Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
bllsht wrote:
>
> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mike
> >> >>
> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >
> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
> >> >pass....
> >> >
> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
> >> >gets 15 ppm.
> >> >
> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
> >> >
> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
> >> >0.16%.
> >> >
> >> >Bye now.....
> >>
> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
> >>
> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
> >>
> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
> >> are higher in Canada.
> >
> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
> >
> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
> >
> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
> >
> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
> >rod' class.
> >
> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
> >therefore:
> >
> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
> >allow up here in Canada.
> >
> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>
> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
> dense, can you?
>
<Chuckle>
Hook, line and...sinker....
My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
how... Scary eh.
Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mike
> >> >>
> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >
> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
> >> >pass....
> >> >
> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
> >> >gets 15 ppm.
> >> >
> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
> >> >
> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
> >> >0.16%.
> >> >
> >> >Bye now.....
> >>
> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
> >>
> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
> >>
> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
> >> are higher in Canada.
> >
> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
> >
> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
> >
> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
> >
> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
> >rod' class.
> >
> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
> >therefore:
> >
> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
> >allow up here in Canada.
> >
> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>
> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
> dense, can you?
>
<Chuckle>
Hook, line and...sinker....
My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
how... Scary eh.
Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
bllsht wrote:
>
> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mike
> >> >>
> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >
> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
> >> >pass....
> >> >
> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
> >> >gets 15 ppm.
> >> >
> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
> >> >
> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
> >> >0.16%.
> >> >
> >> >Bye now.....
> >>
> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
> >>
> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
> >>
> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
> >> are higher in Canada.
> >
> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
> >
> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
> >
> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
> >
> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
> >rod' class.
> >
> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
> >therefore:
> >
> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
> >allow up here in Canada.
> >
> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>
> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
> dense, can you?
>
<Chuckle>
Hook, line and...sinker....
My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
how... Scary eh.
Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mike
> >> >>
> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >
> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
> >> >pass....
> >> >
> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
> >> >gets 15 ppm.
> >> >
> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
> >> >
> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
> >> >0.16%.
> >> >
> >> >Bye now.....
> >>
> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
> >>
> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
> >>
> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
> >> are higher in Canada.
> >
> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
> >
> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
> >
> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
> >
> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
> >rod' class.
> >
> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
> >therefore:
> >
> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
> >allow up here in Canada.
> >
> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>
> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
> dense, can you?
>
<Chuckle>
Hook, line and...sinker....
My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
how... Scary eh.
Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
bllsht wrote:
>
> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mike
> >> >>
> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >
> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
> >> >pass....
> >> >
> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
> >> >gets 15 ppm.
> >> >
> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
> >> >
> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
> >> >0.16%.
> >> >
> >> >Bye now.....
> >>
> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
> >>
> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
> >>
> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
> >> are higher in Canada.
> >
> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
> >
> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
> >
> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
> >
> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
> >rod' class.
> >
> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
> >therefore:
> >
> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
> >allow up here in Canada.
> >
> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>
> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
> dense, can you?
>
<Chuckle>
Hook, line and...sinker....
My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
how... Scary eh.
Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mike
> >> >>
> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >
> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
> >> >pass....
> >> >
> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
> >> >gets 15 ppm.
> >> >
> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
> >> >
> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
> >> >0.16%.
> >> >
> >> >Bye now.....
> >>
> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
> >>
> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
> >>
> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
> >> are higher in Canada.
> >
> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
> >
> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
> >
> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
> >
> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
> >rod' class.
> >
> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
> >therefore:
> >
> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
> >allow up here in Canada.
> >
> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>
> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
> dense, can you?
>
<Chuckle>
Hook, line and...sinker....
My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
how... Scary eh.
Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
bllsht wrote:
>
> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mike
> >> >>
> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >
> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
> >> >pass....
> >> >
> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
> >> >gets 15 ppm.
> >> >
> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
> >> >
> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
> >> >0.16%.
> >> >
> >> >Bye now.....
> >>
> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
> >>
> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
> >>
> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
> >> are higher in Canada.
> >
> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
> >
> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
> >
> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
> >
> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
> >rod' class.
> >
> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
> >therefore:
> >
> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
> >allow up here in Canada.
> >
> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>
> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
> dense, can you?
>
<Chuckle>
Hook, line and...sinker....
My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
how... Scary eh.
Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mike
> >> >>
> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >
> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
> >> >pass....
> >> >
> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
> >> >gets 15 ppm.
> >> >
> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
> >> >
> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
> >> >0.16%.
> >> >
> >> >Bye now.....
> >>
> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
> >>
> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
> >>
> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
> >> are higher in Canada.
> >
> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
> >
> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
> >
> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
> >
> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
> >rod' class.
> >
> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
> >therefore:
> >
> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
> >allow up here in Canada.
> >
> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>
> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
> dense, can you?
>
<Chuckle>
Hook, line and...sinker....
My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
how... Scary eh.
Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
In message <42556555.24BD0C8A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
>> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
>> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
>> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
>> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
>> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
>> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Mike
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >
>> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
>> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
>> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
>> >> >pass....
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
>> >> >gets 15 ppm.
>> >> >
>> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
>> >> >0.16%.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bye now.....
>> >>
>> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
>> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
>> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
>> >>
>> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
>> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
>> >> are higher in Canada.
>> >
>> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
>> >
>> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
>> >
>> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
>> >
>> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
>> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
>> >rod' class.
>> >
>> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
>> >therefore:
>> >
>> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
>> >allow up here in Canada.
>> >
>> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>>
>> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
>> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
>> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
>> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
>> dense, can you?
>>
>
><Chuckle>
>
>Hook, line and...sinker....
>
>My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
>me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
>
>On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
>
>Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Once again, you're comparing Bill's 1978, 6400lb GVW vehicle to a 1989, 4000lb
GVW vehicle. I guess it's just too much to ask of your poor little brain.
Later.
>
>Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
>enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
>how... Scary eh.
>
>Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
>
>http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
>
>Mike
>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
>> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
>> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
>> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
>> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
>> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
>> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Mike
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >
>> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
>> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
>> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
>> >> >pass....
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
>> >> >gets 15 ppm.
>> >> >
>> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
>> >> >0.16%.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bye now.....
>> >>
>> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
>> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
>> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
>> >>
>> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
>> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
>> >> are higher in Canada.
>> >
>> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
>> >
>> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
>> >
>> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
>> >
>> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
>> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
>> >rod' class.
>> >
>> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
>> >therefore:
>> >
>> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
>> >allow up here in Canada.
>> >
>> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>>
>> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
>> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
>> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
>> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
>> dense, can you?
>>
>
><Chuckle>
>
>Hook, line and...sinker....
>
>My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
>me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
>
>On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
>
>Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Once again, you're comparing Bill's 1978, 6400lb GVW vehicle to a 1989, 4000lb
GVW vehicle. I guess it's just too much to ask of your poor little brain.
Later.
>
>Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
>enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
>how... Scary eh.
>
>Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
>
>http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
>
>Mike
>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
In message <42556555.24BD0C8A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
>> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
>> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
>> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
>> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
>> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
>> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Mike
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >
>> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
>> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
>> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
>> >> >pass....
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
>> >> >gets 15 ppm.
>> >> >
>> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
>> >> >0.16%.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bye now.....
>> >>
>> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
>> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
>> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
>> >>
>> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
>> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
>> >> are higher in Canada.
>> >
>> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
>> >
>> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
>> >
>> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
>> >
>> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
>> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
>> >rod' class.
>> >
>> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
>> >therefore:
>> >
>> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
>> >allow up here in Canada.
>> >
>> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>>
>> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
>> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
>> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
>> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
>> dense, can you?
>>
>
><Chuckle>
>
>Hook, line and...sinker....
>
>My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
>me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
>
>On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
>
>Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Once again, you're comparing Bill's 1978, 6400lb GVW vehicle to a 1989, 4000lb
GVW vehicle. I guess it's just too much to ask of your poor little brain.
Later.
>
>Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
>enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
>how... Scary eh.
>
>Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
>
>http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
>
>Mike
>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
>> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
>> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
>> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
>> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
>> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
>> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Mike
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >
>> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
>> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
>> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
>> >> >pass....
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
>> >> >gets 15 ppm.
>> >> >
>> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
>> >> >0.16%.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bye now.....
>> >>
>> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
>> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
>> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
>> >>
>> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
>> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
>> >> are higher in Canada.
>> >
>> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
>> >
>> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
>> >
>> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
>> >
>> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
>> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
>> >rod' class.
>> >
>> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
>> >therefore:
>> >
>> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
>> >allow up here in Canada.
>> >
>> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>>
>> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
>> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
>> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
>> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
>> dense, can you?
>>
>
><Chuckle>
>
>Hook, line and...sinker....
>
>My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
>me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
>
>On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
>
>Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Once again, you're comparing Bill's 1978, 6400lb GVW vehicle to a 1989, 4000lb
GVW vehicle. I guess it's just too much to ask of your poor little brain.
Later.
>
>Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
>enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
>how... Scary eh.
>
>Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
>
>http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
>
>Mike
>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
In message <42556555.24BD0C8A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
>> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
>> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
>> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
>> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
>> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
>> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Mike
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >
>> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
>> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
>> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
>> >> >pass....
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
>> >> >gets 15 ppm.
>> >> >
>> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
>> >> >0.16%.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bye now.....
>> >>
>> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
>> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
>> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
>> >>
>> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
>> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
>> >> are higher in Canada.
>> >
>> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
>> >
>> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
>> >
>> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
>> >
>> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
>> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
>> >rod' class.
>> >
>> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
>> >therefore:
>> >
>> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
>> >allow up here in Canada.
>> >
>> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>>
>> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
>> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
>> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
>> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
>> dense, can you?
>>
>
><Chuckle>
>
>Hook, line and...sinker....
>
>My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
>me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
>
>On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
>
>Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Once again, you're comparing Bill's 1978, 6400lb GVW vehicle to a 1989, 4000lb
GVW vehicle. I guess it's just too much to ask of your poor little brain.
Later.
>
>Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
>enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
>how... Scary eh.
>
>Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
>
>http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
>
>Mike
>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
>> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
>> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
>> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
>> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
>> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
>> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Mike
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >
>> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
>> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
>> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
>> >> >pass....
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
>> >> >gets 15 ppm.
>> >> >
>> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
>> >> >0.16%.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bye now.....
>> >>
>> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
>> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
>> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
>> >>
>> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
>> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
>> >> are higher in Canada.
>> >
>> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
>> >
>> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
>> >
>> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
>> >
>> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
>> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
>> >rod' class.
>> >
>> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
>> >therefore:
>> >
>> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
>> >allow up here in Canada.
>> >
>> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>>
>> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
>> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
>> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
>> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
>> dense, can you?
>>
>
><Chuckle>
>
>Hook, line and...sinker....
>
>My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
>me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
>
>On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
>
>Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Once again, you're comparing Bill's 1978, 6400lb GVW vehicle to a 1989, 4000lb
GVW vehicle. I guess it's just too much to ask of your poor little brain.
Later.
>
>Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
>enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
>how... Scary eh.
>
>Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
>
>http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
>
>Mike
>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
In message <42556555.24BD0C8A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
>> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
>> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
>> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
>> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
>> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
>> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Mike
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >
>> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
>> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
>> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
>> >> >pass....
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
>> >> >gets 15 ppm.
>> >> >
>> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
>> >> >0.16%.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bye now.....
>> >>
>> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
>> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
>> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
>> >>
>> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
>> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
>> >> are higher in Canada.
>> >
>> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
>> >
>> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
>> >
>> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
>> >
>> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
>> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
>> >rod' class.
>> >
>> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
>> >therefore:
>> >
>> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
>> >allow up here in Canada.
>> >
>> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>>
>> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
>> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
>> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
>> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
>> dense, can you?
>>
>
><Chuckle>
>
>Hook, line and...sinker....
>
>My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
>me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
>
>On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
>
>Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Once again, you're comparing Bill's 1978, 6400lb GVW vehicle to a 1989, 4000lb
GVW vehicle. I guess it's just too much to ask of your poor little brain.
Later.
>
>Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
>enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
>how... Scary eh.
>
>Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
>
>http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
>
>Mike
>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4253DD72.8C161A9C@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4252C4CA.D73B8E43@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In message <42513AE3.A39A2BCC@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >bllsht wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In message <424EA779.BA298F23@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Bad guess there bllsht, we have compared paperwork with california folks
>> >> >> >> >online several times and we have higher standards here.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --------. Even the NOx pass/fail cut points you posted here were more than
>> >> >> >> twice what California's are.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Give it up, every time you post this crap we break out our paperwork
>> >> >> >that says different. You are like a broken record and I don't feel like
>> >> >> >proving you wrong with the exact same info 'once again'. We have posted
>> >> >> >it several times, but I guess with all that computer learning you got,
>> >> >> >there is nothing left over for real facts eh.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Mike
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >
>> >> >LOL! So the only post you refuse to comment about is the one where Bill
>> >> >in California 'once again' shows his emissions numbers and the 'fact'
>> >> >that he is allowed to have way higher readings than us and still
>> >> >pass....
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest HC we are allowed is 300 ppm, he is allowed 329 and my CJ7
>> >> >gets 15 ppm.
>> >> >
>> >> >We used to be allowed 350 ppm HC, but they lowered it.
>> >> >
>> >> >The highest CO we are allowed is 1.6% and Bill is allowed 3.83%! I get
>> >> >0.16%.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bye now.....
>> >>
>> >> LOL. You are comparing cut points for a 78 Bronco with a cat and air injection
>> >> to cut points for a 86 CJ with a computer? Surely nobody here is as stupid as
>> >> you think they are. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
>> >>
>> >> You also chose to ignore NOx in your reply. If you recall, and what I've said
>> >> all along is the OP's NOx emissions will suffer greatly using the Nutter hack.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah yeah, I know, you don't get tested for NOx, but YJs do and the cut points
>> >> are higher in Canada.
>> >
>> >Brrraaapppp! Wrong.
>> >
>> >ROTFLMAO!!!!
>> >
>> >This whole discussion was about a CJ or YJ 'without' the computer!!!!
>> >
>> >I got tested at the highest allowed for any tested vehicle allowed on
>> >the road because I have a 1978 Jeep engine in mine. I am in the 'hot
>> >rod' class.
>> >
>> >You are not allowed any higher for anything than a 'hot rod' class, so
>> >therefore:
>> >
>> >California will allow vehicles that pollute more on the roads than they
>> >allow up here in Canada.
>> >
>> >NOx aside, don't matter, they are allowed higher HC and CO levels.
>>
>> My first post in this thread said the OP would fail for NOx in California, where
>> he is, if he lived where loaded mode testing is done. You've whined and cried
>> and argued everything but NOx here. Even now you say "NOx aside, don't matter",
>> even though that was my whole point to begin with. You can't really be that
>> dense, can you?
>>
>
><Chuckle>
>
>Hook, line and...sinker....
>
>My friend Norm Mitchell who posts here now and then has a Nuttered (by
>me) 89 YJ that 'has' to pass all the emissions including NOx.
>
>On his test he got 1500 for NOx in Toronto Canada.
>
>Bill ------ is allowed 2139 IN CALIFORNIA!!!!!
Once again, you're comparing Bill's 1978, 6400lb GVW vehicle to a 1989, 4000lb
GVW vehicle. I guess it's just too much to ask of your poor little brain.
Later.
>
>Some of us backyard hacks can actually tune up a carb vehicle good
>enough to pass emissions without needing a computer to help or tell us
>how... Scary eh.
>
>Here is a link to Norm's post when he passed emissions:
>
>http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=Nor...al.com&rnum=33
>
>Mike
>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
In message <4254C24B.675504B7@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:
> I believe everyone else here, that may be interested, read from the
>sites I provided.
So your claim, as quoted here:
> Geez, they stopped using the Exhaust Gases Recycling valve twenty
>years ago.
Is from one of the sites you posted here? I must have missed that one. LOL!!!
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> LMAO. Where do you get your information?
> I believe everyone else here, that may be interested, read from the
>sites I provided.
So your claim, as quoted here:
> Geez, they stopped using the Exhaust Gases Recycling valve twenty
>years ago.
Is from one of the sites you posted here? I must have missed that one. LOL!!!
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> LMAO. Where do you get your information?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Nutter Bypass Ignition Modification???
In message <4254C24B.675504B7@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:
> I believe everyone else here, that may be interested, read from the
>sites I provided.
So your claim, as quoted here:
> Geez, they stopped using the Exhaust Gases Recycling valve twenty
>years ago.
Is from one of the sites you posted here? I must have missed that one. LOL!!!
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> LMAO. Where do you get your information?
> I believe everyone else here, that may be interested, read from the
>sites I provided.
So your claim, as quoted here:
> Geez, they stopped using the Exhaust Gases Recycling valve twenty
>years ago.
Is from one of the sites you posted here? I must have missed that one. LOL!!!
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> LMAO. Where do you get your information?