Re: "federal" vehicles and emissions (long-winded as usual)

["Ryan Moore" <baradium@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mac @ TRIAD" <mac@domain.elided>
To: "Ryan Moore" <baradium@domain.elided>; <ihc@domain.elided>
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 11:27
Subject: RE: "federal" vehicles and emissions (long-winded as usual)


> ## >> On that note.... T.R.E...  is it possible that the "federal"
> ## >> part of your
> ## >> 304 just means it was a 50 state truck?  Just notice that the
> ## >> non CA/ smog
> ## >> etc scouts are reffered to as "Federal" vehicles in the
> ## >> service manual...
>
> that's not exactly right, Ryan.  it is possible that "Federal" does refer
to
> the non-smog vehicles, but if so, those are not "50-state" vehicles.
> 50-state vehicles are those that pass the emissions requirements of all 50
> states.  if the "Federal" vehicles are without CA emissions equipment then
i
> don't see how they could be 50-state, as for the year they were made they
> wouldn't have been allowed to be sold in California (and probably not Utah
> either, as i hear they had some fairly stringent emissions laws in the mid
> to late '70s too) without the required hardware.
>
> both of my 1972 TravelAlls are 50-state trucks with identical engines and
> emissions equipment.  both have the 392 with A.I.R. system, fully intact
and
> functional, and no EGR.  they both had factory AC too, but neither one
works
> (the 1010's has no fluid, the 1110's pump is sitting in my closet).  both
> originally had Holley 4-barrel carbs and points ignition as well, which
the
> 1010 still has, though the 1110 came to me with a Holley Pro-Jection and
> Crane FireBall XR3000 electronc ignition (and isn't strictly smog-legal
with
> those, either).  the 1010 was a CA truck from the beginning and apparently
> never left the state, whereas the 1110 was first sold in Utah, later
resold
> in Oregon (and perhaps other places in between, all i know is where i got
it
> in Oregon and where the lineset shows it being delivered when new, Salt
Lake
> City), then brought into CA.
>
> anyway, my point is that either a given vehicle is a 50-state model and
has
> all the emissions equipment to meet all states' emissions requirements of
> the given year, or it does not and therefore is not 50-state.  if
"Federal"
> designated engines don't have CA emissions equipment, then i'm pretty
> certain there's no way they could be 50-state engines.
>
> have i been redundant enough throughout this post?  i was trying my best,
> you know.  +)
>
> --Mac
>

You got me on enough enough that I went down and grabbed the service manual
can and brought it back up here, dug out the manuals and looked for where I
saw it.

I was thinking "50 state" as in they only have the requirements needed for
all 50 states... However.... it says "49 state systems - not california," in
other places they are simply referred to as "49 state engines" or by the
other designator I cover in the next paragraph... so they are 49 state
engines, not 50 state....

It does call the "49 state" engines "Federal" engines as I had recalled.  An
example sentence, quoted direcly from Page 3 of CTS-2733, which is in Volume
II of the two volume 1978-1980 set:

 "As indicated on the exhaust emmission effects chart some California
engines are equipped with additional emission controls than the Federal
Engines.  This is because of more stringent air pollution standards in
California than the other 49 states.  In this service manual, Federal refers
to engines sold in all States except California."

So... we have at least established that IH at least used the term "Federal"
to apply to the non california vehicles... did they always use it for that
purpose?  Did they use it for other purposes too?

-Ryan