... WTF? New diesel emission testing protocol?
#1
06-13-2009, 08:49 PM
... WTF? New diesel emission testing protocol?
... I don't post enough on the site, but I had something happen today and I'm pissed! - What do you think about this?
This year was the first for my required Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) emission test; a requirement for annual registration. So before I drove the 2004 Dodge Cummins down to the test facility, I call ADEQ for protocol.
I asked if I could go through the “OBDII Only” lane, they said yes. Well bullshit-me if I didn’t wait in line 20 minutes only for them to say I needed the running test.
Here’s the kicker, ADEQ required me to leave my truck in park, and rev the engine to REDLINE (unloaded) and let off the throttle – three friggin times!
Winging a motor at governed redline goes against the grain of everything I thought I understood about motors.
Do I have reason to be pissed, or is this standard procedure now?
This year was the first for my required Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) emission test; a requirement for annual registration. So before I drove the 2004 Dodge Cummins down to the test facility, I call ADEQ for protocol.
I asked if I could go through the “OBDII Only” lane, they said yes. Well bullshit-me if I didn’t wait in line 20 minutes only for them to say I needed the running test.
Here’s the kicker, ADEQ required me to leave my truck in park, and rev the engine to REDLINE (unloaded) and let off the throttle – three friggin times!
Winging a motor at governed redline goes against the grain of everything I thought I understood about motors.
Do I have reason to be pissed, or is this standard procedure now?
#5
06-14-2009, 12:21 AM
Diesel Bomber
#6
06-14-2009, 12:30 AM
Why doesnt someone start standing up and putting there foot down for this, i know there are guys out there with diesels that have money enough to start a huge lawsuit against the government i mean this crap is getting crazy...i could prove that a straight pipe smoke spewing diesel is safer then a propane burning forklift, which they claim is cleaner then gas, if only i could let the company i work for to let me take a camera in our shop and video tape the sensor we have for unsafe carbon monoxide or dioxide (i can never remember which one is dangerous)we've had 5 or 6 idling trucks in the shop and the little sensor that opens the vents does not go off, bring in a forklift and that little bastard will go off in like 2 minutes...i could put a stop to this **** quick but i would have to have major backing to pull something like that off.
The following 2 users liked this post by stkdram55:
Blueburner (06-20-2009),
jasonfriedlin (06-14-2009)
#7
06-14-2009, 12:49 AM
Diesel Bomber
If I had the money I would do it. If you do some googling you find out the real truth about all this BS they are putting on us. Just smart people gettin rich off most people being gullible is all it is. Not pointin fingers at anybody, but if your interested in the other side of the story other than what mainstream media tells us, google "theories against global warming" and do some reading. Quite interesting
Last edited by jasonfriedlin; 06-14-2009 at 12:51 AM.
#8
06-14-2009, 08:01 AM
Why doesnt someone start standing up and putting there foot down for this, i know there are guys out there with diesels that have money enough to start a huge lawsuit against the government i mean this crap is getting crazy...i could prove that a straight pipe smoke spewing diesel is safer then a propane burning forklift, which they claim is cleaner then gas, if only i could let the company i work for to let me take a camera in our shop and video tape the sensor we have for unsafe carbon monoxide or dioxide (i can never remember which one is dangerous)we've had 5 or 6 idling trucks in the shop and the little sensor that opens the vents does not go off, bring in a forklift and that little bastard will go off in like 2 minutes...i could put a stop to this **** quick but i would have to have major backing to pull something like that off.
Meanwhile, back in oh-so-bad hippie-fornia...
Why not put a resistor in your APS circuit on a toggle switch? The electrical equivalent of a brick under the accelerator...
#9
06-14-2009, 09:19 AM
You're not going to win anything by comparing carbon monoxide emissions to hydrocarbon, volatile organic emissions; the fact that it's dangerous gives the EPA (or ADEQ) the purview to regulate it. It doesn't have a thing to do with global warming, black smoke is not good for the lungs believe it or not. Snap testing is nothing compared to what they could do with five gas scanners, OBD-based opacity monitors, and actual visual inspections that would kill castrate the hobby in months.
Meanwhile, back in oh-so-bad hippie-fornia...
Why not put a resistor in your APS circuit on a toggle switch? The electrical equivalent of a brick under the accelerator...
Meanwhile, back in oh-so-bad hippie-fornia...
Why not put a resistor in your APS circuit on a toggle switch? The electrical equivalent of a brick under the accelerator...
I did find out more about the AZ test:
Diesel emissions testing in Pima County and for light-duty (8,500 lbs GVW and less) vehicles in Maricopa County consists of loading the vehicle on a dynamometer and measuring the opacity of the exhaust plume. The measured opacity must not exceed the established maximum. In Pima County the maximum allowable is 30 percent opacity. In Maricopa County the maximum allowable is 20 percent opacity. (The maximum allowable is determined by the average elevation of the registration area).
Heavy-duty (8,501 lbs and greater) diesel vehicles in Maricopa County are tested using the Society of Automotive Engineers J1667 test protocol, commonly referred to as the "snap-acceleration test." The test consists of measuring the opacity of three, wide open throttle, no-load accelerations from idle to maximum governed engine speed with the transmissions in neutral. The average opacity for the three accelerations cannot exceed the applicable standard for the model year of the engine. The maximum allowable for engine model year 1991 and newer is 40 percent opacity, for engine model year 1990 and older the maximum is 55 percent opacity.
Heavy-duty (8,501 lbs and greater) diesel vehicles in Maricopa County are tested using the Society of Automotive Engineers J1667 test protocol, commonly referred to as the "snap-acceleration test." The test consists of measuring the opacity of three, wide open throttle, no-load accelerations from idle to maximum governed engine speed with the transmissions in neutral. The average opacity for the three accelerations cannot exceed the applicable standard for the model year of the engine. The maximum allowable for engine model year 1991 and newer is 40 percent opacity, for engine model year 1990 and older the maximum is 55 percent opacity.
#10
06-20-2009, 09:16 AM
Diesel Enthusiast
I did find out more about the AZ test:
Heavy-duty (8,501 lbs and greater) diesel vehicles in Maricopa County are tested using the Society of Automotive Engineers J1667 test protocol, commonly referred to as the "snap-acceleration test." The test consists of measuring the opacity of three, wide open throttle, no-load accelerations from idle to maximum governed engine speed with the transmissions in neutral.
So not going to happen. Ever see a 24 Valve run at 6,000 + Rpm? the puller guys do and the thing that gives before lower is the valve train ... not rods. Redline boxes in the day took us over 4 Grand with enough fuel to back us up. .. and that was for the Joe Schmo with some mods on the street. Now apply STOCK Street duty trucks "safe Zone" and minus say 800 Rpm for longevity and set the governor at that level. Now the factory governed speed is far below any sort of what might be preceived as danger levels.
