casm wrote:
Yeah... We were in L.A. The statement about unqualified people explains part of it, but part of it's also greed. Some shops will fail you on a nonexistent technicality or problem that most people wouldn't know to look for in hopes that you'll come back for a re-test on your own dime. It's a racket.
One of my duties is to keep the MIL on the road, and a year and a half ago I took her 1994 E320 in for smog. She lives in Rancho Cucamonga - not exactly Los Angeles, but close. Drove up the way to a nearby smog shop and told them to keep it until they were done and call me - I wasn't going to hang around. Three hours later, having not heard from anyone, I went back by. Idiot at the counter said "We can't smog that car, there is no place to plug in our equipment." HWAT. After staring at the guy for a few minutes I dug into the problem - the 24v E320 has an intake pipe going over the coil pack cover, so you need to remove the pipe, remove the cover, connect the timing light, put the intake pipe back on, then do the thing. They were simply unwilling to do it. I seriously couldn't believe it. In the past I've taken some crap from NorCal smog places, but never "We'd rather not." I definitely sympathize. Google'd the nearest STAR station and the guys did it no questions asked and even charged less than the first place.
Quote:
There's also the problem of having a carburetted vehicle and taking it for smog - the stations just do not know what it is that they're looking at. I've literally had to point things out to them ("yes, this is the air pump, these are the one-way valves, that's the electrosolenoid...") because 25 years of having nothing but fuel-injected vehicles on the market has left them fairly oblivious to what those systems look like.
FACT. I am not that old - carbs were largely dead by the time I started driving and quite dead by the time I started wrenching, but most the guys at these shops are younger still and don't understand *any* of that. My '84 Trans Am was AWFUL under the hood with all the emissions equipment and CCC Q-jet. I swear the guy I was taking it to back then just *assumed* it was okay.
Quote:
Oh, I just remembered one other fun thing I had to go through at smog time: emissions limits being revised below what the car in question was originally rated for. Went through that with one of the Alfas. It was not enjoyable.
That's definitely a thing - I mean, most '80s cars weren't even "rated" for NOx emissions back then. But, the California standards are based on actual test data. Something like 80th or 90th percentile. If the test standard is X, that means 80% (or 90%, whatever it is) of *identical* cars have passed in the past with those numbers. Over time they've narrowed it down, but they're all realistic, attainable numbers. My first Alfa (an '84 GTV6) and a lot of my early Saabs were victims of that too, but in the end I was able to get them in tune. Aside from a Hyundai Santa Fe with leaky valve stem seals, I haven't had a car fail smog in 15+ years.
I argued with this with some numnuts on some other forum - dude insisted the test standards were random and impossible despite the published information on the BAR's website about the policies and histories. I actually dug up 18 years worth of smog tests on my XR4Ti... the car I've had the longest... and *demonstrated* the numbers had actually only changed twice in the past two decades just like the BAR said. I'd rather they not change, but it's ultimately not so bad. The numbers have been stable since '09 or '12 (I don't recall offhand)... I think there isn't enough test data on old cars anymore to make any more useful changes. All four of my '80s cars (two Saabs, a Fiero, and the XR4Ti) pass very easily... I am *real* thankful I don't have that Trans Am anymore, though. No more smog-required carb'd cars for me. It's too dicey, and all that emissions stuff is EXPENSIVE.
Quote:
I'll give you credit for keeping an XR4Ti going, though. Those were good cars; shame they never really got the recognition they deserved in the marketplace. And I'm going to recommend a 3800SC for the Fiero; drove one with that engine in it once, and was very impressed.
The XR4Ti is a MACHINE. 300,000 miles now pushing 22psi and just shy of 300hp. I kept waiting for it to break and it just wasn't, so I got the second one.
As soon as the CRD is done it's getting a twin cam Saab motor, a big turbo, and a cage. I'm aiming for 250ish hp (barely more than stock) and 2400lbs. Should be a fun track car.
I'm waffling on the Fiero. I don't really like the 3800SC - potent and an easy install but it's a boat anchor, and GM never sold a 3800 with a manual transmission so it's a non-starter for me. Same *basic* problem as an LS swap. Installing a longitudinal motor transversely in the Fiero probably won't smog, and the only transverse LS motor is the LS4, which again, only an automatic. My two leading choices right now are the 3.9l V6 from a G6 GT with an honest 250hp or the 2.8t/3.0t V6 from a Saab/Cadillac which is a bit over 300.
*That's* where California smog gets me down, but OTOH I guess I don't have to worry about spending money on Fieros.