Or a Suburban like Kerry... no wait, that's his WIFE'S car...

Jay Stuler wrote:

> "wkearney99" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:JoCdnbnF1Npdh4DcRVn-oQ@speakeasy.net...
>
>>What you should have learned is to get your polluting wreck fixed instead
>
> of
>
>>grousing about it.
>>
>>At ten years old and that many miles it's clear it needs fixing AND you
>
> drive it
>
>>too much.
>
>
> Maybe he should buy an environmentally-friendly car such as the Hummer that
> "Mr. Environment" Shwartznegger drives.
>
>

 

> "Fred W." wrote:
> >
> > Sorry *****. No can-do.
> > See, I live up here in "Live Free or Die" state where we don't need no
> > steenkin' smog tests.
> >
> > -Fred W
> > '98 TJ Sport
> >
> > ---yeah, I know, I know... real jeeps don't have coil springs...

> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:411E5AB8.D9D3A16C@***.net...
> Quit your braggin'.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Not bragging. Just stating the facts. We actually had to get emissions
tests in the southern part of the state for a very short time, I think it
was 4-5 years in the late '80's or early '90's. They had made some air
quality measurements in Nashua, NH that exceeded EPA limits. They made
everyone in the southern part of the state get tested. Miraculously the air
quality improved and they dropped the requirements. I guess those tests are
more powerful than anyone realized! ;-)

In all reality, the vast majority of air pollution in NH is stuff that
drifts across from all the coal and oil fired power plants in the midwest.
Whatever we throw in the air gets lost over the Atlantic (or hits western
europe?)

-Fred W

 

> "Fred W." wrote:
> >
> > Sorry *****. No can-do.
> > See, I live up here in "Live Free or Die" state where we don't need no
> > steenkin' smog tests.
> >
> > -Fred W
> > '98 TJ Sport
> >
> > ---yeah, I know, I know... real jeeps don't have coil springs...

> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:411E5AB8.D9D3A16C@***.net...
> Quit your braggin'.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Not bragging. Just stating the facts. We actually had to get emissions
tests in the southern part of the state for a very short time, I think it
was 4-5 years in the late '80's or early '90's. They had made some air
quality measurements in Nashua, NH that exceeded EPA limits. They made
everyone in the southern part of the state get tested. Miraculously the air
quality improved and they dropped the requirements. I guess those tests are
more powerful than anyone realized! ;-)

In all reality, the vast majority of air pollution in NH is stuff that
drifts across from all the coal and oil fired power plants in the midwest.
Whatever we throw in the air gets lost over the Atlantic (or hits western
europe?)

-Fred W

 

> "Fred W." wrote:
> >
> > Sorry *****. No can-do.
> > See, I live up here in "Live Free or Die" state where we don't need no
> > steenkin' smog tests.
> >
> > -Fred W
> > '98 TJ Sport
> >
> > ---yeah, I know, I know... real jeeps don't have coil springs...

> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:411E5AB8.D9D3A16C@***.net...
> Quit your braggin'.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Not bragging. Just stating the facts. We actually had to get emissions
tests in the southern part of the state for a very short time, I think it
was 4-5 years in the late '80's or early '90's. They had made some air
quality measurements in Nashua, NH that exceeded EPA limits. They made
everyone in the southern part of the state get tested. Miraculously the air
quality improved and they dropped the requirements. I guess those tests are
more powerful than anyone realized! ;-)

In all reality, the vast majority of air pollution in NH is stuff that
drifts across from all the coal and oil fired power plants in the midwest.
Whatever we throw in the air gets lost over the Atlantic (or hits western
europe?)

-Fred W

 

> "Fred W." wrote:
> >
> > Sorry *****. No can-do.
> > See, I live up here in "Live Free or Die" state where we don't need no
> > steenkin' smog tests.
> >
> > -Fred W
> > '98 TJ Sport
> >
> > ---yeah, I know, I know... real jeeps don't have coil springs...

> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:411E5AB8.D9D3A16C@***.net...
> Quit your braggin'.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Not bragging. Just stating the facts. We actually had to get emissions
tests in the southern part of the state for a very short time, I think it
was 4-5 years in the late '80's or early '90's. They had made some air
quality measurements in Nashua, NH that exceeded EPA limits. They made
everyone in the southern part of the state get tested. Miraculously the air
quality improved and they dropped the requirements. I guess those tests are
more powerful than anyone realized! ;-)

In all reality, the vast majority of air pollution in NH is stuff that
drifts across from all the coal and oil fired power plants in the midwest.
Whatever we throw in the air gets lost over the Atlantic (or hits western
europe?)

-Fred W

 

Sorry, it was cold. Not stone cold, but not hot either. I got into line, but
it took them 45 min to an hour to get to it, so it was not hot by any
stretch of the imagination.

I have never come close to being flagged as a GP either, this is my first
time.





"breyfogle" <breyfogle@aol.com> wrote in message
news:I2EMHn.DBA@news.boeing.com...
> You did not say whether your vehicle was stone cold before the test but it
> is common knowledge in the PROC that the hotter the engine the cleaner it
> tests. If the smog station ran the low speed test on a cold engine, all
you
> can do is never go there again !
>
> Just as a reference, I always run 20 miles or so on the freeway before
> pulling in for a smog check but even when I do that, it is not uncommon to
> sit 15-30 minutes with the engine off before the test is run. Even so, my
> box stock '83 258 has never come close to the GP limits.
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:10hq66eai2kog6a@corp.supernews.com...
> > Living in the People's Republic of California has its ups and downs.
> > Yesterday was a down, for a while.
> >
> > The Governor needs to make a yacht payment, so he sent me a vehicle
> > registration renewal notice that demands me to make a trip to the local
> Smog
> > Station and support the yachting tastes of those guys. Anyway, they
> attached
> > a host of sensors and probes to my car while making it run a mile or so
on
> a
> > treadmill.
> >
> > The treadmill part of the test seems to have been my undoing. They
> > administer this test at two speeds, slow - 15mph - and fast - 25mph. My
> car
> > tripped the Gross Polluter flags and sirens during the low speed run on
> the
> > treadmill, but seemed to make the computers happy - or at least
> satisfied -
> > on the high speed run. The machine spit out a report that detailed the
> crap
> > being spewed from the tail pipe.
> >
> > The guy administering the test allowed me to take my car out to the
> freeway
> > and get off at the next exit and come back in, where he immediately
> > administered the exact same test again, and within minutes of pulling
back
> > into the repair bay. On the second test, the car passed with flying
> colors.
> > The report that the machine spits out lists the max reading that is
> allowed,
> > and the actual reading that was measured.
> >
> > Two tests, the first a dismal failure and the second a shining example
of
> > automotive technology working to keep our skies clean and blue. The ONLY
> > difference being a trip around the block, well down the freeway and back
> to
> > the shop. As a Gross Polluter, the NO at low speed tipped the counters
at
> > 1996, whatever that means. The allowable limit is 695 for this category,
> so
> > my car measured roughly 3 times the allowable limit. After the run
around
> > the block, this number came in at 130. The high speed test allowed 717,
> and
> > I got 587 as a GP, and 140 on the 2nd test. Carbon Monoxide and
> Hydrocarbons
> > are also tested and reported, as a Gross Polluter, these numbers
exceeded
> > the max allowable by factors of about 3, and when the car passed the
> numbers
> > tiny fractions of the same numbers when the Polluter flag was tripped.
> >
> > If the car can fail in the low speed test, and pass the high speed test,
> > then drive around the block and pass both tests, why don't they do the
> high
> > speed test first so the low speed test has a better chance of passing?
> >
> > What I learned is that when you take an older car to the Smog ***** for
> > yacht payment collections, mine is a '94 with nearly 200,000 miles,
maybe
> > you should leave it idling in the parking lot before the test is
> > administered. I had come in from a 40+ mile commute, but they let the
car
> > sit for an hour before they got to it, so it cooled off so much that the
> > smog stuff was not up to speed during the test.
> >
> >
>
>

 

Sorry, it was cold. Not stone cold, but not hot either. I got into line, but
it took them 45 min to an hour to get to it, so it was not hot by any
stretch of the imagination.

I have never come close to being flagged as a GP either, this is my first
time.





"breyfogle" <breyfogle@aol.com> wrote in message
news:I2EMHn.DBA@news.boeing.com...
> You did not say whether your vehicle was stone cold before the test but it
> is common knowledge in the PROC that the hotter the engine the cleaner it
> tests. If the smog station ran the low speed test on a cold engine, all
you
> can do is never go there again !
>
> Just as a reference, I always run 20 miles or so on the freeway before
> pulling in for a smog check but even when I do that, it is not uncommon to
> sit 15-30 minutes with the engine off before the test is run. Even so, my
> box stock '83 258 has never come close to the GP limits.
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:10hq66eai2kog6a@corp.supernews.com...
> > Living in the People's Republic of California has its ups and downs.
> > Yesterday was a down, for a while.
> >
> > The Governor needs to make a yacht payment, so he sent me a vehicle
> > registration renewal notice that demands me to make a trip to the local
> Smog
> > Station and support the yachting tastes of those guys. Anyway, they
> attached
> > a host of sensors and probes to my car while making it run a mile or so
on
> a
> > treadmill.
> >
> > The treadmill part of the test seems to have been my undoing. They
> > administer this test at two speeds, slow - 15mph - and fast - 25mph. My
> car
> > tripped the Gross Polluter flags and sirens during the low speed run on
> the
> > treadmill, but seemed to make the computers happy - or at least
> satisfied -
> > on the high speed run. The machine spit out a report that detailed the
> crap
> > being spewed from the tail pipe.
> >
> > The guy administering the test allowed me to take my car out to the
> freeway
> > and get off at the next exit and come back in, where he immediately
> > administered the exact same test again, and within minutes of pulling
back
> > into the repair bay. On the second test, the car passed with flying
> colors.
> > The report that the machine spits out lists the max reading that is
> allowed,
> > and the actual reading that was measured.
> >
> > Two tests, the first a dismal failure and the second a shining example
of
> > automotive technology working to keep our skies clean and blue. The ONLY
> > difference being a trip around the block, well down the freeway and back
> to
> > the shop. As a Gross Polluter, the NO at low speed tipped the counters
at
> > 1996, whatever that means. The allowable limit is 695 for this category,
> so
> > my car measured roughly 3 times the allowable limit. After the run
around
> > the block, this number came in at 130. The high speed test allowed 717,
> and
> > I got 587 as a GP, and 140 on the 2nd test. Carbon Monoxide and
> Hydrocarbons
> > are also tested and reported, as a Gross Polluter, these numbers
exceeded
> > the max allowable by factors of about 3, and when the car passed the
> numbers
> > tiny fractions of the same numbers when the Polluter flag was tripped.
> >
> > If the car can fail in the low speed test, and pass the high speed test,
> > then drive around the block and pass both tests, why don't they do the
> high
> > speed test first so the low speed test has a better chance of passing?
> >
> > What I learned is that when you take an older car to the Smog ***** for
> > yacht payment collections, mine is a '94 with nearly 200,000 miles,
maybe
> > you should leave it idling in the parking lot before the test is
> > administered. I had come in from a 40+ mile commute, but they let the
car
> > sit for an hour before they got to it, so it cooled off so much that the
> > smog stuff was not up to speed during the test.
> >
> >
>
>

 

Sorry, it was cold. Not stone cold, but not hot either. I got into line, but
it took them 45 min to an hour to get to it, so it was not hot by any
stretch of the imagination.

I have never come close to being flagged as a GP either, this is my first
time.





"breyfogle" <breyfogle@aol.com> wrote in message
news:I2EMHn.DBA@news.boeing.com...
> You did not say whether your vehicle was stone cold before the test but it
> is common knowledge in the PROC that the hotter the engine the cleaner it
> tests. If the smog station ran the low speed test on a cold engine, all
you
> can do is never go there again !
>
> Just as a reference, I always run 20 miles or so on the freeway before
> pulling in for a smog check but even when I do that, it is not uncommon to
> sit 15-30 minutes with the engine off before the test is run. Even so, my
> box stock '83 258 has never come close to the GP limits.
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:10hq66eai2kog6a@corp.supernews.com...
> > Living in the People's Republic of California has its ups and downs.
> > Yesterday was a down, for a while.
> >
> > The Governor needs to make a yacht payment, so he sent me a vehicle
> > registration renewal notice that demands me to make a trip to the local
> Smog
> > Station and support the yachting tastes of those guys. Anyway, they
> attached
> > a host of sensors and probes to my car while making it run a mile or so
on
> a
> > treadmill.
> >
> > The treadmill part of the test seems to have been my undoing. They
> > administer this test at two speeds, slow - 15mph - and fast - 25mph. My
> car
> > tripped the Gross Polluter flags and sirens during the low speed run on
> the
> > treadmill, but seemed to make the computers happy - or at least
> satisfied -
> > on the high speed run. The machine spit out a report that detailed the
> crap
> > being spewed from the tail pipe.
> >
> > The guy administering the test allowed me to take my car out to the
> freeway
> > and get off at the next exit and come back in, where he immediately
> > administered the exact same test again, and within minutes of pulling
back
> > into the repair bay. On the second test, the car passed with flying
> colors.
> > The report that the machine spits out lists the max reading that is
> allowed,
> > and the actual reading that was measured.
> >
> > Two tests, the first a dismal failure and the second a shining example
of
> > automotive technology working to keep our skies clean and blue. The ONLY
> > difference being a trip around the block, well down the freeway and back
> to
> > the shop. As a Gross Polluter, the NO at low speed tipped the counters
at
> > 1996, whatever that means. The allowable limit is 695 for this category,
> so
> > my car measured roughly 3 times the allowable limit. After the run
around
> > the block, this number came in at 130. The high speed test allowed 717,
> and
> > I got 587 as a GP, and 140 on the 2nd test. Carbon Monoxide and
> Hydrocarbons
> > are also tested and reported, as a Gross Polluter, these numbers
exceeded
> > the max allowable by factors of about 3, and when the car passed the
> numbers
> > tiny fractions of the same numbers when the Polluter flag was tripped.
> >
> > If the car can fail in the low speed test, and pass the high speed test,
> > then drive around the block and pass both tests, why don't they do the
> high
> > speed test first so the low speed test has a better chance of passing?
> >
> > What I learned is that when you take an older car to the Smog ***** for
> > yacht payment collections, mine is a '94 with nearly 200,000 miles,
maybe
> > you should leave it idling in the parking lot before the test is
> > administered. I had come in from a 40+ mile commute, but they let the
car
> > sit for an hour before they got to it, so it cooled off so much that the
> > smog stuff was not up to speed during the test.
> >
> >
>
>

 

Sorry, it was cold. Not stone cold, but not hot either. I got into line, but
it took them 45 min to an hour to get to it, so it was not hot by any
stretch of the imagination.

I have never come close to being flagged as a GP either, this is my first
time.





"breyfogle" <breyfogle@aol.com> wrote in message
news:I2EMHn.DBA@news.boeing.com...
> You did not say whether your vehicle was stone cold before the test but it
> is common knowledge in the PROC that the hotter the engine the cleaner it
> tests. If the smog station ran the low speed test on a cold engine, all
you
> can do is never go there again !
>
> Just as a reference, I always run 20 miles or so on the freeway before
> pulling in for a smog check but even when I do that, it is not uncommon to
> sit 15-30 minutes with the engine off before the test is run. Even so, my
> box stock '83 258 has never come close to the GP limits.
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:10hq66eai2kog6a@corp.supernews.com...
> > Living in the People's Republic of California has its ups and downs.
> > Yesterday was a down, for a while.
> >
> > The Governor needs to make a yacht payment, so he sent me a vehicle
> > registration renewal notice that demands me to make a trip to the local
> Smog
> > Station and support the yachting tastes of those guys. Anyway, they
> attached
> > a host of sensors and probes to my car while making it run a mile or so
on
> a
> > treadmill.
> >
> > The treadmill part of the test seems to have been my undoing. They
> > administer this test at two speeds, slow - 15mph - and fast - 25mph. My
> car
> > tripped the Gross Polluter flags and sirens during the low speed run on
> the
> > treadmill, but seemed to make the computers happy - or at least
> satisfied -
> > on the high speed run. The machine spit out a report that detailed the
> crap
> > being spewed from the tail pipe.
> >
> > The guy administering the test allowed me to take my car out to the
> freeway
> > and get off at the next exit and come back in, where he immediately
> > administered the exact same test again, and within minutes of pulling
back
> > into the repair bay. On the second test, the car passed with flying
> colors.
> > The report that the machine spits out lists the max reading that is
> allowed,
> > and the actual reading that was measured.
> >
> > Two tests, the first a dismal failure and the second a shining example
of
> > automotive technology working to keep our skies clean and blue. The ONLY
> > difference being a trip around the block, well down the freeway and back
> to
> > the shop. As a Gross Polluter, the NO at low speed tipped the counters
at
> > 1996, whatever that means. The allowable limit is 695 for this category,
> so
> > my car measured roughly 3 times the allowable limit. After the run
around
> > the block, this number came in at 130. The high speed test allowed 717,
> and
> > I got 587 as a GP, and 140 on the 2nd test. Carbon Monoxide and
> Hydrocarbons
> > are also tested and reported, as a Gross Polluter, these numbers
exceeded
> > the max allowable by factors of about 3, and when the car passed the
> numbers
> > tiny fractions of the same numbers when the Polluter flag was tripped.
> >
> > If the car can fail in the low speed test, and pass the high speed test,
> > then drive around the block and pass both tests, why don't they do the
> high
> > speed test first so the low speed test has a better chance of passing?
> >
> > What I learned is that when you take an older car to the Smog ***** for
> > yacht payment collections, mine is a '94 with nearly 200,000 miles,
maybe
> > you should leave it idling in the parking lot before the test is
> > administered. I had come in from a 40+ mile commute, but they let the
car
> > sit for an hour before they got to it, so it cooled off so much that the
> > smog stuff was not up to speed during the test.
> >
> >
>
>

 

.... my guy says I only need a new CAT. Of course, I never need the cheap
parts to fix stuff ...




"Will Honea" <hwj25(remove this)@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-d6hKXyBvv26Z@anon.none.net...
> Sounds like something I mentioned a while back after having mine done.
> The guy who does my tests tries to maintain appointment times so that
> you pull straight in to the test bay w/o ever shutting down. Last
> time, I was marginal at low speed so he had me run it out to the
> freeway, up 2 exits, turn around and come back. As you note, it
> passed with flying colors then. He did suggest look into new cat and
> O2 sensor before I have to bring it back next time, though.
>
> This guy maintains that the biggest problem is that the cat cools down
> below light-off temp too fast and low speed/idle won't heat it up
> enough to light off - altho it will generally stay at temp if it's
> there already and you leave it idling.. He can generally get anything
> I take in to pass the sniffer - maybe that's why he always has a
> wiating list for tests.
>
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:18:44 UTC "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Living in the People's Republic of California has its ups and downs.
> > Yesterday was a down, for a while.
> >
> > The Governor needs to make a yacht payment, so he sent me a vehicle
> > registration renewal notice that demands me to make a trip to the local
Smog
> > Station and support the yachting tastes of those guys. Anyway, they
attached
> > a host of sensors and probes to my car while making it run a mile or so
on a
> > treadmill.
> >
> > The treadmill part of the test seems to have been my undoing. They
> > administer this test at two speeds, slow - 15mph - and fast - 25mph. My
car
> > tripped the Gross Polluter flags and sirens during the low speed run on
the
> > treadmill, but seemed to make the computers happy - or at least
satisfied -
> > on the high speed run. The machine spit out a report that detailed the
crap
> > being spewed from the tail pipe.
> >
> > The guy administering the test allowed me to take my car out to the
freeway
> > and get off at the next exit and come back in, where he immediately
> > administered the exact same test again, and within minutes of pulling
back
> > into the repair bay. On the second test, the car passed with flying
colors.
> > The report that the machine spits out lists the max reading that is
allowed,
> > and the actual reading that was measured.
> >
> > Two tests, the first a dismal failure and the second a shining example
of
> > automotive technology working to keep our skies clean and blue. The ONLY
> > difference being a trip around the block, well down the freeway and back
to
> > the shop. As a Gross Polluter, the NO at low speed tipped the counters
at
> > 1996, whatever that means. The allowable limit is 695 for this category,
so
> > my car measured roughly 3 times the allowable limit. After the run
around
> > the block, this number came in at 130. The high speed test allowed 717,
and
> > I got 587 as a GP, and 140 on the 2nd test. Carbon Monoxide and
Hydrocarbons
> > are also tested and reported, as a Gross Polluter, these numbers
exceeded
> > the max allowable by factors of about 3, and when the car passed the
numbers
> > tiny fractions of the same numbers when the Polluter flag was tripped.
> >
> > If the car can fail in the low speed test, and pass the high speed test,
> > then drive around the block and pass both tests, why don't they do the
high
> > speed test first so the low speed test has a better chance of passing?
> >
> > What I learned is that when you take an older car to the Smog ***** for
> > yacht payment collections, mine is a '94 with nearly 200,000 miles,
maybe
> > you should leave it idling in the parking lot before the test is
> > administered. I had come in from a 40+ mile commute, but they let the
car
> > sit for an hour before they got to it, so it cooled off so much that the
> > smog stuff was not up to speed during the test.
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Will Honea