>At 01:26 PM 4/29/97 -0700, you wrote:
> Here are the limits for my check four years ago
>>(I can't find the one from two years ago, but the idle limits were the same:
>>
>> 1993 1997
>>Hydrocarbons, Idle 1200ppm 600ppm
>>CO, Idle 6.50 % 5.50 %
>>
>>Hydrocarbons, 2000 rpm N/A 500ppm
>>CO, 2000 rpm N/A 4.5 %
>>
>>
>>Gee, does it look like anything has changed? I sure can't tell....
>>Can anyone help me pin this high CO problem down? I have reduced
>>compression in #3 cylinder (100lbs as opposed to 150lbs in the others).
>>Would that contribute?
>>
>
>These smog checks are definitely scary. Not that I know anything about them.
>But these numbers are pretty low. And at 2000 rpm.
What did Tintin get? Or do they just tell you that you fail?
To be sure, you would have to have good combustion to pass. The low
hydrocarbons would indicate that your combustion is complete enough. However,
the CO as opposed to carbon dioxide, C02, indicates more of a reducing, low
oxygen environment.
I believe that is where the catalytic converter come in - to convert more of
the carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide.
Unfortunately adding more air and oxygen to your fuel mix could make your car
run too lean and less efficiently with an increase of hydrocarbons. So it would
be a balancing act.
I would think, if anything, the lower compression in your one cylinder would
increase the hydrocarbons.
But this comes from a person with book knowledge but no real smogging
experience. I moved from Denver just when the EPA was pressuring Colorado to
test emissions. And now I live in Montana where we don't even have state
inspections, the only way.
David
<center><bigger>
</bigger></center><bigger>----------------------------------
David Councill
</bigger>dcouncil@imt.net
http://www.imt.net/~dcouncil/index.html
---------------------------------------
|