This thread is about a 1987 YJ, which by the way has an EGR valve.

In message <42577DFF.C1BB155@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:

> Like, can you find an "Exhaust Gas Recirculation" valve in the TJ
>index?

Have you seen a 20 year old TJ?

EGR is alive and well today on many vehicles. Jeeps included.



>http://www.----------.com/97TJindex.pdf
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:--------------------
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> You're obviously confused, so I'll make it simple for you.
>>
>> You said they stopped using EGR 20 years ago...
>>
>> Not true!!!
>>
>> In message <42562316.34FA8B15@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:
>>
>> > You know the sites were on the previous post. I must sound like a
>> >broken record, trying to beat it into backwards mind.
>> > And my full-sized Bronco weights less than your wannabee.
>> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>> >mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>> >
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So your claim, as quoted here:
>> >>
>> >> Is from one of the sites you posted here? I must have missed that one. LOL!!!

 

This thread is about a 1987 YJ, which by the way has an EGR valve.

In message <42577DFF.C1BB155@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:

> Like, can you find an "Exhaust Gas Recirculation" valve in the TJ
>index?

Have you seen a 20 year old TJ?

EGR is alive and well today on many vehicles. Jeeps included.



>http://www.----------.com/97TJindex.pdf
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:--------------------
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> You're obviously confused, so I'll make it simple for you.
>>
>> You said they stopped using EGR 20 years ago...
>>
>> Not true!!!
>>
>> In message <42562316.34FA8B15@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:
>>
>> > You know the sites were on the previous post. I must sound like a
>> >broken record, trying to beat it into backwards mind.
>> > And my full-sized Bronco weights less than your wannabee.
>> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>> >mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>> >
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So your claim, as quoted here:
>> >>
>> >> Is from one of the sites you posted here? I must have missed that one. LOL!!!

 

This thread is about a 1987 YJ, which by the way has an EGR valve.

In message <42577DFF.C1BB155@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:

> Like, can you find an "Exhaust Gas Recirculation" valve in the TJ
>index?

Have you seen a 20 year old TJ?

EGR is alive and well today on many vehicles. Jeeps included.



>http://www.----------.com/97TJindex.pdf
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:--------------------
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> You're obviously confused, so I'll make it simple for you.
>>
>> You said they stopped using EGR 20 years ago...
>>
>> Not true!!!
>>
>> In message <42562316.34FA8B15@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:
>>
>> > You know the sites were on the previous post. I must sound like a
>> >broken record, trying to beat it into backwards mind.
>> > And my full-sized Bronco weights less than your wannabee.
>> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>> >mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>> >
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So your claim, as quoted here:
>> >>
>> >> Is from one of the sites you posted here? I must have missed that one. LOL!!!

 

This thread is about a 1987 YJ, which by the way has an EGR valve.

In message <42577DFF.C1BB155@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:

> Like, can you find an "Exhaust Gas Recirculation" valve in the TJ
>index?

Have you seen a 20 year old TJ?

EGR is alive and well today on many vehicles. Jeeps included.



>http://www.----------.com/97TJindex.pdf
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:--------------------
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> You're obviously confused, so I'll make it simple for you.
>>
>> You said they stopped using EGR 20 years ago...
>>
>> Not true!!!
>>
>> In message <42562316.34FA8B15@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:
>>
>> > You know the sites were on the previous post. I must sound like a
>> >broken record, trying to beat it into backwards mind.
>> > And my full-sized Bronco weights less than your wannabee.
>> > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>> >mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>> >
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So your claim, as quoted here:
>> >>
>> >> Is from one of the sites you posted here? I must have missed that one. LOL!!!

 

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit I see. I never told the OP
to do anything except to clean his carb and how to do a Nutter that can
be reversed for 'free'....

So I guess seeing as you avoided the question, you are unable to tune a
carb engine to run in California eh?

No computer, no clue....

Mike

bllsht wrote:
>
> In message <4257CE95.D591492A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >LOL! I give up.
> >
> >So you are telling us there is no way a carburetor engine can pass
> >emissions in California without computer assist, eh?
> >
> >If you say so.....
> >
> >Oh, we just fluked that pass on Norm's NOx, we weren't even trying to
> >dial in lower NOx which we could have done if needed.....
> >
> >But hey, if that just 'can't' be done down on that left coast, well...
> >I feel really sorry folks have to put up with such poor 'mechanics'. It
> >still comes down to 'no computer, no clue'.
>
> As usual, when you've painted yourself into a corner, it's the crappy mechanics
> that are the problem, eh? Well, with your lack of knowledge emission systems
> and test procedures, you've showed us what you're capable of. You got your
> buddy's Jeep to get NOx up to the 'gross polluter' limits. Congratulations!
>
> To tell the OP to do this hack, after he's already told you he just spent 6
> months trying to pass smog, is irresponsible. You're setting him up to fail,
> and spend a bunch of money restoring it to factory specs. There is no cost
> limit on missing or modified emission controls, and he'll be required to spend
> what it takes to restore it, and make it pass.
>
> Great advice from a guy with no clue!
>
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4256A00F.FB0F246@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> ><snip>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >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.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> >> 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.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >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.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Too funny, you are the 'foole' that keeps saying no way can the Nutter
> >> >pass NOx and I just proved you wrong.
> >>
> >> You just proved that the hack passes Canada's loose NOx standards for an 89 YJ.
> >> The OP lives in California, and 1500 for NOx would be very close to being a
> >> gross polluter here.
> >>
> >> California pass/fail cutpoints for an 89 YJ would be:
> >> 5015 test - 1015ppm NOx
> >> 2525 test - 875ppm NOx
> >>
> >> Once again, you are actually the fool.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >There are a 'lot' of Nuttered jobs out there that I personally know
> >> >about and we all have passed emissions.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Once again, the OP is in California. It won't fly here.
> >>
> >> >Oh by the by, a YJ has a way higher GVW than 4000 lb, even the old CJ7
> >> >has a GVW of 4450.....
> >>
> >> Still nearly 2000lb less than Bills 6400lb Bronco, which places it in a
> >> different emissions category in California.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Mike
> >> >86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> >> >88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

 

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit I see. I never told the OP
to do anything except to clean his carb and how to do a Nutter that can
be reversed for 'free'....

So I guess seeing as you avoided the question, you are unable to tune a
carb engine to run in California eh?

No computer, no clue....

Mike

bllsht wrote:
>
> In message <4257CE95.D591492A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >LOL! I give up.
> >
> >So you are telling us there is no way a carburetor engine can pass
> >emissions in California without computer assist, eh?
> >
> >If you say so.....
> >
> >Oh, we just fluked that pass on Norm's NOx, we weren't even trying to
> >dial in lower NOx which we could have done if needed.....
> >
> >But hey, if that just 'can't' be done down on that left coast, well...
> >I feel really sorry folks have to put up with such poor 'mechanics'. It
> >still comes down to 'no computer, no clue'.
>
> As usual, when you've painted yourself into a corner, it's the crappy mechanics
> that are the problem, eh? Well, with your lack of knowledge emission systems
> and test procedures, you've showed us what you're capable of. You got your
> buddy's Jeep to get NOx up to the 'gross polluter' limits. Congratulations!
>
> To tell the OP to do this hack, after he's already told you he just spent 6
> months trying to pass smog, is irresponsible. You're setting him up to fail,
> and spend a bunch of money restoring it to factory specs. There is no cost
> limit on missing or modified emission controls, and he'll be required to spend
> what it takes to restore it, and make it pass.
>
> Great advice from a guy with no clue!
>
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4256A00F.FB0F246@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> ><snip>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >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.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> >> 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.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >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.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Too funny, you are the 'foole' that keeps saying no way can the Nutter
> >> >pass NOx and I just proved you wrong.
> >>
> >> You just proved that the hack passes Canada's loose NOx standards for an 89 YJ.
> >> The OP lives in California, and 1500 for NOx would be very close to being a
> >> gross polluter here.
> >>
> >> California pass/fail cutpoints for an 89 YJ would be:
> >> 5015 test - 1015ppm NOx
> >> 2525 test - 875ppm NOx
> >>
> >> Once again, you are actually the fool.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >There are a 'lot' of Nuttered jobs out there that I personally know
> >> >about and we all have passed emissions.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Once again, the OP is in California. It won't fly here.
> >>
> >> >Oh by the by, a YJ has a way higher GVW than 4000 lb, even the old CJ7
> >> >has a GVW of 4450.....
> >>
> >> Still nearly 2000lb less than Bills 6400lb Bronco, which places it in a
> >> different emissions category in California.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Mike
> >> >86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> >> >88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

 

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit I see. I never told the OP
to do anything except to clean his carb and how to do a Nutter that can
be reversed for 'free'....

So I guess seeing as you avoided the question, you are unable to tune a
carb engine to run in California eh?

No computer, no clue....

Mike

bllsht wrote:
>
> In message <4257CE95.D591492A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >LOL! I give up.
> >
> >So you are telling us there is no way a carburetor engine can pass
> >emissions in California without computer assist, eh?
> >
> >If you say so.....
> >
> >Oh, we just fluked that pass on Norm's NOx, we weren't even trying to
> >dial in lower NOx which we could have done if needed.....
> >
> >But hey, if that just 'can't' be done down on that left coast, well...
> >I feel really sorry folks have to put up with such poor 'mechanics'. It
> >still comes down to 'no computer, no clue'.
>
> As usual, when you've painted yourself into a corner, it's the crappy mechanics
> that are the problem, eh? Well, with your lack of knowledge emission systems
> and test procedures, you've showed us what you're capable of. You got your
> buddy's Jeep to get NOx up to the 'gross polluter' limits. Congratulations!
>
> To tell the OP to do this hack, after he's already told you he just spent 6
> months trying to pass smog, is irresponsible. You're setting him up to fail,
> and spend a bunch of money restoring it to factory specs. There is no cost
> limit on missing or modified emission controls, and he'll be required to spend
> what it takes to restore it, and make it pass.
>
> Great advice from a guy with no clue!
>
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4256A00F.FB0F246@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> ><snip>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >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.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> >> 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.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >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.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Too funny, you are the 'foole' that keeps saying no way can the Nutter
> >> >pass NOx and I just proved you wrong.
> >>
> >> You just proved that the hack passes Canada's loose NOx standards for an 89 YJ.
> >> The OP lives in California, and 1500 for NOx would be very close to being a
> >> gross polluter here.
> >>
> >> California pass/fail cutpoints for an 89 YJ would be:
> >> 5015 test - 1015ppm NOx
> >> 2525 test - 875ppm NOx
> >>
> >> Once again, you are actually the fool.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >There are a 'lot' of Nuttered jobs out there that I personally know
> >> >about and we all have passed emissions.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Once again, the OP is in California. It won't fly here.
> >>
> >> >Oh by the by, a YJ has a way higher GVW than 4000 lb, even the old CJ7
> >> >has a GVW of 4450.....
> >>
> >> Still nearly 2000lb less than Bills 6400lb Bronco, which places it in a
> >> different emissions category in California.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Mike
> >> >86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> >> >88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

 

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit I see. I never told the OP
to do anything except to clean his carb and how to do a Nutter that can
be reversed for 'free'....

So I guess seeing as you avoided the question, you are unable to tune a
carb engine to run in California eh?

No computer, no clue....

Mike

bllsht wrote:
>
> In message <4257CE95.D591492A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>
> >LOL! I give up.
> >
> >So you are telling us there is no way a carburetor engine can pass
> >emissions in California without computer assist, eh?
> >
> >If you say so.....
> >
> >Oh, we just fluked that pass on Norm's NOx, we weren't even trying to
> >dial in lower NOx which we could have done if needed.....
> >
> >But hey, if that just 'can't' be done down on that left coast, well...
> >I feel really sorry folks have to put up with such poor 'mechanics'. It
> >still comes down to 'no computer, no clue'.
>
> As usual, when you've painted yourself into a corner, it's the crappy mechanics
> that are the problem, eh? Well, with your lack of knowledge emission systems
> and test procedures, you've showed us what you're capable of. You got your
> buddy's Jeep to get NOx up to the 'gross polluter' limits. Congratulations!
>
> To tell the OP to do this hack, after he's already told you he just spent 6
> months trying to pass smog, is irresponsible. You're setting him up to fail,
> and spend a bunch of money restoring it to factory specs. There is no cost
> limit on missing or modified emission controls, and he'll be required to spend
> what it takes to restore it, and make it pass.
>
> Great advice from a guy with no clue!
>
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >bllsht wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <4256A00F.FB0F246@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
> >>
> >> ><snip>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >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.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> >> 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.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >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.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Too funny, you are the 'foole' that keeps saying no way can the Nutter
> >> >pass NOx and I just proved you wrong.
> >>
> >> You just proved that the hack passes Canada's loose NOx standards for an 89 YJ.
> >> The OP lives in California, and 1500 for NOx would be very close to being a
> >> gross polluter here.
> >>
> >> California pass/fail cutpoints for an 89 YJ would be:
> >> 5015 test - 1015ppm NOx
> >> 2525 test - 875ppm NOx
> >>
> >> Once again, you are actually the fool.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >There are a 'lot' of Nuttered jobs out there that I personally know
> >> >about and we all have passed emissions.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Once again, the OP is in California. It won't fly here.
> >>
> >> >Oh by the by, a YJ has a way higher GVW than 4000 lb, even the old CJ7
> >> >has a GVW of 4450.....
> >>
> >> Still nearly 2000lb less than Bills 6400lb Bronco, which places it in a
> >> different emissions category in California.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Mike
> >> >86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> >> >88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

 

You obviously don't understand how NOx is created, how it's controlled, and how
emission testing is done.

Anyone can tweak enough and get it to pass out the pipe. The problem is you
also have to pass a visual and functional test as well as the emissions test.

Passing out the tailpipe alone may work in Canada, but it ain't gonna fly here.

'Trial and error' will get a bit expensive as well, unless the OP has access to
a dyno and smog machine.

In message <425C0E2E.F099D7FF@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:

>Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit I see. I never told the OP
>to do anything except to clean his carb and how to do a Nutter that can
>be reversed for 'free'....
>
>So I guess seeing as you avoided the question, you are unable to tune a
>carb engine to run in California eh?
>
>No computer, no clue....
>
>Mike
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4257CE95.D591492A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >LOL! I give up.
>> >
>> >So you are telling us there is no way a carburetor engine can pass
>> >emissions in California without computer assist, eh?
>> >
>> >If you say so.....
>> >
>> >Oh, we just fluked that pass on Norm's NOx, we weren't even trying to
>> >dial in lower NOx which we could have done if needed.....
>> >
>> >But hey, if that just 'can't' be done down on that left coast, well...
>> >I feel really sorry folks have to put up with such poor 'mechanics'. It
>> >still comes down to 'no computer, no clue'.
>>
>> As usual, when you've painted yourself into a corner, it's the crappy mechanics
>> that are the problem, eh? Well, with your lack of knowledge emission systems
>> and test procedures, you've showed us what you're capable of. You got your
>> buddy's Jeep to get NOx up to the 'gross polluter' limits. Congratulations!
>>
>> To tell the OP to do this hack, after he's already told you he just spent 6
>> months trying to pass smog, is irresponsible. You're setting him up to fail,
>> and spend a bunch of money restoring it to factory specs. There is no cost
>> limit on missing or modified emission controls, and he'll be required to spend
>> what it takes to restore it, and make it pass.
>>
>> Great advice from a guy with no clue!
>>
>> >
>> >Mike
>> >
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4256A00F.FB0F246@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> ><snip>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >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.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> 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.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >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.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Too funny, you are the 'foole' that keeps saying no way can the Nutter
>> >> >pass NOx and I just proved you wrong.
>> >>
>> >> You just proved that the hack passes Canada's loose NOx standards for an 89 YJ.
>> >> The OP lives in California, and 1500 for NOx would be very close to being a
>> >> gross polluter here.
>> >>
>> >> California pass/fail cutpoints for an 89 YJ would be:
>> >> 5015 test - 1015ppm NOx
>> >> 2525 test - 875ppm NOx
>> >>
>> >> Once again, you are actually the fool.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >There are a 'lot' of Nuttered jobs out there that I personally know
>> >> >about and we all have passed emissions.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Once again, the OP is in California. It won't fly here.
>> >>
>> >> >Oh by the by, a YJ has a way higher GVW than 4000 lb, even the old CJ7
>> >> >has a GVW of 4450.....
>> >>
>> >> Still nearly 2000lb less than Bills 6400lb Bronco, which places it in a
>> >> different emissions category in California.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Mike
>> >> >86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>> >> >88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

 

You obviously don't understand how NOx is created, how it's controlled, and how
emission testing is done.

Anyone can tweak enough and get it to pass out the pipe. The problem is you
also have to pass a visual and functional test as well as the emissions test.

Passing out the tailpipe alone may work in Canada, but it ain't gonna fly here.

'Trial and error' will get a bit expensive as well, unless the OP has access to
a dyno and smog machine.

In message <425C0E2E.F099D7FF@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:

>Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit I see. I never told the OP
>to do anything except to clean his carb and how to do a Nutter that can
>be reversed for 'free'....
>
>So I guess seeing as you avoided the question, you are unable to tune a
>carb engine to run in California eh?
>
>No computer, no clue....
>
>Mike
>
>bllsht wrote:
>>
>> In message <4257CE95.D591492A@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>>
>> >LOL! I give up.
>> >
>> >So you are telling us there is no way a carburetor engine can pass
>> >emissions in California without computer assist, eh?
>> >
>> >If you say so.....
>> >
>> >Oh, we just fluked that pass on Norm's NOx, we weren't even trying to
>> >dial in lower NOx which we could have done if needed.....
>> >
>> >But hey, if that just 'can't' be done down on that left coast, well...
>> >I feel really sorry folks have to put up with such poor 'mechanics'. It
>> >still comes down to 'no computer, no clue'.
>>
>> As usual, when you've painted yourself into a corner, it's the crappy mechanics
>> that are the problem, eh? Well, with your lack of knowledge emission systems
>> and test procedures, you've showed us what you're capable of. You got your
>> buddy's Jeep to get NOx up to the 'gross polluter' limits. Congratulations!
>>
>> To tell the OP to do this hack, after he's already told you he just spent 6
>> months trying to pass smog, is irresponsible. You're setting him up to fail,
>> and spend a bunch of money restoring it to factory specs. There is no cost
>> limit on missing or modified emission controls, and he'll be required to spend
>> what it takes to restore it, and make it pass.
>>
>> Great advice from a guy with no clue!
>>
>> >
>> >Mike
>> >
>> >bllsht wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In message <4256A00F.FB0F246@sympatico.ca>, "Mike Romain" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> ><snip>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >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.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> The fact is you can't prove your claim because it's not true.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> 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.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >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.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Too funny, you are the 'foole' that keeps saying no way can the Nutter
>> >> >pass NOx and I just proved you wrong.
>> >>
>> >> You just proved that the hack passes Canada's loose NOx standards for an 89 YJ.
>> >> The OP lives in California, and 1500 for NOx would be very close to being a
>> >> gross polluter here.
>> >>
>> >> California pass/fail cutpoints for an 89 YJ would be:
>> >> 5015 test - 1015ppm NOx
>> >> 2525 test - 875ppm NOx
>> >>
>> >> Once again, you are actually the fool.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >There are a 'lot' of Nuttered jobs out there that I personally know
>> >> >about and we all have passed emissions.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Once again, the OP is in California. It won't fly here.
>> >>
>> >> >Oh by the by, a YJ has a way higher GVW than 4000 lb, even the old CJ7
>> >> >has a GVW of 4450.....
>> >>
>> >> Still nearly 2000lb less than Bills 6400lb Bronco, which places it in a
>> >> different emissions category in California.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Mike
>> >> >86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>> >> >88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's