Topic: New safety test rules for used cars

[tpl]

The classic car problem could be solved ( with some leakage!) by not subjecting cars plated as Historic vehicles to the tests.

[quadzilla]

Modders will define "better" as more powerful while the car MFGs will be after fuel efficiency and level of emissions. Cars whose engines use custom ECU settings and other mods almost certainly will have different FE and emissions than those stated by the car maker.

I have a +1 tune on my GTI and my FE never changed. I actually think it was slightly better than stock.

[dougjp]

Modders will define "better" as more powerful while the car MFGs will be after fuel efficiency and level of emissions. Cars whose engines use custom ECU settings and other mods almost certainly will have different FE and emissions than those stated by the car maker.

I have a +1 tune on my GTI and my FE never changed. I actually think it was slightly better than stock.

Exactly, based on a bit of experience (hopefully a tech person can chime in), its only when getting into stage 3 type mods where the turbo gets replaced along with lots of other things, where emissions could well be a problem. A stage 1 tune will often reduce emissions or at least not increase them because the fuel is burned more efficiently. Sometimes fuel mileage will improve too, comparing identical driving speeds. Combining a basic tune with cat back exhaust is also possible to meet emissions fairly easily, its only when changing the cat, turbo, intercooler, mass airflow sensor size increase etc. that problems happen.

[blur911]

I have a mixed feeling "aboot" the gobment here. First, I think the new Drive Clean program is a mistake since it relies on OBDII readings and not an actual exhaust test. Scrap it alltogether OR make sure that if some boy racer removes a catalytic converter for example, or runs a custom engine mapping, they will never pass.

What does a custom engine mapping have to do with it?   You custom  map your engine controls  so it will run better with other changes made, it's not to defeat emissions testing.

Modders will define "better" as more powerful while the car MFGs will be after fuel efficiency and level of emissions. Cars whose engines use custom ECU settings and other mods almost certainly will have different FE and emissions than those stated by the car maker.

You're kind of the opposite of a car enthusiast.  Please don't ban the things you don't understand. 

[Fobroader]

I have a mixed feeling "aboot" the gobment here. First, I think the new Drive Clean program is a mistake since it relies on OBDII readings and not an actual exhaust test. Scrap it alltogether OR make sure that if some boy racer removes a catalytic converter for example, or runs a custom engine mapping, they will never pass.

What does a custom engine mapping have to do with it?   You custom  map your engine controls  so it will run better with other changes made, it's not to defeat emissions testing.

Modders will define "better" as more powerful while the car MFGs will be after fuel efficiency and level of emissions. Cars whose engines use custom ECU settings and other mods almost certainly will have different FE and emissions than those stated by the car maker.

You're kind of the opposite of a car enthusiast.  Please don't ban the things you don't understand. 

X1000....this is like my mother being angry at me because her printer doesn't work because I defragged her laptop......

[EV Dan]

I have a mixed feeling "aboot" the gobment here. First, I think the new Drive Clean program is a mistake since it relies on OBDII readings and not an actual exhaust test. Scrap it alltogether OR make sure that if some boy racer removes a catalytic converter for example, or runs a custom engine mapping, they will never pass.

What does a custom engine mapping have to do with it?   You custom  map your engine controls  so it will run better with other changes made, it's not to defeat emissions testing.

Modders will define "better" as more powerful while the car MFGs will be after fuel efficiency and level of emissions. Cars whose engines use custom ECU settings and other mods almost certainly will have different FE and emissions than those stated by the car maker.

You're kind of the opposite of a car enthusiast.  Please don't ban the things you don't understand. 

X1000....this is like my mother being angry at me because her printer doesn't work because I defragged her laptop......

with "format c: /s" 

[EV Dan]

I have a mixed feeling "aboot" the gobment here. First, I think the new Drive Clean program is a mistake since it relies on OBDII readings and not an actual exhaust test. Scrap it alltogether OR make sure that if some boy racer removes a catalytic converter for example, or runs a custom engine mapping, they will never pass.

What does a custom engine mapping have to do with it?   You custom  map your engine controls  so it will run better with other changes made, it's not to defeat emissions testing.

Modders will define "better" as more powerful while the car MFGs will be after fuel efficiency and level of emissions. Cars whose engines use custom ECU settings and other mods almost certainly will have different FE and emissions than those stated by the car maker.

You're kind of the opposite of a car enthusiast.  Please don't ban the things you don't understand. 

If you alter ignition and valve timing or air/fuel mixture in order to increase power, it will affect FE and emissions. Can't have the cake and eat it.

[rrocket]

As Wing's earlier post eluded to, it's not like the new requirements are for absolutely zero leaking. There is a "tolerance" for the leak. If your car is dripping something bad enough that it's creating drops during the inspection, then it's probably enough of an issue that you should have it fixed.

It's my understanding the new test will take at least 1 hour.  So if a car has a few drips in an hour...it fails.

Stupid IMO.

[rrocket]

If you alter ignition and valve timing or air/fuel mixture in order to increase power, it will affect FE and emissions. Can't have the cake and eat it.

Yes, you can.  My Supra was modded.  Heavily.  And I had it during the tail pipe e-testing, not the OBD II crap.  640BHP, single turbo.  And it passed emission testing despite my tune.  If a car is tuned properly, it should still pass emissions.  Afterall, you're just adding more boost.  And more boost requires more fuel and some timing.  You aren't creating more emissions by doing that when everything that is done is complimentary to each other.

Now if you change one thing without the other...yes, you can be dirtier.  But that's not a good tune.

[Firm]

As Wing's earlier post eluded to, it's not like the new requirements are for absolutely zero leaking. There is a "tolerance" for the leak. If your car is dripping something bad enough that it's creating drops during the inspection, then it's probably enough of an issue that you should have it fixed.

It's my understanding the new test will take at least 1 hour.  So if a car has a few drips in an hour...it fails.

Stupid IMO.

I never said it wasn't stupid, I was trying to illustrate that it's not a huge deal to the classic car hobbyist like me. Like I said before it is a potential problem for the low income families, and that's who get hurt the most with this BS.

[rrocket]

I never said it wasn't stupid, I was trying to illustrate that it's not a huge deal to the classic car hobbyist like me. Like I said before it is a potential problem for the low income families, and that's who get hurt the most with this BS.

I'm a hobbyist too.  And almost all 996+ 911s have RMS leaks.  And it's a huge PITA to fix.  And means nothing for the actual safety of the car...the very thing this test is supposed to represent.

[johngenx]

And almost all 996+ 911s have RMS leaks.  And it's a huge PITA to fix.  And means nothing for the actual safety of the car...the very thing this test is supposed to represent.

Oh no kidding.  A time when I love "old fashioned" longitudinal engine/RWD platforms like the Miata is when the trans or RMS needs attention.  FWD can be horrendous and the 911 is no picnic.  Ugh.

And who owns an air cooled 911 that doesn't leak a bit?  Not many.  993s are pretty tight, but earlier cars, sheesh, and yeah 996s are notorious drippers.

I agree in road worthiness but we need to be realistic.  Brakes, tires, steering parts, suspension parts, yes.  Gross leaks?  Sure.  But we need to allow for age and wear and tear on vehicles.

[dougjp]

I have a mixed feeling "aboot" the gobment here. First, I think the new Drive Clean program is a mistake since it relies on OBDII readings and not an actual exhaust test. Scrap it alltogether OR make sure that if some boy racer removes a catalytic converter for example, or runs a custom engine mapping, they will never pass.

What does a custom engine mapping have to do with it?   You custom  map your engine controls  so it will run better with other changes made, it's not to defeat emissions testing.

Modders will define "better" as more powerful while the car MFGs will be after fuel efficiency and level of emissions. Cars whose engines use custom ECU settings and other mods almost certainly will have different FE and emissions than those stated by the car maker.

You're kind of the opposite of a car enthusiast.  Please don't ban the things you don't understand. 

If you alter ignition and valve timing or air/fuel mixture in order to increase power, it will affect FE and emissions. Can't have the cake and eat it.

There, you just proved what blur911 said. There are several subsequent posts including mine that attempt to add more clarity, but its not "zappy" so I suppose we write "into the wind", so to speak..     Can't be seen to have an eco backing smart performance technology, even if it saves a little of the planet.......

EDIT; I was a little harsh, comes from many years of people refusing to listen about the benefits of performance, always negative. Back in the "old days" it was cams, head work and headers. Frequently if those were kept within limits, it resulted in both improved fuel economy and performance. Now its ECU tunes and (still) cat back exhaust flow, and its so much easier and more effective now. Simply put, a well developed tune will explode all the fuel, more often.

So the obvious question is, why don't manufacturers just provide the better performance and economy if both are possible? Three reasons, perhaps more. 1: Reliability, they need a buffer. Not just component engine parts but driveline components too are engineered for the base engine with a tolerance to accommodate an optional engine but not a whole lot more. Also fuel octane ratings, with a tune you don't want to be like lots of buyers who may well put 87 octane in some times or all the time into their turbo. 2: Drive-ability. Manufacturers often want a smoother throttle input response, or a wider torque band. As an example, several manufacturers have dropped power ratings on turbos to get those conditions (eg: Hyundai). 3: Costs. Those of us who have burned out a clutch on a chipped Audi can imagine what the manufacturer wants to avoid paying for....   

[safristi]

So manufacturers have a CHIP on their shoulder.........knock it OFF