91 Honda failed emissions
Guest
Posts: n/a
91 Honda failed emissions
Hey everyone,
I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
etc.
Still failed emissions.
I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
"engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
Rock on.
I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
etc.
Still failed emissions.
I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
"engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
Rock on.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
testy wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
> and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
> etc.
>
> Still failed emissions.
>
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
> dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
> "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
> types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
> every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
> oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
> checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
>
> But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
> facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
> converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
> next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
> exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
>
> One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
> figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
> He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
> that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
> affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
> the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
>
> Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
> Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
>
>
> Rock on.
>
>
if your catalyst has failed, it's probably because of the oil
consumption problem. in time, the new catalyst will fail for the same
reasons. that might be fixed by a new pcv valve. you should also look
into the coolant level & make sure you have no leaks. if the level
drops, the ecu's temp sensor gets an artificially low temp reading &
injects excess gas to compensate for "cold" conditions. with a previous
89 civic of mine, fixing a slow coolant leak dropped oil consumption as
well as gas consumption!
you may also want to look into a "new" motor. many many times, this is
recommended and entirely unnecessary, but if conditions have allowed the
motor to wear to the extent of the oil consumption you're describing,
you'll just keep pouring money into the thing each time you refill.
you can get a cheap usable motor here for example:
http://nippon-motors.com/honda.htm
$350 for a d15b2.
> Hey everyone,
>
> I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
> and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
> etc.
>
> Still failed emissions.
>
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
> dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
> "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
> types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
> every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
> oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
> checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
>
> But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
> facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
> converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
> next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
> exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
>
> One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
> figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
> He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
> that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
> affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
> the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
>
> Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
> Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
>
>
> Rock on.
>
>
if your catalyst has failed, it's probably because of the oil
consumption problem. in time, the new catalyst will fail for the same
reasons. that might be fixed by a new pcv valve. you should also look
into the coolant level & make sure you have no leaks. if the level
drops, the ecu's temp sensor gets an artificially low temp reading &
injects excess gas to compensate for "cold" conditions. with a previous
89 civic of mine, fixing a slow coolant leak dropped oil consumption as
well as gas consumption!
you may also want to look into a "new" motor. many many times, this is
recommended and entirely unnecessary, but if conditions have allowed the
motor to wear to the extent of the oil consumption you're describing,
you'll just keep pouring money into the thing each time you refill.
you can get a cheap usable motor here for example:
http://nippon-motors.com/honda.htm
$350 for a d15b2.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
testy wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
> and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
> etc.
>
> Still failed emissions.
>
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
> dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
> "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
> types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
> every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
> oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
> checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
>
> But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
> facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
> converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
> next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
> exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
>
> One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
> figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
> He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
> that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
> affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
> the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
>
> Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
> Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
>
>
> Rock on.
>
>
if your catalyst has failed, it's probably because of the oil
consumption problem. in time, the new catalyst will fail for the same
reasons. that might be fixed by a new pcv valve. you should also look
into the coolant level & make sure you have no leaks. if the level
drops, the ecu's temp sensor gets an artificially low temp reading &
injects excess gas to compensate for "cold" conditions. with a previous
89 civic of mine, fixing a slow coolant leak dropped oil consumption as
well as gas consumption!
you may also want to look into a "new" motor. many many times, this is
recommended and entirely unnecessary, but if conditions have allowed the
motor to wear to the extent of the oil consumption you're describing,
you'll just keep pouring money into the thing each time you refill.
you can get a cheap usable motor here for example:
http://nippon-motors.com/honda.htm
$350 for a d15b2.
> Hey everyone,
>
> I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
> and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
> etc.
>
> Still failed emissions.
>
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
> dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
> "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
> types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
> every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
> oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
> checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
>
> But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
> facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
> converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
> next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
> exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
>
> One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
> figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
> He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
> that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
> affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
> the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
>
> Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
> Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
>
>
> Rock on.
>
>
if your catalyst has failed, it's probably because of the oil
consumption problem. in time, the new catalyst will fail for the same
reasons. that might be fixed by a new pcv valve. you should also look
into the coolant level & make sure you have no leaks. if the level
drops, the ecu's temp sensor gets an artificially low temp reading &
injects excess gas to compensate for "cold" conditions. with a previous
89 civic of mine, fixing a slow coolant leak dropped oil consumption as
well as gas consumption!
you may also want to look into a "new" motor. many many times, this is
recommended and entirely unnecessary, but if conditions have allowed the
motor to wear to the extent of the oil consumption you're describing,
you'll just keep pouring money into the thing each time you refill.
you can get a cheap usable motor here for example:
http://nippon-motors.com/honda.htm
$350 for a d15b2.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
Waiving the right to remain silent, "testy"
<mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> said:
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your
> tank - no dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals.
> On a lark I added "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've
> never had any luck with these types of oil additives.
So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
for a bad engine.
--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail
The United States is the greatest country in the world..!
Twenty-five million illegal aliens can't be wrong.
<mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> said:
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your
> tank - no dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals.
> On a lark I added "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've
> never had any luck with these types of oil additives.
So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
for a bad engine.
--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail
The United States is the greatest country in the world..!
Twenty-five million illegal aliens can't be wrong.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
Waiving the right to remain silent, "testy"
<mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> said:
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your
> tank - no dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals.
> On a lark I added "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've
> never had any luck with these types of oil additives.
So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
for a bad engine.
--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail
The United States is the greatest country in the world..!
Twenty-five million illegal aliens can't be wrong.
<mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> said:
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your
> tank - no dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals.
> On a lark I added "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've
> never had any luck with these types of oil additives.
So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
for a bad engine.
--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail
The United States is the greatest country in the world..!
Twenty-five million illegal aliens can't be wrong.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
In article <VEY_d.5016$uw6.1859@trnddc06>, "testy"
<mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
> and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
> etc.
>
> Still failed emissions.
>
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
> dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
> "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
> types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
> every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
> oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
> checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
>
> But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
> facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
> converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
> next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
> exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
>
> One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
> figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
> He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
> that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
> affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
> the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
>
> Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
> Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
>
>
> Rock on.
Please repost next week and let us know whether your Honda passed the emissions
test. Prior to the test, let your gas tank run almost dry and feel it with
high octane gasoline. I seem to recall reading that high test gasoline has
less pollutants in it.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
<mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
> and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
> etc.
>
> Still failed emissions.
>
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
> dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
> "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
> types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
> every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
> oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
> checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
>
> But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
> facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
> converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
> next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
> exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
>
> One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
> figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
> He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
> that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
> affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
> the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
>
> Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
> Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
>
>
> Rock on.
Please repost next week and let us know whether your Honda passed the emissions
test. Prior to the test, let your gas tank run almost dry and feel it with
high octane gasoline. I seem to recall reading that high test gasoline has
less pollutants in it.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
In article <VEY_d.5016$uw6.1859@trnddc06>, "testy"
<mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
> and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
> etc.
>
> Still failed emissions.
>
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
> dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
> "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
> types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
> every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
> oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
> checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
>
> But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
> facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
> converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
> next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
> exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
>
> One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
> figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
> He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
> that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
> affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
> the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
>
> Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
> Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
>
>
> Rock on.
Please repost next week and let us know whether your Honda passed the emissions
test. Prior to the test, let your gas tank run almost dry and feel it with
high octane gasoline. I seem to recall reading that high test gasoline has
less pollutants in it.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
<mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I was in here in the beginning of February with a 91 Civic, 222,000 miles,
> and a failed emissions test. So I did the cheap stuff, oil change, tune up,
> etc.
>
> Still failed emissions.
>
> I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your tank - no
> dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals. On a lark I added
> "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've never had any luck with these
> types of oil additives. Like I said before, I was burning 1-2 quarts of oil
> every 2 weeks or approx. every 700 miles. Since then I haven't burned any
> oil! It's been about 3 weeks. I'm still pretty skeptical so I've been
> checking my oil regularly but the additive actually seems to be working.
>
> But it still wouldn't pass so I went to a "certified emissions repair
> facility". They checked out my emissions and said it was the catalytic
> converter. So $285 later I have a new cat and plan on getting tested again
> next week. Driving home I did notice a lot less smoke coming from the
> exhaust. Hopefully, that fixed the problem.
>
> One thing the mechanic told me that I thought was pretty interesting: he
> figured it was the cat because the oxides of nitrogen were highly elevated.
> He said that EGR valves and catalytic converters are really the only things
> that keep those levels in check. He also said that a failed cat may not
> affect the car's performance at all, something I was unaware of. I guess
> the performance is only affected if the cat is "plugged"?
>
> Thanks to everyone for their help, especially Jason, Tegger, Jim Beam, and
> Michael Pardee. I've learned a lot from this group!
>
>
> Rock on.
Please repost next week and let us know whether your Honda passed the emissions
test. Prior to the test, let your gas tank run almost dry and feel it with
high octane gasoline. I seem to recall reading that high test gasoline has
less pollutants in it.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
> So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
> for a bad engine.
>
> --
> Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail
>
> The United States is the greatest country in the world..!
> Twenty-five million illegal aliens can't be wrong.
Read my entire post next time. "Engine Restorer" did work and that IS a
miracle.
> for a bad engine.
>
> --
> Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail
>
> The United States is the greatest country in the world..!
> Twenty-five million illegal aliens can't be wrong.
Read my entire post next time. "Engine Restorer" did work and that IS a
miracle.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
> So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
> for a bad engine.
>
> --
> Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail
>
> The United States is the greatest country in the world..!
> Twenty-five million illegal aliens can't be wrong.
Read my entire post next time. "Engine Restorer" did work and that IS a
miracle.
> for a bad engine.
>
> --
> Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail
>
> The United States is the greatest country in the world..!
> Twenty-five million illegal aliens can't be wrong.
Read my entire post next time. "Engine Restorer" did work and that IS a
miracle.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
> Please repost next week and let us know whether your Honda passed the
emissions
> test. Prior to the test, let your gas tank run almost dry and feel it with
> high octane gasoline. I seem to recall reading that high test gasoline has
> less pollutants in it.
>
> --
> NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
> We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
> We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
>
>
>
Will do. I've heard the same thing about hi-test gasoline. Thanks.
emissions
> test. Prior to the test, let your gas tank run almost dry and feel it with
> high octane gasoline. I seem to recall reading that high test gasoline has
> less pollutants in it.
>
> --
> NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
> We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
> We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
>
>
>
Will do. I've heard the same thing about hi-test gasoline. Thanks.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
> Please repost next week and let us know whether your Honda passed the
emissions
> test. Prior to the test, let your gas tank run almost dry and feel it with
> high octane gasoline. I seem to recall reading that high test gasoline has
> less pollutants in it.
>
> --
> NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
> We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
> We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
>
>
>
Will do. I've heard the same thing about hi-test gasoline. Thanks.
emissions
> test. Prior to the test, let your gas tank run almost dry and feel it with
> high octane gasoline. I seem to recall reading that high test gasoline has
> less pollutants in it.
>
> --
> NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
> We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
> We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
>
>
>
Will do. I've heard the same thing about hi-test gasoline. Thanks.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
In article <Xns961E703E83DAAlarrythefrog@68.6.19.6>, "Larry J."
<usenet2@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote:
> Waiving the right to remain silent, "testy"
> <mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> said:
>
> > I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your
> > tank - no dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals.
> > On a lark I added "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've
> > never had any luck with these types of oil additives.
>
> So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
> for a bad engine.
I understand your point of view but it's hard to make a guess about how
"bad" his engine happens to be. It's possible that the engine is in fairly
great condition but certain things need to be done to keep it running such
as changing the cat. converter, adding a new PCV valve and checking for
leaks e.g. radiator, transmission, oil pan. Installing new spark plugs
might also help. After he does all or at least some of the these
things--the engine might run for another 20,000 or more miles.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
<usenet2@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote:
> Waiving the right to remain silent, "testy"
> <mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> said:
>
> > I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your
> > tank - no dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals.
> > On a lark I added "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've
> > never had any luck with these types of oil additives.
>
> So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
> for a bad engine.
I understand your point of view but it's hard to make a guess about how
"bad" his engine happens to be. It's possible that the engine is in fairly
great condition but certain things need to be done to keep it running such
as changing the cat. converter, adding a new PCV valve and checking for
leaks e.g. radiator, transmission, oil pan. Installing new spark plugs
might also help. After he does all or at least some of the these
things--the engine might run for another 20,000 or more miles.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 91 Honda failed emissions
In article <Xns961E703E83DAAlarrythefrog@68.6.19.6>, "Larry J."
<usenet2@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote:
> Waiving the right to remain silent, "testy"
> <mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> said:
>
> > I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your
> > tank - no dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals.
> > On a lark I added "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've
> > never had any luck with these types of oil additives.
>
> So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
> for a bad engine.
I understand your point of view but it's hard to make a guess about how
"bad" his engine happens to be. It's possible that the engine is in fairly
great condition but certain things need to be done to keep it running such
as changing the cat. converter, adding a new PCV valve and checking for
leaks e.g. radiator, transmission, oil pan. Installing new spark plugs
might also help. After he does all or at least some of the these
things--the engine might run for another 20,000 or more miles.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
<usenet2@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote:
> Waiving the right to remain silent, "testy"
> <mikfaitdiespamdie@yahoo.com> said:
>
> > I tried that guaranteed emissions passer stuff you put in your
> > tank - no dice. I think it actually elevated some of my totals.
> > On a lark I added "engine restorer" to the crankcase. I've
> > never had any luck with these types of oil additives.
>
> So, why do you keep buying the crud..? There is no "miracle cure"
> for a bad engine.
I understand your point of view but it's hard to make a guess about how
"bad" his engine happens to be. It's possible that the engine is in fairly
great condition but certain things need to be done to keep it running such
as changing the cat. converter, adding a new PCV valve and checking for
leaks e.g. radiator, transmission, oil pan. Installing new spark plugs
might also help. After he does all or at least some of the these
things--the engine might run for another 20,000 or more miles.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
pwman2002
Honda Mailing List
1
Sep 8, 2008 08:23 PM
Lady via CarKB.com
Honda Mailing List
18
Apr 2, 2005 10:51 PM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)