Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
#111
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
goes away once warmed up though.
It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
"stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
/Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
> HA!
>
> I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> CO into the air.
>
> Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> crap' numbers eh?
>
> Mike
>
> Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> >
> > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
think
> > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> >
> > /Peter
> >
> > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > >
> > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > >
> > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > >
> > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > >
> > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
regardless
> > of
> > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > >
> > > > What are the reasons?
It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
goes away once warmed up though.
It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
"stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
/Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
> HA!
>
> I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> CO into the air.
>
> Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> crap' numbers eh?
>
> Mike
>
> Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> >
> > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
think
> > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> >
> > /Peter
> >
> > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > >
> > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > >
> > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > >
> > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > >
> > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
regardless
> > of
> > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > >
> > > > What are the reasons?
#112
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
goes away once warmed up though.
It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
"stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
/Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
> HA!
>
> I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> CO into the air.
>
> Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> crap' numbers eh?
>
> Mike
>
> Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> >
> > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
think
> > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> >
> > /Peter
> >
> > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > >
> > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > >
> > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > >
> > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > >
> > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
regardless
> > of
> > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > >
> > > > What are the reasons?
It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
goes away once warmed up though.
It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
"stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
/Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
> HA!
>
> I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> CO into the air.
>
> Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> crap' numbers eh?
>
> Mike
>
> Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> >
> > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
think
> > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> >
> > /Peter
> >
> > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > >
> > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > >
> > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > >
> > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > >
> > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
regardless
> > of
> > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > >
> > > > What are the reasons?
#113
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
I have a '71 Bronco that is that way. I even considered putting a
freeflow CAT on it to make it smell better but I'm not sure what that
would do to the engine.
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
>
>
>>HA!
>>
>>I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
>>CO into the air.
>>
>>Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
>>crap' numbers eh?
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>>
>>>Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
>>>Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
>
> think
>
>>>I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>>>
>>>/Peter
>>>
>>>"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
>>>
>>>>It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
>>>>
>>>>They are heavier than they look too.
>>>>
>>>>Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
>>>>
>>>>Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>>>>
>>>>me@privacy.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
>
> regardless
>
>>>of
>>>
>>>>>>what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>>What are the reasons?
>
>
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
71 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco
03 TJ Rubicon - Rubicon Express 4.5"
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase')
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
freeflow CAT on it to make it smell better but I'm not sure what that
would do to the engine.
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
>
>
>>HA!
>>
>>I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
>>CO into the air.
>>
>>Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
>>crap' numbers eh?
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>>
>>>Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
>>>Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
>
> think
>
>>>I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>>>
>>>/Peter
>>>
>>>"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
>>>
>>>>It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
>>>>
>>>>They are heavier than they look too.
>>>>
>>>>Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
>>>>
>>>>Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>>>>
>>>>me@privacy.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
>
> regardless
>
>>>of
>>>
>>>>>>what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>>What are the reasons?
>
>
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
71 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco
03 TJ Rubicon - Rubicon Express 4.5"
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase')
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
#114
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
I have a '71 Bronco that is that way. I even considered putting a
freeflow CAT on it to make it smell better but I'm not sure what that
would do to the engine.
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
>
>
>>HA!
>>
>>I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
>>CO into the air.
>>
>>Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
>>crap' numbers eh?
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>>
>>>Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
>>>Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
>
> think
>
>>>I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>>>
>>>/Peter
>>>
>>>"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
>>>
>>>>It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
>>>>
>>>>They are heavier than they look too.
>>>>
>>>>Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
>>>>
>>>>Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>>>>
>>>>me@privacy.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
>
> regardless
>
>>>of
>>>
>>>>>>what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>>What are the reasons?
>
>
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
71 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco
03 TJ Rubicon - Rubicon Express 4.5"
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase')
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
freeflow CAT on it to make it smell better but I'm not sure what that
would do to the engine.
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
>
>
>>HA!
>>
>>I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
>>CO into the air.
>>
>>Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
>>crap' numbers eh?
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>>
>>>Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
>>>Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
>
> think
>
>>>I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>>>
>>>/Peter
>>>
>>>"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
>>>
>>>>It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
>>>>
>>>>They are heavier than they look too.
>>>>
>>>>Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
>>>>
>>>>Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>>>>
>>>>me@privacy.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
>
> regardless
>
>>>of
>>>
>>>>>>what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>>What are the reasons?
>
>
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
71 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco
03 TJ Rubicon - Rubicon Express 4.5"
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase')
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
#115
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
I have a '71 Bronco that is that way. I even considered putting a
freeflow CAT on it to make it smell better but I'm not sure what that
would do to the engine.
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
>
>
>>HA!
>>
>>I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
>>CO into the air.
>>
>>Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
>>crap' numbers eh?
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>>
>>>Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
>>>Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
>
> think
>
>>>I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>>>
>>>/Peter
>>>
>>>"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
>>>
>>>>It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
>>>>
>>>>They are heavier than they look too.
>>>>
>>>>Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
>>>>
>>>>Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>>>>
>>>>me@privacy.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
>
> regardless
>
>>>of
>>>
>>>>>>what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>>What are the reasons?
>
>
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
71 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco
03 TJ Rubicon - Rubicon Express 4.5"
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase')
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
freeflow CAT on it to make it smell better but I'm not sure what that
would do to the engine.
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
>
>
>>HA!
>>
>>I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
>>CO into the air.
>>
>>Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
>>crap' numbers eh?
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>>
>>>Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
>>>Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
>
> think
>
>>>I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>>>
>>>/Peter
>>>
>>>"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
>>>
>>>>It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
>>>>
>>>>They are heavier than they look too.
>>>>
>>>>Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
>>>>
>>>>Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>>>>
>>>>me@privacy.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
>
> regardless
>
>>>of
>>>
>>>>>>what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>>What are the reasons?
>
>
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
71 Bill Stroppe Baja Bronco
03 TJ Rubicon - Rubicon Express 4.5"
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase')
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
#116
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
I find most of the 'carb' Jeeps are very seldom tuned up at all and
smell bad like you mention.
They don't 'have' to and they shouldn't!
Rather than properly clean the carbs with a kit every main tune-up like
the maintenance schedule calls for, 'mechanics' like some of the ones on
this group cut the poor carbs open to get at the factory settings to try
and make up for dirt (or their fear of opening a carb). This tosses the
computer out of balance and the damn things stink to high heaven like
you have noticed.
They make them pass, then set it to run after or worse have no emissions
so they just set them rich and go. They will run rich, it covers a lot
of defects up.
Then the average owner starts playing with the settings because the
'mechanic' cut it open to make them accessible and the thing will never
run clean.
One friend went in to get his emissions and the garage bay had 17 ppm HC
in it's air so the machine wouldn't initialize for the test. Those
mechanics were breathing worse than comes out my tailpipe.
I tuned my idle jets 1/4 turn leaner than my ear called for for 'beat
lean' for that emissions and got the low readings. I probably could
have left them because I am allowed 350 ppm HC!
So you gotta figure the 15 ppm or even the allowed 350 isn't what you
are smelling on the trail. Those rigs are way out of whack.
But man oh man have you ever followed one of those black smoke belching
rattling leaky diesels on the trail? I have LOL!
Maybe in a few years after they clean out some of the sulfur (we have
some of the highest sulfur in the world in our fuels) and force a diesel
to pass a real emissions test, my opinion could change, but not for now.
Mike
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
> > HA!
> >
> > I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> > CO into the air.
> >
> > Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> > crap' numbers eh?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> > >
> > > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
> think
> > > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> > >
> > > /Peter
> > >
> > > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > > >
> > > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > > >
> > > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > > >
> > > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > >
> > > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
> regardless
> > > of
> > > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > > >
> > > > > What are the reasons?
smell bad like you mention.
They don't 'have' to and they shouldn't!
Rather than properly clean the carbs with a kit every main tune-up like
the maintenance schedule calls for, 'mechanics' like some of the ones on
this group cut the poor carbs open to get at the factory settings to try
and make up for dirt (or their fear of opening a carb). This tosses the
computer out of balance and the damn things stink to high heaven like
you have noticed.
They make them pass, then set it to run after or worse have no emissions
so they just set them rich and go. They will run rich, it covers a lot
of defects up.
Then the average owner starts playing with the settings because the
'mechanic' cut it open to make them accessible and the thing will never
run clean.
One friend went in to get his emissions and the garage bay had 17 ppm HC
in it's air so the machine wouldn't initialize for the test. Those
mechanics were breathing worse than comes out my tailpipe.
I tuned my idle jets 1/4 turn leaner than my ear called for for 'beat
lean' for that emissions and got the low readings. I probably could
have left them because I am allowed 350 ppm HC!
So you gotta figure the 15 ppm or even the allowed 350 isn't what you
are smelling on the trail. Those rigs are way out of whack.
But man oh man have you ever followed one of those black smoke belching
rattling leaky diesels on the trail? I have LOL!
Maybe in a few years after they clean out some of the sulfur (we have
some of the highest sulfur in the world in our fuels) and force a diesel
to pass a real emissions test, my opinion could change, but not for now.
Mike
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
> > HA!
> >
> > I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> > CO into the air.
> >
> > Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> > crap' numbers eh?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> > >
> > > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
> think
> > > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> > >
> > > /Peter
> > >
> > > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > > >
> > > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > > >
> > > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > > >
> > > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > >
> > > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
> regardless
> > > of
> > > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > > >
> > > > > What are the reasons?
#117
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
I find most of the 'carb' Jeeps are very seldom tuned up at all and
smell bad like you mention.
They don't 'have' to and they shouldn't!
Rather than properly clean the carbs with a kit every main tune-up like
the maintenance schedule calls for, 'mechanics' like some of the ones on
this group cut the poor carbs open to get at the factory settings to try
and make up for dirt (or their fear of opening a carb). This tosses the
computer out of balance and the damn things stink to high heaven like
you have noticed.
They make them pass, then set it to run after or worse have no emissions
so they just set them rich and go. They will run rich, it covers a lot
of defects up.
Then the average owner starts playing with the settings because the
'mechanic' cut it open to make them accessible and the thing will never
run clean.
One friend went in to get his emissions and the garage bay had 17 ppm HC
in it's air so the machine wouldn't initialize for the test. Those
mechanics were breathing worse than comes out my tailpipe.
I tuned my idle jets 1/4 turn leaner than my ear called for for 'beat
lean' for that emissions and got the low readings. I probably could
have left them because I am allowed 350 ppm HC!
So you gotta figure the 15 ppm or even the allowed 350 isn't what you
are smelling on the trail. Those rigs are way out of whack.
But man oh man have you ever followed one of those black smoke belching
rattling leaky diesels on the trail? I have LOL!
Maybe in a few years after they clean out some of the sulfur (we have
some of the highest sulfur in the world in our fuels) and force a diesel
to pass a real emissions test, my opinion could change, but not for now.
Mike
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
> > HA!
> >
> > I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> > CO into the air.
> >
> > Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> > crap' numbers eh?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> > >
> > > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
> think
> > > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> > >
> > > /Peter
> > >
> > > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > > >
> > > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > > >
> > > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > > >
> > > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > >
> > > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
> regardless
> > > of
> > > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > > >
> > > > > What are the reasons?
smell bad like you mention.
They don't 'have' to and they shouldn't!
Rather than properly clean the carbs with a kit every main tune-up like
the maintenance schedule calls for, 'mechanics' like some of the ones on
this group cut the poor carbs open to get at the factory settings to try
and make up for dirt (or their fear of opening a carb). This tosses the
computer out of balance and the damn things stink to high heaven like
you have noticed.
They make them pass, then set it to run after or worse have no emissions
so they just set them rich and go. They will run rich, it covers a lot
of defects up.
Then the average owner starts playing with the settings because the
'mechanic' cut it open to make them accessible and the thing will never
run clean.
One friend went in to get his emissions and the garage bay had 17 ppm HC
in it's air so the machine wouldn't initialize for the test. Those
mechanics were breathing worse than comes out my tailpipe.
I tuned my idle jets 1/4 turn leaner than my ear called for for 'beat
lean' for that emissions and got the low readings. I probably could
have left them because I am allowed 350 ppm HC!
So you gotta figure the 15 ppm or even the allowed 350 isn't what you
are smelling on the trail. Those rigs are way out of whack.
But man oh man have you ever followed one of those black smoke belching
rattling leaky diesels on the trail? I have LOL!
Maybe in a few years after they clean out some of the sulfur (we have
some of the highest sulfur in the world in our fuels) and force a diesel
to pass a real emissions test, my opinion could change, but not for now.
Mike
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
> > HA!
> >
> > I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> > CO into the air.
> >
> > Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> > crap' numbers eh?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> > >
> > > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
> think
> > > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> > >
> > > /Peter
> > >
> > > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > > >
> > > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > > >
> > > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > > >
> > > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > >
> > > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
> regardless
> > > of
> > > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > > >
> > > > > What are the reasons?
#118
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
I find most of the 'carb' Jeeps are very seldom tuned up at all and
smell bad like you mention.
They don't 'have' to and they shouldn't!
Rather than properly clean the carbs with a kit every main tune-up like
the maintenance schedule calls for, 'mechanics' like some of the ones on
this group cut the poor carbs open to get at the factory settings to try
and make up for dirt (or their fear of opening a carb). This tosses the
computer out of balance and the damn things stink to high heaven like
you have noticed.
They make them pass, then set it to run after or worse have no emissions
so they just set them rich and go. They will run rich, it covers a lot
of defects up.
Then the average owner starts playing with the settings because the
'mechanic' cut it open to make them accessible and the thing will never
run clean.
One friend went in to get his emissions and the garage bay had 17 ppm HC
in it's air so the machine wouldn't initialize for the test. Those
mechanics were breathing worse than comes out my tailpipe.
I tuned my idle jets 1/4 turn leaner than my ear called for for 'beat
lean' for that emissions and got the low readings. I probably could
have left them because I am allowed 350 ppm HC!
So you gotta figure the 15 ppm or even the allowed 350 isn't what you
are smelling on the trail. Those rigs are way out of whack.
But man oh man have you ever followed one of those black smoke belching
rattling leaky diesels on the trail? I have LOL!
Maybe in a few years after they clean out some of the sulfur (we have
some of the highest sulfur in the world in our fuels) and force a diesel
to pass a real emissions test, my opinion could change, but not for now.
Mike
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
> > HA!
> >
> > I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> > CO into the air.
> >
> > Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> > crap' numbers eh?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> > >
> > > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
> think
> > > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> > >
> > > /Peter
> > >
> > > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > > >
> > > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > > >
> > > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > > >
> > > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > >
> > > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
> regardless
> > > of
> > > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > > >
> > > > > What are the reasons?
smell bad like you mention.
They don't 'have' to and they shouldn't!
Rather than properly clean the carbs with a kit every main tune-up like
the maintenance schedule calls for, 'mechanics' like some of the ones on
this group cut the poor carbs open to get at the factory settings to try
and make up for dirt (or their fear of opening a carb). This tosses the
computer out of balance and the damn things stink to high heaven like
you have noticed.
They make them pass, then set it to run after or worse have no emissions
so they just set them rich and go. They will run rich, it covers a lot
of defects up.
Then the average owner starts playing with the settings because the
'mechanic' cut it open to make them accessible and the thing will never
run clean.
One friend went in to get his emissions and the garage bay had 17 ppm HC
in it's air so the machine wouldn't initialize for the test. Those
mechanics were breathing worse than comes out my tailpipe.
I tuned my idle jets 1/4 turn leaner than my ear called for for 'beat
lean' for that emissions and got the low readings. I probably could
have left them because I am allowed 350 ppm HC!
So you gotta figure the 15 ppm or even the allowed 350 isn't what you
are smelling on the trail. Those rigs are way out of whack.
But man oh man have you ever followed one of those black smoke belching
rattling leaky diesels on the trail? I have LOL!
Maybe in a few years after they clean out some of the sulfur (we have
some of the highest sulfur in the world in our fuels) and force a diesel
to pass a real emissions test, my opinion could change, but not for now.
Mike
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Sorry Mike, my comment may have been more pointed than I meant it to be.
> It's not just your rig either, most of the older carbureted Jeeps I wheel
> with have a very strong raw gas smell coming from the tailpipe. To be
> honest, being pretty light-informed as far as science is concerned, I've no
> idea whether this odour is a "bad" emission or not, pollution-wise. It may
> well be innocuous, and diesel exhaust may be far more objectionable in every
> way. In fact, even some of the newer gas rigs with more in the way of
> emission controls smell pretty bad to me in the same way when they are
> starting up cold - my wife's ZJ for example has an awful raw gas smell. It
> goes away once warmed up though.
>
> It's just that my personal opinion is that following some gas rigs on the
> trail is an unpleasantly oderiferous experience, so rejecting diesels as
> "stinky" seems a bit contrived to me.
>
> I can't share any numbers on my TJ because it's too new to have been tested,
> although that particular grace period is about to expire. The aforementioned
> ZJ (with a 360) was tested at 2 ppm HC (1 ppm at idle) and 0.00 CO%.
>
> Don't you tune your carb specifically for the emissions tests, then change
> it for your "25% seat-of-the-pants" boost after then tests are done? If so,
> that may be why my ol' honker seems to think > 15 ppm.
>
> Anyway, you've got me pretty convinced that diesels are a bad thing, at
> least for around here. I just wanted to point out that gas engines can be
> pretty "stinky" too ... at least to some of us.
>
> /Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 10:06 AM
> Subject: Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
>
> > HA!
> >
> > I got the paperwork to show my 'Nuttered' 258 blows 15 ppm HC and 0.16%
> > CO into the air.
> >
> > Why don't you cough up your fancy 'injected and computerized all to
> > crap' numbers eh?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Peter Pontbriand wrote:
> > >
> > > Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> > > Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I
> think
> > > I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
> > >
> > > /Peter
> > >
> > > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:418401FB.3978BABB@sympatico.ca...
> > > > It has the aerodynamics of a brick and two full axles.
> > > >
> > > > They are heavier than they look too.
> > > >
> > > > Basically the 6 and 4 get the same mileage, so would a diesel.
> > > >
> > > > Diesel also is way too stinky to have in a convertible Jeep.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > > > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > > >
> > > > me@privacy.net wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >you are never going to get great mileage out of a Wrangler
> regardless
> > > of
> > > > > >what engine you put in it, for obvious reasons.
> > > > >
> > > > > What are the reasons?
#119
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
Peter, that was an ignorant post! Gasoline engines are much cleaner that
diesel, it's just the Federal laws haven't been applied to them yet,
probably because they would effect our transportation and industry. But
it's coming: http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/light.html My Bronco
is basically a "Nutter Bypass" as it never had a computer, just the
ignition brain box, and it burns clean:
http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg And frankly, after driving a tractor
over a million miles, I hate the smell of diesel! A few of my trucks:
http://www.----------.com/rextrans.jpg
http://www.----------.com/kenworth.jpg
http://www.----------.com/white.jpg
http://www.----------.com/mack.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I think
> I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>
> /Peter
diesel, it's just the Federal laws haven't been applied to them yet,
probably because they would effect our transportation and industry. But
it's coming: http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/light.html My Bronco
is basically a "Nutter Bypass" as it never had a computer, just the
ignition brain box, and it burns clean:
http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg And frankly, after driving a tractor
over a million miles, I hate the smell of diesel! A few of my trucks:
http://www.----------.com/rextrans.jpg
http://www.----------.com/kenworth.jpg
http://www.----------.com/white.jpg
http://www.----------.com/mack.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I think
> I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>
> /Peter
#120
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Why no fuel effecient Jeep?
Peter, that was an ignorant post! Gasoline engines are much cleaner that
diesel, it's just the Federal laws haven't been applied to them yet,
probably because they would effect our transportation and industry. But
it's coming: http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/light.html My Bronco
is basically a "Nutter Bypass" as it never had a computer, just the
ignition brain box, and it burns clean:
http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg And frankly, after driving a tractor
over a million miles, I hate the smell of diesel! A few of my trucks:
http://www.----------.com/rextrans.jpg
http://www.----------.com/kenworth.jpg
http://www.----------.com/white.jpg
http://www.----------.com/mack.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I think
> I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>
> /Peter
diesel, it's just the Federal laws haven't been applied to them yet,
probably because they would effect our transportation and industry. But
it's coming: http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/light.html My Bronco
is basically a "Nutter Bypass" as it never had a computer, just the
ignition brain box, and it burns clean:
http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg And frankly, after driving a tractor
over a million miles, I hate the smell of diesel! A few of my trucks:
http://www.----------.com/rextrans.jpg
http://www.----------.com/kenworth.jpg
http://www.----------.com/white.jpg
http://www.----------.com/mack.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
Peter Pontbriand wrote:
>
> Ya know, all the unburned hydrocarbons spewing from the tailpipe of a
> Nuttered 258 with no catcon doesn't smell all that great either ... I think
> I prefer the smell of diesel exhaust to be honest.
>
> /Peter