Jerry

>How lets see the see the smog certificate on your POS.

Let us see your high school diploma, or better yet, even something
indicating you completed the sixth grade for that matter.

jasonp

Little off topic Mike but I thought I'd let you know I picked up a running
4.2L out of an 84CJ for $150, here in Calgary no smog crap, pretty
decent....



"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:411D22CA.27E4DA4A@sympatico.ca...
> LOL!
>
> I have no cat and no computer or smog crap and mine still passes!
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> jasonp wrote:
> >
> > So how do you feel about me pulling my cat and smog crap off my Jeep?
> > Probably not real happy, huh?
> >
> > "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.
> > >

jasonp

Little off topic Mike but I thought I'd let you know I picked up a running
4.2L out of an 84CJ for $150, here in Calgary no smog crap, pretty
decent....



"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:411D22CA.27E4DA4A@sympatico.ca...
> LOL!
>
> I have no cat and no computer or smog crap and mine still passes!
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> jasonp wrote:
> >
> > So how do you feel about me pulling my cat and smog crap off my Jeep?
> > Probably not real happy, huh?
> >
> > "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.
> > >

jasonp

Little off topic Mike but I thought I'd let you know I picked up a running
4.2L out of an 84CJ for $150, here in Calgary no smog crap, pretty
decent....



"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:411D22CA.27E4DA4A@sympatico.ca...
> LOL!
>
> I have no cat and no computer or smog crap and mine still passes!
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> jasonp wrote:
> >
> > So how do you feel about me pulling my cat and smog crap off my Jeep?
> > Probably not real happy, huh?
> >
> > "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.
> > >

jasonp

Little off topic Mike but I thought I'd let you know I picked up a running
4.2L out of an 84CJ for $150, here in Calgary no smog crap, pretty
decent....



"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:411D22CA.27E4DA4A@sympatico.ca...
> LOL!
>
> I have no cat and no computer or smog crap and mine still passes!
>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> jasonp wrote:
> >
> > So how do you feel about me pulling my cat and smog crap off my Jeep?
> > Probably not real happy, huh?
> >
> > "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.
> > >

Ben

I don't have emissions test here in South Carolina.. Gotta love the Right
Wing south...

Ben
95 YJ 2.5L

"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.
>
>

Ben

I don't have emissions test here in South Carolina.. Gotta love the Right
Wing south...

Ben
95 YJ 2.5L

"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.
>
>

Ben

I don't have emissions test here in South Carolina.. Gotta love the Right
Wing south...

Ben
95 YJ 2.5L

"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.
>
>

Ben

I don't have emissions test here in South Carolina.. Gotta love the Right
Wing south...

Ben
95 YJ 2.5L

"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.
>
>

Will Honea

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