my 224/230 passed emissions!

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jun 2, 2007 | 12:05 AM

#16

black95z0122

Thread Starter

Registered User

Joined: Apr 2004

Posts: 185

Quote:

Originally Posted by ttop1986

Thats good to know that cam will pass because I'm running stock cam with long tubes. I'm due for inspection in a few months. Do you have any pics of how your cats are set up? Right now I have a mini highflow cat after my ypipe, but I know this is not enough because the exhaust makes your eyes water a little.

Your also only a couple towns over from me.

I have one cat in the stock location on the passenger side and the other is sideways right underneath the end of the trans. I had to make some heat shielding for that cat and use alot of heat wrap to make sure there wasn't alot of heat getting at the trans.

the law is mass is that no exaust system louder than stock is legal and the cat cannot be moved. But alot of shops won't give you a problem. There are people with loud exaust, lifted trucks and all sorts of stuff around and they all have stickers. just shop around. most will tell you right off the bat whether their going to pass you or not. Don't go to any shop that does emissions repair. those guys tend to know all the rules and enforce them. Good luck

Jun 2, 2007 | 12:57 AM

#17

Wild1

Registered User

Joined: Oct 2002

Posts: 2,277

From: Orange Kounty, Kalifornia

You got me all excited so I grabbed my California emissions from November 2006 and it's PPM, not Grams.

..........Max......Measured
HC.......83...........10
CO......0.48........0.01
NOx.....689.........370
CO2.......x..........15.1

I've searched online to find several scientific calculators to convert grams to PPM but the numbers just don't add up. There is no way 83 PPM is equal to 0.08 grams by volume. If the limit in Massachusetts is 1.20, 0.08 in California is crazy. That can't be right.

Anyone have a good conversion for PPM to Grams?

Last edited by Wild1; Jun 2, 2007 at 12:59 AM. Reason: Tables shifted above

Jun 2, 2007 | 12:55 PM

#18

truedualws6

Registered User

Joined: Jan 2004

Posts: 1,406

From: Downey, CA

Can't find conversion

I've also looked for a conversion for grams/mile to PPM and have not
found anything. There are key missing parameters to do it by hand.
It's probably a standard factor based on a typical car travelling for
one mile under various operating conditions.

If anyone has this conversion please post it because most of the non-CA
tests are in grams/mile and I've always wanted to be able to compare
results. For my test the key is HC. The limit is 49 ppm and I test at
48 ppm.

I just found this: http://www.imreview.ca.gov/styles/sm...k/overview.pdf

Section 2.2.1 discusses the difference between the CA and federal tests but
it does not provide a direct conversion.

Last edited by truedualws6; Jun 2, 2007 at 01:03 PM. Reason: Added linky

Jun 2, 2007 | 06:38 PM

#19

neil350

Registered User

Joined: Apr 2000

Posts: 2,670

From: T E X A S

Nice numbers, for comparison sakes, here are my smog numbers, my car has LTs, dual cats and a untouched motor. I'm looking in to the X.e 2224/230 for mine as well, glad to see people passed.

Bolt on LT1, Hooker LTs, Magna Flow Cats

Low Speed

HC(PPM) Standard: 114 TA:42
CO(%) Standard: 0.63 TA: 0.09
C02(%) TA: 14.9
O2(%) 0.2
NOx(ppm) Standard: 796 TA: 34
Dilution(%) Standard >6 TA:15.0

High Speed
HC(PPM) Standard: 117 TA:77
CO(%) Standard: 0.65 TA: 0.24
C02(%) TA: 14.8
O2(%) 0.3
NOx(ppm) Standard: 879 TA: 169
Dilution(%) Standard >6 TA:15.0