|
New Catalytic Converter
I have a 1998 Honda Civic EX Sedam. It has 209,800 miles as of now.
Recently, I had the heat shield for the cat. converter replaced, due to the old one rattling. I felt that it may have been due to decay of the cat. converter itself. Is there a point to where a cat converter should be replaced, as a means of routine maintenance? -- Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/alt.autos.honda/ More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"warlock162" <bray@dwsd.org> wrote in news:a1dfde6e46b90fb43b9d6bdd46cebf72
@localhost.talkaboutautos.com: > I have a 1998 Honda Civic EX Sedam. It has 209,800 miles as of now. > > Recently, I had the heat shield for the cat. converter replaced, due to > the old one rattling. I felt that it may have been due to decay of the > cat. converter itself. > > Is there a point to where a cat converter should be replaced, as a means > of routine maintenance? > When you don't pass smog any more. And even then you don't replace it unless diagnostics point to it needing replacement. OEM cats last for galactic mileages if the engine is given decent care. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote
> "warlock162" <bray@dwsd.org> wrote >> I have a 1998 Honda Civic EX Sedam. It has 209,800 miles >> as of >> Is there a point to where a cat converter should be >> replaced, as a means >> of routine maintenance? >> > > > When you don't pass smog any more. And even then you don't > replace it > unless diagnostics point to it needing replacement. > > OEM cats last for galactic mileages if the engine is given > decent care. I personally would say if it lasts 200k+ miles and it then fails emissions, then the engine may have been cared for just fine. This is based on reading about others' cat converter failures as well as my own recent experience (failed NOx emissions at 206k miles). Many sites say the cat is supposed to last the life of the car. But what is the life of the car in miles and years? Are those sites hearkening back to the days, not too long ago, when a car that lasted 150k miles was a good one? Older cars will have deteriorating parts not readily maintained. The fuel/air mixture and its purity is more likely to be thrown off, meaning it is more likely contaminants get into the cat. Plus ISTM that the really old cars have seen a lot of fillups. More fillups = more playing of the lottery that impurities in the gas. As for waiting until the car fails emissions, for a ten-year-old car I would consider, among other things, how the car's MPG is today versus five years ago. It is possible the cat is clogged, raising exhaust back pressure, and reducing MPG. I saw an improvement in MPG (over several fillups) after replacing my 91 Civic's cat converter a few months ago. The car may run noticeably better, too, particularly under loads like long steep hills. |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Elle" <honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote in news:RuP1l.5776$%z5.1373
@newsfe09.iad: > "Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote >> "warlock162" <bray@dwsd.org> wrote >>> I have a 1998 Honda Civic EX Sedam. It has 209,800 miles >>> as of >>> Is there a point to where a cat converter should be >>> replaced, as a means >>> of routine maintenance? >>> >> >> >> When you don't pass smog any more. And even then you don't >> replace it >> unless diagnostics point to it needing replacement. >> >> OEM cats last for galactic mileages if the engine is given >> decent care. > > I personally would say if it lasts 200k+ miles and it then > fails emissions, then the engine may have been cared for > just fine. This is based on reading about others' cat > converter failures as well as my own recent experience > (failed NOx emissions at 206k miles). > > Many sites say the cat is supposed to last the life of the > car. But what is the life of the car in miles and years? OEM Honda cats last well over 300,000 miles provided all the HT ignition components are replaced at regular intervals (with OEM only) of five years or less, the car is never allowed to even come close to run out of gas, and the oil is changed every 5K or less. Poor maintenance and aftermarket parts, plus running out of gas, are the primary killers of catalytic converters. Proper care must start from mile one and never, ever let up. Running out of gas even once (or even regularly running with a very low fuel tank level) will take a significant toll on cat life. > Are > those sites hearkening back to the days, not too long ago, > when a car that lasted 150k miles was a good one? Older cars > will have deteriorating parts not readily maintained. The > fuel/air mixture and its purity is more likely to be thrown > off, meaning it is more likely contaminants get into the > cat. Plus ISTM that the really old cars have seen a lot of > fillups. More fillups = more playing of the lottery that > impurities in the gas. Gasoline impurities have nothing to do with cat life, unless you somehow ended up with leaded gas at some point. > > As for waiting until the car fails emissions, for a > ten-year-old car I would consider, among other things, how > the car's MPG is today versus five years ago. It is possible > the cat is clogged, raising exhaust back pressure, and > reducing MPG. Cats only ever get clogged from poor maintenance, aftermarket ignition parts, or oil burning (poor maintenance). A cat attached to an engine maintained as I state above will never get clogged. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote
> OEM Honda cats last well over 300,000 miles provided all > the HT ignition > components are replaced at regular intervals (with OEM > only) of five > years or less, the car is never allowed to even come close > to run out of > gas, and the oil is changed every 5K or less. I can appreciate your confidence but I have seen nothing to back up your claim. OEM Honda cats may last this long but I think it is the rare one that does, even with good maintenance. > Gasoline impurities have nothing to do with cat life, > unless you somehow > ended up with leaded gas at some point. Dirty unleaded gas may shorten cat converter life. We disagree. Your opinion vs. mine. |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Elle" <honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote in news:CPW1l.237$Us1.167
@newsfe05.iad: > "Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote >> OEM Honda cats last well over 300,000 miles provided all >> the HT ignition >> components are replaced at regular intervals (with OEM >> only) of five >> years or less, the car is never allowed to even come close >> to run out of >> gas, and the oil is changed every 5K or less. > > I can appreciate your confidence but I have seen nothing to > back up your claim. OEM Honda cats may last this long but I > think it is the rare one that does, even with good > maintenance. It's good maintenance that's rare, not cats that last 300K with that good maintenance. Many believe their maintenance is "good", even when it's definitely not. This affects their reportage, and thus the results web surfers see. > >> Gasoline impurities have nothing to do with cat life, >> unless you somehow >> ended up with leaded gas at some point. > > Dirty unleaded gas may shorten cat converter life. No way. Not at all. Not in any way, shape or form, any time. The EPA sees to that with devastating penalties for transgressors. As far as cats are concerned, retail road-going automotive gasoline in all of North America is of superbly excellent quality, everywhere, all the time. No exaggeration or exceptions. > > We disagree. Your opinion vs. mine. > Of course. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 01:04:42 +0000, Tegger wrote:
> "Elle" <honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote in news:CPW1l.237$Us1.167 > @newsfe05.iad: > >> "Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote >>> OEM Honda cats last well over 300,000 miles provided all the HT >>> ignition >>> components are replaced at regular intervals (with OEM only) of five >>> years or less, the car is never allowed to even come close to run out >>> of >>> gas, and the oil is changed every 5K or less. >> >> I can appreciate your confidence but I have seen nothing to back up >> your claim. OEM Honda cats may last this long but I think it is the >> rare one that does, even with good maintenance. > > > > It's good maintenance that's rare, not cats that last 300K with that > good maintenance. > > Many believe their maintenance is "good", even when it's definitely not. > This affects their reportage, and thus the results web surfers see. > > > >>> Gasoline impurities have nothing to do with cat life, unless you >>> somehow >>> ended up with leaded gas at some point. >> >> Dirty unleaded gas may shorten cat converter life. true. > > > > No way. Not at all. Not in any way, shape or form, any time. The EPA > sees to that with devastating penalties for transgressors. > > As far as cats are concerned, retail road-going automotive gasoline in > all of North America is of superbly excellent quality, everywhere, all > the time. No exaggeration or exceptions. unfortunately, that's not true. there are most definitely different qualities of gasoline, and different degrees to which they affect catalysts. now, there is indeed a base enforced by the epa, but it's not at a level that /ensures/ catalysts last forever. and "enforcement" is on a batch basis. some batches are tested, most not. you don't /really/ know what you're putting in your tank every time, especially if you buy discount. > > > > >> We disagree. Your opinion vs. mine. >> >> > > Of course. |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote
> It's good maintenance that's rare, not cats that last 300K > with that good > maintenance. > > Many believe their maintenance is "good", even when it's > definitely not. > This affects their reportage, and thus the results web > surfers see. This has been on my mind ever since I started reading more intensively about cats a few months ago. It seems to me it is really hard to say what the cause is of high mileage cats going bad. You might be right. I just do not know and have not seen any really good discussion of it. Only the vague "should last the life of the car" seems to be most everywhere. One factor that is on my mind is that it seems almost impossible to delay ring wear and so oil burning etc. in older cars. So despite the best maintenance, the probability that more oil and other crud is going out the exhaust is better. Blah blah you know the rest. Does that mean one who is really careful should count on 300k miles? I just do not know. Getting data is particularly hard given how few keep a car to 250k+ miles while also having ensured excellent maintenance habits. |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
Tegger wrote:
> warlock162 wrote: >> Is there a point to where a cat converter should be replaced, as a means >> of routine maintenance? > When you don't pass smog any more. And even then you don't replace it > unless diagnostics point to it needing replacement. > OEM cats last for galactic mileages if the engine is given decent care. I take it they fail slowly? Over the last few years, both my smog test HC counts have been creeping up. At last August's test the idle was 1 (one!) count below spec. The car runs fine and gets great mileage. Plugs, ignition hardware, etc. have all been changed at least once during this interval. I know this isn't much to go on, but does this sound like a slowly failing cat? (92 Accord, I4, M5, 190K.) Thanks |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
Greg Campbell <nospam@null.net> wrote in
news:_tS2l.70464$uS1.9375@newsfe19.iad: > Tegger wrote: > >> warlock162 wrote: > >>> Is there a point to where a cat converter should be replaced, as a >>> means of routine maintenance? > > >> When you don't pass smog any more. And even then you don't replace it >> unless diagnostics point to it needing replacement. > >> OEM cats last for galactic mileages if the engine is given decent >> care. > > > I take it they fail slowly? Yes. It's usually "sintering" that causes them to deteriorate and lose effectiveness. > Over the last few years, both my smog test HC counts have been > creeping up. At last August's test the idle was 1 (one!) count below > spec. The car runs fine and gets great mileage. Plugs, ignition > hardware, etc. have all been changed at least once during this > interval. > > I know this isn't much to go on, but does this sound like a slowly > failing cat? (92 Accord, I4, M5, 190K.) > /Way/ too hard to say from here. I'm thinking not. You need to give ALL your numbers, not just the HC one. If you have a history, give that as well, not just the numbers from one test. Here's an example of a history: http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/misc/...emissions.html I go for smog again this spring with likely over 320K on the odometer. Plus my cat is now a new aftermarket unit (old one rusted out). This should be interesting. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
Tegger wrote:
> Greg Campbell <nospam@null.net> wrote in >> I know this isn't much to go on, but does this sound like a slowly >> failing cat? (92 Accord, I4, M5, 190K.) > /Way/ too hard to say from here. I'm thinking not. You need to give ALL > your numbers, not just the HC one. If you have a history, give that as > well, not just the numbers from one test. Here's all the history Az DOT has. HC Idle HC Load CO Idle CO Load. (220 ppm) (220 ppm) (1.2%) (1.2%) 2004 173 82 .34 .52 2005 181 74 .21 .46 2006 207 100 .56 .64 2007 219 105 .4 .46 2008 190 157 .6 .57 I use M1 5 or 10-30, and don't add any oil/fuel additives, so prompt zinc poisoning seems somewhat unlikely. Car burns no oil to speak of, needing a little over 1/2 qt at 3500~4000 miles. Oil gets changed after another ~4K. Wary of 2007's near miss, I made a real effort to heat the snot out of the cat immediately before 2008's test. A week before, I threw in a bottle of Valvoline 'synpower' injector cleaner ($2 at Big Lots!), which supposedly has semi-useful phenolic amines in addition to the standard kerosene and 'petroleum distillates.' Then made a point to rev and load the lump on the way into work. Idle and low throttle smoothness did seem to improve. Mileage has been constant over the last 4 years, varying from low to high 30's, depending on my driving. OEM temperature plugs look very good, no sign of excess gas in the mix. Thanks -Moo |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
Greg Campbell <nospam@null.net> wrote in news:494C434F.3090904@null.net:
> Tegger wrote: >> Greg Campbell <nospam@null.net> wrote in > >>> I know this isn't much to go on, but does this sound like a slowly >>> failing cat? (92 Accord, I4, M5, 190K.) > >> /Way/ too hard to say from here. I'm thinking not. You need to give ALL >> your numbers, not just the HC one. If you have a history, give that as >> well, not just the numbers from one test. > > > Here's all the history Az DOT has. > > HC Idle HC Load CO Idle CO Load. > (220 ppm) (220 ppm) (1.2%) (1.2%) > > 2004 173 82 .34 .52 > 2005 181 74 .21 .46 > 2006 207 100 .56 .64 > 2007 219 105 .4 .46 > 2008 190 157 .6 .57 > > Numbers are incomplete. No NOx. No CO2. Does AZ not test for NOx? -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Tegger" wrote
>> Here's all the history Az DOT has. >> >> HC Idle HC Load CO Idle CO Load. >> (220 ppm) (220 ppm) (1.2%) (1.2%) >> >> 2004 173 82 .34 .52 >> 2005 181 74 .21 .46 >> 2006 207 100 .56 .64 >> 2007 219 105 .4 .46 >> 2008 190 157 .6 .57 > Numbers are incomplete. No NOx. No CO2. > > Does AZ not test for NOx? It's been many years since I've had to have a full test on my car, as I kept buying new ones, and new ones are exempt from inspection. But seeing the above HC and CO testing, that's about what I remember being tested. So I suspect they don't test for NOx, though in reference to the catalytic converter inspection (on the right side of this sheet) there is a notation about NOx: http://www.myazcar.com/pdf/emissions_control_equip.pdf Note that this sheet is titled "Emissins Control Visual Inspection...." Our state legislature never had much interest in education, you see. |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Tegger" <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote in message news:Xns9B7AB00F12DFDtegger@208.90.168.18... > Greg Campbell <nospam@null.net> wrote in news:494C434F.3090904@null.net: > >> >> Here's all the history Az DOT has. >> >> HC Idle HC Load CO Idle CO Load. >> (220 ppm) (220 ppm) (1.2%) (1.2%) >> >> 2004 173 82 .34 .52 >> 2005 181 74 .21 .46 >> 2006 207 100 .56 .64 >> 2007 219 105 .4 .46 >> 2008 190 157 .6 .57 >> >> > > > > Numbers are incomplete. No NOx. No CO2. > > Does AZ not test for NOx? > > I know they used to, but I've been outside the test area for 8 years. AZ never reported CO2 but would fail the car if dilution was excessive. The NOx would certainly complete the picture, but I'm thinking none of those numbers - even in 2004 - are very good looking. The idle HC has been pretty close to the limit from the beginning and not changing much. Ditto the CO under load. (As I found out the hard way, the CO under load is also sensitive to changes in load. My carbureted Dodge failed with 5% CO under load because it had a feedback carb and the fuel pump was bad. Under acceleration the carb went full rich trying to compensate and when they let off the accelerator the pump caught up... blammo!) IIRC the car is a 92 Accord, so it was a dozen years old when the 2004 test was run. The CO idle numbers make me suspect the O2 sensor has seen better days, and getting that in line would probably clean up the picture (if not the numbers). The HC numbers are also sensitive to engine temperature and even oil condition. Some people report passing failed HC tests by changing the oil and retesting. The engine temperature is supposed to be taken into account by running a "conditioning cycle" (revving the engine) and retesting if the test failed the first time, but that is not done if the test is passed the first time. Mike |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Howard Lester" <heylester@dakotacom.net> wrote in message news:NbKdnaAWIZhU5dDUnZ2dnUVZ_hWdnZ2d@posted.dakot acomip... > > http://www.myazcar.com/pdf/emissions_control_equip.pdf > > Note that this sheet is titled "Emissins Control Visual Inspection...." > Our state legislature never had much interest in education, you see. LOL! When I moved to Arizona from California in 1874 I was immediately struck by the lax standards for spelling even in public signs. There was a cabinet that was prominently labeled "ELECTRICAL CABINENT" in front of the building where I worked and there were street signs proclaiming the street to be "Indain Trail." I lived on Wescott street and the signs were pretty evenly divided on the spelling: Wescott or Westcott. I was more amazed by the lax standards for auto safety. A fellow at work wanted to register his VW beetle, and I didn't think it could be registered until he added a headlight... one headlight was not only missing, there was a big hole where the mount should have been. No problem! Mike (Hey, y'all, holt my beer and watch this!) |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Michael Pardee" wrote
> LOL! When I moved to Arizona from California in 1874 How'dja get here - by covered wagon? :-) Wail, I think the state's toughened up some aspects of the testing, but were smart to realize that new cars aren't going to fail, so they've exempted those that are up to 4 years old. But get this: Mine's now 5 years old and just today went in for testing. But what did they test? They checked to see that the car has a gas cap, the check engine light doesn't come on when the engine is started, and that my OBD connector has "integrity." They did not, um, sniff the tailpipe as they did on Glen's car. All that for $12.25. I could have gotten a 16" pizza with mushrooms for that money, and it'd have tasted a heck of a lot better. |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Michael Pardee" <null@null.org> wrote in message news:RqadnSeEU4fpFtDUnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@sedona.net.. . > LOL! When I moved to Arizona from California in 1874 Or 1974, whichever <8^P |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
Howard Lester wrote:
> "Michael Pardee" wrote >> LOL! When I moved to Arizona from California in 1874 > How'dja get here - by covered wagon? :-) > Wail, I think the state's toughened up some aspects of the testing, but were > smart to realize that new cars aren't going to fail, so they've exempted > those that are up to 4 years old. But get this: Mine's now 5 years old and > just today went in for testing. But what did they test? They checked to see > that the car has a gas cap, the check engine light doesn't come on when the > engine is started, and that my OBD connector has "integrity." Didn't they hook the OBD to their computer? What manner of 'integrity' were they looking for? >They did not, > um, sniff the tailpipe as they did on Glen's car. Errrr... I'll let the tailpipe crack slide, but I gotta draw the line at being called 'Glen!' That's low... ;) > All that for $12.25. I could have gotten a 16" pizza with mushrooms for that > money, and it'd have tasted a heck of a lot better. Ah, shrooms. That explains a lot! :) Last I looked, Az doesn't conduct any sort of driver's test, either written or on-road. Show up, pay your $, prove you can detect large shapes with at least one eye, and you're golden. A license lasts for something like 20 years. I can't fault the lean government, but you've got to keep the lax standards in mind and drive very defensively. Riding a motorcycle developed my sense of paranoia regarding traffic. It's served me well in Tucson. -Greg |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Greg Campbell" wrote >>They checked to see that the car has a gas cap, the check engine light >>doesn't come on when the engine is started, and that my OBD connector has >>"integrity." > Didn't they hook the OBD to their computer? What manner of 'integrity' > were they looking for? >>They did not, um, sniff the tailpipe as they did on Glen's car. > Errrr... I'll let the tailpipe crack slide, but I gotta draw the line at > being called 'Glen!' That's low... ;) Sorry Greg! ;-) I was going on memory.... not very high integrity on my part. As for the OCD/I mean OBD, I saw the tech hook something up to something underneath the car's steering column. >> All that for $12.25. I could have gotten a 16" pizza with mushrooms for >> that money, and it'd have tasted a heck of a lot better. > Ah, shrooms. That explains a lot! :) Yum - and fresh, too. > Last I looked, Az doesn't conduct any sort of driver's test, either > written or on-road. Show up, pay your $, prove you can detect large > shapes with at least one eye, and you're golden. A license lasts for > something like 20 years. I can't fault the lean government, but you've > got to keep the lax standards in mind and drive very defensively. Riding a > motorcycle developed my sense of paranoia regarding traffic. It's served > me well in Tucson. I got a new license about 12 years ago, and yeah, it's good for another 4. I guess 65 is a magic number. You're right -- I don't recall having had to take a test even when I moved here, but 12 years ago I had to look into the little magic viewer to identify colored things. I know "kids" in their 20's have licenses that are good until they need walkers. |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
"Howard Lester" <heylester@dakotacom.net> wrote in
news:NbKdnaAWIZhU5dDUnZ2dnUVZ_hWdnZ2d@posted.dakot acomip: > "Tegger" wrote > > >> Here's all the history Az DOT has. >>> >>> HC Idle HC Load CO Idle CO Load. >>> (220 ppm) (220 ppm) (1.2%) (1.2%) >>> >>> 2004 173 82 .34 .52 >>> 2005 181 74 .21 .46 >>> 2006 207 100 .56 .64 >>> 2007 219 105 .4 .46 >>> 2008 190 157 .6 .57 > > >> Numbers are incomplete. No NOx. No CO2. >> >> Does AZ not test for NOx? > > It's been many years since I've had to have a full test on my car, as > I kept buying new ones, and new ones are exempt from inspection. But > seeing the above HC and CO testing, that's about what I remember being > tested. So I suspect they don't test for NOx, though in reference to > the catalytic converter inspection (on the right side of this sheet) > there is a notation about NOx: > > http://www.myazcar.com/pdf/emissions_control_equip.pdf > > Note that this sheet is titled "Emissins Control Visual > Inspection...." Our state legislature never had much interest in > education, you see. > > All right, assuming NOx and CO2 are unavailable, I can think of a few things off the top of my head. This is in no particular order, so do the easy, cheap stuff first. Remember that HC is simply raw gas that's getting out of the combustion chamber without having been burnt up first. CO is incomplete combustion, from too much fuel and not enough oxygen (the resulting combusted molecule has only one oxygen atom instead of two). 1) Check the cat inlet and outlet temperatures. Take the car out for a drive sufficient to warm the engine up to full operating temperature. A bit of high-speed driving is a good idea. When measured with an infrared thermometer, the cat should have an outlet about 30-100 F higher than the inlet. If in and out are the same, or the outlet is cooler, the cat is either insufficiently warmed up, or it's no longer working anymore. 2) Do you have EGR? Partially-plugged EGR can cause across-the-board high emissions, which is why I asked about NOx. 3) Retarded ignition timing. You'd be dumping raw gas directly into the exhaust manifold, expecting the cat to do the clean up, something it's not designed to do. 4) Dirty injectors with poor spray pattern. Run a Motorvac service (~$100), which is not a bad idea even if there's no actual issue to solve. 5) Thermostat too old and stuck open. Will cause rich running and high emissions. 6) What do the spark plugs look like? What kind and color of deposits on them? Do they show signs of proper spark? Have you checked each plug wire to make sure you get a purply-blue spark at each one? (Use a spare spark plug to check in a dark garage or at night.) 7) How old is the oxygen sensor? Is it OEM or aftermarket? An old sensor will result in poor control of fuel mixture. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
Tegger wrote:
> "Howard Lester" <heylester@dakotacom.net> wrote in >> "Tegger" wrote >> >>>> Here's all the history Az DOT has. >>>> >>>> HC Idle HC Load CO Idle CO Load. >>>> (220 ppm) (220 ppm) (1.2%) (1.2%) >>>> >>>> 2004 173 82 .34 .52 >>>> 2005 181 74 .21 .46 >>>> 2006 207 100 .56 .64 >>>> 2007 219 105 .4 .46 >>>> 2008 190 157 .6 .57 >> >>> Numbers are incomplete. No NOx. No CO2. >>> >>> Does AZ not test for NOx? >> Note that this sheet is titled "Emissins Control Visual >> Inspection...." Our state legislature never had much interest in >> education, you see. Gov't cost cutting measures at work. Just ask Vanna; them vowels is 'spensive! > All right, assuming NOx and CO2 are unavailable, I can think of a few > things off the top of my head. This is in no particular order, so do the > easy, cheap stuff first. > > Remember that HC is simply raw gas that's getting out of the combustion > chamber without having been burnt up first. CO is incomplete combustion, > from too much fuel and not enough oxygen (the resulting combusted > molecule has only one oxygen atom instead of two). Yea, I get it. :) > 1) Check the cat inlet and outlet temperatures. > Take the car out for a drive sufficient to warm the engine up to full > operating temperature. A bit of high-speed driving is a good idea. When > measured with an infrared thermometer, the cat should have an outlet > about 30-100 F higher than the inlet. If in and out are the same, or the > outlet is cooler, the cat is either insufficiently warmed up, or it's no > longer working anymore. That I can do. I rescued some high temp thermocouples and a meter from the dumpster. Will wire up two sensors, one on each end of cat. I suspect I'll see some temp rise. Even if aging, the cat probably isn't DOA. Does anyone know what sort of HC levels a cat-free system would emit? (I know, 'Google.com!') :) > 2) Do you have EGR? > Partially-plugged EGR can cause across-the-board high emissions, which > is why I asked about NOx. Got EGR. Ports and valve are clear and working. (Chased all 'round a CEL a year or two back. Found the valve wasn't rising fast enough. A small drill to the air metering orifice fixed it up.) > 3) Retarded ignition timing. > You'd be dumping raw gas directly into the exhaust manifold, expecting > the cat to do the clean up, something it's not designed to do. Haven't ever checked timing. You've got me curious, I'll borrow an Autozone light and have a look. > 4) Dirty injectors with poor spray pattern. > Run a Motorvac service (~$100), which is not a bad idea even if there's > no actual issue to solve. Corporate Bastards recently sent my job to Singapore. No spendin' allowed! :( > 5) Thermostat too old and stuck open. > Will cause rich running and high emissions. Therm was changed about 2 years back. (Changed the fan temp switch and figured I'd do everything while I was there.) How well does the engine coolant temperature sensor hold up? > 6) What do the spark plugs look like? What kind and color of deposits on > them? Do they show signs of proper spark? Have you checked each plug > wire to make sure you get a purply-blue spark at each one? (Use a spare > spark plug to check in a dark garage or at night.) Plugs look textbook. Going by this chart, http://www.dansmc.com/spark_plugs/sp...s_catalog.html The ground electrode color is #15, but w/o the lumpy texture. Insulator deposits are a _very_ light tan, close to 13, but far less thick. Haven't checked wires' they are looking a little old. Will do dark and scary test. > 7) How old is the oxygen sensor? Is it OEM or aftermarket? > An old sensor will result in poor control of fuel mixture. Haven't looked at it up close. As an official cheap bastard fuel efficiency nut, the O2 is one of those things I've been itching to replace or at least check. I understand that as they age, they tend over report free o2, resulting in a progressively richer mix. Given the plugs' appearance, I'm thinking the mix is pretty close to optimal. (?) Thanks -Moo |
Re: New Catalytic Converter
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 10:01:50 -0700, Greg Campbell wrote:
> Tegger wrote: > >> "Howard Lester" <heylester@dakotacom.net> wrote in > >>> "Tegger" wrote >>> >>>>> Here's all the history Az DOT has. >>>>> >>>>> HC Idle HC Load CO Idle CO Load. >>>>> (220 ppm) (220 ppm) (1.2%) (1.2%) >>>>> >>>>> 2004 173 82 .34 .52 2005 181 >>>>> 74 .21 .46 2006 207 100 >>>>> .56 .64 2007 219 105 .4 .46 >>>>> 2008 190 157 .6 .57 >>> >>>> Numbers are incomplete. No NOx. No CO2. >>>> >>>> Does AZ not test for NOx? > >>> Note that this sheet is titled "Emissins Control Visual >>> Inspection...." Our state legislature never had much interest in >>> education, you see. > > Gov't cost cutting measures at work. Just ask Vanna; them vowels is > 'spensive! > >> All right, assuming NOx and CO2 are unavailable, I can think of a few >> things off the top of my head. This is in no particular order, so do >> the easy, cheap stuff first. >> >> Remember that HC is simply raw gas that's getting out of the combustion >> chamber without having been burnt up first. CO is incomplete >> combustion, from too much fuel and not enough oxygen (the resulting >> combusted molecule has only one oxygen atom instead of two). > > Yea, I get it. :) > >> 1) Check the cat inlet and outlet temperatures. Take the car out for a >> drive sufficient to warm the engine up to full operating temperature. A >> bit of high-speed driving is a good idea. When measured with an >> infrared thermometer, the cat should have an outlet about 30-100 F >> higher than the inlet. If in and out are the same, or the outlet is >> cooler, the cat is either insufficiently warmed up, or it's no longer >> working anymore. > > That I can do. I rescued some high temp thermocouples and a meter from > the dumpster. Will wire up two sensors, one on each end of cat. hard to get good thermal contact. best to use an infrared reader. > I > suspect I'll see some temp rise. Even if aging, the cat probably isn't > DOA. Does anyone know what sort of HC levels a cat-free system would > emit? (I know, 'Google.com!') :) > >> 2) Do you have EGR? >> Partially-plugged EGR can cause across-the-board high emissions, which >> is why I asked about NOx. > > Got EGR. Ports and valve are clear and working. (Chased all 'round a > CEL a year or two back. Found the valve wasn't rising fast enough. A > small drill to the air metering orifice fixed it up.) > >> 3) Retarded ignition timing. >> You'd be dumping raw gas directly into the exhaust manifold, expecting >> the cat to do the clean up, something it's not designed to do. > > Haven't ever checked timing. You've got me curious, I'll borrow an > Autozone light and have a look. > >> 4) Dirty injectors with poor spray pattern. Run a Motorvac service >> (~$100), which is not a bad idea even if there's no actual issue to >> solve. > > Corporate Bastards recently sent my job to Singapore. No spendin' > allowed! :( > >> 5) Thermostat too old and stuck open. Will cause rich running and high >> emissions. > > Therm was changed about 2 years back. (Changed the fan temp switch and > figured I'd do everything while I was there.) > > How well does the engine coolant temperature sensor hold up? in my experience, they have been known to drift. my 89 wouldn't warm up, or at least, the computer thought it wasn't warming up because the sensor was reading colder than actual, thus the lock-up clutch on the auto transmission wasn't being switched on. new sensor cured that problem. fuel economy has improved also because now the engine is not running in cold enrichment mode for as long. > >> 6) What do the spark plugs look like? What kind and color of deposits >> on them? Do they show signs of proper spark? Have you checked each plug >> wire to make sure you get a purply-blue spark at each one? (Use a spare >> spark plug to check in a dark garage or at night.) > > Plugs look textbook. > Going by this chart, > http://www.dansmc.com/spark_plugs/sp...s_catalog.html The ground > electrode color is #15, but w/o the lumpy texture. Insulator deposits > are a _very_ light tan, close to 13, but far less thick. plugs are so cheap, replace anyway. don't attempt to clean as this can leave metal deposits on the insulator that make the spark weaker, not stronger. > > Haven't checked wires' they are looking a little old. Will do dark and > scary test. just replace anyway. simply not worth trying to diagnose something you may or may not be able to detect. only use oem leads or expensive coiled core silicone like ngk. > >> 7) How old is the oxygen sensor? Is it OEM or aftermarket? An old >> sensor will result in poor control of fuel mixture. > > Haven't looked at it up close. As an official cheap bastard fuel > efficiency nut, the O2 is one of those things I've been itching to > replace or at least check. I understand that as they age, they tend > over report free o2, resulting in a progressively richer mix. Given the > plugs' appearance, I'm thinking the mix is pretty close to optimal. (?) > > Thanks > > -Moo |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:08 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands