EPA-AA-TSS-85-0 7
Technical Report
Inspection and Maintenance
of New Technology Vehicles
in Washington, B.C.
Jonathan Adler
July 1985
NOTICE
Technical Reports do not necessarily represent final EPA
decisions or positions. They are intended to present
technical analysis of issues using data which are
currently available. The purpose in the release of such
reports is to facilitate the exchange of technical
information and to inform the public of technical
developments which may form the basis for a final EPA
decision, position or regulatory action.
Technical Support Staff
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Mobile Sources
Office of Air and Radiation
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE
ON NEW TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES
IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
1.0 Introduction
In 1978 and 1979, EPA conducted an emissions test program
in Portland, Oregon. The Portland Study provided data which
have been useful in the development of mobile source models and
public policy regarding inspection and maintenance (I/M)
programs. Among these data is information about the emissions
behavior of a fleet influenced by I/M, the costs and
effectiveness of emission-related repairs, and how well I/M
short tests can identify excess emissions. Since the
completion of the Portland Study, many changes have occurred in
the emission control technology of cars. The new technology
alters the way cars perform on the short tests of I/M programs,
respond to repairs, and behave in a fleet. Since the changes
have included the addition of complex electronic controls,
questions have arisen about whether most mechanics can conduct
effective repairs on these vehicles.
EPA desired to have information about new technology cars
which would be comparable to the information gained in the
Portland Study, subject to more restricted resources. EPA
initiated a test program in Washington, D.C. to analyze how new
technology vehicles respond to I/M. Washington was chosen as
the sample site because testing facilities were already
available, because the I/M program there does not allow cost
waivers (which would introduce recruiting and data analysis
complications), and because its centralized format made
recruiting easier. The program was conducted by the testing
firm of EG&G Automotive Research (EG&G) under EPA contract
number 68-03-3202 during the spring and summer of 1984. The
contractor completed testing on seventy-eight light-duty
vehicles. Twenty-four vehicles were of the 1980 model year,
and fifty-four were of the 1981 model year.
In this program, new technology vehicles which failed the
I/M test in D.C. were given two or three series of emissions
tests, each including a Federal Test Procedure (FTP), a Highway
Fuel Economy Test, and the following short tests: 50 mph
cruise, four-mode idle, engine restart idle, and loaded
two-mode idle. Each test series also included an examination
and diagnosis by an in-house mechanic. The seventy-eight cars
were recruited for EG&G testing after they failed the initial
I/M test at a District-operated test lane. The first series of
EG&G tests provided information about the condition of the
vehicles as they failed. After the first test, the vehicles
were returned to their owners, who then completed the I/M
-------
-2-
process. The cars were brought back to the test facility after
they had been repaired and passed District or District-licensed
reinspection. Each received a second test series. The
difference between the emission results in the first and second
series shows the amount of emission reduction achieved for
these vehicles by the repairs. As part of his second
examination, the contractor's mechanic described the repairs
which appeared to have been done, and those which were reported
by the owner. Most of the vehicles were then released from the
program, but twenty-two were retained for further repairs,
which were conducted by the contractor's mechanic. Originally,
the contractor was to have chosen vehicles which had high
emissions (at least twice the FTP standard for one or more
pollutant) during the second test to receive these repairs. In
retrospect, it appears that this criterion was not followed in
all cases. All of the cars chosen for contractor repairs had
emission-related malfunctions during the second test sequence,
but not all had high FTP emissions. After the contractor's
repairs, these vehicles were tested a third time.
In June, 1984, EPA became aware of some quality control
problems being experienced at the D.C. inspection stations.
Because of these problems, EPA became concerned that some of
the vehicles being tested by the contractor may have been
inappropriately failed at their initial D.C. inspection and
others may have been inappropriately passed upon reinspection.
In order to allow the results of this study to be applicable to
I/M programs without these problems, some vehicles should be
removed from the analysis. Data analysis techniques which
accomplish this removal are discussed in the next section.
2.0 Data Preparation
The results of this project will show approximately the
emission reductions that were achieved from these vehicles by
the I/M program in Washington, D.C. during the spring and
summer of 1984. At that time, the program was experiencing
some quality assurance (QA) problems. Because of these
problems, some decisions which were made by the inspection
stations during the inspections and reinspections may have been
incorrect. Such decisions affect the emissions reductions
achieved by the I/M program; they also affect the results of
this study. In order to estimate the results of an I/M program
without these QA problems, cases in which these decisions were
incorrect should be removed from the analysis. While this
study cannot compensate for cases in which vehicles incorrectly
passed the initial inspection (they are not part of the study),
cases in which vehicles incorrectly fail the inspection or pass
the reinspection may be evaluated. It would be impossible to
re-create the condition of each car at the inspection station
-------
•J
at either the initial or the post-repair I/M test, but the
car's actual performance there may be inferred from the results
of the four idle-neutral segments among the short tests which
were conducted by the contractor. Emission readings of the
D.C. inspection are taken during the idle-neutral mode.
During the second (post-repair) test sequence, sixteen
vehicles failed at least one of the contractor's idle tests at
the 1.5% CO and 300 ppm HC cutpoints used in D.C. They and
their scores are listed in Appendix E. Eight of the sixteen
failed decisively in all four segments, with all CO readings
over 3.0% or all HC readings over 350 ppm. These vehicles
(numbers 002, 004, 042, 049, 126, 127, 133, and 231) probably
should not have passed the reinspection, based on their
consistently high idle scores. Vehicle 231 received subsequent
repairs by the contractor which reduced its idle emissions
below the cutpoints, so it receives special note in the results
section. The results section of this report includes analyses
of the data both with these vehicles included and with them
removed. The other eight may have legitimately passed the
reinspection, because each came close to passing at least one
of the contractor's idle tests. They are not treated
separately from the rest of the data.
There were also several cars which probably should not
have failed their initial inspections. Vehicle 24, for
example, had FTP scores of 0.11 g/mi of HC and 1.09 g/mi of CO
and idle test scores of 0.2% CO and 20 ppm HC during the first
contractor test sequence. However, there is no clear
distinction in the data between cars that should not have
failed the D.C. test and cars that could have properly failed.
This lack of a distinctly clean group of cars dictates
that one can only arbitrarily define a criterion for whether a
vehicle correctly failed the initial D.C. inspection.
"Screening" based on the contractor's idle test results is an
attempt to apply such a criterion. It assumes that a car which
has consistently low idle scores at the laboratory probably
should have had low scores at the D.C. lanes. By applying
conservative cutpoints to all four idle segments it may be
possible to identify and remove falsely failed cars. Screening
extrapolates a low idle score from four other low idle scores.
There are several cases in the data where three of the four
known idle scores are low (much less than the I/M cutpoints)
and the fourth is high (exceeding the cutpoints). It is also
possible that all four idle tests at the lab could be low and
the D.C. inspection score legitimately high due to an
intermittent problem. Despite this shortcoming, screening is
the best available method to identify cases of vehicles which
should not have failed the initial inspection or participated
in this testing program.
-------
-4-
The data from this project were analyzed with combinations
of the following conditions applied:
- The eight vehicles which clearly should not have passed
reinspection are excluded. This determination is based on
idle scores above 3.0% CO or 350 ppm HC in all four
idle-neutral segments of the second test sequence. By
comparing results with and without this condition, the
importance of proper reinspection becomes clear.
Vehicles are excluded which have low emissions in all four
idle segments of the initial test sequence. Conservative
screening cutpoints of 0.3% CO and 60 ppm HC were chosen
because higher cutpoints further reduce the sample size,
and lower readings approach the tolerance limits of the
measurement system.
These conditions are intended to remove from analysis
vehicles which appear to have received incorrect inspections or
reinspections. However, they may, when applied, introduce
sampling bias to the results. It is not possible to determine
the exact effects of this bias.
The results include average emissions for the first and
second tests, and average emissions of the vehicles as they
left the program (the third test, when performed, otherwise the
second.)
3.0 Results
Commercial maintenance reduced avarage emissions of HC and
CO and raised emissions of NOx from the test fleet.
Maintenance by the contractor further reduced emissions of HC
and CO. The contractor was also able to reduce NOx to a level
below that of the as-received fleet. Fuel economy improved
slightly on average with maintenance, but there was
considerable variation among vehicles.
Tables 1 through 6 summarize the average FTP scores of
groups of vehicles in this program. Results are separated by
model year. Within the 1980 model year, the results of General
Motors (GM) vehicles and non-GM vehicles are separated because
of the sealed carburetor technology which only GM applied in
that year. This separation is not useful among vehicles which
received repairs at the laboratory (Table 2), as only three
1980 cars received such repairs. When reviewing the tables,
the reader should consider the following notes.
The values listed depend heavily on the performance of a
small group of the vehicles in the sample. The results are
-------
-5-
average values, and a single vehicle which has very high
emissions will influence them considerably. A few of the cars
have emissions which are high enough to classify them in EPA
terms as "super emitters" (at least 12 g/mi HC or 180 g/mi
CO). In some of the smaller samples, large changes in the
average emissions could be caused by the influence of one such
vehicle. Note the difference between Tables 5 and 6 in the
"changes 1-2" result for the 1981 vehicles. The difference
between the samples represented in these tables is attributable
to one vehicle, #231.
The additional reductions which were achieved by the
contractor's repairs were affected by the following factors:
- The mechanic is competent and especially well-versed
in emission control. He also had the use of the
vehicles' FTP scores as a diagnostic indicator.
- Vehicles were often chosen for this maintenance
because they had problems, evident from the
mechanic's observations, for which the repairs would
reduce emissions.
- The goal of the mechanic was to reduce the vehicles'
emissions during the FTP.
- The reductions may have been limited by the fact
that the test contract did not allow the contractor
to repair all of the cars, and that some repairs
were omitted in order to isolate the effects of
others.
Table 1 lists the average emissions for all vehicles in
each category of the sample. The values listed for "test 1"
and "test 2" are the average emissions during the initial ("as
received") test and the second (after commercial repair) test.
The "final" values are the average emissions of the vehicles as
they left this testing program; i.e., the results of the third
(after contractor maintenance) test in cases where such tests
were done, and the results of the second test in the other
cases. The values listed for "change 1-2" are the percentages
by which emissions changed as a result of commercial
maintenance (i.e., the change from test 1 to test 2). The net
change values show the percentage difference between the
emissions of the vehicles as received and those of the vehicles
as they left the program.
-------
Model
Year
81
N
54
80
24
80 10
GM only
80
Non-GM
14
-6-
Table l
Average FTP Scores, All Vehicles
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
HC
(q/mi)
1.70
1.22
-28%
1.01
-41%
1.59
1.25
-21%
1.19
-25%
1.80
1.43
-21%
1.33
-26%
1.43
1.12
-22%
1.10
-23%
CO
(q/mi)
30.71
22.28
-27%
17.08
-44%
27.57
19.53
-29%
18.85
-32%
30.43
17.04
-44%
15.24
-50%
25.53
21.31
-17%
21.42
-16%
NOx
(q/mi)
1.12
1.19
+ 6%
1.07
- 4%
1.90
2.03
+ 7%
1.83
- 4%
2.22
2.51
+ 13%
2.10
- 5%
1.67
1.68
+ 1%
1.63
- 2%
Fuel
Economy
(mi/gal)
19.79*
19.96
+ 1%
20.23
+ 2%
19.63
19.60
0%
19.59
0%
16.23
16.38
+ 1%
16.39
+ 1%
23.09
22.78
- 1%
22.75
- 1%
* Average fuel economy represents the harmonic mean of
individual fuel economies; the inverse of the mean of the
inverses of the individual values.
The scores listed in Table 1 for the first and second
tests should approximate those of same model year vehicles
which failed the inspection and were repaired in the
Washington, D.C. I/M program during the spring and summer of
1984. The emission reductions shown between the two tests are
probably close to the actual reductions which the program
achieved at that time.
-------
-7-
Table 2 shows the average emissions of the vehicles which
received contractor repairs. The contractor was more
successful at reducing emissions than the commercial repair
facilities. It should be noted that the contractor tended to
repair those vehicles which had evident problems even after the
commercial repairs.
Table 2
Average FTP Scores of Vehicles
Receiving Contractor Maintenance
Fuel
Model HC CO NOx Economy
Year N (g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) (mi/gal)
81 19 Test 1 2.01 36.02 1.43 17.74
Test 2 1.86 36.74 1.55 17.55
Change 1-2 - 7% +2% +8% - 1%
Final 1.26 21.98 1.19 18.16
Net Change -37% -39% -17% + 2%
80 3 Test 1 2.39 51.64 2.64 18.78
Test 2 1.52 26.25 3.71 19.49
Change 1-2 -36% -49% +41% + 4%
Final 1.06 20.77 2.11 19.42
Net Change -56% -60% -20% + 3%
-------
-8-
Table 3 shows the emission values and reductions for the
vehicles which were correctly failed in the initial inspection
of the I/M program (as predicted by the screening technique
described earlier). A comparison of these results with those
in Table 1 shows the importance of quality assurance during the
initial inspection. The increased reduction figures from the
correctly failed vehicles are a result of their higher average
emissions during the initial test. The total reduction from
this group is roughly the same as that of the whole sample,
because these are the vehicles from which the reductions may be
obtained. Repairs of the falsely failed vehicles which are
excluded from this group yield little benefit, as their already
low emissions are difficult to reduce further.
Table 3
Average FTP Scores, Correct Failures
Model
Year
81
80
N
40
21
80 9
GM only
80
Non-GM
12
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
HC
(q/mi)
2.10
1.24
-41%
1.16
-45%
1.69
1.26
-25%
1.20
-29%
1.75
1.25
-29%
1.14
-35%
1.64
1.27
-23%
1.24
-24%
CO
(q/mi)
38.82
21.20
-45%
18.91
-51%
30.17
20.47
-32%
19.69
-35%
31.20
15.13
-52%
13.13
-58%
29.39
24.47
-17%
24.60
-16%
NOx
(q/mi)
1.15
1.29
+ 12%
1.10
- 4%
1.88
2.03
+ 8%
1.80
- 4%
2.18
2.54
+ 17%
2.08
- 5%
1.65
1.65
0%
1.60
- 3%
Fuel
Economy
(mi/gal)
18.67
19.28
+ 3%
19.48
+ 4%
19.34
19.38
0%
19.37
0%
16.25
16.55
+ 2%
16.56
+ 2%
22.55
22.23
- 1%
22.20
- 2%
-------
-9-
Table 4 shows the emission reductions for vehicles in the
sample which legitimately passed the I/M reinspection. These
vehicles had lower average emissions after repair than the
average for the whole sample, because the vehicles which should
not have passed the reinspection tended to have high
after-repair FTP emissions.
Table 4
Average FTP Scores, Correctly Reinspected Vehicles
lodel
Year
81
N
HC
(g/mi)
CO
(g/mi)
NOx
(g/mi)
Fuel
Economy
(mi/gal)
50
80
20
80 8
GM only
80
Non-GM
12
Test l
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
1.74
1.07
-38%
1.00
-42%
1.39
0.99
-29%
0.93
-33%
1.72
1.21
-30%
1.08
-37%
1.17
0.85
-27%
0.82
-30%
31.26
18.72
-40%
16.63
-47%
24.60
13.98
-43%
13.16
-47%
29.36
12.05
-59%
9.80
-67%
21.42
15.27
-29%
15.39
-28%
1.12
1.25
+ 12%
1.11
- 1%
1.91
2.09
+ 9%
1.85
- 3%
2.13
2.53
+19%
2.02
- 5%
1.77
1.79
+ 1%
1.73
- 2%
19.77
20. 11
+ 2%
20.25
+ 2%
20.27
20.35
0%
20.33
0%
16.37
16.58
+ 1%
16.59
+ 1%
24.09
23.97
- 1%
23.93
- 1%
-------
-10-
7Table 5 shows the average emissions for vehicles in the sample
which correctly failed the initial inspection and correctly
passed the reinspection, combining the effects shown in Tables
3 and 4.
Table 5
Average FTP Scores
Correct Failure and Correct Reinspection
Model
Year N
81 37
80 17
80 7
GM only
80 10
Non-GM
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test l
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
Test 1
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
HC
(q/mi)
2.17
1.23
-43%
1.15
-47%
1.48
0.96
-35%
0.88
-41%
1.65
0.94
-43%
0.80
-52%
1.36
0.98
-28%
0.94
-31%
CO
(q/mi)
39.76
20.60
-48%
18.12
-54%
27.28
14.16
-48%
13.19
-52%
30.20
8.89
-71%
6.32
-79%
25.23
17.85
-29%
18.00
-29%
NOX
(q/mi)
1.17
1.35
+ 15%
1.15
- 2%
1.89
2.10
+ 11%
1.82
- 4%
2.07
2.57
+24%
1.98
- 4%
1.76
1.77
+ 1%
1.71
- 3%
Fuel
Economy
(mi/gal)
18.58
19.25
+ 3%
19.46
+ 5%
20.00
20.20
+ 1%
20.19
+ 1%
16.43
16.83
+ 2%
16.85
+ 2%
23.58
23.49
0%
23.44
- 1%
-------
-11-
Vehicle #231 correctly failed the initial test, but should
not have passed the reinspection. It is the only such car
which received contractor maintenance. The contractor was able
to reduce its idle emissions so that it would have passed.
Table 6 shows the average emissions for the group described in
Table 5 with vehicle tt23l included.
Table 6
Average FTP Scores
As Table 5, but including Vehicle K231
Model
Year
81
N
38
Test l
Test 2
Change 1-2
Final
Net Change
HC
(q/mi)
2.14
1.42
-34%
1.13
-47%
CO
(q/mi)
39.06
24.82
-36%
17.77
-55%
NOx
(q/mi)
1.19
1.32
+ 11%
1.14
- 4%
Fuel
Economy
(mi/gal)
18.62
19.11
+ 3%
19.50
+ 5%
-------
-12-
4.0 Repair Comments
The comments of the contractor's mechanic (Appendix B)
list the results of his examinations of the cars for each test
sequence. The examinations provide information about the
condition of the cars at the time of each test. In the first
examination, the mechanic described the vehicle as received, in
the condition in which it failed the I/M test. The examination
gives clues about why it failed. In his examination
accompanying the second test, the mechanic described the
condition of the car as it passed the reinspection. He
assessed any new or continuing problems which were present.
The comments on the second test sequence also list what repairs
were done, as reported by the vehicle owner, and attempt to
include their cost. The comments accompanying the third test
sequence list repairs done by the contractor and any problems
which were not repaired. This section summarizes the comments,
discussing the common emission-related malfunctions and the
effectiveness of commercial repairs. The complete sample of
twenty-four 1980 model year vehicles and fifty-four 1981 model
year vehicles is discussed.
Of particular interest in this study are design features
which distinguish the 1980 and later model year vehicles from
older models such as closed loop control systems and limited
adjustment carburetors. There were three cases of
malfunctioning closed loop systems among the forty-one vehicles
which have such systems. Two of these caused extremely high
FTP emissions, and were successfully repaired by replacement of
the oxygen sensors. Both vehicles had been super emitters,
among the worst in the whole group, and were brought close to
the FTP standards by the repairs. They also showed roughly 40%
improvements in fuel economy after the repairs. It must be
noted that one of these vehicles did not have high emissions as
received; it became a super-emitter after the commercial
repairs. (See comments on vehicle #231 in Appendix B for more
details.) The third case of a closed-loop system problem
caused higher than average emissions, and was successfully
repaired through replacement of an unspecified "three-way" part.
Sealed parameter carburetors were used in 1980 model year
GM cars and are used on all later model year cars. These
carburetors have plugs which discourage the novice mechanic
from adjusting the air-fuel mixture. Mechanics are able to
permanently remove the plugs. A carburetor missing these plugs
has probably been adjusted. Four of the ten 1980 GM cars
entered this study with missing mixture plugs. A fifth had its
plugs removed during the commercial repairs. Of the fifty-four
1981 cars, ten (18.5%) entered the study without the plugs, and
two more had them removed by commercial repair facilities. The
-------
-13-
FTP emissions of this group were not significantly higher than
the average for the whole sample. The proportion of the group
within the sample, roughly 20% for 1981 cars, agrees with that
found in recent EPA tampering surveys.
Though not a new technology, air injection became common
in the late seventies. Problems with air injection systems are
a known cause of I/M failures. Twenty-two (92%) of the 1980
vehicles and forty-seven (87%) of the 1981 vehicles were
equipped with these systems. The mechanic noted that these
systems were malfunctioning in four (18%) of the 1980 cars and
sixteen (34%) of the 1981 cars. The FTP emissions of this
group were not significantly different from the sample
average. Most of these malfunctions were associated with
diverter valves, which tended to stick or were not properly
actuated.
The mechanic reported that thirty-seven (47%) of the
vehicles had timing misadjustments of at least two degrees.
The range of misadjustment was +8° to -14°. More vehicles had
retarded timing than advanced. Twenty-five vehicles had
misadjusted timing after the commercial repairs.
Eight vehicles (10%) arrived with excessively dirty air
filters. Some of these were replaced during commercial
maintenance. Other less dirty air filters were also replaced.
Thirteen (17%) cars had dirty or worn spark plugs. Commercial
repair facilities usually did not specify that they replaced
the plugs, beyond stating that major or minor tune-ups were
done. As with the air filters, spark plugs were replaced that
perhaps did not need to be. Twelve cars (15%) entered the
program with damaged, leaking, or misrouted hoses. Some of
these cases were repaired, but five new cases were noted after
the commercial repairs. Ten cars (13%) had malfunctioning
heated air systems. Some were repaired, but two more were
noted after commercial repairs. There were nine cases (12%) of
choke problems. Again, some were repaired and two more
appeared. Seventeen cars (22%) arrived with faulty EGR
systems. Twelve cars (15%) showed evidence of misfueling
(damaged inlet restrictor, fuel lead above unleaded standard,
or lead deposits detected in the tailpipe — these indications
were usually not recorded in the comments, as they were coded
into the computerized dataset). None of these problems can be
singled out as causing emissions to be higher than others,
because the sample sizes are so small.
The average repair bill was about $95 for both model
years. This figure is approximate, as the comments do not
include cost data for all cars, and some of the bills included
costs for non-I/M repairs. Major carburetor repairs were among
-------
-14-
the most expensive, often costing over $200. Commercial repair
facilities conducted twelve of these repairs. One of these
caused a large decrease in FTP emissions, and one caused a
large increase. The rest had mixed small changes. Four of the
cars which received major carburetor work scored close to or
below the standards on the first FTP, and another has been
classified as a false I/M failure, indicating that these
expensive repairs were unnecessary in some cases.
Twenty-five cars (32%) received tune-ups, which cost
roughly $50 - $100. Tune-ups were often done after carburetor
repair work, further boosting repair costs. Some vehicles
received more than one tune-up before passing the
reinspection. It is not evident how a second tune-up would
differ from the first.
Maintenance by the contractor was more successful in
reducing FTP emissions than that of commercial facilities.
Again, it should be noted that the goal of the contractor's
mechanic was to reduce FTP emissions of HC, CO, and NOx rather
than to pass the I/M test. There were not enough of these
repairs to allow statements about the success of particular
types of repairs. The mechanic avoided tune-ups in favor of
specific adjustments. In some cases he did not perform all
possible repairs, in an attempt to isolate the effects of
individual repairs, so even more reductions than he achieved
were available. Some cars left the program with unexplained
high emissions.
The following general conclusions can be drawn from the
mechanic's comments:
1. The problems addressed by both the commercial
mechanic and the contractor's mechanic tended to be
related to traditional I/M problems (e.g., ignition
timing, air filters, tune-ups, etc.) rather than to
new technology components. This is despite the fact
that malfunctioning closed-loop systems caused very
high emissions in some cases.
2. Many cars had their air/fuel mixture plugs removed.
However, it is not clear whether the removals caused
lower emissions by allowing proper adjustment of the
mixture or whether they caused higher emissions by
allowing improper adjustments.
3. The contractor's mechanic noted some problems during
the second test seguence which were not present
during the first, indicating poor work during the
commercial repairs.
-------
-15-
4. In some cases emissions increased after commercial
repairs.
5. Some vehicles received expensive repairs which
probably were not necessary. Other less expensive
repairs were also unnecessarily conducted.
6. Some vehicles had to undergo repairs more than once
in order to pass reinspection.
This evidence indicates that some commercial repair facilities
may not be competent, equipped, or motivated to perform correct
diagnosis and repair.
5.0 Conclusions
This study showed that average emissions from new
technology vehicles were reduced by the I/M program in
Washington, D.C. during the spring and summer of 1984. It also
showed that this benefit would be increased with improved
quality assurance. Individual vehicles within the study had
increased idle and FTP emissions after I/M, indicating that
they received possibly inappropriate repairs. Many of the
vehicles in the program seemed to have problems with
conventional emission-related components. The few which had
malfunctions in new technology components were among the
highest of emitters. They showed large reductions when
properly repaired. This study also indicates that the air
quality benefit and the cost-effectiveness of I/M for new
technology vehicles, like old technology vehicles, could be
improved by efforts being directed at improving the diagnosis
and repair of vehicles which fail I/M tests.
-------
Appendices
A Miscellaneous Information About the Vehicles
B Comments of the Contractor's Mechanic
C Results of Federal Test Procedures
D Results of Idle-Neutral Modes of Short Tests during the
First Test Sequence
E Results of Idle-Neutral Modes of Short Tests of Vehicles
Which had High Idle Emissions After Commercial Repairs
-------
Appendix A: Miscellaneous Information
About the Vehicles
-------
VEHICLE
NUMBER
2
4
5
a
14
17
19
20
21
24
26
28
29
39
40
41
42
43
46
47
48
49
51
52
102
103
104
105
108
109
1 1 1
1 15
120
121
124
126
127
130
131
133
134
135
139
144
145
146
156
157
158
159
161
162
169
171
172
175
177
179
182
192
199
204
21 1
213
221
223
228
230
231
234
245
257
258
266
268
270
272
274
MANUF.
/YEAR
FOROyBO
FORD/80
TOYOTA/ 80
VWA/80
FORD/80
GM/80
VWA/80
NISSAN/80
FORD/80
VWA/80
FUJI/80
NISSAN/80
NISSAN/80
GM/80
GM/80
GM/80
GM/80
GM/80
GM/80
GM/80
GM/80
GM/80
MITSUBISHI/BO
FORD/80
FORD/81
GM/81
GM/81
CHRY/81
GM/81
GM/81
GM/81
GM/81
MITSUBISHI/81
TOYOTA/81
FORD/81
TOYO.KOGYO/81
GM/81
FORD/81
GM/81
FORD/81
GM/81
HONDA/81
NISSAN/81
GM/81
NISSAN/81
GM/81
FORD/81
GM/81
NISSAN/81
FORD/81
FORD/81
NISSAN/81
GM/81
GM/81
GM/81
GM/81
GM/81
FIAT/81
GM/81
GM/81
CHRV/81
VOLVO/81
TOYO.KOGYO/81
BMW/81
CHRV/81
GM/81
NISSAN/81
CHRY/81
NISSAN/81
GM/81
GM/81
GM/81
FORD/81
FORD/81
FORD/81
CHRV/81
GM/81
AUDI/81
ENGINE
SIZE
250
140
108
89
98
301
97
91
200
97
97
as
75
350
231
301
301
231
173
368
260
301
156
140
302
307
173
135
98
307
173
151
86
89
302
120
98
255
98
302
231
107
75
98
91
98
200
231
91
200
302
1 19
231
98
97
231
231
122
173
98
135
130
91
108
135
98
146
225
168
98
231
98
302
302
98
135
307
105
MILEAGE -
59676
13900
45336
40063
62437
32110
45281
97562
79754
42925
63230
46063
57791
68604
48217
38025
33654
59602
53097
37135
59599
35004
60793
39522
47179
33374
19234
19959
28216
29266
36665
35171
37061
39336
45461
36245
60627
55593
32638
25784
33280
72567
25294
39314
19237
27372
29254
46775
40758
36314
61 153
50479
29235
43422
25189
27100
34777
6679
55150
341 13
35296
49743
21004
12330
57332
59709
67031
43937
44804
39697
26575
28240
67516
49614
40693
21443
70147
27574
FUEL
SYSTEM
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
PORT FI
CARB
CARB
PORT FI
CARB-
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
PORT FI
CARB
CARB
CARB
PORT FI
CARB
PORT FI
CARB
CARB
PORT FI
CARB
PORT FI
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
CARB
PORT FI
CATALYST
TYPE
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXIO
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OXID
OX3W
OX3W
3WAY
OX3W
3WAV
OX3W
OX3W
OX3W
OXIO
OXIO
3WAV
3WAV
3WAV
OX3W
3WAY
OX3W
3WAY
OXIO
OXID
3WAV
OXID
3WAV
OX3W
3WAY
OXID
OX3W
3WAV
OXIO
3WAV
3WAV
3WAV
3WAY
3WAV
3WAV
3WAV
3WAV
OX3W
3WAV
OX3W
3WAV
OX3W
SWAY
3WAY
OXID
3WAY
3WAY
3WAY
3WAY
3WAY
OX3W
OX3W
3WAV
OX3W
3WAY
CONTROL.
CONFIG.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
N/A
N/A
CL.LOOP
OP. LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
N/A
N/A
CL.LOOP
N/A
CL.LOOP
OP. LOOP
CL.LOOP
N/A
OP. LOOP
CL.LOOP
N/A
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
OP. LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
N/A
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
OP. LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CL.LOOP
CO (FTP)
STANDARD
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
3.40
3.40
7.00
7.00
7.00
3.40
7.00
3.40
3.40
7.00
3.40
7.00
7.00
3.40
7.00
3.40
7.00
3.40
3.40
7.00
3.40
7.00
3.40
7.00
3.40
3.40
3.40
3.40
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
7.00
3.40
7.00
7.00
7.00
3.40
7.00
3.40
7.00
7.00
3.40
7.00
3.40
7.00
7.00
7.00
3.40
7.00
7.00
7.40
3.40
3.40
PAGE A-1
-------
Appendix B: Comments of the Contractor's Mechanic
-------
TEST FTP RESULTS (9/m1)
VEH* SEQ.* HC CO NOX
COMMENTS
PAGE B-1
8 A 1.36
B .73
14 A 3.07
A 4.03 55.76 1.23 HEATED AIR DOOR ASSY MSG. IDLE MIXT LIM DEVICE MSG. CHOKE LEAN. TIMING 4 DEG
LOW. SPARK WIRES SHORTING. AIR BYPASS VALVE DISC. DIVERTOR VALVE STUCK. HEAD
GASKET LEAKING. NO D.C. FAILURE RESULTS GIVEN.
B 2.74 45.82 1.24 NO LABEL. TEMP SENSOR IN AIR CLEANER IS CONNECTED TO DIVERTOR VALVE. OIL 2 QTS
LOW. REBUILT CARB AND TUNE TO PASS INSP FOR $220.37.
A 2.04 44.61 1.00 IDLE MIXTURE LIMITER MISSING. FAILED HC-315 AND CO-8.75% AT LANE.
B 2.74 69.38 .84 IDLE CO STILL RICH. SERVICE STN IN D.C. PUT IN A NEW BATTERY AND SPARK PLUGS
AND GAVE IT A REINSP TO PASS. REPAIRS COST $128.05 INCLUDING THE NEW BATTERY
AT $73.09 INCL TAX. UNCLEAR WHETHER OWNER REQUESTED NEW BATTERY ASIDE FROM I/M
REPAIR. IF SO, I/M REPAIR COST $54.96, INCL REINSP FEE.
A 1.51 23.63 1.09 IDLE AND FAST IDLE SPEEDS HIGH. FAILED CO AT LANE - 4.5%.
B .79 9.37 1.40 IDLE SPEED STILL A LITTLE HIGH. TIMING -5 DEG FROM SPEC, WAS +2 DEG FROM
SPEC. NEW AIR FILTER IS NOT THE CORRECT SIZE. SERVICE STN GAVE ADJ FOR $15.90.
23.10 .59 EGR VALVE APPEARS TO BE STUCK. VALVES OUT OF ADJ. FAILED CO AT LANE - 5.27%,
SPEC 1.5%.
13.13 .47 OWNER GOT CARB OVERHAUL IN VIRGINIA FOR $223.98.
62.33 1.07 AIR PUMP SYSTEM DISABLED. BYPASS HOSE PLUGGED IN 2 PLACES. TIMING 4 DEGREES
LOW, IDLE SPEED 350 HIGH. FAST IDLE SPEED LOW. FAILED AT LANE HC-448 (SPEC
300) AND CO-8.05%, (SPEC 1.5%).
B 2.29 50.21 1.61 AIR SYSTEM STILL DISABLED. TIMING 4 DEGREES LOW. IDLE SPEED 90 RPM HIGH.
MIXTURE CAP MSG. FAST IDLE SPEED LOW. EGR LINE DISCON. CAR GIVEN MINOR TUNE-UP
TO PASS TEST. COST $45.95.
A 2.24 23.49 2.54 NO STICKER FOR ENGINE FAMILY. HEATED AIR DOOR STUCK. IDLE SPEED +300 CHOKE
RICH. CHOKE LIMITER ALTERED. TIMING +8 DEG OVER SPEC. PCV HOSE COLLAPSED.
FAILED AT LANE HC-393.
B 3.07 34.20 2.28 NO SIGNIF CHANGES. OWNER SAID HE PUT IN NEW AIR FILTER, CLEANED UP HIS CAR,
AND PASSED REINSP.
A .43 4.39 2.50 OK. CAR FAILED CO AT LANE - 2.76%.
B .44 4.87 2.16 OWNER SPENT $152.12 FOR TUNE-UP, BUT STILL FAILED CO AT LANE. OWNER REPORTED
TRYING 3 TIMES AT THE LANE BEFORE HE PASSED.
A .57 8.80 .77 CO IS IN SPEC 2.0 + OR - 1.0 AT LAB. IDLE RPM 600 HIGH. CARB 8. FILTERS VERY
DIRTY, OIL LEAKAGE. FAILED CO AT LANE.
B .42 4.31 1.02 OIL IS VERY DIRTY. ENGINE HAS MINOR OIL LEAKAGE. CARBURETOR IS SLIGHTLY
DIRTY. FAST IDLE SPEED SPECIFICATIONS NOT AVAILABLE. IDLE SPEED 350 RPM HIGH.
PAID ABOUT $20, NOT INCLUDING A LOT OF MUFFLER WORK, FOR A RE-INSP AT A DC
AMOCO STN. UNCLEAR IF ANY ADJ MADE.
21 A 1.41 9.71 2.31 BROKEN VAC LINE TO HAI SYSTEM. TIMING +4 DEG FROM SPEC. AIR FILTER VERY
DIRTY. AIR PUMP DUMPS VERY SOON AT IDLE. FAILED AT LANE, HC-371 AND CO-1.9%.
B 1.53 9.50 1.81 AIR PUMP DUMPS CONTIN. EMISSIONS CLEAN WITH VACUUM APPLIED TO DIVERTOR. CAR
MAY HAVE IDLED TOO LONG. DELAY VALVE IN DIVERTOR BLEEDS DOWN. SERVICE STN
GAVE MINOR MAINT WITH NO APPARENT ADJUSTMENTS FOR $31.90.
17
19
20
* TEST SEQUENCE A IS OF THE VEHICLE IN THE CONDITION RECIEVED; SEQUENCE B IS OF THE VEHICLE AFTER COMMERCIAL REPAIR; SEQUENCE C
IS OF THE VEHICLE AFTER REPAIRS DONE BY THE CONTRACTOR (IF ANY).
-------
TEST FTP RESULTS (g/mi)
VEH# SEQ. HC CO NOX COMMENTS PAGE B-2
T
22 A 1.38 15.79 1.81 ENGINE DOES NOT IDLE WHEN COLD. CHOKE NOT WORKING, NO FAST IDLE. IDLE CO HIGH
ONCE, BUT LOW DURING SHORT TESTS. FAILED HC-582 AND CO-3.9% AT LANE. VEHICLE
AT ONE TIME DID NOT HAVE A CATALYST IN IT AND OWNER USED LEADED FUEL, HAS
CATALYST NOW.
B 2.51 27.82 1.82 OWNER DID MINOR MAINT, BUT STILL FAILED INSP FOR 2 TRIES. THEN WENT TO AN
AUTHORIZED REINSP GAS STATION AND WAS PASSED FOR $30.18, BUT NO REPAIRS MADE.
24 A .11 1.09 2.13 SEEMS OK. IDLE CO GENERALLY ONLY .02% ON SHORT TESTS. BUT SHOWED 1.3% AT LAB
INSP. FAILED CO AT LANE-2.99%, LIMIT 1.5%. OWNER HAS HAD CATALYST REPLACED BY
DEALER.
B .10 .99 2.04 OWNER SAID HE GOT AN ADJUSTMENT "SET TO SPEC" TO PASS - NO RECEIPT.
26 A .15 9.99 1.52 RPM 100 LOW. CO ON SHORT TESTS LOW, BUT ON UNDERHOOD INSP WAS 1.35%. FAILED
CO AT LANE-1.8%.
B .17 5.52 1.58 IDLE RPM VARIES FROM -50 TO +200 FROM SPEC. A DC AMOCO STN GAVE "ADJ CARB"
8. RE-INSP FOR $29. 10.
28 A .30 3.71 1.47 TIMING +4 DEG. IDLE EMISSIONS ALL LOW, EXCEPT DURING ECOMP INSP IN WHICH CO
WAS 5%. APPARENTLY DUE TO LONG IDLE. FAILED AT LANE, CO-4.72%.
B .33 3.70 1.66 OWNER PAID $16.00 FOR AN ADJUSTMENT, BUT NO ADJ APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN MADE.
NOR WAS ONE NECESSARY.
29 A .65 12.17 1.82 IDLE MIXTURE IS TOO RICH. RPM +230. FAILED AT LANE HC-57B 8. CO-15%, LIMITS
300 & 1.5%. .
B .28 2.50 1.96 RPM +300, TIMING -2 DEG. TUNE-UP FOR $112.27 BY GARAGE IN DC (INCLUDES ABOUT
$25 OF OTHER).
39 A .74 2.64 3.31 IDLE SPEED +100. EGR VALVE STUCK. FAILED AT LANE, HC - 448 PPM.
B .63 3.76 3.26 CAR IS CLEAN. OLDS DLR SET ENG TO SPEC 8. ADJ CARB, LUBED EGR VALVE WHICH WAS
STICKING. NO COST INFO.
40 A 1.12 9.34 1.26 NO BUILD DATE AVAILABLE. TIMING 9 DEG LOW, ONE VAC LINE DAMAGED, CARB AND PCV
SYSTEM VERY DIRTY. FAILED HC AT LANE-495.
B 1.26 12.02 1.81 CARB TOO LEAN OR VACUUM LEAK SOMEPLACE. OWNER PAID $185.82 TO OVERHAUL CARB
AND ADJ.
41 A 1.69 34.82 1.41 NO BUILD DATE AVAILABLE. SPARK PLUGS INCORRECTLY GAPPED AND WORN. MIXTURE
PLUGS ARE PUNCHED OUT. AIR CONDITIONER COMPRESSOR DRIVE BELT BROKE. RPM +160.
ALL IDLE EMISSIONS HIGH, OFF-IDLE LOW. SEC VAC BREAK RICH. FAILED AT LANE C0~
5.75%, LIMIT 1.5%.
B .91 6.23 1.67 NO BUILD DATE AVAILABLE. NO LEAD SAMPLE FOR FUEL. RPM +300. OWNER PAID $87.00
FOR UNKNOWN REPAIRS.
42 A 2.19 36.13 3.17 TIMING 4 DEG LOW, PRIMARY VAC BREAK RICH, CHOKE VAC DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. FAILED
AT LANE HC-687 AND CO-15%, NO RECEIPT.
B 3.06 51.31 3.04 PCV CRACKED. EGR APPEARS STUCK. OWNER WENT TO 2 STNS FOR TUNE-UP. REPAIRS
WERE PAID ABOUT $100. WAS PASSED BY A THIRD STATION.
-------
TEST FTP RESULTS (g/mi)
VEH* SEQ. HC CO NOX COMMENTS PAGE 8-3
43 A 2.41 57.89 1.43 EVAP VENT LINE DAMAGED. PCV AND OTHER HOSES OIL SOAKED OR HEAT HARDENED. ONE
SIDE OF AIR SYSTEM DISABLED. ENGINE IDLE SPEED IS ERRATIC, TIMING + 5 DEG.
FAILED AT LANE CO-5.92%.
B 1.32 11.55 4.97 AIR FILT ELEM DIRTY. IDLE MIXT PLUGS PUNCHED OUT. SPARK PLUGS WORN. DIVERTER
VALVE IS LEAKING VAC CHECK VLV MISSING. TMG ERRATIC (POSSIBLE). TMG CHAIN
PROB. IDLE SPD +500. CHEVY DLR REPL CANNISTER & MISC FOR $93.65 AND SERV STN
GAVE REINSP & CARB ADJ (?)
C .52 3.05 1.85 TIMING IS TOO ERRATIC TO MEASURE. DLR REPL AIR PIPE 8. CHK VALVE FOR $58.69.
AT LAB DIRECTION & LAB RECONN AN EGR HOSE.
46 A 1.39 22.03 3.28 FUEL ANALYSIS NOT AVAILABLE. TIMING 2 DEG LOW, FAST IDLE HIGH. FAILED CO AT
LANE 1.62%.
B 1.30 16.87 3.11 PCV VALVE DIRTY. PCV HOSES ARE OIL SOAKED AND HARD. EVAP CANISTER FILTER IS
DIRTY. CARB FLOAT BOWL HOSE TO CANISTER IS OFF. COOLANT LEVEL LOW. EGR VALVE
AND INTERNAL BACK PRESSURE TRANSDUCER NOT WORKING. INIT TIMING IS 2 DEG
RETARDED. GULF STN DID UNKNOWN REPS FOR $123.
C 1.09 7.38 2.11 CATALYST LKS ON BOTTOM. EXCESSIVE EXTERNAL OIL LEAKAGE. REPL PCV VALVE.
REPLACED PCV HOSES. REPLACED EVAPORATIVE CANISTER FILTER. REPLA EGR VALVE.
RECONNECTED CANISTER FLT BOWL HOSE. FILLED COOLANT TO PROPER LEVEL. ADJ INITIAL
TIMING TO 8 DEG BTDC.
47 A 3.23 82.40 1.13 IDLE MIXTURE TOO RICH. FUEL ANALYSIS NOT AVAILABLE. TIMING 4 DEG LOW. MIXTURE
LIMITER MISSING. FAILED CO AT LANE -4.9%, PASSED HC AT 262 PPM.
B .55 9.09 1.56 IDLE MIXTURE PLUGS BROKEN OUT. CARBURETOR FLOAT BOWL VENT HOSE IS DETERIORATED
FAST IDLE SPEED GREATER THAN SPEC. IDLE CO LEAN. IDLE SPEED +100. CAD DLR ADJ
CARB, TIMING, CHOKE FOR $120.75.
48 A .94 2.29 2.70 DISTRIBUTOR BOLT LOOSE. PCV HOSE HEAT HARDENED. IGNITION TIMING VARIABLE DUE
TO DISTRIBUTOR BOLT LOOSE. CHOKE DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. FAILED HC - 1739 AT LANE.
B .64 2.69 1.60 HEATED AIR DUCT DAMAGED. CARB EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY. IDLE MIX PLUGS PUNCHED OUT.
EFE VLV IS FROZEN. PCV VLV EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY. OIL LEAKAGE UNDER CAR. INIT
TMG IS 14 DEG RETARD. DIST HOLD DOWN BOLT IS LOOSE. FAST IDLE SPEED IS GRTR
THAN SPEC. PLUMBTESMO POSITIVE. DEALER DID REPS FOR $38.
49 A 2.03 33.30 1.92 ALL IDLE CONDITIONS SHOW HIGH HC & CO, OFF IDLE OK. IDLE MIXTURE LIMITER
MISSING. FAILED HC 8. CO AT LANE.
B 1.57 22.68 1.80 CARB IS SLIGHTLY GUMMED UP. IDLE MIXTURE SCREWS ARE UNCAPPED. SECOUNDARV
VACUUM BREAK DIAPHRAGM IS LEAKING. FAST IDLE SPEED LOWER THAN SPECIFIED. EXXON
STN GAVE TUNE-UP FOR $47.70.
51 A 3.38 75.00 3.22 CARBURETOR ASSEMBLY IS LEAKING FUEL. VACUUM ADVANCE DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. PCV
FILTER MISSING. OIL IS EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY. COOLANT LEVEL EXCEPTIONALLY LOW.
FAST IDLE SPEED LOW. IDLE SPEED -160. TIMING +3 DEG. FAILED HC:900 8. CO:15%
AT LANE.
B 1.93 50.33 3.04 OWNER PAID $36.99 FOR CARB ADJ 8. RE-INSP AT TIRE DLR.
C 1.57 51.88 2.38 INSTALLED NEW CARB AND AIR FILTER.
52 A 1.06 23.16 2.70 AIR CLEANER TEMP SENSOR DEFECTIVE. IDLE MIXTURE LIMITING DEVICE IS MISSING.
SPARK PLUGS ARE WORN. OIL LEVEL EXCESSIVELY LOW. ENGINE COOLANT RUSTY. FAST
IDLE SPEED GREATER THAN SPEC. IDLE SPEED IS +120 RPM. FAILED CO AT LANE:7.08%.
B 1.20 28.75 2.69 HOSE OFF EGR TVS. TIMING -3 DEG, IDLE RPM +100, CARB RICH. FORD DLR GAVE CARB
OVERHAUL. TUNE-UP AND RE-INSP FOR $333.05.
-------
TEST FTP RESULTS (g/mi)
VEH# SEQ. HC CO NOX
COMMENTS
PAGE B-4
102 A 2.22
B 1 .49
103 A 1.48
B 2.88
104
105 A
B
108 A
B
109 A
1 1 1
B
115 A
B
120 A
B
.38
.27
.25
1.16
.97
.39
.34
10.30 179.85
1 .80
.31
.29
.53
.49
.46
.48
3.12 1.47
14.42 1.19
13.14 1.19
27.48 1.31 AIR BVPASS/DIVERTOR VALVE STUCK. FAILED AT LANE, HC-735, CO-11%.
18.97 .69 THE DIVERTOR VALVE DUMPS OFF IDLE CONTINOUSLY, MAY BE ELECTRICAL OR COMPUTER
BOX. MAY HAVE DAMAGED CONVERTOR. I CAN HEAR DUMPING. SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN
DIFFICULT TO CORRECT. OWNER GOT TUNE, NEW EGR. AND REBUILT CARB BY 2 PLACES
FOR TOTAL $278.34.
14.00 1.58 CHOKE MALADJUSTED RICH. FAILED CO AT LANE AT 2.25%.
93.86 1.38 CHOKE IS RIVETED AND CANNOT BE SET. CODES 24 AND 35 SET. MIXTURE SOLENOID
GOING RICH. OWNER SPENT $350.99 ON TWO TUNE-UPS, CARB OVERHAUL.
5.19 2.78 IDLE SPEED 200 RPM HIGH. TIMING +6 DEG OVER SPEC. IDLE MIX LIM DEVICE ALTERED.
CHOKE VAC HOSE DISCONNECTED. EGR TVS DISCONNECTED 8. HOSES MISROUTED. FAILED HC
AT 671 AND CO AT 13% AT LANE.
3.25 2.54 HEATED AIR DOOR TEMP SENSOR INOP BY VAC LINE PLUGGED. IDLE SPEED STILL HIGH.
TVS VAC LINE TO CHOKE PRIMARY VAC BREAK AND EGR STILL DISABLED. TIMING STILL
HIGH. BUICK DEALER REPLACED ECM. SAYING CODE 548,55 DISPLAYED, NO APPARENT CHARGE.
FIXED TVS SO EGR AND CHOKE WORKING.
IDLE MIXTURE RICH. COOLANT TEMP SENSOR HAS BAD CONNECTION. FAILED AT LANE
HC-445 (SPEC 300), AND CO 4.06% (SPEC 1.5%).
TIMING AND IDLE SPEED MEASURED DIFF THAN BEFORE BUT NO APPARENT ADJUSTMENTS
WERE MADE BY GARAGE. SERV STN CHG $11.13 FOR REINSP.
6.70 .35 NO EMISSION LABEL. ALL ELSE OK. IDLE SPEED +180, TIMING -3 DEG FAILED CO AT
LANE - 4.88%.
5.60 .34 NO LABEL. IDLE SPEED AND TIMING SAME. DEALER IN D.C. CLEANED CARB AND TUNED
ENG FOR EST $186.04.
.73 CODE 13 - POSSIBLE 02 CIRCUIT RICH. EGR VALVE APPEARS TO BE STUCK. AIR
FILTER VERY DIRTY. HIGH CO AT ALL CONDITIONS. OWNER REPORTEDLY HAD A DEALERSHIP
TUNE-UP WITHIN LAST 3 MONTHS FOR $125.00. FAILED AT LANE HC-799 8. CO-8.44%.
10.93 2.21 OK. OWNER REPORTED HAVING NEW EGR INSTALLED, CARB OVERHAULED 8. MAJOR TUNE-UP
BY SAME DEALER.
5.11 1.60 MIXT LIM DEVICE BROKEN. IDLE CO GOES RICH AFTER SHORT IDLE PERIOD. TIMING -4
DEG FROM SPEC. EGR VAC LINE PLUGGED. AIR DOWNSTREAM AIR LINE KINKED. OIL 1 1/2
QTS HIGH. FAILED CO AT STATE LANE AT 4.76%.
2.13 1.47 CHOKE IS RIVETED AND CANNOT BE SET. AIR AND EGR HOSES SAME CONDITION. GOT TWO
TUNE-UPS FOR $83.75.
19.87 1.32 BUILD DATE NOT AVAILABLE. CODES 34, 35 8. 55 STORED. FAILED CO AT LANE-4.64%,
LIMIT 1.5%.
18.76 1.53 CHOKE NON-ADJUSTABLE, RIVETED. SAME CODES STILL STORED. IDLE CO VARIES,
SOMETIMES LOW, SOMETIMES HIGH. PAID $99.37 FOR A TUNE-UP 8. RE-INSP AT A DC
EXXON STN.
8.60 1.61 IDLE MIXT LIM ALTERED. IDLE SPEED +400. IDLE CO MEASURED HIGH DURING UNDERHOOD
INSP, BUT VERY LOW DURING SHORT TESTS. FAILED CO AT LANE.
8.29 1.81 IDLE SPEED +700 NOW. DEALER PERFORMED 36K MAINTENANCE INTERVAL BUT ONLY
APPEARED TO ADJUST THE IDLE SPEED, COST $75.87, AND GAVE CAR REINSP TO PASS.
-------
VEH*
121
124
126
127
130
TEST
SEQ.
A
B
A
B
A
B
A
B
A
B
FTP
HC
.22
.26
3.68
2.94
2.11
2.06
.52
.77
1 .24
.97
RESULTS (g/mi)
CO NOX
2
3
27
28
51
54
10
17
1 1
1 1
.76
. 19
.44
. 1 1
.09
.05
.96
.22
.82
.96
.81
.77
2.67
1 .92
1 .59
.43
.31
.30
.62
.57
COMMENTS
RPM +250. TIMING +6 DEG . EMISSIONS VERY LOW ON ALL SHORT TESTS. BUT FAILED
AT LANE. HC-499, LIMIT 300.
RPM & TIMING SAME. SEARS GAVE ENGINE DIAGNOSIS AND TUNE-UP FOR $69.90.
IDLE SPEED +180, AIR BYPASS VALVE STUCK. FAILED HC-1105 AND CO-3.87% AT LANE.
FAST IDLE SPEED GREATER THAN SPECIFIED. DUMP VALVE NOT OPERATING CORRECTLY.
TIMING IS ADVANCED 10 DEG. IDLE CO TOO RICH. MECHANIC INDICATES PROBLEM WITH
COMPUTER SYSTEM, WILL NOT DO THIRD SEQUENCE. FORD DEALER CHG $136.38 FOR
EMISSIONS TEST AND NEW FUEL PUMP.
IDLE SPEED +200, RICH IDLE CO.
OIL ONE QUART LOW. PCV FILTER DIRTY. GULF STN IN VA CHG $20.00 FOR "CLEAN
CARB & ADJ TMG". IDLE & FTP EMISSIONS SAME.
EGR VALVE STICKING IN OPEN POSITION. IDLE SPEED +600. FAILED CO AT LANE.
02 SENSOR MAY BE FAULTY, BUT NO CODES STORED. OWNER GOT UNKNOWN REPAIRS FOR
ABOUT $20.
WORN CAP, ROTOR,' PLUGS. TIMING +7 DEG. EGR DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. AIR BYPASS VALVE
STUCK. PCV VALVE & FILTER DIRTY. NO LANE TICKET. PROBABLY FAILED BOTH HC 8. CO.
RPM +160, TIMING -2 DEG. CAR NEEDS THE RESTART IDLE TEST, OTHERWISE HIGH IDLE
PAGE B-5
131
133 A
B
134
135
139
.85
.34
1.16
.96
1 .57
1 .07
14.30
6.27
19.92
14.65
38.31
19.95
.38
.42
.73
.75
.67
.65
A
B
A
B
. 16
.38
.45
. 27
1.51
4.63
6. 19
2.87
.94
.91
1 .02
1 .03
HC & CO. OWNER GOT MINOR TUNE-UP FOR ABOUT $37.
IDLE MIXTURE TOO RICH AT IDLE. CHOKE LIM DEVICE ALTERED. TIMING 8 DEG BELOW
SPEC. 02 SENSOR SEEMS TO BE PEGGED LEAN AT IDLE. CAUSING RICH MIXT. OWNER HAD
CARB OVERHAULED RECENTLY. FAILED CO AT LANE-4.26%, LIMIT 1.5%.
OIL LEVEL LOW. SEARS DID AN "ENGINE DIAGNOSIS", BUT UNCLEAR WHAT WAS DONE.
NO CHARGE BEC SEARS RECENTLY DID SOME WORK. EMISSIONS LOW NOW. NO CHANGE TO
TIMING OR IDLE SPEED.
IDLE RPM +500. TIMING 6 DEG LOW. AIR BYPASS DIVERTER VALVE STUCK. FAILED
HC-609 AND CO-6.48% AT LANE, LIMITS 300 8. 1.5%
COOLANT SLIGHTLY RUSTY. OIL IS SLIGHTLY OVERFULL. CARBURETOR HAS GUM DEPOSITS
ON THE EXTERIOR EVAPORITIVE FAMILY IS EQ. EMISSIONS ARE STILL VERY HIGH. NO
APPARENT CHANGES MADE. AMOCO STN DID "SERVICE CARB & ADJ TO PASS", PLUS OIL
CHG, FOR $64.11.
RPM +200. TIMING +3 DEG. RICH IDLE CO. IDLE LIMITER DISABLED. CHOKE VAC
DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. PLUGS WORN. FAILED CO AT LANE-4.59%, LIMIT 1.5%.
ENGINE IDLE SPEED IS NON-ADJUSTABLE. RPM +100, TIMING +3 DEG. A TUNE-UP
PLACE IN DC GAVE "ADJ CARB" & RE-INSP. FOR $31.75.
ADDED TWO QUARTS OF OIL. NO BUILD DATE AVAILABLE. CAR FAILED AT LANE HC-146
AND CO-15.0%, BUT ALL EMISSIONS AT LAB VERY LOW.
DEALER GAVE AN EMISSIONS CHECK AT NO CHARGE. PASSED AT LANE.
MIXTURE IS RICH. FUEL ANALYSIS NOT AVAILABLE. MIXTURE LIMITER ALTERED. IDLE
SPEE +300, TIMING +5 DEG. FAILED AT LANE HC-409 AND CO-12.3%.
IGNITION TIMING IS 7 DEG RETARD. IDLE SPEED IS +240. OWNER WENT TO DLR TWICE
BEFORE PASSING AT LANE. GOT CARB OVERHAUL & MISC TUNE-UP WORK FOR $200.
-------
TEST FTP RESULTS (g/mi)
VEH# SEC). HC CO NOX
COMMENTS
PAGE B-6
144 A
B
145 A
B
146 A
B
156
157
161
.37
.37
.34
.29
.30
.54
.36
.45
.43
1 .47
B 1 .58
C 1 .85
158 A
B
159 A
B
A
B
162 A
B
.28
.28
.50
.75
.44
2.48
.64
.62
.51
.57
10.87
9.08
8.69
4.75
4.50
3.37
3.69
25. 14
32.29
32.20
4. 29
4.00
6.07
13.51
7.96
46.38
15.98
.42
.44
.45
5.52 .71
4.57 .90
.36
.41
.43
.77
.40
.48
.49
.95
1 .02
1 .20
1 .00
.93
1.12
1 .94
14.63 1.77
7.25 .67
5.94 .64
NO APPARENT PROBLEMS. ALL SHORT TEST EMISSIONS LOW. FAILED CO AT LANE - 4.29%.
CARBURETOR VENTURI HAS DIRT ON WALLS. IDLE ADJUSTMENT LIMITING DEVICE BROKEN.
(PLUG REMOVED). IGNITION TIMING IS 2 DEC LOW. PLUMBTESMO SHOWS VERY SLIGHT AMT
OF PINK. CHEV DEALER CHECKED EMISSIONS, LOW, NO CHG & NO REPAIRS.
IDLE MIXTURE SCREW TURNED IN TO BRING MIXTURE SOLENOID DWELL TO 30 DEG. PULSE
AIR SYSTEM NOT WORKING PROPERLY.
CARB VERY DIRTY, PLUGS WORN. ALL SHORT TESTS LOW. FAILED AT LANE HC-470.
IDLE SPEED IS SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN SPECIFIED, (+70). OWNER REPORTED PAYING
$150 FOR TUNE-UP.
ALTERNATOR BELT WORN. IDLE SPEED +125. NO FUEL LEAD ANALYSIS AVAILABLE. IDLE
CO RICH DURING UNDER-HOOD INSP, BUT LOW ON SHORT TESTS. FAILED LANE, CO-5.23%.
ENGINE CURB IDLE SPEED +150. GULF STN DID "LOW EMISSION TUNE", PLUS SCOPE,
CLEAN CARB FOR $128.
IDLE MIXTURE LIMITING DEVICE PLUG HAS BEEN PUNCHED OUT. SPARK PLUGS SOOTY.
PCV FILTER DIRTY. OIL 1/2 QUART LOW. DUMPS AIR TO ATMOSPHERE AT PROLONGED
IDLE. FAILED HC-576 PPM & CO-4.42% AT LANE.
FAST IDLE SPEED LOWER THAN SPEC. IDLE SPEED +250. TIMING IS 8 DEG RETARDED.
TIRE STORE ADJ CARB & REINSP FOR $35.51.
IDLE MIXTURE SCREW PLUGS MISSING. SECONDARY VACUUM BREAK DEFECTIVE. EVAPORATIVE
CANISTER FILTER MISSING. RICH OXYGEN SENSOR INDICATION (CODE 45). FAST IDLE
SPEED LOWER THAN SPEC. IGNITION TIMING -8 DEG. FAILED AT LANE HC-326 AND CO-4.29%.
TIMING UNCHANGED. AMOCO STN GAVE ADJ FOR 36.00. VEHICLE THEN PASSED AT S.W. STN.
SET CARB MIXTURE SOLENOID DWELL TO 30 DEG, USING AIR BLEED SCREW. NEW CARB
WOULD COST $415 AND TAKE 1 WEEK TO GET. SO SENT CAR HOME. WITHOUT 4TH SEQUENCE.
IDLE SPEED +500. ALL SHORT TESTS LOW. FAILED AT LANE HC-404 AND CO-1.56%.
NO FAST IDLE SPECIFICATION GIVEN. IDLE SPEED IS +350. ALL ELSE APPEARS THE
SAME. OWNER SAID HIS BROTHER MADE ADJ, THEN CAR PASSED AT LANE.
SPARK PLUGS HAVE RICH MIXTURE SOOTY DEPOSITS. HIGH CO. ONLY AFTER PROLONGED
IDLE. FAILED CO AT LANE - 2.46%.
ENGINE OIL 1 QUART LOW. COOLANT LEVEL LOW. DELAY OF VACUUM TO DUMP VALVE
APPEARS TO BE TOO SHORT, BUT SOURCE OF PROBLEM CANNOT BE PINPOINTED. TIRE
DLR GAVE UNKNOWN REPAIRS FOR $168. PASSED AT LANE, ALTHOUGH EMISSIONS ARE
HIGHER THAN BEFORE.
REPLACED DELAY VALVE TO AIR DUMP SYSTEM.
TIMING -4 DEG. FAILED CO AT LANE - 6.29%.
OXYGEN SENSOR BAD. OWNER TOOK CAR TO A GULF STN FOR MINOR INEFFECTIVE REPAIR,
THEN TO FORD DLR FOR AND UNKNOWN 3-WAY PART REPL FOR TOTAL $139.16. DLR TOLD
OWNER TO USE RESTART PROCEDURE, WHICH WORKED AFTER 3RD TRY.
NEW OXYGEN SENSOR INSTALLED.
CAR IS OK. PULSE AIR SYSTEM MAY BE INADEQUATE. NO BUILD DATE AVAILABLE. FAILED
LANE HC - 321 & CO - 2.24%.
CHOKE IS NOT ADJUSTED CORRECTLY. ALTERNATOR BELT IS LOOSE. IDLE SPEED +230.
VA DLR GAVE MAJOR TUNE FOR ABOUT $105.
-------
TEST FTP RESULTS (g/mi)
VEH# SEQ. HC CO NOX COMMENTS PAGE B-7
169 A 3.77 11.31 2.45 ENGINE IDLE SPEED IS AUTOMATICALLY CONTROLLED. IDLE MIXTURE PLUGS BROKEN OUT.
SECONDARY VACUUM BREAK DEFECTIVE. CHARCOAL CANISTER FILTER MISSING. OIL IS
SLIGHTLY GAS DILUTED AND VERY DIRTY. INITIAL TIMING IS 2 DEC LOW. PLUMBTESMO
SLT POS; FAILED HC AT LANE - 1787 PPM.
B 2.41 17.36 3.55 AIR FILTER IS DIRTY. ENGINE INITIAL TIMING IS 3 DEG LOW. PLUMBTESMO SLIGHTLY
POSITIVE. EXXON STN DID CARB OVERHAUL AND COMPLETE TUNE-UP FOR EST $400. COST
UNCLEAR DUE TO OTHER MAJOR WORK.
C 2.13 16.35 4.34 REPLACED AIR FILTER. REPLACED MISSING EVAPORATIVE CANISTER FILTER. CHANGED
OIL 8. FILTER. CHANGED RADIATOR COOLANT. SET INITIAL TIMING TO 15 DEG BTDC.
CHECKED SOLENOID DWELL 30 DEG.
171 A 4.58 30.70 .27 TEMPERATURE SENSOR FOR AIR DOOR DEFECTIVE. PCV VALVE BROKE WHEN INSPECTING.
FUEL TANK PURGE SOLENOID DEFECTIVE. AIR INJECTION TUBES HAVE HOLES. IDLE SPEED
+100. DIVERTER VALVE DEFECTIVE. FAILED CO AT LANE - 5.5%.
B .55 9.88 .21 COMBINATION AIR TUBE & CRANKCASE VENT TUBE GROMMET LEAKING OIL EXCESSIVELY.
CANISTER PURGE SOLENOID LEAKS VACUUM. SEARS DID UNKNOWN REPAIRS FOR $180. CHEV
DLR REPL PULSE AIR UNDER WARRANTY, ALSO SET CARB MIXTURE AND GAVE REINSP FOR
$62.90.
172 A 1.11 17.34 .33 AIR CLEANER TEMPERATURE SENSOR DEFECTIVE. PLUMBTESMO SLT POS. FAILED AT LANE,
HC - 353 & CO - 7.12%.
B 1.13 16.95 .33 GULF STN GAVE REINSP & PASS FOR $12.00. NO REPAIRS. IDLE CO ON LAB TESTS SHOWED
IT STILL SHOULD FAIL.
C .72 8.73 .32 REMOVED AND REPLACED CARBURETOR. ADJUSTED IDLE SPEED TO MANUFACTURERS
SPECIFICATIONS ©700 RPM IN DRIVE.
175 A .68 7.14 1.42 METAL HOSE FROM CHECK VALVE TO ENGINE HAS A HOLE IN IT. PCV FILTER IS
EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY. EVAPORATIVE CANISTER FILTER MISSING. OIL LEVEL IS
EXCESSIVELY LOW. FAST IDLE SPEED IS GREATER THAN SPECIFIED. IDLE CO TOO RICH.
FAILED AT LANE, HC - 314 & CO - 6.06 %.
B .48 5.91 1.08 SPARK PLUGS ARE WORN. FAST IDLE SPEED LOWER THAN SPEC. INITIAL TIMING IS 2
DEG RETARDED. OLDS DLR IN MD DID INTERNAL CARB ADJ 8. MINOR SERVICE FOR ABOUT
$133.
177 A 2.66 60.15 .48 IDLE MIXTURE PLUGS BROKEN OUT. EVAP CANISTER FILTER MISSING. FAST IDLE SPEED
GREATER THAN SPEC. TIMING -2 DEG. FAILED CO AT LANE.
B .33 3.55 2.79 IDLE MIXTURE LIMITING DEVICE PUNCHED OUT. ENGINE SPEED SENSOR DEFECTIVE.
VEHICLE SPEED SENSOR CIRCUIT MALFUNCTION. EGR SYSTEM DOUBLE-CHECKED AND IS OK.
NO THIRD SEQUENCE GIVEN. OLDS DLR REPL CHK VLV AND INTAKE MAIN PIPE FOR AIR
SYSTEM, AND REPL ECM, ALL UNDER WARRANTY.
179 A 3.02 88.05 .11 INITIAL TIMING IS UNREADABLE-NO MARKS GIVEN. CURB IDLE SPEED IS HIGHER THAN
SPEC. IDLE CO EXCESSIVELY HIGH. LANE ICO=10.51.
B 2.03 44.13 .25 NO OBVIOUS PROBLEMS WERE FOUND. NO THIRD SEQUENCE WILL BE PERFORMED SINCE WE
DON'T HAVE THE PROPER EQUIPMENT FOR THIS TYPE OF VEHICLE. NO CHARGE, PASSED AT
LANE. ADJUSTED FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM.
182 A 1.45 76.04 .73 PCV VALVE IS BROKEN. CODE 55 STORED, MAY BE AN ERROR. FAST IDLE SPEED LOWER
THAN SPEC. EGR VALVE INOPERATIVE. CURB IDLE SPEED +100.
B .40 6.50 2.57 EGR VALVE FROZEN. STILL SHOWS CODE 55. OWNER GOT A TUNE-UP FOR $39.95.
C .32 1.55 1.24 INSTALLED NEW EGR VALVE AND SET IDLE SPEEDS.
-------
TEST FTP RESULTS (g/mi)
VEH* SEQ. HC CO NOX
COMMENTS
PAGE B-8
192
199
204
21 1
213
221
223
228
230
A
B
A
B
C
A
B
A
B
A
B
A
B
C
A
B
A
B
C
A
B
C
.69
.38
1 .59
1 .09
.80
1.41
1 .45
1 .95
2.09
1 .07
.76
4.09
1 .34
1 .63
.28
.23
1 . 20
1.14
.88
1 .59
1 .50
.84
3
3
25
18
14
10
7
50
49
13
3
56
24
33
5
4
21
20
13
26
26
15
.76
.82
.81
.51
.32
.52
.58
.35
.00
.72
.27
.22
.73
.79
.57
.83
.63
.54
.40
.79
. 17
. 19
.51
.64
1.21
1 .25
1.12
3.75
3.59
.65
.77
1 . 24
1 .05
1.11
2.52
1 .26
.85
.98
1.11
1 .09
1 .06
.62
.60
.79
AIR CLEANER TEMP SENSOR DEFECT. AIR FILT CLOGGED W/DIRT. SPK PLUGS WORN. BOTH
CANISTER PURGE SLNDS DEFECTIVE. EXTERNAL OIL LKAGE . SPK PLG WIRES DFCTV . FAST
IDLE SPD LOWER THAN SPEC. PULSE AIR VACUUM VLV IS INOPERATIVE. INIT TIMG IS 6
DEG RETARD. IDLE SPD IS +200. PLUMB SLT POS . LANE CO - 4.93%.
AIR INJECTION TUBES RUSTED AND LEAKING. CANISTER PURGE SOLENOID LEAKS VACUUM.
TEMPERATURE SENSOR FOR HEAT DOOR INOPERATIVE. INITIAL TIMING 7 DEG LOW. IDLE
SPEED +450. CHEV DLR IN DC DID CARB WORK 8. MISC FOR ABOUT $250.
PLUG APPEARS FOULED. PCV VALVE AND FILTER IS VERY DIRTY. FAST IDLE SPEED
HIGHER THAN SPEC. EXHAUST SYSTEM LEAKS. FAILED CO AT LANE- 3.03%.
IDLE MIXTURE PLUG MISSING. IDLE CO HIGH ONCE DURING LAB INSP, VERY LOW DURING
SHORT TESTS. TIRE DLR REPL AIR FLTR AND GAVE REINSP FOR $32.73.
LAB ADJUSTED IDLE MIXTURE AND CURB IDLE SPEED.
IDLE MIXTURE IS TOO RICH. FAILED CO AT LANE: 3.39%.
TIMING +6 DEG. VOLVO DLR ADJ LAMBDA DUTY CYCLE FOR $21.08.
AIR FILTER EXCESSIVELY DIRTY. SPARK PLUGS WORN. VACUUM ADVANCE ASSEMBLY
DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. NO ENGINE SPECIFICATIONS AVAILABLE. ENGINE DECAL MISSING.
FAILED CO AT LANE - 3.94%.
OWNER PAID ABOUT $75 FOR A MINOR TUNE-UP AND RE- INSPECTION FEE. NO 3RD
SEQUENCE WAS DONE BECAUSE OWNER COULD NOT WAIT ANY LONGER.
IGNITION TIMING UNREADABLE. IDLE CO AND HC HIGH. FAILED CO AT LANE - 7.01%.
COLD START VALVE DEFECTIVE. VACUUM ADVANCE DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. A FRIEND AT BMW
DEALERSHIP ADJ AIR FLOW METER AT NO CHG .
AIR CLEANER VACUUM HOSE IS NOT FITTING CORRECTLY. FAST IDLE SPEED LOW. IDLE
SPEED IS +350. TIMING IS +8 DEG. FAILED AT LANE HC:733 AND C0:4.68%.
HOSE FROM EGR TVS CROSSED WITH HOSE FROM SWITCHING VALVE TVS. AC NOT WORKING,
HOSE LEAKING. AC SOLENOID NOT WORKING. IDLE SPEED +500. DLR GAVE MINOR TUNE FOR
$66.25.
CHANGE HOSE AT EGR TVS WITH HOSE FROM SWITCHING VALVE.
IDLE SPEED +100, EGR DIAPHRAGM APPEARS TO LEAK. FAILED HC : 312 AND CO: 2.16%
AT LANE.
GAS STN GAVE RE-INSP FOR $10.60. NO REPAIRS MADE.
IGNITION TIMING MARKS NOT VISIBLE. HIGH CO EMISSIONS. DURING UNDERHOOD INSP
ONLY. FAILED CO AT LANE: 5.89%.
CAR NEEDS PLUGS AND WIRES. PLUG FOR MIXTURE ADJUSTMENT IS MISSING. CAR
ADJUSTED BY A FRIEND, WHO OWNS A SERVICE STN, AT NO CHG, BUT NO APPARENT CHANGES
MADE.
SPARK PLUGS AND CABLES REPLACED. MIXTURE SET.
HOSE FROM CCEV CROSSED WITH HOSE FROM AIR CLEANER SENSOR. FAILED AT LANE
HC:538 8. CO: 13.08%.
AIR CLEANER TEMPERATURE SENSOR NOT FUNCTIONING. TIMING IS -2 DEG. OWNER PAID
$35.22 AT A SERV STN FOR "SET TO SPECS".
ADJUST IDLE MIXTURE.
-------
TEST
VEH* SEQ.
FTP RESULTS (g/mi)
HC CO NOX
COMMENTS
PAGE B-9
231
234
245
257
258
266
270
A
B
C
A
B
1 .00
8.32
.56
.40
.36
3.75
.48
2.42
1 .08
1 .50
1.11
.90
13.46 1.64
181.07 .32
4.83 .87
6.31 .45
4.88 .47
55.91
8.69
15.12
11.81
3.34
B
C
A
B
A
B
C
A
.98
1 .04
.46
.20
2.41
2. 14
1 .28
.43
1 1 .
10.
4.
2.
59.
51 .
28.
7.
56
81
62
53
62
67
28
10
2.88
.93
.65
.78
1 .89
2.08
.81
2.04
1.21
C .65 6.91 .67
268 A 1.92 46.15 .55
74.81 .35
32.26 .62
20.94 1.58
1 .46
1 .44
OIL LEVEL IS ONE QUART LOW. INITIAL TIMING MARK NOT FOUND. FAILED AT LANE
HC:936 AND CO:12.19%. EPA EST MILEAGE OF THIS VEH FROM OWNERS STATEMENTS.
FUEL INJECTION COMPONENTS MAY BE DEFECTIVE. INITIAL TIMING IS -14 DEG FROM
SPEC. IDLE SPEED IS 100 RPM. GAS STN ADJ FUEL INJECTION FOR $19.08.
OXYGEN SENSOR REPLACED & IDLE MIXTURE ADJUSTED. TIMING STILL -14 DEG.
PULSE AIR TUBES RUSTED THROUGH. TIMING +7 DEG, IDLE SPEED +100. FAILED HC-314
AND CO-5.93% AT LANE.
PULSE AIR TUBES RUSTED THROUGH. SPENT $49.43 FOR TUNE-UP AT AN AUTO SERVICE
CENTER.
BUILD DATE NOT AVALIABLE. CARBURETOR ASSEMBLY IS EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY. CANISTER
FILTER IS MISSING. IDLE SPEED IS AUTOMATICALLY CONTROLLED. FAST IDLE SPEED LOWER
THAN SPECIFIED. EGR VALVE DOES NOT WORK. INITIAL TIMING IS -13 DEG. FAILED CO AT
LANE: 8.12%.
TIMING IS -3 DEG NOW. 2 REPAIRS AND RETESTS BEFORE PASSING. BUICK DLR FIRST DID
A MIXT ADJ, THAN ANOTHER ONE & A NEW DIST CAP, FOR $67.00 TOTAL.
REPLACED EGR VALVE.
HOSE FROM CARBURETOR TO PURGE CONTROL SOLENOID OFF. IDLE RPM 100 LOW. FAILED
CO AT LANE: 2.55%.
OWNER PAID $119.36 FOR CARB WORK, AND RE-INSP AT A GAS STN.
AIR FILTER IS EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY. PCV VALVE EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY. TIMING
MARKS UNREADABLE. IDLE CO AND HC TOO RICH. FAILED AT LANE HC:450 AND CO:12.27%.
DIVERTOR VALVE CONSTANTLY DUMPS. EGR VALVE STUCK CLOSED. GAS STN "SET EMISSION
CONTROL FOR INSP" FOR $36.69, INCL RE-INSP FEE.
REPLACED EGR VALVE.
DISTRIBUTOR ROTOR & CAP WORN. DIVERTER VALVE DUMPS CONSTANTLY, VACUUM PROBLEM.
EGR VALVE DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. OIL LEVEL IS EXCESSIVELY LOW. OIL IS VERY DIRTY.
CLNT IS VERY LOW. CLNT IS VERY RUSTY. INIT TIMING IS RETARD 6 DEG FROM SPEC.
IDLE SPEED HIGHER THAN SPEC. IDLE CO AND HC TOO RICH. LANE HC - 293,
CO - 11.98.
DIVERTER DUMPS CONTINUOSLY, ELECTRONICS. EGR VALVE DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. TIMING
IS RETARDED. SERVICE STATION REPLACED AIR FILTER. PCV VALVE 8. VENT FILTER,
FUEL 8. OIL FILTERS. DID NOT PASS. SECOND SERVICE STATION PASSED CAR. $44.58
FOR PARTS 8. LABOR AT FIRST STN. INSP FEE ONLY AT 2ND STN.
TIMING CORRECTED. AIR PUMP STILL DUMPS TOO MUCH. NEW EGR VALVE INSTALLED.
CARBURETOR ASSEMBLY IS EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY. PCV FILTER IS EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY.
ENGINE OIL IS EXCEPTIONALLY DIRTY. ENGINE OIL IS VERY LOW. HEATED AIR DUCT
MISSING. IDLE MIXTURE LIMITING DEVICE IS MISSING. CURB IDLE SPEED IS -80.
FAILED CO AT LANE: 4.8%.
CHOKE STAYS ON DUE TO POOR ELECTRICAL CONNECTION. OWNER BOUGHT MINOR PARTS
FOR $9.93 AND PASSED RE-INSP. UNCLEAR IF ANY REPAIRS OR ADJ WERE MADE.
ELECTRIC CHOKE CONNECTION CLEANED.
TEMPERATURE SENSOR NOT WORKING. SPARK PLUGS WORN. OIL LEVEL IS TWO QUARTS
LOW. INITIAL TIMING IS -2 DEG. IDLE SPEED IS -260. IDLE CO RICH AT UNDERHOOD
INSP, BUT LOW ON SHORT TESTS. FAILED CO AT LANE: 5.34%.
OWNER HAD MINOR MAINT PERFORMED, BUT ALL WAS UNRELATED TO THE EMISSIONS
FAILURE, FOR $37. PASSED RE-INSP AT LANE.
IDLE MIXTURE AND IDLE SPEED SET TO SPEC.
-------
TEST FTP RESULTS (g/mi)
VEH# SEQ. HC CO NOX COMMENTS PAGE B-10
272 A 7.11 152.36 2.74 CODE 45 SHOWING RICH OXYGEN SENSOR. HOSE TO SPEED CONTROL OFF, HOSE CONNECTED
WRONG. EGR VALVE DIAPHRAGM LEAKS. LANE IHC=347, ICO=3.54.
B 7.22 150.27 2.81 CURB IDLE SPEED IS ELECTRONICALLY CONTROLLED. AIR CLEANER TEMPERATURE SENSORS
ARE INOPERATIVE. SPARK PLUGS ARE WORN. RICH OXYGEN SENSOR INDICATION, CODE 45.
EGR VALVE DEFECTIVE. REPAIR SHOP REPLACED CRANKCASE FILTER. $15.00 FOR EMISS
TEST. $12.53 FOR FILT.
C 7.57 152.74 1.97 REPLACED EGR VALVE, SPARK PLUGS, AIR CLEANER PVS SWITCH, AND HOT AIR DOOR
TEMPERATURE SENSOR.
274 A 5.39 207.52 .19 VACUUM ADVANCE ASSEMBLY LEAKS VACUUM. HEATED AIR DUCT DAMAGED. COLD START
INJECTOR UNPLUGGED. IDLE CO IS TOO RICH. TIMING MARKS NOT PRESENT. IDLE SPEED
IS + OR - 75 RPM. LANE IHC=305, ICO=13.78.
B .98 8.12 .36 HOLE IN TAILPIPE. NO SPECS AVAILABLE FOR TIMING. WHEN MEASURED, TIMING WAS ON
THE "1" MARK. DEALER REPLACED OXYGEN SENSOR ($75.08) TOTAL COST $131.16
INCLUDING IDLE SPEED ADJUSTMENT & CLEANING INJECTORS.
-------
Appendix C: Results of Federal Test Procedures
-------
VEHICLE
NUMBER
2
4
5
8
14
17
19
20
21
24
26
28
29
39
40
41
42
43
46
47
48
49
51
52
102
103
104
105
108
109
1 1 1
1 15
120
121
124
126
127
130
131
133
134
135
139
144
145
146
156
157
158
159
161
SCORES FROM FIRST
HC CO NOx
(9/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi )
4
2
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
3
2
3
1
2
1
1
10
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
.03
.04
.51
.36
.07
.24
.43
.57
.41
. 1 1
. 15
.30
.65
.74
. 12
.69
. 19
.41
.39
.23
.94
.03
.38
.06
.22
.48
.38
. 16
.39
.30
.31
.53
.46
.22
.68
. 1 1
.52
.24
.85
. 16
.57
. 16
.45
.37
.29
.54
.45
.47
.28
.50
.48
55.
44.
23.
23.
62.
23.
4.
8.
9.
1 .
9.
3.
12.
2.
9.
34.
36.
57.
22.
82.
2.
33.
75.
23.
27.
14.
5.
14.
6.
179.
5.
19.
8.
2.
27.
51 .
10.
1 1 .
14.
19.
38.
1 .
6.
10.
5.
4.
3.
25.
4.
6.
46.
76
61
63
10
33
49
39
80
71
09
99
71
17
64
34
82
13
89
03
40
29
30
00
16
48
00
19
42
70
85
1 1
87
60
76
44
09
96
82
30
92
31
51
19
87
52
75
37
14
29
07
38
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
3
1
2
1
3
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
.23
.00
.09
.59
.07
.54
.50
.77
.31
. 13
.52
.47
.82
.31
.26
.41
. 17
.43
. 28
. 13
.70
.92
. 22
.70
.31
.58
.78
. 19
.35
.73
.60
.32
.61
.81
.67
.59
.31
.62
.38
.73
.67
.94
.02
.42
.71
.36
.43
.40
.95
.20
. 12
FTP
MPG
17
19
23
26
23
15
26
35
19
25
21
29
27
16
17
17
16
16
19
1 1
18
15
19
19
15
15
18
21
26
12
18
22
30
31
15
22
24
14
25
15
17
24
28
26
27
29
17
18
28
21
15
.46
.66
.64
.72
.29
.99
. 13
.90
.26
.23
.87
.05
.58
.26
.49
.38
.33
.80
.94
.55
.62
.09
.97
.52
.62
.32
.37
.96
.27
. 16
.57
. 10
.49
.04
.83
.64
.01
.89
.26
.45
. 26
.88
.25
.91
.06
.83
.37
.49
. 18
.49
.52
SCORES FROM SECOND FTP
HC CO NOX MPG
(g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi)
2
2
2
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
.74
.74
.79
.73
.29
.07
.44
.42
.53
. 10
. 17
.33
.28
.63
.26
.91
.06
.32
.30
.55
.64
.57
.93
.20
.49
.88
.27
.97
.34
.80
.29
.49
.48
.26
.94
.06
.77
.97
.34
.96
.07
.38
. 27
.37
.30
.36
.43
.58
.28
.75
,64
45
69
9
13
50
34
4
4
9
5
3
2
3
12
6
51
1 1
16
9
2
22
50
28
18
93
3
13
5
10
2
18
8
3
28
54
17
1 1
6
14
19
4
2
9
4
4
3
32
4
13
15
.82
.38
.37
. 13
.21
.20
.87
.31
.50
.99
.52
.70
.50
.76
.02
.23
.31
.55
.87
.09
.69
.68
.33
.75
.97
.86
.25
. 14
.60
.93
. 13
.76
.29
. 19
. 1 1
.05
.22
.96
.27
.65
.95
.63
.87
.08
.57
.50
.69
.29
.00
.51
.98
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
4
3
1
1
1
3
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
. 24
.84
.40
.47
.61
.28
. 16
.02
.81
.04
.58
.66
.96
.26
.81
.67
.04
.97
. 1 1
.56
.60
.80
.04
.69
.69
.38
.54
. 19
.34
.21
.47
.53
.81
.77
.92
.43
.30
.57
.42
.75
.65
.91
.03
.44
.90
.41
.77
.48
.02
.00
.94
16
19
22
24
26
15
26
28
19
25
22
28
27
14
18
18
15
17
19
13
17
15
20
19
14
12
19
21
23
15
19
21
30
29
17
21
24
14
25
15
17
24
29
26
27
28
17
18
28
19
15
. 14
.25
.42
.68
.25
.00
.05
.85
.53
. 15
.77
.58
.92
.97
.21
.37
.80
.95
.91
.29
. 10
.49
.85
.75
.81
.59
.06
.78
.98
.65
.32
.74
.94
.52
.51
.94
.64
.46
.71
.06
.80
.36
.80
.78
.95
.46
.76
.39
.09
. 15
.24
SCORES FROM THIRD FTP
HC CO NOx MPG
(g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) PAGE C-l
_
- - - -
_ _ _ _
_ _
- - - -
_
_ _ _ _
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
_
- - - -
_
_
- - - -
-
- . -
.52 3.05 1 .85 17.88
1 .09 7.38 2.11 20. 12
_
- - - -
_ _ _ _
1 .57 51 .88 2.38 20.49
- - - -
_
- - - -
.25 3.12 1 .47 17.86
- - - -
- - - -
_
- - - -
_ _ _ _
- - - -
_
- - - -
- - - -
_
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
_
- - - -
_ - _
.34 8.69 .45 26.69
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
1 .85 32.20 .49 18.96
- - - -
.44 7.96 .93 19.25
.62 14.63 1.77 15.26
-------
VEHICLE
NUMBER
162
169
171
172
175
177
179
182
192
199
204
21 1
213
221
223
228
230
231
234
245
257
258
266
268
270
272
274
SCORES FROM FIRST
HC CO NOx
(g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi)
.51
3.77
4.58
1.11
.68
2.66
3.02
1 .45
.69
1 .59
1.41
1 .95
1 .07
4.09
.28
1 .20
1 .59
1 .00
.40
3.75
.46
2.41
.43
1 .92
1 .50
7.11
5.39
7.25
11.31
30.70
17.34
7. 14
60.15
88.05
76.04
3.76
25.81
10.52
50.35
13.72
56.22
5.57
21 .63
26.79
13.46
6.31
55.91
4.62
59.62
7.10
46. 15
20.94
152.36
207.52
.67
2.45
.27
.33
1 .42
.48
. 1 1
.73
.51
1.21
3.75
.65
1 . 24
1.11
.85
1.11
.62
1 .64
.45
3.34
.65
1 .89
2.04
.55
1 .58
2.74
. 19
FTP
MPG
26.73
19.20
23.41
26.41
20.05
16.38
19.84
15.21
27. 10
20.61
21 .56
26.03
23.79
17.59
26.50
21 .45
15.01
20.52
28.73
16.40
26.80
13.32
13.52
21 .72
20.88
1 1 .42
15. 28
SCORES FROM SECOND FTP
HC CO NOX MPG
(g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi) .
.57
2.41
.55
1.13
.48
.33
2.03
.40
.38
1 .09
1 .45
2.09
.76
1 .34
.23
1.14
1 .50
8.32
.36
.98
. 20
2. 14
.48
2.42
1.11
7 . 22
.98
5.94
17.36
9.88
16.95
5.91
3.55
44. 13
6.50
3.82
18.51
7.58
49.00
3.27
24.73
4.83
20.54
26. 17
181 .07
4.88
1 1 .56
2.53
51 .67
8 .69
74.81
15.12
150.27
8.12
.64
3.55
. 21
.33
1 .08
2.79
. 25
2.57
.64
1 . 25
3.59
.77
1 .05
2.52
.98
1 .09
.60
.32
.47
2.88
.78
2.08
1.21
.35
1 .46
2.81
. 36
27.24
17.59
25.50
25.86
19.79
18.43
21 .39
18.00
25.95
21 .09
21 .56
26.30
24.09
21 .34
25.56
21 .37
14.93
14.93
27. 76
19.38
26.89
13.77
12.39
17.97
21 .59
1 1 .45
22. 13
SCORES FROM THIRD
HC CO NOx
(g/mi) (g/mi) (g/mi)
_
2.13
-
.72
-
-
-
.32
-
.80
-
-
-
1 .63
-
.88
.84
.56
-
1 .04
-
1 .28
.65
1 .08
.90
7.57
-
_
16.35
-
8.73
-
-
-
1 .55
-
14.32
-
-
-
33.79
-
13.40
15.19
4.83
-
10.81
-
28 . 28
6.91
32.26
11.81
152.74
-
_
4.34
-
.32
-
-
-
1 .24
-
1.12
-
-
-
1 .26
-
1 .06
. 79
.87
-
.93
-
.81
.67
.62
1 .44
1 .97
-
FTP
MPG
_
18.10
-
27.41
-
-
-
17.45
-
22.02
-
-
-
20.85
-
19.66
16.39
20.97
-
19.24
-
13.50
13.22
22.07
21 .43
11.52
-
PAGE C-2
-------
Appendix D: Results of
Idle-Neutral Modes of Short
Tests during the First Test Sequence
-------
FOUR-MODE IDLE
VEHICLE FIRST MODE THIRD MOOE-
NUMBER HC (ppm) CO (%) HC (ppm) CO (V)
2
4
5
8
14
17
19
20
21
24
26
28
29
39
40
41
42
43
46
47
48
49
51
52
102
103
104
105
108
109
1 1 1
1 15
120
121
124
126
127
130
131
133
134
135
139
144
145
146
156
157
158
159
161
162
169
171
172
175
177
179
182
192
199
204
21 1
213
221
223
228
230
231
234
245
257
258
266
268
270
272
274
510
250
75
80
240
40
120
40
300
20
20
40
400
300
90
230
490
250
100
320
190
375
220
50
800
50
ISO
22
37
650
18
85
25
20
800
260
230
220
200
335
130
40
300
70
35
1 15
180.
130
40
30
160
80
1000
120
145
260
100
130
35
50
45
1 10
135
90
35
10
15
20
20
45
900
90
185
20
20
40
45
1 15
6.80
"1.50
1 .80
3.30
2.40
.02
1.30
.90
1 . 10
.02
.70
.05
6.00
.04
.05
3.00
5.40
5.40
.50
5.30
.02
5.40
4.00
1 .35
6.80
. 15
2.80
.25
.05
5.20
.15
1 .20
.04
.02
2.00
3.10
2.60
3.60
4. 10
2.60
3.20
.05
3.20
. 15
.04
.60
1 .50
1 .55
.05
.04
1.10
.50
. 1 1
2.05
1 .90
4.40
1 .20
2.80
.03
. 15
.03
1 .35
1 .30
1 .90
.07
.03
.09
.40
.04
.08
.21
.86
2.80
.03
.31
.29
.30
3.80
700
250
105
65
240
40
80
50
310
20
20
40
390
130
100
215
510
230
100
330
160
350
190
60
600
50
160
21
23
880
25
70
20
35
800
310
180
210
190
350
130
35
250
35
40
70
25
135
30
20
140
80
740
120
150
40
100
140
75
25
65
105
140
85
190
10
20
30
15
25
700
80
190
95
20
40
60
120
7.40
2.00
3. 10
2.60
2.60
.02
1 .20
.60
1 .30
.02
.40
.07
5.60
.04
.05
2.90
6. 10
5.20
1 .00
5.40
.02
5.20
4.00
1 . 10
5.00
. 15
2.60
.40
.04
5.40
.22
.90
.04
.02
2.20
3.50
3.00
3.40
3.60
2.60
3.50
.05
2.50
.06
.04
.09
.04
1 .40
.04
.04
1 .25
.65
. 15
1 .85
1 .70
. 12
1 .20
3.00
.70
.05
.04
1 .20
1 .60
1 .85
.80
.03
.08
.20
.03
.03
.22
.48
2.90
2.00
. 10
.20
.55
3.60
LOADED TWO-MODE
IDLE MODE
HC (ppm) CO (%)
700
350
130
50
260
50
20
60
300
20
20
40
390
230
70
205
340
220
100
275
220
370
200
40
800
60
170
43
23
520
25
70
25
20
300
245
190
40
190
290
135
30
320
25
35
85
20
130
35
30
140
60
720
120
145
20
95
140
60
25
65
100
130
85
370
10
20
25
20
15
600
80
180
20
70
70
90
120
7.40
1 .80
3.60
2.10
2.85
.02
.02
.70
1 .40
.02
.03
.05
5.80
.04
.04
3.00
3.70
5.00
1 .00
4.60
.02
5.40
4.10
1 . 10
6.00
. 19
3.00
.20
.03
3.00
.25
1 . 10
.03
.02
.08
3.60
3.40
.05
4.00
2.10
3.30
.05
3.00
.04
.04
.20
.04
1 .40
.04
.04
1 .30
.21
. 14
2. 10
1 .80
. 10
1 .20
3.10
.25
.05
.04
1 .20
.1 .20
1 .80
1 .60
.03
.07
.30
.04
.03
.22
.50
2.80
.02
.95
.28
1 .00
3.60
RESTART IDLE
HC (ppm) CO (%)
700
240
75
55
220
40
100
50
320
20
20
40
370
125
65
215
350
230
100
305
150
360
190
45
650
50
170
21
23
100
30
50
20
60
800
250
180
40
190
320
120
30
260
40
40
80
20
105
35
20
125
80
850
125
150
25
95
140
40
30
50
95
140
85
60
10
20
40
15
20
480
80
190
20
20
65
140
560
7.40
1 .90
2.10
1 .60
2.40
.02
1 .20
.60
1 .20
.02
.02
.05
5.40
.04
.05
3.00
4.00
4.90
.80
5.00
.02
5.40
4.00
.40
4.50
. 12
2.80
.20
.03
2.20
. 18
.33
.04
.02
2.00
3.20
3.10
.05
3.50
2.40
3.20
.04
2.50
.06
.04
. 10
.04
1 .00
.04
.04
1 .20
.80
. 16
1 .90
1 .70
.09
1 . 10
2.80
.04
.05
.03
1 .20
1 .70
1 .80
.35
.03
. 10
.50
.03
.03
. 19
.39
2.70
.03
.25
.30
2. 10
3.50
PAGE D-1
-------
Appendix E: Results of Idle Neutral
Modes of Short Tests of Vehicles which had
High Idle Emissions after Commercial Repairs
-------
FOUR-MODE IDLE LOADED TWO-MODE
VEHICLE FIRST MODE THIRD MODE IDLE MODE RESTART IDLE
NUMBER HC (ppm) CO (%) HC (ppm) CO HI) HC (ppm) CO (*) HC (ppm) CO (*)
PAGE E-1
2
4
42
49
126
127
133
231
350
380
400
290
230
250
450
420
3.70
6. 10
5.50
3.50
3.50
2.60
3.70
1.20
325
390
390
280
230
260
480
360
3.80
6.80
6.00
3.50
3.30
3.60
3.70
1.20
325
390
390
290
280
230
400
420
3.50
6.60
5.50
3.50
4.00
3.20
3. 10
1 .20
300
380
400
285
250
220
450
410
3.80
6.40
6. 10
3.70
3.20
3. 10
3.50
1.20
------- |