skishop69

I was incorrect. That changed a few (several) years ago when the EPA left that decision to the states. Luckily, we still have the exemption.

That's strange that Oregon would 'do away with the 20 year exemption'. I say this, because that part of the law is written by the Federal branch of the EPA. As I understand it, the states can't write or change a law that undermines or supercedes Federal law. I agree though to utilize the loophole. The statistics used to be that cars 15-20 years old had a 45% failure rate. Some was general wear and some was lack of maintenance. Some vehicles just won't pass, some will. I've got a '76 SB Chev 400 that's putting out just under 400hp and 500 ft/lbs of torque at 2600 rpm. It passes emissions for '96. Better programs, better training.... Wait for it!

"yes i know i have the lift and pugs, but no money for tires " Good thing you pointed it out, I was gonna say you forgot to 'supersize' something there. Looks identical to my Brat, but my topper is black. I found a hi top I'm going after this week.

I see what you mean GD. Talk about a thread taking a bad turn.

You are correct, I meant to say 'not completely inert'. There is still unburned O2 in the exhaust stream though. And, you are right about the runability being at idle, although it does exist a short period off-idle. As to the stated reasons for removing it... Say no more...

Ok, since SOME people are getting a little cranky about this..... I am an EPA and WA state certified Master Emissions Technician. I did not get this by going through a 'Crackerjack' class. The exhaust gas introduced to the combustion chamber contains unburned fuel and O2. If it were inert, it wouldn't cause a runability problem when it sticks open. If you ever have the chance, watch your fuel trim data and induce an EGR leak. You will see the fuel trim climb as it tries to add fuel to get back to 14.7/1. As stated before... "(though you do get detonation from excessive cyl temps, but not enough to notice unless your mechanical or tuning is WAY out of whack)." On OBD2 vehicles, the ECM gives more spark advance to obtain better mileage and HP when the EGR is open. On carbbed systems, this is NOT the case. Again.... "The effect on mileage is NEGLIGABLE at best. To even see it, you would need to spend WAY too much time (and money) on the dyno." As well, the 'actual' increase in engine life on older and some newer vehicles is negligable. IT WILL NOT AFFECT YOUR ENGINE LIFE OR MILEAGE. My suggestion is to stop believing everything your community college professor tells you, get rid of the second rate text books, get some real world experience and take the EPA mandated classes. Then go spend some time on a dyno actually testing things out. If you're going to get cocky, you better have more than a book to back it. Don't believe everything you read.

If your EGR went bad causing detonation, it stuck open or was leaking. The detonation was caused by the lean condition from sucking unmetered 'air' through the EGR (though you do get detonation from excessive cyl temps, but not enough to notice unless your mechanical or tuning is WAY out of whack). You solved that (temporarily) by richening the mixture. The EGR is there to reduce combustion temps thereby reducing NoX (oxides of nitrogen). NoX is far more dangerous to the environment than the Co or Hc's released by combustion. ALL the EGR is there for is NoX reduction. The effect on mileage is NEGLIGABLE at best. To even see it, you would need to spend WAY too much time (and money) on the dyno. Because it is designed for use under specific conditions dictated by RPM, load and engine temp, the camshaft(s) and timing really have nothing to do with it. UNLESS... You are dealing with OBD2 systems controlling timing (not to mention every other bloody component on the engine) and variable degree camshafts, then the system (all mechanical and electronic components) was designed to work in harmony. Up until the gov't mandate for OBD1 in the mid 80's (and even then), the EGR was a bolt on patch to help reduce NoX though not near as efficient as now. In your case, pull it off and pitch it in the round file. zzz You're NOT going to hurt ANYTHING. EXCEPT... your emissions and the environment. (No I'm not a tree hugger. I own my share of high performance/high polluting vehicles.) Back to my repast...

I did a search and didn't find my answer, so... Anyone here know of any company still making toppers for the Brat? Another question... '82 would have been a Gen 2 Brat, correct? Thanks

Can you post the actual readings? Did it fail idle or cruise? It's important to know what's been done, how hot was the vehicle when you went down, did you wait in line long, blah, blah, blah. Shoot th info over if you can.

Bump... GD did you get my mail?

The TDO3 is smaller than the TD04, ( so there won't be an injector prob) but there are two AR versions of the 03. One at .47 and the other at .63. I talked with a couple of turbo shops and ran some numbers and the .63 TD03 will supply enough flow (which is the one I have).

I would be very comfortable with that. Anyone else can throw their hat in in case there's scheduling issues. I'll IM ya.

That will be forged pistons (N/A), moly rings, stainless valves, ported heads, balanced, custom intake, 3" downpipe, intercooler, walbro pump, MSD pump controller, boost controller, Z injectors and 7 - 10psi boost with the larger TD03 and delta cams. We're also thinking about running a Jacobs Ign sys and changing to DIS. The real power producing area is the intake and how you port the heads. If it can't breath, it can't run. I always tell my customers to spend the money on the intake and heads it will always pay you back.

I know this should be in the off topic area, but I trust the guys here. My Ex lives in Portland and has a 99 Yukon that needs a water pump. The job takes two hours (maybe more if you haven't done one). I need a recommendation for a good mechanic who is inexpensive or one of you chaps who is a mechanic. I need someone who will stand by their work with no BS. There's not a whole lot of cash flow right now for her and I can't get down to do it (I'm a GM tech). Cash will be paid for the job and she will have the pump. Will have to be a weekend job. Thanks guys!!!

That's what I figured......

Funny, my XT6 turbo project is in the same boat. Motors out, turbo's apart.... No forward motion. Illegal play. 15 yard penalty. We did do a computer dyno of what the motor should put out when complete and it came in just under 250hp. God I hope the case holds up.:-\

Just looking for some input. I usually use Fel Pro or McChord gaskets for just about everything. My '84 turbo coupe is going to need them when I finish the fuel pump and since we all know how prone they are to leak.... Reccomendations? I would think in stock form (the engine), copper gaskets would be overkill. I need to get this one done before I tear into the Brat for the 2.7 retro.

BEWARE aftermarket fans that use 'zip strips' through the radiator. The one thing I can tell you from years of off roading is that they WILL tear your rad up! It takes a while and will almost always occurr at the most inoppertune time. The fan is great, but get a kit or build one to solid mount it. All the bouncing around off road causes the fan to bounce independently from the rad, and the little strips eventually tear the core up. I removed the mechanical fans on ALL of m previous wheeling rigs and went electric. Great for HP boosts and you can turn them off so as not to throw water around the engine compartment.

Well, I finally had time yesterday to pull the motor and wiring harness out of my donor 88 XT6. BTW, who's the brainiac that thoght it was a good idea to put the ECM in the trunk?! I think it took more time to pull the harness in one piece than it did to yank the motor! No the hard part of coming up with the $1600 to rebuild it properly and dump it in my Brat. Damn RAM is proud of those forged pistons and stainless valves. I honestly figure it's gonna take about a year to get it built (with turbo), installed with the lift and 5spd d/r. But hey, what project ever goes quickly and smoothly?

I'm sorry, that was supposed to be RX! We're going out tonight and will mourn it's loss accordingly

I was out at the wrecking yard this AM picking up a motor for a Jeep and what did I see going to the crusher.... A white RS! It was in reapiaable shape. No rust or major damage. Too late to stop it's final drive though.

I'll have to look into that. I remember that back in the 80's, only California CATs had to be NoX reducing. Since most of the cars I smog are OBD II, I think some of my old school info may be foggy.

NoX emissions are caused by one thing only... Excessive combustion temps. This however may be caused by several things. The three biggest offenders are... Too much timing advance, causes excessive cylinder pressure which in turn creates too much heat during combustion. Poor cooling system. Pretty much self explanatory. High compression combined with too little timing retard at mid to high revs. Same explanation as too much timing. On vehicles prior to OBD II (up to '95) the CAT has nothing to do with NoX. There are a few exceptions to the rule though. Subaru is NOT one of them. There are other causes, bt heat and timing are the most common. Replacing your CAT will not affect your NoX reading. Start with the basics.

Depending on the Ford application, there is either one ONLY in the tank OR... There is one in the tank for priming the system (drawing from the tank) and one in line on the frame rail to actually provide the pressure to run the system. On the two pump systems, the one in the tank is completely useless by itself as it is a high volume low pressure pump strictly for 'moving' fuel.

Some peoples' kids...