2 92's FAIL e-test!!!!!!!!!

[Electric Frost]

This weekend I had my ONTARIO e-test done on my red car to get it registered, and on the silver one to get it renewed. Guess what, they both FAILED... I'm very heartbroken, especially after spending soo much money on getting the red one certified.
Here are the readings:

silver red allowable
HC (ppm) 88 95 67
CO (%) 0.26 0.33 0.37
NO (ppm) 2367 1975 501

As you can see, the numbers b/w the two cars are VERY close. The main problem here is the NO, with secondary issues causing slighlty high HC's. I have already tried testing both cars hot and cooler, and after alot of wasted $$$ ($35 for initial tests, 17.50 re-tests), they still both fail. I am under the impression that the cats are original in both cases, and not sure about the O2s. I have a few questions:
1) Both cars run great with no lack of power or bucking whatsoever. However, in the past both cars have had malfunctioning ignition casuing them to misfire and run rich for some period of time. Could this have killed my cats? Also, tonight, several hours after my e-test the check engine light came on and stayed on for 30kms until i shut the car off. I was gonna get out and paper clip it, but I decided that the whiteout condititions I was driving through at the time were unfavourable for poking around under the hood in.
2) I have searched previous posts and found some discussion about unplugging the SPOUT connector, but some disagreement. Can someone give me some insight?
3) Does that "stuff in a can" really work?? I ask this because I have generally had no success with any "stuff out of a can"
4) What could likely be causing my HC's to be a bit too high???

Any help pertaining to any of the questions would be greatly appreciated!!!!!!

 

[doucebag]

I had my 91+ for close to a year before putting it on the road. The guy that I bought it from also had it sitting for a while. I live 1/2 west of Bellville, so I had to take the E-test. I ran mabey 1 tank of fuel through the car before I had the E-test. I was very nervous about it because the car sat for so long. It passed with flying colours. Did the technicain not tell you what failed or how to fix it? I thought they did.
As for the "stuff in a can", I looked at it too. But on the label you were to run it in your car for I think it said a month before the E-test. I could be wrong on the time period. I never bought it... I was told that running the higher octane fuel would work kind of the same way. shrug I don't know it its true ar not.
Other that that all I can say is good luck.

 

[sdpatt]

My '91 is having a similar problem with the emissions testing here in Dallas, Texas. Today, after tightening the two hose clamps that connect the intake mainfold crossover tube (left loose after a recent timing belt change - oops) and installing new O2 sensors (the replaced sensors were only two years old), the numbers stayed the same as the last test and about what you are showing.

As a check, I disconnected and plugged the canister purge vacuum line to the throttle body since I have been getting the 85 code for most of the car's life with no effect on previous emissions tests (HC @ 6-14 ppm and CO at .06-.14 ppm). The result was a reduction in the HC, CO and NOx readings enough to pass the 15 mph dyno test and almost enough to pass the 25 mph load test.

From reading Toyota's article and from the results of that check test, I believe that I still have a source of unmetered air getting into the intake manifold causing high combustion temperatures (greater NOx production) and low CO production and feed to the catalytic converter (less efficient NOx reduction). Both of these characteristics conspire to increase the NOx output from the tailpipe.

The fact that both of your engines and mine emitted approximately the same output, makes me feel that there is either a common mode of failure or these older engines are going to have a really tough time passing the tighter emissions standards. But from the numbers my engine put out last year (although unloaded), I have to believe that they are capable of running very cleanly. If I find a cause and solution, I will let the Forum know about it.

<small>[ January 20, 2003, 07:37 AM: Message edited by: sdpatt ]</small>

 

[jbeano]

When I etested my 95 MTX last May it failed and the numbers were very close to yours. I also drove around for a while with a misfire and it killed my cats. I replaced the cats, O2 sensors and cleaned the MAF. The car passed the retest with flying colours.

<small>[ January 19, 2003, 10:43 PM: Message edited by: jbeano ]</small>

 

[Hubes]

my bro luckily had some connections when my car was up a few months ago. his friend let my car run 10 times on the dyno because it kept failing emissions and then it finally passed but barely. if i find the sheet with the results i will post them.

 

[Electric Frost]

Scott,

I read the link. Thank you, it was very informative. From what I can gather, the common reason for excess NOx production is overly high combustion temperatures, perhaps caused by worn out O2 sensors, or for some other reason. Would this suggest that potentially using 87 octane fuel thats burns cooler for the test would yield better results? (seems kind of anti-expected) I have run nothing but 93 or 94 octane in it for the last 50,000kms, but as far as the red one I don't know what he ran in it.

Also, Jbeano, it seems as though the O2 sensors replacement is a good idea. I was also wondering if you could give me some details on what kind of setup you used for your cat. replacement, along w/approx. $$$, either here or on the SHOpower list?????

 

[Mike92Silver]

knock on wood, but i can post my last sheet, and i leave my superchip in the car and i dont have a problem, lets hope this year is no different!

 

[Hubes]

ok, here are the following stats according to my sheet i got upon inspection.

BTW ' " ' stands for GPM
reading MA legal limit
HC GPM .71 1.20
CO GPM 19.10 20.00
NOx GPM .86 2.50
CO2 GPM 143.79 N/A

i was real close on the CO. what gives?

 

[sdpatt]

Hubes, I think that the units of measure on those gasses was ppm as in parts per million. If your engine had been putting out gallons per minute, passing an emissions test would have been the least of your problems.

I omitted the information that both of the catalytic covnerters on my car had been replaced last year. One in February and the other in November. Both were due to the "death rattle" of failed internals. The first cat had a large dent and scar from a strike with road debris.

I replaced the O2 sensors because I was afraid that I had possibly contaminated the old ones from the use of a non-sensor safe RTV when re-sealing the oil pan after replacing the connecting rod bearings. I changed the oil and the sensors the morning before the last re-test yesterday, obviously, with little or no effect.

The change that did make a diffrence was the plugging of the charcoal purge canister vacuum line. The numbers dropped markedly across the board. The search for other sources of unmetered air (vacuum leaks) continues. I plan to replace the purge solenoid valve (previously ordered and to be received tomorrow) and its rubber lines and possibly remove and reinstall the intake mainfold and fuel rails before the next retest. What a pain.

<small>[ January 20, 2003, 12:01 PM: Message edited by: sdpatt ]</small>

 

[Hubes]

oops. gallons per minute seems a bit to high. when the test was conducted on my car i had replaced the 02 sensors only 4 months prior. the shop shop y pipe and cats are fairly new too, i put them on in the fall of 2001. other than that and a k and n i am running completely stock.

 

[srfdude]

Posted by Electric Frost:
This weekend I had my ONTARIO e-test done on my red car to get it registered, and on the silver one to get it renewed. Guess what, they both FAILED... I'm very heartbroken, especially after spending soo much money on getting the red one certified.
Here are the readings:

silver red allowable
HC (ppm) 88 95 67
CO (%) 0.26 0.33 0.37
NO (ppm) 2367 1975 501 <<<<

Man I thought CA was bad. These requirements for a '92 are around 50% tighter in Ontario than here in Ca., for my '95. I'll bet most US cars would have a hard time passing these numbers.
Mike

 

[Ishodu]

srfdude:
Man I thought CA was bad. These requirements for a '92 are around 50% tighter in Ontario than here in Ca., for my '95. I'll bet most US cars would have a hard time passing these numbers.

Well some parts of Ont anyway, I am about 100 miles north of him and I have no emmisions testing.