Re: on that failed emissions question? and seats

[Ian Lomax <sfalfisto@domain.elided>]

ok so i'm no eric storhok (which i was thankful for as
i watched him scraping undercoating off the $2001
challenge spider... didn't look like much fun), but i
did work with this stuff for a few years...  in my
experience TRYING to make cats fail, CO was never the
first thing to go.  HC was.  and HC and CO almost
always move together, opposite of NOx.  if eric
doesn't come up with a better suggestion, i'll ping my
old diamler_______ buddies (cause after all the
chrysler is silent right?) and see what they say.

and i bet you could easily mount a seat backwards...
but i must have missed the beginning of that thread. 

cheers,
ian lomax
former automotive minion (fred d's words, not mine)
--- Tessie McMillan <tessmc@domain.elided> wrote:
> I would like to bring this question back again. Do
> you think it is
> possible that the emissions inspection folks have
> recently changed their
> equipment or testing methodology?
> 
> I have an '87 Graduate and exactly the same thing
> happened to me: failed
> on CO by 6.4 times the normal value; everything else
> was FINE. The comment
> that the [rude] b****, er, woman -- why is it they
> have to have a
> chip on their shoulder? -- in charge made to me at
> the time was "oh, this
> is a sportscar, and all sportscars fail CO". Oh
> really....? I had done an
> Italian tuneup before going in so the engine was
> VERY hot, the car runs
> fine, except for the popping noise which I believe
> is a crack appearing
> in my exhaust manifold. It is an easy start, has
> good pickup, etc., and
> idles fine. No stumbling which might indicate a bad
> O2 sensor. The only
> thing I can think of is that I might be idling
> slightly below 1000 rpm
> ... er... my tach doesn't work, really, so it's hard
> to tell...
> 
> I asked Pasquale Perrina to give me his opinion of
> the numbers I got from
> the emissions station, and he was surprised only CO
> was out. He pointed
> out (and I had a little bit of trouble understanding
> because he has a
> slight accent) that the Alfa manual states to
> *remove* the O2 sensor to
> perform testing on the engine. So I understood his
> opinion to be that the
> car should still pass *emissions* regardless of what
> is happening with the
> sensor.
> 
> If the cat is bad, why only CO? If I have a hole in
> my center muffler, why
> only CO? If my sparkplugs are dirty and the oil is
> old, why only CO? I
> don't understand why only one contaminant would be
> more prominent than the
> others.
> 
> Thanks - hoping Eric Storhok is reading this... &:-)
> 
> Now about seats (humor me here, guys): is it
> possible to mount the Spider
> passenger seat backwards?
> 
> Tess
> in drizzly Seattle, WA USA
> -- 
> Victim of Audi Bangernomics
> 
> --
> to be removed from alfa, see
> /bin/digest-subs.cgi
> or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided


__________________________________________________
Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help?
Donate cash, emergency relief information
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/

--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided