h a l f b a k e r y0.5 and holding.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
A small electric fan blows clean air into the exhaust flow, and dilutes the NOx and CO.
Once the emission test has been passed, the exhaust can be reconnected as normal.
[link]
|
| |
This type of system was used on some of the older rotary engine Mazdas to burn up extra hydrocarbons. It used some kind of belt-driven pump to force air into a small chamber coming off of the exhaust manifold and reduced emmissions quite a bit. |
|
| |
Turn the heater on full blast, that draws heat from the engine.
Had to do it once. 110 in AZ getting emmisions tested and the car was on the verge of over heating. |
|
| |
Baked, called a smog pump. Check 80's GM models. The half-assedest emissions "control" I ever saw. |
|
| |
What el said - you're not *reducing* anything, only diluting it. |
|
| |
That's what the idea is about, cheating on an emissions test. |
|
| |
Has anyone noticed
Reduced
Emission
Vechile is also R.E.V |
|
| |
In 1990, when the Clean Air Act was introduced (US), my slightly modified ’79 Trans-Am wouldn’t pass emissions – not even close. So, I’d nearly empty the tank, pour in a gallon of “dry gas” (ethanol), drive it around a bit, then get it inspected. It passed emissions with flying colors. |
|
| |
Not necessarily. Ethanol does not burn as efficiently as gasoline, and therefore requires more fuel. Ethanol is also more harsh, causing more wear and tear on key components of the engine. Thus, an engine designed to run ethanol would likely need to be heavier. |
|
| |
Furthermore, with today's common practice of corn-based ethanol, you get only about 1.4 x the energy output of fuel from the energy input, which presumably would be a drain on the power grid, which has its own, albeit not as severe as autos, emissions problems to curtail. Furthermore, there are the emissions required for harvesting and increased amount of land-based hauling from a larger geographic area. Factor all of that in, and it's anybody's guess how much benefit there is to switching. |
|
| |
My '84 Mercury Cougar also had the asinine smog pump on it. Just drained power and therefore probably raised the smog level instead of lowering it. |
|
| |
Can anyone explain how the smog pump worked, or didn't work? |
|
| |
As I understand it, the theory is that it provided more oxygen in the exhaust stream to help finish burning the remaining hydrocarbons. |
|
| |
I've got one car that has an air injection pump. It's on a car that's notorious for barely passing emissions, but I've never had any trouble. |
|
| |
Too much timing advance will up the NOx considerably, as I recall finding out when our 1984 Thunderbird failed. (A car I later happily gave away, though it passed emissions no problem when I adjusted things properly.) |
|
| |
So, even if none of the hydrocarbons in the exhaust flow were burnt, then it would work by dilution anyway!
I've never seen an emission test, but I assume it is done at idle, when exhaust gases are at the lowest temperature and flow rate. |
|
| |