Members with 74 1.8, information needed for history of cars Options

[wonkipop]

@L-Jet914

that really is the japanese gold of beer that info.

its 412 stuff there. EC-d!!! so its definitely 1974.
no 412s in 1975 MY.

mr. b will be beside himself.

platinum.

[wonkipop]

those EC-d or is it EC-D (whatever) - they had EGR in 1974 on those VW 412s.

i found a pic of an original 412 variant with the full original gear on it.
and the EGR isn't even like the EGR on the 75 914s.

lot of mucking about going on at VW hq in 74?

i am not familiar with 412s. or 411s we never got them in australia.
there were a handful running around here 30 years ago that came in from south africa,
but they were all twin carb jobs.

i'll bet there is an EC-c (EC-C) and its a 412 without the EGR?

[Van B]

I'm curious if the signature dates on those forms start to reveal something as we build more data

[wonkipop]

there is something going on - thats for sure.

[L-Jet914]

nice stuff @L-Jet914

there are all sorts of folks here. who would have thought we got a smog expert.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

I wouldn't call myself a smog expert haha. I just happen to know where to look up information when smogging a vehicle, if the vehicle emission control label is missing. I was shown these websites one day taking a update course to renew my smog license.

[wonkipop]

nice stuff @L-Jet914

there are all sorts of folks here. who would have thought we got a smog expert.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

I wouldn't call myself a smog expert haha. I just happen to know where to look up information when smogging a vehicle, if the vehicle emission control label is missing. I was shown these websites one day taking a update course to renew my smog license.

that stuff you posted is fantastic mate.

[wonkipop]

ok @L-Jet914

i have scanned through your stuff you posted.

its all there --- exactly what i have found in the parts manual.

the ECU is the same from the VW vans (kombis) and 412s.
the AFM is the same.
both do not change. universal.

all that is different is the 914s run a different distributor.
only the 914s run VR. vacuum retard distributors.

but the vans and the 412s run EGR.

you set them up different at idle in terms of idle revs.
they all have the same CO. 4.5% max.

its all in the distributor!?

and of course how that must connect to the throttle body.

and this is somehow being submitted in the first quarter of 1974 calendar year.

,,,,,,

except i think we did find an EC-A that was built before calendar year 1974.
have to trawl back through the info in this thread.
i think its yours actually. 11/74?
(EDIT - its nihil44's EC-A).
but seems to imply an A comes after a B.

they could have been making them in anticipation knowing they were ok and ready to go? if that is the reason they were knocking them out of germany in 11/73.

be great if there were similar CARB/EPA documents out there covering the EC-B version.
i bet they date from earlier than these documents?

incredible find you have in your files. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

[StarBear]

@StarBear
Got the paper, thanks bud!
How are you attaching them to the engine tin? I assume with some kind of temperature resistant over laminate?

@Van B Yay! Just peel off the backing. Make sure the old sticker is off completely and the tin is clean. Seems to hold up so far.

[wonkipop]

found where LJet914 got the California Air Resources Board documents from.

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/new-vehicle-and-engi...duty-trucks-and

nothing in there for EC-b.
however CARB does note the records may be incomplete.

looking around at other manufacturers documents and even some of VWs the business with rescinding the order is unusual. they also do it for the documents covering the 914 2.0 for model year 74. i can't quite understand what the document LJet914 posted means as they seem to rescind the original order (jan 74) and then replace it with the same thing (march 74)? Also the orders are quite late in date, comparable orders for other VWs and other makes of cars, including porsche for the 911 are dated sept or oct of the calendar year the model year starts. so there is some funny stuff going on where the EC-a is gettng approval in jan74 instead of sept/oct 73 where you expect it to be dated.

----

i had a good look either side in 73 and 75.
found this.
slightly off topic but worth posting.
@JeffBowlsby probably interested.
looks like Volkswagen of America was calling the 73 914 2.0 a 914S at the stage they wre submitting for CARB approval in Oct. 1972.

[Van B]

shouldn't you be asleep?!

[JeffBowlsby]

The CA-only decal for the side windows was probably the clear label placed on the windshield like these below. I have several on my website on the Plates, Labels, Markings page. If you have an image of the labels I am missing, or have a better quality image, please send them to me or post it here in this thread.

[wonkipop]

shouldn't you be asleep?!

yeah, should have been. woken up by a commotion in the lane.
couldn't get back to sleep.

think its a side effect of the dicktator's vid lock up, gotten used to the quiet.
its getting noisy around here again at random hours now that the lunatics have been released from the asylum.


-------

the executive order numbering system is simple.
each manufacturer gets a number after the A
VW gets A-7

then each submitted engine family gets a number in chronological order they were submitted. its starts in 73 for VAG.

1973
A-7 thru A-7-2 covers 914S, 914 1.7 and other ac vws.

1973
A-7-3(covers 914.2 from oct 73 and other ac vws)
A-7-3-A (covers 914.2 from mar 73 and other ac vws)
A-7-4 water cooled dashers.
A-7-5 (covers 914 1.8 from jan 74, and from mar 74)
A-7-6 twin carb kombi.

1974
A-7-7 thru A-7-10 covers the 75 914s and other VWs.

if its to be taken at face value there is nothing missing on CARB file unless there is an A-7-5-A revision that is missing.
seems to say only EC-A (or as its written EC-a) 1.8 have exhaust emission approval and only from from jan 74 on.

914 mystery continues.

but its safe to say there was such a thing as an EC-d and it was in 412s.
as well as the EC-a that is in 914s.
as far as california goes.
and we know there is an EC-b, its in some of our 914s.
and there probably was an EC-c. maybe in 412s.

[wonkipop]

@JeffBowlsby .

thanks for those windscreen decels jeff.
they are interesting.
strictly speaking those 1974 914s are not meeting california emissions standards.
HC and CO exceed the standard.
NOx does meet the standard.

i did come across something looking for the cal emis standards 1974.
the big three in detroit lobbied for averaging across their entire fleet of models for sale.
that way they could slide in some only half denuded muscle cars by offsetting against small economy cars that were well under the emis. limits. they were successful in their lobbying and so a fleet average applied to californian sales (and national sales).

i think VAG must have been doing the same - given those windscreen decals.
offsetting the 914s against the bigger numbers of sedans and commercials sold?

[L-Jet914]

@wonkipop You are correct the A-7-5-A is the revision to the rescinded A-7-5. My 914 was built 4/74. All the ARB EO's on the page you found are only for CA certified vehicles. If the vehicle is US E.P.A 49 state certified their engine families etc do not appear within the site as they do not comply to CA emission standards.

[wonkipop]

@wonkipop You are correct the A-7-5-A is the revision to the rescinded A-7-5. My 914 was built 4/74. All the ARB EO's on the page you found are only for CA certified vehicles. If the vehicle is US E.P.A 49 state certified their engine families etc do not appear within the site as they do not comply to CA emission standards.

yes, its interesting.

but we have EC-B stickers which use the same wording as the EC-A stickers.
"conforms to California + USEPA regulations".

so.....it kind of doesn't clear up the mystery.
but it does point toward something called the EC-a getting firm approval either from jan 74 on or mar 74 on.




and to complicate things there is an EC-B sticker that is only USEPA conforming.

[wonkipop]

i cracked the Executive Order open a little bit more.

i found a specfication description for a retard and advance function distributor included in the Executive Order A-7-6 covering the 74 Kombi Van fitted with the dual carb version of the 1.8.

the dist is described as C-V-VR. = centrifugal + vacuum + vacuum retard.



compare it to the A-7-5 covering the EC-a engine 914 1.8.

the dist is described as C-VR = centrigugal + vacuum retard.



if they were talking about our cars with the EC-B sticker it would say C-V-VR.
our cars have the vacuum advance and vacuum retard.
(vacuum = vacuum advance function).
also our tune up sticker matches that dual functioning distributor hooked up.

in this E O they are talking about your cars (L-Jet 914).
the EC-A cars with only the distributor retard hooked up as supported by your original tune up sticker.

so the EC-A cars are approved in california from Jan 29th 1974 on for 3 months and a further 30 days and from March 25th on for 3 months and a further 30 days. which gets them to the end of production for 74 MY.

the EC-B cars are still missing in this documentation from CARB.
we know they conform to California and EPA. (or at least their sticker claims that).

i think it would be reasonable to conclude that EC-A cars kick in for sale in california after end of jan 74. (they might be making them in production a little earlier but they hit the showrooms for legit sale after that date).

which begs the question, what were porsche selling in their cali showrooms as a base model before jan 74 for MY 74. they must have had something to offer?

[wonkipop]

Based on my trials, I would wager that the ECU is different, or at least the program. My car simply would not start in that configuration.

i doubled checked to be sure. no change. but..............


this is in the factory manual.



i'd missed inception date of 74 1.8. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
its well after 74 MY production starts - which was august 73.

compare inception date of 75. aug 74.

had a quick scout of members Vin in the big list on this site.
sure enough - couldn't turn up a 1.8 with a vin before nov 73.
its all 2.0 cars early on.
the list is not exhaustive by any means, but you would think there would be one there.

so - looks like 1.8 L Jet is late coming to the party.
don't start building them until nov 73.

anyone with a 11/73 Vin has the first month of production of L jet on the first engine to ever have it.

@nihil44 @RRietman @StarBear all have 11/73.

randy takes the prize. he has the earliest L jet closest to the beginning.

i don't know what they were selling in USA showrooms for the last quarter of 73.
but it wasn't 74MY 1.8s going on what i can find.
by the time they are made - nov 73, put on a ship and distributed in the USA it would be jan/early 1974.

this makes a bit more sense with the CARB EO? starting california approval jan 74.

[wonkipop]

i think i have worked out this emission sticker thing.
even though most (all so far) EC-B say conforms to california, they do not appear to send the EC-B to california.

all the EC-B i can find on internet in good condition with extensive documentation show they were sold new in states other than california.

this agrees with wonki, @Van B and @StarBear EC-B cars. known sold new on east coast.

EC-B have the vac advance hooked up.

EC-A are sent to california and have the vac advance disconnected and port plugged on throttle body. EO-7-5 proves that. stipulated in description of distributor.
tune stickers show it too. (thanks to L-JET914 for that priceless CARB document).

BUT.
brand new 74 MY base 914s are late to the showrooms and in short supply?

it appears all a dealer would have to do is disconnect the vac advance on a EC-B car and plug the port and they have an EC-A CARB approved car.

it might have been handy for stocks of 914 available in the USA at that time if they were short on cars to sell in california. just send them down there if they had to.

how they handled the sticker in legal terms i don't know.

-----

i'm beginning to think that the mythical 49 state car is one without vacuum retard.
a member here Pete000 has one with a TB that has no vac idle port. nihil44's is the same. i got a hunch that is the EC-B without cal conforming parts. you have to have vac retard for CARB. it can't be sent there for sale under any circumstances. not without swapping out the throttle body. so the stickers make it clear, its to be moved around in stock for the 49 states only.

[Van B]

Ok, so I’m following everything but the fact that my car simply would not start with the vacuum retard attached. INSTANTLY floods! I’ve tried it twice and the second time I really made sure timing and idle speed were on the money.

[wonkipop]

Ok, so I’m following everything but the fact that my car simply would not start with the vacuum retard attached. INSTANTLY floods! I’ve tried it twice and the second time I really made sure timing and idle speed were on the money.

attached or not attached?

the photos you posted show all the vac lines attached van.
retard and advance. thats how the car came to you right?

way i see it with vac retard attached its going to start easier from cold.
but once its warm its going to idle hotter (esp out in traffic). it stays retarded.

a car without vac retard attached is going to be a little harder to start from cold.
but once its warm will idle at 7.5 BTDC.
EDIT - and idle cooler too out in traffic.


------


i've never thought too hard about this before.
i never had to do anything to the car back 30 years ago.
it ran sweet-as for 15 years.
and its kind of running sweet-as again (except for the cold start being not up to what it used to be).

the thing about having no vac retard line, which i'm speculating for a 49 state car,
(and those throttle bodies are out there, with the right part # on them) is maybe the enrichment mix is tweaked on the ECU. its another area i have to go in and teach myself about. i've never had to touch the car in those areas, nor do i necessarily want to,
but i have to read the factory manual and get my head around how you can tweak the ECU. or even the AFM. other members here who have been fooling around actively with their 1.8s would really know this stuff.

i guess what i am saying is, cold the ECU definitely does adjust the fuel enrichment.
and that would be tuned or in synch with the vac retard scenario.

if you don't have vac retard (as maybe a true 49 state car is), maybe they tweaked an adjustment on the ECU from the factory. but i don't know. thats my next bit of reading.