Emissions tester

Anyone know anything about these? I heard they're not so expensive. I'm wondering if i could use my old 386 computer for such testing.

Doearch using "osbii". A 386 should do fine.

Bob AZ

An emisions -testing- tool would be a gas analyzer, prices ranging from about $4000.00 - $6000.00 for a decent non-dispersive infrared analyzer to $40,000+ for a flame ionization detector of near IM quality.

You could on the other hand be asking about software cabable of reading trouble codes and data stream of on board diagnostic systems, they range from a few hundred dollars to around $5000.00, but the usual minimum platform needed is a P2 at 166mhz and a couple of gigs of HD space. IIRC, the old "Rinda" software would run on a 386 PC, but it probably hasn't developed in the last ten years or so. (don't see their name mentioned much any more)

And in Oregon you don't even need a fricking tool, you can take your failing auto though the DEQ test center as many times as you want and get a nice pretty report on every run that has all the levels printed out - all for free. They do prohibit people from working on their cars in the parking lot, though.

Ted

Actually, owning anything short of a full IM-240 dyne/FID gas analyzer will not help you to predict whether you will pass the Wisconsin emissions test. There is no way that you can corelate the reading you'd get from even a $6000.00 NDIR gas analyzer to the IM-240 test that is performed at the test facility, and if you now need to seek the services of a professional for a tune-up, from where are the skills going to come from to operate and apply the readings you'd get if you -did- purchase this eqiuipment?

You get three trips through the test lane as part of your registration fee, if your vehicle fails on the first attempt, you have all of the necessary data printed out on the VIR (blue and white sheet) to effect a repair. Why spend money in an attempt to know what they are already telling you for free?

FWIW, comparing the equipment such as stupid mechanic described to the equipment used in The Wisconsin Emissions program is like comparing a fourth of July bottle rocket to the space shuttle.

A low buck gas analyzer -might- have some use for testing catalytic convertor efficiency (if you don't mind drilling holes in your exhaust system), but the same thing can be done thru the process of elimination by making certain that your engine has proper fuel control, proper and adaquate spark at the right time, proper EGR function, is running at the correct temperature, has adaquate compression and correct cylinder sealing, has been fed the correct oil throughout its life. IOWs, properly maintained.

In Wisconsin, he gets three trips through for free, the fourth and subsequent tests are $15.00 each. You can buy a test for $15.00 if you're contemplating a used car purchase, to see if it will pass and that test will be logged for 6 months meaning that if you do buy the car and it passed on the paid test, you won't have to run it through again after the change of ownership, as is the norm. And, as you said, they already give you better more detailed information for free than what could ever possibly be gleaned from a rummage sale gas analyzer.

With a modern computer controlled car you normally need nothing more than good ignition parts, pcv valve, clean air filter, clean oil, full tank and a good oxygen sensor to pass the emissions test. I did have trouble with a Jaguar and had to get a test waiver because the car appeared to have a blown head gasket. I sold the car outside the testing zone rather than pay for an engine repair. The test staion doesn't want your word that you fixed the problem, they insist on a statement from your mechanic. They also will provide the driver with a list of mechanics who are able to fix emissions problems. Many of those do not have expensive testing equipement. Typically, I use the self diagnostic system to be sure my car is in good running condition. If something's wrong with the O sensor, EGR, timing or ignition the system should tell me so. I like to go in confident that I'll pass because failing the test is both costly and annoying.

i can't think of a "modern computer controlled car" that didn't also come with a catalytic convertor, so you're going to need one of those also.

Oh, compression is important also. Shouldn't that have been included in your above list?

They have little choice.

They insist on a statement from *someone*, check the back side of the VIR, it is in fact a statement to be signed by whomever fixed the vehicle. if it's an owner repair, and there is some question, they'll ask to see reciepts from the parts vendor for whatever the vehicle owner may have replaced in his attempt to fix the vehicle.

They do NO such thing. They have available, a list of shops who have met the minimum (and I can't overstress the word MINIMUM) requirements that have been arbitrarily set. I might also add, I personally compiled the first three editions of that list, I also objected strongly as the requirements needed to be listed were systematically watered down to the point that all that was need was a pulse. The only reason to be on the list to begin with is in the event that you're going to need a waiver, since only repairs performed by a shop listed on the list will be considered toward the total dollars spent to meet waiver criteria.

Because it is not a requirement, which is pretty much what I've been saying all along.

Sorry, I can't see how the dollars spent correcting a problem before the IM test is performed could possibly be any different than the dollars spent correcting the exact same problem after the IM test is performed

You are saying you have all the answers, having worked within the system. Take a look once at how it really works. I've been running older cars through the system for a long time. On the Jaguar, I got a waiver without getting the work done. I sold the car instead. If you do your own repairs and the car fails, the test station will give you hell like some sort of Gestapos. I've been told that, when the car failed, I had to go to a professional mechanic and was offered a list of local garages and their success rate in fixing emissions propblems. One of the garages with a 100% success rate is my brother-in-laws business. He has only rudimentary testing devices and relies mostly on experience and the self-diagnostic tests from the engine computer. Testing is a pain in the hind end. Even radio commentators say they took a home outside the testing district to avoid such aggravations. I bought my wife a convertible from a private party and was told I had to pass emission to get process the registration. It passed. A month or two later the plates were up for renewal and, as the car model was an odd number year, it needed testing for renewal. This time it failed. If I have work done by a professional who will make sure the car passes it will be costing me from $150 up to a few hundreds. If it's a matter of a sensor or a tune-up, I get by with less that $100 doing the work myself. Emissions control testing amounts to a state tax upon car owners living within specified counties. People living outside the district plan can polute to their hearts content. People with realtively new cars don't have to be tested or heavy trucks either. None of this makes sense to me and I believe the process violates the Wisconsin constitutions requirement for equal taxation.

As for the fact that the catalytic converter is part of the system, this appears to return to the origen of the debate. I was asking about reasonable test equipment to test the exhaust. That would complete the missing link not covered by the self diagnostic system.

Wish I was living in Oregon.

"Have all the answers?" Is that how your brain responds to having incorrect information corrected? Too bad. Let's read on....

You should take a close look at the paragraph that is printed at the top of the back page of your Vehicle Inspection Report (VIR) it will verify everything that I've already related here.

I've been dealing with the emissions program in Wisconsin for 20 years, I doubt that your knowledge or experience beats mine.

Selling the car is NOT the same as getting a waiver. If by chance your brother in law cooked up some bogus repair orders that perported that some dollar amount had been spent on your Jaguar in an attempt to make it comply, then your brother in law is a crook and committed fraud.

Absurd. They are strictly forbidden from giving people hell. One can only imagine the things they found by-passed or disconnected by you or your brother in law. I've spent way more time in emissions test stations than you, before, during and after my term of employment with Envirotest, I have NEVER seen anything but friendly courteous service displayed by the lane inspectors and management staff. I have seen inspectors and manager spit on and assaulted by people who eveidently do NOT have full control of their faculties. Stupid thought to believe that attacking someone merely doing their job is going to improve their lot in life. (where does this sound familiar from?)

Another absurdity. READ the top of the back side of your Vehicle Inspection Report (VIR). It SPECIFICALLY speaks to the contrary to that which you claim. If you can't read, have someone do it for you and make the necessary grunting noises as required for you to understand.

Again, you are in agreement that an "emissions tester" (look up at the subject title) IS NOT NECESSARY.

The fact that your brother in law is on the "list" only proves to me that his shop needs to resort to getting vehicles waivered because he can't diagnose and repair what people bring to him. There is no *reason* to be on the "list" except as a program requirement should a waiver be sought.

Bullshit. You're probably one of the majority that procrastinates until the last day of the month and then finds long lines of vehicles. That is hardly the fault of the program. I've taken four customer vehicles in for re-testing in the past work week, I waited no longer that one minute in line before the inspector waved me into the test lane.

And this is supposed to prove what? Tell you what; Charlie Sykes is an old high school buddy, I'll call him up and have him announce that AHoudini should jump in the nearest lake that he can find with open water. Will you obey his radio anouncement?

Change of ownership tests are good in the system for 6 months, if you did a change of ownership test and then had to retest within the same calander year, then the two tests were way more than two months apart as you claim. You're either very confused or a liar.

As for passing one test at change of ownership and failing at renewal, yeah, no schitt, things malfunction on cars that cause the emissions to be higher than allowed. best way to avoid that ever happening is to use public transportation.

Yes, cars cost money to maintain, and only foolish mechanics work for free. As for the mechanic making sure the car will pass after repair, the only way that can happen is if the mechanic takes the car in to the test station while it's in his custody which I think is a very wise thing on his part to do for you, plus the added convienience to you is a nice gesture. I ALWAYS take my customers car in for a re-test, this avoids any confusion about whether they warmed the vehicle up sufficiently before the test is performed.

And as I've repeatedly said, you are FREE to do your own work. No one can stop you, the test station CAN NOT reject a retest just because the vehicle owner repaired his own vehicle as long as the back of the VIR is filled out.

Not true. For the duration of the first IM-240 contract that Envirotest Sysyems Corp. had with the state of Wisconsin, they were performing the tests at a loss in profits. Because Wisconsin was one of the first states to impliment IM-240 testing, they did it as a demonstratation model to attract business from other states and countrys who were going to be implimenting IM-240 testing. Their new present contract does allow that they make a slight profit (maybe), but it quickly evaporates the more times a vehicle needs a free re-test, and at $15 for a fourth test and subsequent test, and knowing what I do about the individual costs to test a vehicle to begin with, that profit isn't much.

Basic logic would dictate that since the increased registration fee goes to the emisions test contractor, it can NOT be considered a tax to begin with since the state doen't get to keep the dollar amount that registration fees went up when testing was implimented. In other words, you haven't thought this out very well.

No they can't. And you'd be the first person I've ever met that finds pollution to be contenting to ones heart.

The reason that vehicle emissions testing is required in the seven couunty area is because that is where the pollution is. [DUH] If people living outside the district actually were polluting to their hearts content, that is where the pollution would *be* and that is where the remediation programs would be located. Oh wait, there were billions spent cleaning up the Fox River Valley area, so again, I prove you wrong. Boils down to the ones making it dirty get to clean it up, and by the way, the vehicle registration fee is the same innthe other 65 counties as it is in the 7 county test area, so the people living in the other 65 counties that don't have mandated vehicle emissions testing are having to pay for cleaning up YOUR exhaust poop, so don't give me that 'they're getting off scott free' crap. You aren't being charged full price for the mess you've made.

Where did you come up with THIS whopper? From your brother in law?

Define "heavy trucks." Wisconsin tests gasoline powered vehicles up to 14,000 pounds gross vehicle weight. If you see a commercial heavy truck that is emitting excessive smoke no matter whether is is gasoline powered or diesel powered, you can call the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and report the vehicles licence number, believe me, the fleet manager in charge of that vehicle or the vehicle owner will be made to have that vehicle tested.

Oh, you want ALL heavy trucks load tested just as light duty and passenger cars are? That is very do-able, but the necessary equipment costs orders of magnitude more than what they're testing with now, so be prepared for a huge increase in registration fees and an enormous increase in what it costs to ship real goods via the transportation system in this country. You think stuff is expensive now, you better hope you don't get what you're wishing for.

I'm a little lax on Wisconsin constitutional law, could you please point me to where the Wisconsin Constitution or even the United States Constitution makes ANY mention of motor vehicles?

ANY MENTION.

Hell, I'll even settle for the Constitution from Never-Never land which is apparently where you're from.

Model year 1996 and newer vehicles DO have the capability to test the catalytic convertor. Model year vehicles older than 1996, well since there are many factors involving catalytic convertor efficiency and how well they are able to clean what they ingest, you'd be wasting your time, not to mention that you'd need other equipment like a propane source and an accurate flow meter to do it with any degree of accuracy, plus, you'll spend more time dicking around waiting for the thing to warm up then you would waiting in line at your friendly neighborhood test facility.

Don't know about in your state, but in Ontario the DriveClean program is badly missunderstood by MOST repair and test centers.

The waiver is available if any single repair item over the threshold is "required" to make the vehicle pass. The part does NOT need to be installed, and in fact not ONE CENT in repairs needs to be spent if diagnosis shows definitively it is required. You do need to pay for the diagnostics. Anyone who requires you to spend the threshold amount to give you a waiver is the crook.

Selling the vehicle is not much of an option, as it cannot be registered without a full pass. No waivers for transfers. You have to give a vehicle away if it doesn't pass (basically sell for parts - or peanuts)

I've seen the same thing in Oregon, I'm sorry to say. The emissions staff know their job and are courteous to people. Some of the customers are something else entirely, however.

A year or so back there was a story in the major daily newspaper about some goofball with a 82 Datsun 210 that took his malfunctioning vehicle through the test site NINE TIMES trying to get it passed. Each time he took the car home and dicked with it, then came back and it failed again. Finally on the 9th try the car suddenly lurched off the Dyno and smashed into the wall. The guy admitted to the inspector that he had modified the carb linkage because of some problem and the vehicle had been "surging" slightly. The guy then proceeded to file a lawsuit against the state asking for some rediculous amount like $20,000. Meanwhile he was still driving around his car with the smashed front fender. The story didn't say if he ever collected any money.

I did write the dumb reporter (who wrote the story with a sympathetic slant to the car owner) and asked her to explain to me how it's the IM testers fault when I have successfully passed my own Datsun 210 through the testing program first try without any work done to it at all save my own.

The problem is that people all try testing their vehicles at lunchtime, or between 4 and 5 pm on the way home. I've had to wait 20 minutes or more for a test when doing this. But still, even 20 minutes once every 2 years? It's no big deal.

In Oregon the state tests, but calling it a tax is still B.S. If the state didn't test then the increased air pollution would increase the number of people sick with resprietory trouble, and as some of them are poor, they end up in the emergency room, driving up medical costs for all of us. So, either way your gonna pay.

Not only that but if you mandate statewide pollution testing, then your going to have to put test stations in every county. A lot of them being rural your going to end up with a lot of testers sitting on their hands all day long doing nothing. Thus you drive up the price of the program and end up with little to show for it.

In Oregon the state law says that ANY vehicle, passenger car or otherwise, that emits excessive visible smoke is illegal. They mean smoke coming out of the vehicle all the time, not just under initial accelleration. And there's a phone number too that is buried in the documentation from the test station that you can use to report such vehicles. I've reported a few of them myself. The DEQ people that take the reports tell me that they probably get about 1-2 smoke reports a month, so I'm sure that they act on them as well.

And it's unnecessary anyhow. As we all should know, mistuned, broken engines that emit a lot of pollution get worse gas mileage than properly running engines. Consider how many hundreds to thousands of dollars a month that poor fuel mileage will add to the typical truckers operating costs. Truckers keep an eagle eye on fuel costs and if something breaks and their engine starts consuming a lot of fuel, they get right on it and get it fixed, not like the typical passenger car owner who drives his vehicle into the ground.

Ted

Here, it only seems to be misunderstood by a person named Houdini. We made it a point that technician outreach was freely and easily available, we held free seminars at all of the Votech schools, and developed ongoing seminars that were/are held at the technical assistance centers, plus, hosting in service days for all Votech instructors, published a monthly newsletter that was mailed out to anyone who cared to subscribe plus it all being available via the internet.

Here, the dollar amount has to be spent and it has to be backed up by legitimate reciepts. Merely showing up with an estimate claiming that it's going to cost $XXX.xx leaves too much opportunity for fraud.

Agreed. Seems from my observations, the ones driving Jaguars and other exotic expensive vehicles that they can barely afford to own are the worst.

Odds are he collected.

One of my duties was to do damage investigations on vehicles where the owner claimed that the vehicle was damaged during the test. Our IM-240 program started in December, 1995. One fellow brought in a claim for a blown engine on a mid 80 GM FWD. I asked to see his estimates from the repair shop, the estimates were dated May of 1994. My partner turned to him and asked him about the date discrepancy, the mootorist just sat there and stammered, my partner then explained that cases of fraud were prosecuted to the full extent of the law, the motorist stood up, said "excuse me, I must have made a mistake" collected all of his paperwork and left the building. Tom and I laughed about that guy for months.

Agreed.

Back in 96, the numbers quoted were $500 per ton to remediate pollution at the vehicle tailpipe, $5000 per ton to remediate it at all other sources.

Sounds about the same as Wisconsin.

Not to mention that fleets are having alternate fuel rammed down their throats. Mr. Houdini should be happy he doesn't have to foot the bill for a CNG program on top of all the paperwork that has to be filed with the state and feds documenting compliance.

Strictly due to the fact that YOU don't know what you're asking about

Reading comprehension a little weak there Houdini?

Oh, I read it accurately. What you fail to realize is that to be listed, all you have to do is perform 3 emissions repairs in a one year period, fixing three cars on the first try is no monumental feat, and for all anyone knows, your brother in law shotguns every possible part he can in order insure that the vehicle will pass. Consumers would be better served if the criteria were linked to dollars spent per failure weighted by mileage and model year.

Bi-annual means that something is done TWICE a year. As for YOU having a hand in the frequency of the testing, which state senator or assemblyman are you again? Or, you could try another lie on me and see if I believe it.

I'm ignorant? Ha-ha, at least I know the difference between bi-annual and bi-ennial.

You're a dumb shit. No wonder you have problems.

And here the estimate needs to be from a certified repair or test and repair center. The intent of the law is to "grandfather" a vehicle that, for instance, requires a $2000 unobtanium catalytic converter or a $1500 unobtanium control valve to make the car pass, to be driven another 2 years by the current owner. It does NOT apply to "gross polluters" where massive ammounts of oil smoke are spewing from the exhaust, or where it is running so rich your eyes burn just looking at it. The vehicle needs to be "testable" - actually - I believe that requirement may have been removed - used to be the exhaust, tires, visible alignment, etc had to meet a particular standard - but because too many people were giving the testers too much grief when they refused to test a car, the rules were changed - a leaky exhaust won't pass anyway, nor will a gross poluter burning a quart of oil every 500 miles.