Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 12:52:26 -0000 From: MeatballTurbo <carl.robsonnospamcing-czechs.com> Subject: Re: Passed emissions!
In article <MPG.1ace2f1e3eca0d74989bf2nospam.individual.de>, djtaylornospamoot.com says... > > Now doesn't that just prove to a lot of the "Environmental" politicians > > that we have in power, that just because a car is old, doesn't mean it > > should legislated off the road, by stricter and more stringent testing > > It's not even as simple as that. Consider a new 4x4 doing the school > run. It might well have a cat but until that has warmed up to full > heat, it's not going to be very efficient and you may well find that > running long distances in old cars is no more of a problem than mums > doing the school run in brand new cars. > > Of course all things being equal, lower emissions are good. > oh yeah, quite agree. When my T16 passed the MOT last week the readings where. CO 0.3 (can have upto 3.5 for my pre CAT 85) HC 450PPM (can be 1200ppm for older cars). Tester was impressed, and said he thought it might be running lean, other Saab owners have said it might even be a bit rich as with an uprated FPR boost wound up and bigger injectors their CO was about the same, and their HC was somwhere in the 200s. Seems too much unburn't fuel might be making it's way through, although I tend to get between 27-29 to the gallon as long as I don't hoof it around to much like holding 3rd until 70 :) -- The poster formerly known as Skodapilot. http://www.bouncing-czechs.com
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
