any way you look at it, 10% accuracy is pretty sucky - but they also claim "Inspect & Measure" programs have the same "10% accuracy" rating, so something is wrong with the reported data...
Something I have an issue with is tailpipe height - I get the IR absorption spectrosopy. I don't see how they can sense a raised 4x4 with a tailpipe 3' off the ground one second and a lowered 914 the next.
Posted by: ericread Jul 4 2009, 08:41 PM
There have been a number of threads regarding different states that seem to echo the following:
Given that the participants of this BBS are pretty darned smart, I don't really understand the uproar. We know that in some states our cars (1975 and older) have been exempted from annual smog testing. We also know that although we may be exempted from annual testing, we have not been exempted from meeting specific smog requirements. The argument is that once the car has been licensed, then we are free to do what we want, beacuse the states don't have any way to find out what we've done. Now that the states may have found a way to see if we cheated, we may be caught. What's the problem?
If you've made any significant changes to your smog system, or if you happened to put a different engine into your 914, and if your 914 doesn't meet smog requirements, you're may end up having to follow the law, like a lot of us do every day.
The technicality of not needing an annual test, or of getting a "classic" plate was never intended to provide you with a "Get Out of Jail Free" card. That some people here interpreted it as such poses significant risk to them.
If you are planning a "track" car, then use it at the track. Otherwise, it appears we will all have to follow the law.
Flame on.....
Eric Read
Posted by: newto914s Jul 5 2009, 10:51 AM
There have been a number of threads regarding different states that seem to echo the following:
The technicality of not needing an annual test, or of getting a "classic" plate was never intended to provide you with a "Get Out of Jail Free" card. That some people here interpreted it as such poses significant risk to them.
If you are planning a "track" car, then use it at the track. Otherwise, it appears we will all have to follow the law.
Flame on.....
Eric Read
I get it, I'm not looking for a "get out of jail free" card. My car is essentially stock. running D-jet with a slightly tweeked MPS. Gint makes a great point, the limits are set below what our cars came from the factory to emit. And honestly, if I had a suby swap my car would be running cleaner.
Posted by: ericread Jul 5 2009, 11:11 AM
There have been a number of threads regarding different states that seem to echo the following:
The technicality of not needing an annual test, or of getting a "classic" plate was never intended to provide you with a "Get Out of Jail Free" card. That some people here interpreted it as such poses significant risk to them.
If you are planning a "track" car, then use it at the track. Otherwise, it appears we will all have to follow the law.
Flame on.....
Eric Read
I get it, I'm not looking for a "get out of jail free" card. My car is essentially stock. running D-jet with a slightly tweeked MPS. Gint makes a great point, the limits are set below what our cars came from the factory to emit. And honestly, if I had a suby swap my car would be running cleaner.
I agree that the owners of '76 models are in a particular bind. Am I correct in understanding that you are being held to a stricter standard than the original specs required? That seems blatently unreasonable. Since a lot of the '76 models have been modified, isn't there anybody out there that has a cat or any of the other pieces that you may need to pass the visual inspection???
My (uneducated, at best) understanding is that you have to detune your car to the point it really doesn't run very well to get emission numbers that are acceptable to the state.
On a lighter note, I am a bit dissapointed in that whenever I post a message such as I did, I usually get seriously flamed as being everything bad up to and including un-American. The flamers must be out driving this weekend...
Please keep us up to date on your issue. As I have a '74, I don't have any smog pieces that you can use. But if you need any particular parts, please post your request. I'm sure anyone that can assist will step up to the plate.
Eric Read
Posted by: ArtechnikA Jul 5 2009, 11:14 AM
...My car is essentially stock. running D-jet with a slightly tweeked MPS. Gint makes a great point, the limits are set below what our cars came from the factory to emit.
So there ya go, no problem.
The 'road test' sensor can't know the standards are required to meet - it only knows total emisions. This is why the human-intervention inspection is required - to compare the actual vehicle against the standards it is required to meet. Since your car can meet those standards with flying colors (yes?) you have no problem.
Edited because I re-read the original post...
Minus the required cat and air pump...
Worst-case, you have been inconvenienced. [pithy comment about the nature of government omitted, but this is where it'd go...] Best-case, your car has developed an engine-management malfunction, and you have been alerted to this fact before it caused any serious damage.
Posted by: Gint Jul 5 2009, 02:24 PM
That's not exaclty what I said. The CO limit the roadside tester is using is lower or more strict than the limit the state imposed for my 1970 914/6 to meet during non-dyno or standing testing at a state sanctioned faclilty. I believe the roadside limit for CO is more strict than the Colorado state testing specification for a 1974 model year also. 1976 may have a even stricter limit, but I can't speak to that.
I was reading the tech spec booklet this morning and it states that a stcok 914 will actually meet a much stricter CO limit. Left it in the garage, be right back.
Edit: According to the 914 VWPorsche Technical Specification booklet (which doesn't list a 914/6):
CO content specifications
1.7 MPC - 850-900 rpm 1-3% volume
1.8 AFC - 800-900 rpm 2-3% volume
2.0 MPC Engine code GA 850-900 Max. 1.5(max .3 from 1974 mod.)
Posted by: ghuff Jul 5 2009, 10:55 PM
There have been a number of threads regarding different states that seem to echo the following:
Given that the participants of this BBS are pretty darned smart, I don't really understand the uproar. We know that in some states our cars (1975 and older) have been exempted from annual smog testing. We also know that although we may be exempted from annual testing, we have not been exempted from meeting specific smog requirements. The argument is that once the car has been licensed, then we are free to do what we want, beacuse the states don't have any way to find out what we've done. Now that the states may have found a way to see if we cheated, we may be caught. What's the problem?
If you've made any significant changes to your smog system, or if you happened to put a different engine into your 914, and if your 914 doesn't meet smog requirements, you're may end up having to follow the law, like a lot of us do every day.
The technicality of not needing an annual test, or of getting a "classic" plate was never intended to provide you with a "Get Out of Jail Free" card. That some people here interpreted it as such poses significant risk to them.
If you are planning a "track" car, then use it at the track. Otherwise, it appears we will all have to follow the law.
Flame on.....
Eric Read
Given what we have seen this law is pretty inaccurate if I read an above posters message right. He quoted some testing figures for the 6 that were beyond that which the original posters car put out, but accepted by the state.
That right there shows this is purely a money/power grab type issue.
Is that not an issue? I mean correct me if I am wrong.
The very fact that there is conflicting senses of obligation to an authority here should be a clue that something is not right.
It stinks. There is no excuse on a state level for two sets of standards or agencies. The validity of this needs to be challenged. A reasonable set of standards needs to be there for vehicles in which certain replace parts such as EGR or other bits are no longer available for limited use and mileage.
That is my understanding historically part of the reasoning why classic and antique vehicle tags exist. They are limited mileage and some states have hot-rod or street rod tags which allow limited street use to/from shows and events.
Not everyone has a big block turbo chevy runnin 11:1 AFR at idle with no cats.
Why do we not focus on emissions where it counts, such as industry and power plants etc?
Posted by: ArtechnikA Jul 6 2009, 05:06 AM
...testing figures for the 6 that were beyond that which the original posters car put out, but accepted by the state.
That right there shows this is purely a money/power grab type issue.
Is that not an issue? I mean correct me if I am wrong.
...There is no excuse on a state level for two sets of standards or agencies.
I agree. You need to take a deep breath and realize that is _not_ what is happening here.
The roadside remote sensor DOES NOT establish, set, or enforce emissions standards for a particular vehicle. It has a (fairly low) threshold level of specific (easily measured...) emissions gasses. It ONLY establishes a threshold level that requires an INSPECTION by certified technicians that DO apply individual emissions standards to a SPECIFIC car in reference to the applicable law.
Pass the inspection and you're OK.
Compare it to DUI law. You're flagged into a random checkpoint. You do not cooperate and you refuse the blood test. In most states, refusal to comply with the test is a guilty plea, end of story.
Same thing here - your vehicle is seen with a big emissions profile. If you refuse the inspection, it's taken as an admission of guilt. Pass the inspection and be on your way.
If your car meets its applicable standards as required by current law, it should pass. If it can't, it should fail. If you thought the end of periodic inspection was your free pass to remove factory-installed emissions-control equipment, you guessed wrong. (And here is where I am at odds with California and many other states: IMO - if you *CAN* meet the standards, it shouldn't matter whether you did it with the factory parts or not.)
There are damn few internal combustion motor vehicles that are TOTALLY exempt from all emissions standards. (I have one that meets even CARB requirements. Hint: anything older than 1955 is free...)
BTW - The "go after some real criminals" defense is always going to be a non-starter.
Posted by: ericread Jul 6 2009, 01:20 PM
...testing figures for the 6 that were beyond that which the original posters car put out, but accepted by the state.
That right there shows this is purely a money/power grab type issue.
Is that not an issue? I mean correct me if I am wrong.
...There is no excuse on a state level for two sets of standards or agencies.
I agree. You need to take a deep breath and realize that is _not_ what is happening here.
The roadside remote sensor DOES NOT establish, set, or enforce emissions standards for a particular vehicle. It has a (fairly low) threshold level of specific (easily measured...) emissions gasses. It ONLY establishes a threshold level that requires an INSPECTION by certified technicians that DO apply individual emissions standards to a SPECIFIC car in reference to the applicable law.
Pass the inspection and you're OK.
Compare it to DUI law. You're flagged into a random checkpoint. You do not cooperate and you refuse the blood test. In most states, refusal to comply with the test is a guilty plea, end of story.
Same thing here - your vehicle is seen with a big emissions profile. If you refuse the inspection, it's taken as an admission of guilt. Pass the inspection and be on your way.
If your car meets its applicable standards as required by current law, it should pass. If it can't, it should fail. If you thought the end of periodic inspection was your free pass to remove factory-installed emissions-control equipment, you guessed wrong. (And here is where I am at odds with California and many other states: IMO - if you *CAN* meet the standards, it shouldn't matter whether you did it with the factory parts or not.)
There are damn few internal combustion motor vehicles that are TOTALLY exempt from all emissions standards. (I have one that meets even CARB requirements. Hint: anything older than 1955 is free...)
BTW - The "go after some real criminals" defense is always going to be a non-starter.
Well said!
Eric
Posted by: jhadler Jul 6 2009, 02:00 PM
With "better than 10% accuracy." (The way I read that, it means it's right 10% of the time. maybe they mean each reading is within 10% of its actual value - but that's not what they say.)
No, that's exactly what they say. 10% accuracy means that an indicated reading of 3500 ppm could be anything between 3150 ppm and 3850 ppm.
10% is really not that bad. If you look at what they are measuring, and how they are doing it, 10% is really quite an impressive accuracy. As for the mobile system having the same claimed accuracy as the permanent testing stations? I don't know, it's possible that the they both have the same accuracy, but are based on different principles. I would hazard a guess and say that the mobile system is more maintenance intensive, and that there is more work required to keep it operating at that 10% level. The
They're not looking at the pipe itself, but the cloud behind the vehicle. Granted, a lifted 4x4 is likely to measure less than the 914 as the system no doubt is designed to look at passenger cars, and not big rigs.
Note: While I'm impressed with the design of the system, I'm not necessarily supporting the way it seems to be used.
-Josh2
Posted by: ArtechnikA Jul 6 2009, 02:18 PM
No, that's exactly what they say. 10% accuracy means that an indicated reading of 3500 ppm could be anything between 3150 ppm and 3850 ppm.
What you have described is not 10% accuracy - it is 10% error. But it's semantics, mostly...
They're not looking at the pipe itself, but the cloud behind the vehicle.
But that's quite an issue. THE cloud behind THE vehicle - at 1 vehicle a second. How much of the leading vehicle's cloud is still in the air when I pass through right behind him?
Posted by: jhadler Jul 6 2009, 02:41 PM
No, that's exactly what they say. 10% accuracy means that an indicated reading of 3500 ppm could be anything between 3150 ppm and 3850 ppm.
What you have described is not 10% accuracy - it is 10% error. But it's semantics, mostly...
In metrology, "accuracy" a crude term used in the statement of the uncertainty of the measurement. "error" is not a generally used term, although that is what it is widely interpreted as. What I would really like to know is what is the basis of their 10% number? 1-sigma? 2? 3? Makes a BIG difference on what the REAL uncertainty of the measurement is. And I wonder if they would even release that information. My guess? It's a 1-sigma statement, and at that point, 10% is not so great.
But that's quite an issue. THE cloud behind THE vehicle - at 1 vehicle a second. How much of the leading vehicle's cloud is still in the air when I pass through right behind him?
Agreed. And if a car is right in front of you belching a cloud of mosquito killing smoke, how well does the system compensate for the leading cars' contamination of your measurement? I would hope the sampling rate is high enough that it can average multiple measurements per vehicle pass, and be able to set a background level prior to the next vehicle passing by.
Getting back to the original topic, the numbers the system displayed on the vehicle in question showed a really high HC value. It didn't say if there was a background correction, but it did seem to have a radar gun measurement coupled with it, and it indicated that the car was -slowing- not accelerating. Okay, looking at the data, it did say that there were 8 samples for the given measurement, but how fast was the sampling rate? And it does not indicate if there's a background correction.
I dunno, I just plan to avoid the stations for time being... Right now they're not like photo radar (which can be placed anywhere), they are placed at specific locations, at specific times (check the website). Just don't go there...
A good idea, but may not be well executed...
-Josh2
Posted by: ArtechnikA Jul 6 2009, 02:51 PM
...Just don't go there...
If by 'there' you mean 'Colorado' I agree.
I wonder if the Colorado Tourism Commission realizes how many people are starting to think the whole state is A Place To Avoid...
I was last in California 6 years ago and aside from the carne asada burritos I'm not sure why I'd go back. Colorado was longer ago than that - drove through part of the state on the way to PA when we moved here - just over 6 years ago.
So I gotta ask - if "10% Accuracy" means ±5% - what does "90% accuracy" mean ?
edit - left off the smiley... :-)
Posted by: jhadler Jul 6 2009, 03:01 PM
...Just don't go there...
If by 'there' you mean 'Colorado' I agree.
I wonder if the Colorado Tourism Commission realizes how many people are starting to think the whole state is A Place To Avoid...
I'm torn on this one. On the one hand we need the revenue, on the other hand, there are a lot of tourists that I can personally do without...
Just spent last week in a very high tourist concentration, had a great time, but could definitely tell the locals from the yokels with little difficulty...
So I gotta ask - if "10% Accuracy" means ±5% - what does "90% accuracy" mean ?
Well, I would interpret their statement to mean ±10%. As for something that says "90% accuracy"? I would rack that up to something brewed up by a marketing goon that doesn't know anything about statistics or experimental measurements... Make it sound good to joe six-pack and they'll buy it.
-Josh2
Posted by: banger Jul 7 2009, 12:46 AM
I was thinking that an easy way around the roadside detectors is to re-rout the exhaust. They assume the exhaust comes straight out the back, from the tail pipe. It would be interesting to see if it would read different with an exhaust that faces downward, or routes it out the side, instead of the back.
Posted by: Mikey914 Jul 7 2009, 01:51 AM
Better yet, leave a chrome tip welded to emilate the exhaust where it should come out, and route the exhaust to the other side.
Posted by: newto914s Jul 13 2009, 07:40 PM
I take it all back, sorry Colorado.
I passed, but more than that I learned a little bit(cue after-school special music)
Turns out, at the bottom of that letter it specifically says NOT to do any adjustments to your car. Bring it in as it failed the van drive by, because they are actually trying to "help." Turns out, if I had failed the inspection today I would have qualified for financial ad. So the $715 to get my car exempt would have come out of a mix of state and private funds, not my pocket. Why would I qualify you ask, because everyone qualifies.
Not only that tid-bit of info, the "specialist" was really pretty cool. Saying things like, "your numbers are pretty close, good enough, we'll get you through." they didn't say anything about the cat or smog pump ether. Then to top it off I got gifts for playing. $25 voucher to the Grease Monkey and a voucher to a free e-check. So $50 in door prizes.
I'll post the actual results tomorrow. Thanks guys for listening to me vent on this.
Samson
Posted by: Ferg Jul 13 2009, 10:02 PM
What did we learn from all this???
Next time shut the car off and coast by the smog van 
did it the other day in my driver.
Sure as hell will do it if I ever see one in the P car.
Ferg
Posted by: newto914s Jul 14 2009, 12:57 PM
What did we learn from all this???
Next time shut the car off and coast by the smog van
did it the other day in my driver.Sure as hell will do it if I ever see one in the P car.
Ferg
I'm truly exempt now. For 18 months I can drive by a van belching smoke and I won't get a letter. After 18 months I can potentially set one off again and have to come in for an inspection again. But 18 months is along time to make changes to my car
Posted by: jhadler Jul 14 2009, 01:15 PM
What did we learn from all this???
Next time shut the car off and coast by the smog van
did it the other day in my driver.Sure as hell will do it if I ever see one in the P car.
Ferg
Ferg, given that you drive in Boulder, you may not have a choice. The van location in Boulder is the on-ramp from Pearl St to Foothill southbound. I forget which days it's there, but it's a fixed schedule. Shutting off the car and coasting uphill is not an easy thing to do...
-Josh2
Posted by: Ferg Jul 14 2009, 01:23 PM
Thanks for the tip Josh, been a while since I've done that on ramp.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)