NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
01-27-2004, 10:25 PM
#21
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
Rebuild the engine, or sell it using your mechanic to vouch for it.
Of course don't give him your compression readings, something he would
have seen in about a minute with a scope's, balance test.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
> ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
> over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
> What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
> else didn't do before.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
Of course don't give him your compression readings, something he would
have seen in about a minute with a scope's, balance test.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
> ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
> over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
> What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
> else didn't do before.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
01-27-2004, 10:25 PM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
Rebuild the engine, or sell it using your mechanic to vouch for it.
Of course don't give him your compression readings, something he would
have seen in about a minute with a scope's, balance test.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
> ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
> over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
> What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
> else didn't do before.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
Of course don't give him your compression readings, something he would
have seen in about a minute with a scope's, balance test.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
> ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
> over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
> What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
> else didn't do before.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
01-28-2004, 10:29 AM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
You have a carburator on a Fuel injected 5.2? Never heard of that.
With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
crap.
Marc
"Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
crap.
Marc
"Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
01-28-2004, 10:29 AM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
You have a carburator on a Fuel injected 5.2? Never heard of that.
With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
crap.
Marc
"Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
crap.
Marc
"Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
01-28-2004, 10:29 AM
#25
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
You have a carburator on a Fuel injected 5.2? Never heard of that.
With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
crap.
Marc
"Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
crap.
Marc
"Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
01-28-2004, 11:48 AM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
First thing to do is 'verify' the compression values. Buy a cheap
compression gauge and do it yourself. If the numbers are close, then in
all probability the engine is shot. My reason for verification it is
just possible that the mechanics gauge is shot or has drifted from the
original calibration. Unless you use a recently calibrated gauge,
take most 'numbers' with a grain of salt.
In article <_tQRb.8609$Iw6.1553@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, Marc
<icscout_nospam_@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> You have a carburator on a Fuel injected 5.2? Never heard of that.
>
> With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
> crap.
>
> Marc
>
> "Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
>
> > 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> > 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> > Actual compression:
> > Cylinder 1: 80
> > Cylinder 2: 85
> > Cylinder 3: 80
> > Cylinder 4: 85
> > Cylinder 5: 50
> > Cylinder 6: 75
> > Cylinder 7: 65
> > Cylinder 8: 80
> >
>
>
compression gauge and do it yourself. If the numbers are close, then in
all probability the engine is shot. My reason for verification it is
just possible that the mechanics gauge is shot or has drifted from the
original calibration. Unless you use a recently calibrated gauge,
take most 'numbers' with a grain of salt.
In article <_tQRb.8609$Iw6.1553@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, Marc
<icscout_nospam_@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> You have a carburator on a Fuel injected 5.2? Never heard of that.
>
> With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
> crap.
>
> Marc
>
> "Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
>
> > 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> > 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> > Actual compression:
> > Cylinder 1: 80
> > Cylinder 2: 85
> > Cylinder 3: 80
> > Cylinder 4: 85
> > Cylinder 5: 50
> > Cylinder 6: 75
> > Cylinder 7: 65
> > Cylinder 8: 80
> >
>
>
01-28-2004, 11:48 AM
#27
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
First thing to do is 'verify' the compression values. Buy a cheap
compression gauge and do it yourself. If the numbers are close, then in
all probability the engine is shot. My reason for verification it is
just possible that the mechanics gauge is shot or has drifted from the
original calibration. Unless you use a recently calibrated gauge,
take most 'numbers' with a grain of salt.
In article <_tQRb.8609$Iw6.1553@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, Marc
<icscout_nospam_@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> You have a carburator on a Fuel injected 5.2? Never heard of that.
>
> With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
> crap.
>
> Marc
>
> "Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
>
> > 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> > 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> > Actual compression:
> > Cylinder 1: 80
> > Cylinder 2: 85
> > Cylinder 3: 80
> > Cylinder 4: 85
> > Cylinder 5: 50
> > Cylinder 6: 75
> > Cylinder 7: 65
> > Cylinder 8: 80
> >
>
>
compression gauge and do it yourself. If the numbers are close, then in
all probability the engine is shot. My reason for verification it is
just possible that the mechanics gauge is shot or has drifted from the
original calibration. Unless you use a recently calibrated gauge,
take most 'numbers' with a grain of salt.
In article <_tQRb.8609$Iw6.1553@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, Marc
<icscout_nospam_@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> You have a carburator on a Fuel injected 5.2? Never heard of that.
>
> With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
> crap.
>
> Marc
>
> "Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
>
> > 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> > 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> > Actual compression:
> > Cylinder 1: 80
> > Cylinder 2: 85
> > Cylinder 3: 80
> > Cylinder 4: 85
> > Cylinder 5: 50
> > Cylinder 6: 75
> > Cylinder 7: 65
> > Cylinder 8: 80
> >
>
>
01-28-2004, 11:48 AM
#28
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
First thing to do is 'verify' the compression values. Buy a cheap
compression gauge and do it yourself. If the numbers are close, then in
all probability the engine is shot. My reason for verification it is
just possible that the mechanics gauge is shot or has drifted from the
original calibration. Unless you use a recently calibrated gauge,
take most 'numbers' with a grain of salt.
In article <_tQRb.8609$Iw6.1553@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, Marc
<icscout_nospam_@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> You have a carburator on a Fuel injected 5.2? Never heard of that.
>
> With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
> crap.
>
> Marc
>
> "Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
>
> > 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> > 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> > Actual compression:
> > Cylinder 1: 80
> > Cylinder 2: 85
> > Cylinder 3: 80
> > Cylinder 4: 85
> > Cylinder 5: 50
> > Cylinder 6: 75
> > Cylinder 7: 65
> > Cylinder 8: 80
> >
>
>
compression gauge and do it yourself. If the numbers are close, then in
all probability the engine is shot. My reason for verification it is
just possible that the mechanics gauge is shot or has drifted from the
original calibration. Unless you use a recently calibrated gauge,
take most 'numbers' with a grain of salt.
In article <_tQRb.8609$Iw6.1553@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, Marc
<icscout_nospam_@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> You have a carburator on a Fuel injected 5.2? Never heard of that.
>
> With those compression numbers, your 5.2 would be running like complete
> crap.
>
> Marc
>
> "Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:045cf2664a62d0cc66eaa4168287ca1c@news.teranew s.com...
>
> > 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> > 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> > Actual compression:
> > Cylinder 1: 80
> > Cylinder 2: 85
> > Cylinder 3: 80
> > Cylinder 4: 85
> > Cylinder 5: 50
> > Cylinder 6: 75
> > Cylinder 7: 65
> > Cylinder 8: 80
> >
>
>
02-08-2004, 01:41 PM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
It turned out that the problem was with the catalytic convertor.
Although the NOx was low, the convertor itself was apparently
installed wrongly. A new cat and exhaust later, and the car passed.
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 18:14:02 GMT, Blue Moon <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I have a 1994 Jeep Grand Cherokee, 8 cylinder. I am having problems
>with passing emissions inspection in north NJ (Sussex County). The
>original results were:
>
>Gas Standard Reading Result
>HC 100 27 Pass
>CO% 0.50 0.69 Fail
>CO2% 13.9
>RPM 2668
>
>No figures were given for NOx or O2%.
>
>Okay, no big problem, thinks I. The following parts were replaced:
>
>Oil filter & oil
>Air filter
>8 Spark plugs
>Plug wires (including the distributor/coil wire)
>Oxygen Sensor
>
>A mechanic checked the vehicle out, and had a friend of his test
>emissions. Despite the vehicle running excellently (no pings, knocks,
>stalls, bad starts, dirty exhaust etc.) they could only get the CO%
>down to about 0.51 - 0.52.
>
>He tested a load of parts, and reported the following:
>
>1. Fuel pressure test - ok
>2. Coolant temp sensor - ok
>3. PCV - ok
>4. Air filter - new
>5. EGR - 100% working ok
>6. B-map - ok
>7. TPS - ok
>8. Injector Balance - ok
>9. Plugs, Wires - New
>10. Throttle body - cleaned, ok
>11. AIS Motor - ok
>12. Air control motor - ok
>
>He couldn't figure out what the problem was, but suggested I simply
>put it through the test with a gallon of alcohol.
>
>I filled up the gas tank with Mobil Super +, and drove around for a
>week to clean the fuel lines through. I filled up again with Mobil
>Super +, added a quart of dry gas and a gallon of denatured alcohol
>(so I'm guessing the tank would have had about 4% - 5% alcohol), drove
>it 15 miles and put it through inspection.
>
>To my amazement, I got the following results:
>
>Gas Standard Reading Result
>HC 100 30 Pass
>CO% 0.50 0.61 Fail
>CO2% 14.1
>RPM 2430
>
>I'm like .... WTF????
>
>I've been told the local gas stations are putting additives in the gas
>in this area due to the weather, and a lot of cars are losing fuel
>consumption and failing emissions inspections. But this is
>ridiculous. I can hardly import a tank of gas from Florida, so what
>the hell else can I do to get this thing to pass?
>
>Any suggestions gratefully received, short of "move to a state with
>less draconian measures".
--
Blue Moon
Although the NOx was low, the convertor itself was apparently
installed wrongly. A new cat and exhaust later, and the car passed.
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 18:14:02 GMT, Blue Moon <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I have a 1994 Jeep Grand Cherokee, 8 cylinder. I am having problems
>with passing emissions inspection in north NJ (Sussex County). The
>original results were:
>
>Gas Standard Reading Result
>HC 100 27 Pass
>CO% 0.50 0.69 Fail
>CO2% 13.9
>RPM 2668
>
>No figures were given for NOx or O2%.
>
>Okay, no big problem, thinks I. The following parts were replaced:
>
>Oil filter & oil
>Air filter
>8 Spark plugs
>Plug wires (including the distributor/coil wire)
>Oxygen Sensor
>
>A mechanic checked the vehicle out, and had a friend of his test
>emissions. Despite the vehicle running excellently (no pings, knocks,
>stalls, bad starts, dirty exhaust etc.) they could only get the CO%
>down to about 0.51 - 0.52.
>
>He tested a load of parts, and reported the following:
>
>1. Fuel pressure test - ok
>2. Coolant temp sensor - ok
>3. PCV - ok
>4. Air filter - new
>5. EGR - 100% working ok
>6. B-map - ok
>7. TPS - ok
>8. Injector Balance - ok
>9. Plugs, Wires - New
>10. Throttle body - cleaned, ok
>11. AIS Motor - ok
>12. Air control motor - ok
>
>He couldn't figure out what the problem was, but suggested I simply
>put it through the test with a gallon of alcohol.
>
>I filled up the gas tank with Mobil Super +, and drove around for a
>week to clean the fuel lines through. I filled up again with Mobil
>Super +, added a quart of dry gas and a gallon of denatured alcohol
>(so I'm guessing the tank would have had about 4% - 5% alcohol), drove
>it 15 miles and put it through inspection.
>
>To my amazement, I got the following results:
>
>Gas Standard Reading Result
>HC 100 30 Pass
>CO% 0.50 0.61 Fail
>CO2% 14.1
>RPM 2430
>
>I'm like .... WTF????
>
>I've been told the local gas stations are putting additives in the gas
>in this area due to the weather, and a lot of cars are losing fuel
>consumption and failing emissions inspections. But this is
>ridiculous. I can hardly import a tank of gas from Florida, so what
>the hell else can I do to get this thing to pass?
>
>Any suggestions gratefully received, short of "move to a state with
>less draconian measures".
--
Blue Moon
02-08-2004, 01:41 PM
#30
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
It turned out that the problem was with the catalytic convertor.
Although the NOx was low, the convertor itself was apparently
installed wrongly. A new cat and exhaust later, and the car passed.
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 18:14:02 GMT, Blue Moon <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I have a 1994 Jeep Grand Cherokee, 8 cylinder. I am having problems
>with passing emissions inspection in north NJ (Sussex County). The
>original results were:
>
>Gas Standard Reading Result
>HC 100 27 Pass
>CO% 0.50 0.69 Fail
>CO2% 13.9
>RPM 2668
>
>No figures were given for NOx or O2%.
>
>Okay, no big problem, thinks I. The following parts were replaced:
>
>Oil filter & oil
>Air filter
>8 Spark plugs
>Plug wires (including the distributor/coil wire)
>Oxygen Sensor
>
>A mechanic checked the vehicle out, and had a friend of his test
>emissions. Despite the vehicle running excellently (no pings, knocks,
>stalls, bad starts, dirty exhaust etc.) they could only get the CO%
>down to about 0.51 - 0.52.
>
>He tested a load of parts, and reported the following:
>
>1. Fuel pressure test - ok
>2. Coolant temp sensor - ok
>3. PCV - ok
>4. Air filter - new
>5. EGR - 100% working ok
>6. B-map - ok
>7. TPS - ok
>8. Injector Balance - ok
>9. Plugs, Wires - New
>10. Throttle body - cleaned, ok
>11. AIS Motor - ok
>12. Air control motor - ok
>
>He couldn't figure out what the problem was, but suggested I simply
>put it through the test with a gallon of alcohol.
>
>I filled up the gas tank with Mobil Super +, and drove around for a
>week to clean the fuel lines through. I filled up again with Mobil
>Super +, added a quart of dry gas and a gallon of denatured alcohol
>(so I'm guessing the tank would have had about 4% - 5% alcohol), drove
>it 15 miles and put it through inspection.
>
>To my amazement, I got the following results:
>
>Gas Standard Reading Result
>HC 100 30 Pass
>CO% 0.50 0.61 Fail
>CO2% 14.1
>RPM 2430
>
>I'm like .... WTF????
>
>I've been told the local gas stations are putting additives in the gas
>in this area due to the weather, and a lot of cars are losing fuel
>consumption and failing emissions inspections. But this is
>ridiculous. I can hardly import a tank of gas from Florida, so what
>the hell else can I do to get this thing to pass?
>
>Any suggestions gratefully received, short of "move to a state with
>less draconian measures".
--
Blue Moon
Although the NOx was low, the convertor itself was apparently
installed wrongly. A new cat and exhaust later, and the car passed.
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 18:14:02 GMT, Blue Moon <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I have a 1994 Jeep Grand Cherokee, 8 cylinder. I am having problems
>with passing emissions inspection in north NJ (Sussex County). The
>original results were:
>
>Gas Standard Reading Result
>HC 100 27 Pass
>CO% 0.50 0.69 Fail
>CO2% 13.9
>RPM 2668
>
>No figures were given for NOx or O2%.
>
>Okay, no big problem, thinks I. The following parts were replaced:
>
>Oil filter & oil
>Air filter
>8 Spark plugs
>Plug wires (including the distributor/coil wire)
>Oxygen Sensor
>
>A mechanic checked the vehicle out, and had a friend of his test
>emissions. Despite the vehicle running excellently (no pings, knocks,
>stalls, bad starts, dirty exhaust etc.) they could only get the CO%
>down to about 0.51 - 0.52.
>
>He tested a load of parts, and reported the following:
>
>1. Fuel pressure test - ok
>2. Coolant temp sensor - ok
>3. PCV - ok
>4. Air filter - new
>5. EGR - 100% working ok
>6. B-map - ok
>7. TPS - ok
>8. Injector Balance - ok
>9. Plugs, Wires - New
>10. Throttle body - cleaned, ok
>11. AIS Motor - ok
>12. Air control motor - ok
>
>He couldn't figure out what the problem was, but suggested I simply
>put it through the test with a gallon of alcohol.
>
>I filled up the gas tank with Mobil Super +, and drove around for a
>week to clean the fuel lines through. I filled up again with Mobil
>Super +, added a quart of dry gas and a gallon of denatured alcohol
>(so I'm guessing the tank would have had about 4% - 5% alcohol), drove
>it 15 miles and put it through inspection.
>
>To my amazement, I got the following results:
>
>Gas Standard Reading Result
>HC 100 30 Pass
>CO% 0.50 0.61 Fail
>CO2% 14.1
>RPM 2430
>
>I'm like .... WTF????
>
>I've been told the local gas stations are putting additives in the gas
>in this area due to the weather, and a lot of cars are losing fuel
>consumption and failing emissions inspections. But this is
>ridiculous. I can hardly import a tank of gas from Florida, so what
>the hell else can I do to get this thing to pass?
>
>Any suggestions gratefully received, short of "move to a state with
>less draconian measures".
--
Blue Moon