newZman

Someone on here had to have run into this before... I am doing an LT1 swap into my 84 Z28 and want it to be able to pass emissions testing if required.

This car came originally with a carburated 305 with a decent cam and headers stock so I cant imagine the levels are going to be too stringent. I thought the whole thing behind the new motors is that they have lower levels by design, so it stands to reason that one could upgrade to a new setup (LT1 etc...) with modest performance upgrades and still pass local testing, which for this car would be a tail pipe and visual.

I know for a fact I can throw a carburated 350 with a healthy cam profile and headers with the works and tune that carburator to pass emissions... So why would anyone want to spend the time and money to swap in a newer motor if you cant pass local requirements?

What do I need to do to make sure my swap will pass emissions?

I know it will have to have the O2 sensor/s and catalytic converters present, but besides that will the emission levels be low enough to pass, with say a hotcam upgrade only?

Does a person need to have have multiple tunes for their ECM?

I think these are important questions. It would be nice to be able to comply with what is required and still get what we want without going through unethical means. What if I have to sell the car, I'ld like to have more than a fast car good for nothing but the track to offer someone.

diablizzard

iTrader: (8)

If it's a bone stock lt1, it should pass no problem. all engines have to meet a standard, and the newer ones are alot tougher. you would only have to meet 84 standards. In the end I'd say your tune would determine the results. if it fails, take the results and adjust the tune to pass. you really won't need an egr valve with the LT4 hotcam because of the overlap, the normal LT4 doesn't have one. What state are you in, that makes a large difference. Fuel injected has the nice convienence of being able to produce power and put out low emissions.

pound

iTrader: (7)

I know it will pass an idle and high idle test. Not sure about a dyno as my state doesn't do that test any more. Just throw a cat on there and you're good.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

The Federal requirement is the car needs to pass the requirements of the engine, not the chassis. Your state may apply it differently for enforcement.

newZman

I am in Oregon and not all counties require it, I want to be safe no matter what. They dont open the hood here anymore so they dont know what anyone has put in so they go by the standards of the year of the vehicle. I have never gone through with anything in the early 80's, I am thinking they will just do a visual and tailpipe emissions like they did on my old 79 pickup. Not sure though.

All in all it sounds like it's doable through tuning which is what I was hoping. Any more info would be great.

newZman

Is it really necessary, from an environmental standpoint, to require vehicles older than 25 years to comply with emission standards applicable at the time the motor was manufactured?

In my opinion it certainly is not from a humanitarian standpoint. I will venture to guess that the majority of vehicles, in that category, being driven daily are owned and operated by either, poor to lower middle class, the elderly and the occasional hobbyist. By maintaining these sorts of stringent requirements we force people who cannot afford and should not be purchasing new cars to accrue debt at times in there lives when they need to be a bit more frugal, or spending a lot of money in maintenance costs to make a vehicle that probably wouldn’t have been on the road much longer anyway last another 20 years. So much for getting those vehicles off the road. It is also my opinion that unless a person is flush with cash they should not be buying a new car.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that, the majority of cars on the road today are newer than 25 years old. I will also guess that there is actually a pretty small percentage of cars older than 25 years being driven on a daily basis. Is the environmental risk really that severe when put into perspective? In fact if we don’t require people to fix these cars there would probably be even fewer of them the road. And the hobbyist is most likely going to make that car as good, or better than it was stock anyway. Think about it, do some research. It just doesn’t make sense from an environmental standpoint either.

If the things I say here are true, and I challenge anyone to prove otherwise, than we are doing more harm to humans than we are doing good for the environment.

All this said, I think we need to control the emission levels for new cars and maintain those requirements for some finite period of time, for both humanitarian and environmental reasons. But the way it is now, is not right in my opinion.

Thanks for the soap box.

diablizzard

iTrader: (8)

When you get the CAT don't go el cheapo

newZman

Thanks for that info... That's probably why the 79 ickup I was talking about had a hard time.

diablizzard

iTrader: (8)

A lot of states stopped testing for tailpipe emissions on anything 95 and older, for the same reason you stated. It was costing more money and time, when the large majority of vehicles on the road are OBD II. I'm not sure if oregon did the same.

newZman

That's interesting, maybe other states will follow suite. Here anything newer than 1974 has to have cats visible and at the least a tial pipe sniff, OBDII get plugged in.

diablizzard

iTrader: (8)

That really bites the big one. I'm not the one to maintain a cat.

newZman

Yep!