EPA

[DanTurboLancer]

You are pretty lucky Sigmaproject, you dont have a "come look at me" paint job, and the front of your car doesnt look like A Mack Truck!

But if you hadnt seen him and loaded it up, and he heard that Induction noise,
Yeah i wouldnt doubt he would take some more interest in it!


When i get it back on the road im going to be even more paranoid to drive it than i was before!
And they will have the plates on record, so i will be steering well clear of town.

Probably just take your words of wisdom and head out through the Vine yards!!





Oh and like every one else, they would have been having a break, so no word as yet.

Hopefully this week so i can start making some sort of progress...
Pain just waiting around only to be waiting for Bad news haha

[Sigmaproject]

I spent the weekend, cruising the Vineyards I had no idea how vast an area the Vineyards cover. Came in from Lower Belford and used my GPS to go down every road and laneway. Was raining so as soon as the tar finished, so did I.
Only stopped at Tempest two. Spent the rest of the time driving in the rain. FANTASTIC

[DanTurboLancer]

I only went to Harrigans Irish pub for the first time the other week.
First time i have actually stopped at any of the spots out that way, i agree very relaxing and Beautiful!


Wish they would fix some of the roads but, Pot holes!

[DanTurboLancer]

Spoke to the Epa representative this afternoon.

I will be recieving the official letter from the EPA in the next couple of days.

So i wont say too much until i have read through the actual letter, and then called the EPA themselves.

But basically they are saying the Engineers report doesnt mean anything.

As they say Pod filters
Non Standard intercoolers,
and adjustable Fuel pressure regulators,

Create high Emisson levels.


They are deeming the car unregisterable, until i remove those items, and get photos taken to prove the changes...


Or
I Trailer the car down to Sydney and go through all of their testing and have the probe up the exhaust and it passes the emission levels test.



I need to call them and ask If it does pass with the things mentioned
(Pod filter, FMIC) is it able to be passed?
Or do they simply not accept Pod filters period??

And if i am to take off the Fuel pressure Reg, what am i going to replace it with?
Because as far as i am aware, a standard Magna Fuel pressure reg. isnt designed for, and wont cope with the requirements of a Turbo application...




Can anyone correct me on that??

[turbosigma]

A U.S. site said that a porsche 944 regulator is bolt in - no idea if true.

easy way - Bolt on a sigma turbo carby set up on. Will have loads more emissions than your current setup. But whats logic to do wth it.

I can see there point on the reg, maybe the pod, but the cooler is just a pipe when all said an done.

I'm guess'n that they don't know about the Non-standard efi computer yet.

[DanTurboLancer]

Yeah man they know about the non factory computer, and it is covered by the Engineers report also.
I dont have a hand controller, so i cant adjust the mapping while driving.


As far as i can see it, They can olny see that i can pass an emissions test with the fuel set in a certain way, then wind up the Fuel pressure and also wind up the boost which will then alter the emissions output......

But honestly ANYONE can do this by simply taking the car for a retune Weather it is Injected or Carby!!


And why would i just wind up the pressure on the fuel pressure regulator, without having the full tune altered, it wouldnt have the desired effect...??





Someone else pointed out that the factory Magna Fuel pressure reg. is Adjustable, can anyone show me how and where, ive never played with one...

I want to show the EPA guys this.


As i wrote before, on their very own site, it states that pod filters are not illegal, its is PREFERRED THAT THEY NOT BE USED, except in cases where the vehicle Required an air box to lower its Air intake noise levels to pass the Decibel tests from the factory!!!

It says nothing about the concern with Pod filters to be inregard to Emission output!




Im dieing to hear their reason over the FMIC!!

[DanTurboLancer]

Under Engine managment System, - modified



The EPAs own website

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/noise ... enoise.htm

[turbosigma]

Im dieing to hear their reason over the FMIC!!

When doing a rebuild on a mates cordia turbo - wanted to do the normal bov/intercooler.

Being the good guys we are, phoned up the rta to see if ok.

bov no, because of the air flow meter - ok, get that.

intercooler - no - why not, its just a pipe - RTA dude "I Dont Know" - its not the EPA, but I guess you will get the same answer.

Best of Luck.

[DanTurboLancer]

Thanks mate,
Yeah i will keep everyone posted as soon as i find out more!

Its not looking very good for Anyone that has fitted a Pod filter or a non factory intercooler to their car....
But maybe its just N.S.W??....

[MATNES]

Its not looking very good for Anyone that has fitted a Pod filter

you just need to plumb the crank case vent to it and any other hoses that went to the std air cleaner. problem solved

and how do you have a modified carbie, throttle body and engine management system????

MATT

[DanTurboLancer]

check ou the pics mate, i had to make an adaptor pipe to have the crank case air plumbed back to the intake side!

Its the pod filter itself.

Well its a 1974 model car that came out with a Carb.
That has been changed.

That does not mean it is a defect just because it has a cross next to it, just means it is not stock!

[DanTurboLancer]

Well after 6 weeks i had to call the EPA rep. who does the inspections.
He told me i would receive a letter from the EPA direct, outlining what they required...

2 weeks later no Letter, so i called the EPA direct on friday afternoon.
I am told that the Rep. game me the wrong information, so Another 2 weeks of my Rego has been waisted...


I have to make some kind of Airbox (something that the Rep told me I couldnt do early on.

Or fit anysort of factory style Plastic Airbox..............

So i either try to make something from some sheet metal, or just fit an airbox from a Charade or something, that will fit in the limited space.

-------------------------------


And they will not allow the adjustable Fuel pressure regulator, no ifs ands or Buts...
They will not allow ANY type of manually Mechanically adjustable fuel pressure Reg!

So i will fit a stock Magna one on.

Does anyone have a couple of spares i can have?

Im not sure of what model this manifold is from so i dont know if all the Regulators are the same?? (will bolt straight on)


---------------------------



Then i take it for photo time AGAIN.

Then once the photos are taken,
I have to trailer the car down to Sydney (Hour and a half away)

to the EPA emissions testing facilities,
and get it all checked out,
and if it passes then they will allow the Inlet manifold (because it has been modified)
and the FMIC............


Getting over this in a big way

[75wagon]

I suppose that is some good news. But not all.

So the front mount, what does that mean? Do you have to remove it completely? What did Starions come with?

Do you have to fit a Magna Fuel Press Reg or can you just fit a non rising rate type that allows higher pressure?

Dave...

[DanTurboLancer]

I suppose that is some good news. But not all.

So the front mount, what does that mean? Do you have to remove it completely? What did Starions come with?

Do you have to fit a Magna Fuel Press Reg or can you just fit a non rising rate type that allows higher pressure?

Dave...

They are going off the Emissions rules and regulations requirements for my 'Sigma 1977 Block'.... "Cough loudly"

To my knowledge All Fuel pressure regulator are rising rate by using Vacuum, but they are set.
Mine is Mechanically manually adjustable, so that is what they dont like...

When i asked him what Factory Mitsu Magna Fuel pressure reg i could use, that was made to cope with a turbo application.
His reply was simply, not my problem, it just has to go!


And can anyone tell me what vehicle came from the factory with a fuel injected Airbox in 1977 ????


he was very vauge in regard to the Intercooler, and why it needed to be tested,
but basically said that the emission requirements could be altered by The cooling effect of an intercooler allowing a person to increase the boost levels, and therefore would require more fuel added...
And so i guess they are just testing that...??

They didnt give me a straight answer, there is no rule in the EPA or ADR rules regarding it.
Its just their decision

[75wagon]

So isn't the thing they are testing the exhaust reading with a probe?
So if it makes it through the test with a FMIC then why should they care?
I know, because they are bastards, that just have to make life difficult for the sake of it... did I just say that?

Dave...

[DanTurboLancer]

Yes mate thats what i was meaning.
It has to go down to the EPA testing facility, and they will test it with their equipment..

If it passes then all ok,
if it doesnt.....
well lets just say it will!

[Torana68]

BEFORE you go, google something like "passing smog test" just as there are settings for max HP and different ones for max fuel economy there are settings for smog testing, just the incorrect timing could cause a fail..... just a hint

[DanTurboLancer]

Thanks Torana68, i will definitely look into that!!

[DanTurboLancer]

From the EPA Website, with thanks to Pete - TRIIKY and his mate Rob.
Cheers fellas!


Page 2-14



Review of Fuel Quality Requirements for Australian Transport
Chapter 2 - Motor Vehicle Emissions – Policy Setting and Control Technologies 2-14


Table 2-4: ADR Emission Standards for Passenger Cars.........
It is a table showing the ADR levels for emissions...



http://www.environment.gov.au/atmospher ... 3e51-1.pdf

[DanTurboLancer]

2.2 Current Vehicle Engine And Emission Control Technologies
This section reviews some of the more significant technologies that are available, or
are emerging into commercial availability, for improving the emissions and/or fuel
consumption performance of road vehicles. Given the nature of this study, the
primary emphasis is on those technologies that are directly affected by, or reliant on,
the quality of fuel used in the vehicle.
There is now an almost endless catalogue of technologies, and combinations of
technologies, to control vehicle emissions and/or to reduce fuel consumption. This
part of the report summarises the most significant, commercially available and nearterm
strategies.
Not all strategies are used in all vehicles. Some engines, because of their design,
size or fuel type may require fewer controls than others in order to meet regulated
emission limits. Some technologies can only be applied to specific fuel or engine
types.
It is also important to note that, for most light duty vehicles (i.e. cars, station wagons
etc up to 2.7 tonnes), tailpipe emission levels (apart from CO2) are generally not a
direct function of engine size or fuel consumption. Standards for light duty vehicles
generally set a maximum g/km emission level regardless of the engine size or vehicle
mass. In these vehicles, manufacturers may, for commercial reasons, incorporate
only the minimum controls necessary to meet regulated emission limits.
Hence a vehicle powered by a large six cylinder engine with a range of highly
effective emission control strategies may well have lower emissions than a small
three or four cylinder engine with only minimal controls.
On the other hand, CO2 emissions, for any given fuel, are directly proportional to the
rate of fuel consumption, so emissions of this gas tend to increase with vehicle mass.
It should also be noted that some technologies may have a “swings and
roundabouts” effect, in that they tend to improve one aspect of emissions at the
expense of another. For instance, lean burn technology can greatly improve fuel
consumption (and hence CO2 emissions), but cause NOx emissions to increase
significantly.
Fuel selection itself is also a major factor in determining emission levels. Petrol tends
to have high air toxics and low regulated gas emissions; diesel has very low CO and
HC, but high NOx and fine particulate emissions. LPG and CNG have very low air
toxics and particulate emissions, but HC (non-reactive) can be a problem for CNG.
Beyond the “direct” influences of technologies and fuels, there is also the important
issue of maintaining the emissions performance of vehicles at an acceptable level
throughout their operating lives. Whether achieved through accredited fleet
Review of Fuel Quality Requirements for Australian Transport
Chapter 2 - Motor Vehicle Emissions – Policy Setting and Control Technologies 2-19
management systems or through regulated inspection / testing programs, this “whole
of life” approach to vehicle emissions performance is being increasingly recognised
as an essential element in emissions management.
Less well recognised, but potentially of some significance, is the role of fuel additives
in achieving and maintaining lower emission levels and, possibly, in reducing fuel
consumption. This is a contentious area and there is considerable scepticism about
some of the claims made for these products.
Nevertheless, the oil industry routinely adds detergent formulations to commercial
petrol in order to maintain fuel injector performance, and similar benefits are widely
acknowledged to flow from the use of similar additives in diesel engines.

[DanTurboLancer]

This part i found interesting.
The EPA are siting that the Fuel Pressure regulator is adjustable, so its not legal.
And the Inlet manifold has been modified (Throttle Body moved) so it and the Intercooler have to be emissions tested.
However reading this, None of those parts are regarded as a Petrol Vehicles Engine Controls...
So should they be regarded as being able to effect the Emissions level?

http://www.environment.gov.au/atmospher ... 3e51-1.pdf

2.2.1 Summary of Fuel Consumption and Emissions Reduction Technologies
The strategies outlined below each fall into one of three categories, viz:

• Fuel management and in-engine controls, which are primarily aimed at optimising
combustion to achieve clean, efficient and properly timed burning;

• exhaust after-treatments, which clean up residual pollutants in the exhaust
stream; and

• body/transmission/running gear enhancements, aimed at reducing or smoothing
the load on the engine.


Petrol Vehicles

(a) Engine Controls
• Computerised fuel and ignition management
• Lambda sensor
• Exhaust gas recirculation
• Multi-point fuel injection
• Sequential fuel injection
• Direct fuel injection
• Air assisted direct fuel injection
• 2-Stroke direct injection
• Turbo/supercharging
• Variable intake duct geometry
• Variable valve timing and/or lift geometry
• Lean burn
• Low-friction bearings and pistons and roller cam followers
• Multi-valve heads (3,4 or 5 valves/cylinder)
• Knock sensors


(b) Exhaust After-treatment
• 3-way catalyst
• Advanced catalyst formulation
• Larger surface area/volume ratio catalysts
• Electrically heated catalyst
• Close-coupled catalyst
• Continuous on-board emission monitoring (on board diagnostics - OBD)


(c) Body/Transmission/Running Gear
• Hybrid drivetrains (internal combusion/electric or fuel cell/electric)
• Adaptive automatic transmissions
• Rotor lock-up automatic transmissions
• Continuously variable / multi-ratio transmissions
• Lightweight components (plastics, magnesium, aluminium, composites, highstrength
steel)
• Improved aerodynamics
• Low rolling resistance tyres

[webby]

Yeah, the EPA are bastards
The inspector that was checking Dad's chemical storage the other week tried to tell me to take my paddock bomb to the Sydney EPA joint to get it emissions tested