Tegger's new cat

Tegger ) writes:
> (Micheal C. Jordan) wrote in
> :
>
>
>>
>> Mr. Tegger. Check out this calculator at the Province of British
>> Columbia's emissions testing web site (AirCare). The year of the car,
>> engine size, and curb weight is entered. It then calculates the CO,
>> NOx, and HC limits for B.C..
>>
>> The weight part is a bit sticky. B.C. uses "Curb Weight". The Ontario
>> DriveClean program uses "ETW" (Estimated Test Weight).
>
>
>
> No, it's "Equivalent Test Weight". Look at the DriveClean printout.

I'm looking at 3 printouts, 2002, 2004, and 2006, and they all read
"Estimated" test weight. They also contain GVWR. Did they change the "ETW"
definition after 2006?


>
> This figure bears no relation to gross weight, curb weight, dry weight,
> your hat size, the phase of the moon, or anything else that exists in the
> real world. It's a weasel number used by the government to shuffle cars
> around so the ones they don't like are given a hard time while others get a
> free ride, all without needing to change the schedules themselves.
>

Do you know which ones they don't like?

>
>
>> The ETW on my
>> DriveClean printout is like 200 Kg over the curb weight listed in my
>> manual. As the weight goes up, the limits become stricter in Ontario
>> (and B.C.).
>>
>> The surprise that I had was how loose the B.C. limits were for a 1987
>> car compared to the Ontario limits. A failing 1987 car in Ontario
>> would pass in B.C.! B.C. limits (using Ont.'s ETW!) appear to be 50%
>> to 100% higher for a 1987 car, compared to the limits in Ontario. And
>> the gov. of Ont. said they were going to be easy on the old cars when
>> they brought in the Ont. DriveClean Emissions testing at the end of
>> the 1990's.
>
>
>
> It was the previous Premier whose government said (and did) just that.
>
> The new Premier (the Communist Dalton McGuinty, who looks exactly like
> Lee Harvey Oswald) made a lot of changes to DriveClean that ended up
> making things more expensive and far more difficult.
>

Typical, ran with what Harris rammed in, and then made it worse.

Many car owners have been financially victimized by DriveClean.

Global Television is doing a story about DriveClean on their "News At Six"
news show Mon. Sept. 22/08, according to their promotions. It looks like
it's about "cheaters".



>
>
> --
> Tegger
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Micheal C. Jordan wrote:
> Tegger ) writes:
>> (Micheal C. Jordan) wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>> Mr. Tegger. Check out this calculator at the Province of British
>>> Columbia's emissions testing web site (AirCare). The year of the car,
>>> engine size, and curb weight is entered. It then calculates the CO,
>>> NOx, and HC limits for B.C..
>>>
>>> The weight part is a bit sticky. B.C. uses "Curb Weight". The Ontario
>>> DriveClean program uses "ETW" (Estimated Test Weight).
>>
>>
>> No, it's "Equivalent Test Weight". Look at the DriveClean printout.
>
> I'm looking at 3 printouts, 2002, 2004, and 2006, and they all read
> "Estimated" test weight. They also contain GVWR. Did they change the "ETW"
> definition after 2006?
>
>
>> This figure bears no relation to gross weight, curb weight, dry weight,
>> your hat size, the phase of the moon, or anything else that exists in the
>> real world. It's a weasel number used by the government to shuffle cars
>> around so the ones they don't like are given a hard time while others get a
>> free ride, all without needing to change the schedules themselves.
>>
>
> Do you know which ones they don't like?
>
>>
>>> The ETW on my
>>> DriveClean printout is like 200 Kg over the curb weight listed in my
>>> manual. As the weight goes up, the limits become stricter in Ontario
>>> (and B.C.).
>>>
>>> The surprise that I had was how loose the B.C. limits were for a 1987
>>> car compared to the Ontario limits. A failing 1987 car in Ontario
>>> would pass in B.C.! B.C. limits (using Ont.'s ETW!) appear to be 50%
>>> to 100% higher for a 1987 car, compared to the limits in Ontario. And
>>> the gov. of Ont. said they were going to be easy on the old cars when
>>> they brought in the Ont. DriveClean Emissions testing at the end of
>>> the 1990's.
>>
>>
>> It was the previous Premier whose government said (and did) just that.
>>
>> The new Premier (the Communist Dalton McGuinty, who looks exactly like
>> Lee Harvey Oswald) made a lot of changes to DriveClean that ended up
>> making things more expensive and far more difficult.
>>
>
> Typical, ran with what Harris rammed in, and then made it worse.
>
> Many car owners have been financially victimized by DriveClean.

i bet manufacturers and dealers haven't!



>
> Global Television is doing a story about DriveClean on their "News At Six"
> news show Mon. Sept. 22/08, according to their promotions. It looks like
> it's about "cheaters".
>
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Tegger
>>
>> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
>> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
>
>

"Elle" > wrote
> 5.
> Bad catalytic converter (though not excusing what caused
> it to go bad.) (I replaced it with a Magnaflow direct fit
> (so OEM flange connections) converter. I bought it online
> from dotcomparts.com . It cost about $94.

Update: I searched for where to dispose of the old
converter. I learned that scrap yards pay money for them
because the converters contain precious metals. I sold my
old OEM converter today for $25. No idea if this is
reasonable. Also, in my area selling used converters
involves legalities. I had to bring in copies of the receipt
for my new converter; was fingerprinted and photographed at
the scrap yard with the old converter; and they made a
photocopy of my driver's license. Apparently police are
watching for scrap yards buying stolen converters. Googling
suggests there is in fact an epidemic of thefts. Maybe this
is one argument for replacing old OEM converters (when they
fail, and assuming no other causes are found other than age)
with cheap aftermarket ones.

(Micheal C. Jordan) wrote in
:

> Tegger ) writes:
>> (Micheal C. Jordan) wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Mr. Tegger. Check out this calculator at the Province of British
>>> Columbia's emissions testing web site (AirCare). The year of the
>>> car, engine size, and curb weight is entered. It then calculates the
>>> CO, NOx, and HC limits for B.C..
>>>
>>> The weight part is a bit sticky. B.C. uses "Curb Weight". The
>>> Ontario DriveClean program uses "ETW" (Estimated Test Weight).
>>
>>
>>
>> No, it's "Equivalent Test Weight". Look at the DriveClean printout.
>
> I'm looking at 3 printouts, 2002, 2004, and 2006, and they all read
> "Estimated" test weight. They also contain GVWR. Did they change the
> "ETW" definition after 2006?



I'm looking at a number of printouts right now. I didn't look far enough
back when I said the word was "equivalent" and not "estimated".

The switch to "equivalent" from "estimated" appears to have taken place
some time between mid-2002 and mid-2003. All my post-May/03 printouts
say "equivalent".



>
>
>>
>> This figure bears no relation to gross weight, curb weight, dry
>> weight, your hat size, the phase of the moon, or anything else that
>> exists in the real world. It's a weasel number used by the government
>> to shuffle cars around so the ones they don't like are given a hard
>> time while others get a free ride, all without needing to change the
>> schedules themselves.
>>
>
> Do you know which ones they don't like?



Older ones. McGuinty want so force old cars off the road. This is why
he's eliminated the 19-year rolling exemption, even though 20+ year-old
cars make up something like 1% of the cars on the road in Ontario, and
typically cover far lower annual mileages than newer cars.

My '91 is required to meet the same HC and CO numbers as a '99 of the
same "equivalent" weight class. My wife's '99 Tercel /was/ in the same
"equivalent" weight class as my Integra up to the last two tests. For
those it was inexplicably dropped a weight class, which entitled it to
higher legal emissions. The effect of such legal weaseling is to force
more older cars into failing while making it harder for newer cars to
fail. This allows the McGuinty government to justify their actions by
pointing to the higher failure rate of older cars.


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

jim beam > wrote in
t:

> Micheal C. Jordan wrote:

>>
>> Many car owners have been financially victimized by DriveClean.
>
> i bet manufacturers and dealers haven't!



Smog testing in Ontario was sold to repair garages by including the
regulation that repairs had to be made at a DriveClean facility in order to
count towards the "repair cost limit". This assured garages that they'd be
able to use drivers as sugar tits to help them suck back the $80,000 or
whatever it cost them to install the equipment in the first place.

It was later discovered that not enough cars were failing, and garages
weren't making enough money off smog repairs, so the allowable numbers were
successively dropped and the repair cost limit was raised from $400 to
$600.

Some years ago Lee Harvey McGuinty floated a trial balloon to the effect
that he thought smog testing wasn't having the effect it was supposed to,
and that it was terribly expensive for poorer people. Garages and the
environuts screamed blue bloody murder. McGuinty then went in the
completely opposite direction, making the test /more/ expensive and /more/
strict. Then he got re-elected. Ontarians are pretty stupid.


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

"Elle" > wrote in newsqcBk.612$tp1.10
@newsfe06.iad:

> "Elle" > wrote
> Re explaining why her car failed NOx on a recent emissions
> test:
>> 2.
>> Carbon deposits in cylinders, especially for older, high
>> mileage cars. (Solution: The beamer's and others' Italian
>> tuneup. Ran at high speed on long, steep hill for about an
>> hour. Revved some to red line.)
>
>
> Add another anecdote: Today on Car Talk, Tom and Ray
> dismissed the Italian tuneup as unnecessary on today's fuel
> injected car.


Aw, they're no fun. And they're Italian, too.


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Grumpy AuContraire > wrote in
:

>
>
> Tegger wrote:
>> (Micheal C. Jordan) wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>
>>>Mr. Tegger. Check out this calculator at the Province of British
>>>Columbia's emissions testing web site (AirCare). The year of the car,
>>>engine size, and curb weight is entered. It then calculates the CO,
>>>NOx, and HC limits for B.C..
>>>
>>>The weight part is a bit sticky. B.C. uses "Curb Weight". The Ontario
>>>DriveClean program uses "ETW" (Estimated Test Weight).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> No, it's "Equivalent Test Weight". Look at the DriveClean printout.
>>
>> This figure bears no relation to gross weight, curb weight, dry
>> weight, your hat size, the phase of the moon, or anything else that
>> exists in the real world. It's a weasel number used by the government
>> to shuffle cars around so the ones they don't like are given a hard
>> time while others get a free ride, all without needing to change the
>> schedules themselves.
>
> So... When are youse guys gonna revolt?



Never, I assure you.

Canadians are too stupid to actually try and do something to change the
system.


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

"Elle" > wrote in news:ZkSBk.8417$tp1.7626
@newsfe06.iad:

> "Elle" > wrote
>> 5.
>> Bad catalytic converter (though not excusing what caused
>> it to go bad.) (I replaced it with a Magnaflow direct fit
>> (so OEM flange connections) converter. I bought it online
>> from dotcomparts.com . It cost about $94.
>
> Update: I searched for where to dispose of the old
> converter. I learned that scrap yards pay money for them
> because the converters contain precious metals. I sold my
> old OEM converter today for $25. No idea if this is
> reasonable. Also, in my area selling used converters
> involves legalities. I had to bring in copies of the receipt
> for my new converter; was fingerprinted and photographed at
> the scrap yard with the old converter; and they made a
> photocopy of my driver's license. Apparently police are
> watching for scrap yards buying stolen converters. Googling
> suggests there is in fact an epidemic of thefts.



There is.

I've been told the thieves tend to target SUVs and minivans because they're
higher off the ground (easier access). The crooks use a cordless Sawzall,
and are off and running with the cat in less than a minute.

What baffles me is how all radios are protected by that fancy anti-theft
mechanism that renders them useless without the security code, but cats,
ECMs and airbags (all far more valuable than the radio) are protected by
nothing at all.



--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Tegger wrote:
> "Elle" > wrote in news:ZkSBk.8417$tp1.7626
> @newsfe06.iad:
>
>> "Elle" > wrote
>>> 5.
>>> Bad catalytic converter (though not excusing what caused
>>> it to go bad.) (I replaced it with a Magnaflow direct fit
>>> (so OEM flange connections) converter. I bought it online
>>> from dotcomparts.com . It cost about $94.
>> Update: I searched for where to dispose of the old
>> converter. I learned that scrap yards pay money for them
>> because the converters contain precious metals. I sold my
>> old OEM converter today for $25. No idea if this is
>> reasonable. Also, in my area selling used converters
>> involves legalities. I had to bring in copies of the receipt
>> for my new converter; was fingerprinted and photographed at
>> the scrap yard with the old converter; and they made a
>> photocopy of my driver's license. Apparently police are
>> watching for scrap yards buying stolen converters. Googling
>> suggests there is in fact an epidemic of thefts.
>
> There is.
>
> I've been told the thieves tend to target SUVs and minivans because they're
> higher off the ground (easier access). The crooks use a cordless Sawzall,
> and are off and running with the cat in less than a minute.
>
> What baffles me is how all radios are protected by that fancy anti-theft
> mechanism that renders them useless without the security code, but cats,
> ECMs and airbags (all far more valuable than the radio) are protected by
> nothing at all.

Speaking from bitter experience, it took years and several radios for
this to happen (multiple radios stolen from my 1982 Rabbit & 1988 Acura
Integra).

"Tegger" > wrote
> I've been told the thieves tend to target SUVs and
> minivans because they're
> higher off the ground (easier access). The crooks use a
> cordless Sawzall,
> and are off and running with the cat in less than a
> minute.
>
> What baffles me is how all radios are protected by that
> fancy anti-theft
> mechanism that renders them useless without the security
> code, but cats,
> ECMs and airbags (all far more valuable than the radio)
> are protected by
> nothing at all.

From a little more research today, two followup comments to
your own above: First, some companies are now selling
anti-cat converter theft devices. E.g.
http://www.catclamp.com/. Second, from chat with my scrap
yard guys (as they completed an FBI level investigation,
complete with mug shot, of me for completing a cat converter
sale), we suspect my city's recycling center folks
discourage chatter about selling catalytic converters to
scrap centers, since it might promote more thievery. I
searched my city's recycling center site (which covers
automotive fluids and household hazardous waste) and, having
turned up nothing, then called the city recycling
department. They said good question but they had not
anything to offer, except call Autozone and the like.