Mud-club
Chat & Social => The Bar - General Chat => Topic started by: carbore on October 26, 2007, 20:24:31
-
Ok,
So on one hand we say that American cars are evil planet killing gas guzzlers,
But at the same time various UK cars fail to meet "Tough" US emission regs?
OK I know that there are more V8 monsters and that they use them more, but im talking about the Defender etc not being US compliant but a 10litre Dodge ram being clean as a whistle?
I genuinely don't understand this?
How does that work?
-
Isn't it because most US Pick-ups (& vans) are classified as 'Commercials', hence exempt (or under a different catchment??)
-
So is the chrysler PT Cruiser! :roll:
The Americans just register any vehicle that fails emission tests as a commercial vehicle.
Unless made outside the USA.
-
Not exactly accurate. "commercials" are still subject to emission controls, at least in California (the strictest state for emissions):
http://www.dmv.org/ca-california/smog-check.php
smog certification is required for all vehicles except the following:
Diesel powered vehicles
Electric vehicles
Hybrid vehicles
Motorcycles
Trailers
Natural gas powered vehicles more than 14,000 pounds
Qualifying vehicles made in 1975 or older
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vr/smogfaq.htm
smog inspections are required for all vehicles except diesel powered vehicles, electric, natural gas powered vehicles over 14,000 lbs, hybrids, motorcycles, trailers, or vehicles 1975 and older.
And they don't like diesels there (in CA). You cannot buy/own a diesel engined car in CA. At least you couldn't when i lived there. You can get diesel engined trucks, but only on vehicles over 8500lbs in weight.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3012/is_12_178/ai_53476149
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ca_diesel.php
They are pushing cleaner fuels like biodiesel and methanol though. The older cars (early 70's did pump out loads of crap, but they are getting cleaner every year. My '91 Jeep that i brought back with me from California passes smog here every year no problem.
BTW...
The term "smog" originated in England, meaning bad air quality created by a combination of smoke and fog.
-
Funny how the catalytic converter was introduced in Europe (during Germany's presidencym guess who makes all the big cars imported into the USA) with emissions standards set out on the US federal standard, ie their ambient temperature which we never actually see in the UK.
There is an awful lot of hypocresy involved in the emisions war.
-
Absolutely right there is - and cats is a topic I can have a real rant over! (thank you Johnson Mathey!! :evil: ).
Anyhoo. Emissions regs generally call for low nitrous outputs and stuff like that. The problem with yank motors generally is that the fuel consumption is horrific. Road car or truck, they're generally pretty poor. And thats the problem. CO2 is a function of the amount of fuel burnt and the thermal efficiency of the engine. Burn more fuel, get more CO2 - and there's the problem. Three-way cats increase fuel consumption too, which simply makes the problem worse.
Cheers
8)
Eeyore
-
Burn more fuel, get more CO2 - and there's the problem. Three-way cats increase fuel consumption too, which simply makes the problem worse.
Ahh! I'm not alone! I've been reckoning this since they were beginning to get introduced in the late 80's and early 90's in the UK. We had people at Lotus who were proving that engines fitted with cats produced more of certain emmisions that those without. Early cats could increase fuel consumption by something like 10% IIRC. No doubt they are better now, but they are still a serious restriction in the exhaust system.
The Ford lean burn programme at the end of the 80's had far more going for it than catalytic converters, but they were basically 'out voted'. Bit like Betamax and VHS!!!
-
Ford and Rover together.
It was no coincidence that the regulation allowing cars with engines below 2.0 litres to run on lean-burn strategies was canned whilt the Germans were in power.
Where is it they make BMW and Mercedes again......
The USA?
no
China?
Not in the 90's
Germany?
Bingo. not a conflict of interests at all then :?
-
Not overly the case. To get the best outta 3-way cats you need to run 'em on lean and rich cycles alternatively (both cycles harvest and release different compounds from the cat). The US demanded cats therefore Europe and Japan had to follow with mass-market cars simply 'cos the US was a big, big market. Clenliness of exhaust outputs became an marketing issue, too. Other countries picked up on the hysteria and bingo! Cats became mandatory or standard and lean-burn was eliminated because it would kill cats.
Personally, I would have rather had a Mondeo doing 70 to the gallon.
Nah, I blame the States, Europe was guilty of only following suit. :wink:
Cheers
8)
Eeyore
-
That's my point though, how many (read how few) cars with less than 2.0l engines get exported to the USA?
In comparison how many big engined luxury cars get exported, loads and loads. So it was in the German interest to follow the US federal emission test, even though it's completely irrelivant in the colder Europian climate!
It was an oportunity for BMW and Merc to stab the competition in the back.
Once again business driving politics. Nice :evil:
-
Nah, I blame the States, Europe was guilty of only following suit. :wink:
No change there then :(
-
Oh and IIRC it was brought about by the simple rule that is a car has a means to detect the fuel/air ratio then the engine must be tuned to run stoichiometric (try saying that after too much happy-juice).
Funny then how even cat-equiped cars run rich at idle and at more than 70% wide open throttle, which IIRC was the criticism of lean burn at the time.
-
It's getting 'em to run rich that's the secret to the modern Cat. I can't remember the chemical exchanges (not my field) but modern engine strategies have a real hard time keeping the rich/lean thing going without burning the cat out.
At leats with modern cars the heat-up time for the cat has been greatly reduced (which don't half help with that 'eggy' smell! :lol: ).
Cheers
8)
Eeyore