Just wanted to say.. The 2.8 passed the 2008 Ontario E-test.. Results are..
#1
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Windsor Ontario
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 1987 Firebird Formula
Engine: 2004 LQ4
Transmission: T-5 WC
Axle/Gears: 3.42
Just wanted to say.. The 2.8 passed the 2008 Ontario E-test.. Results are..
Hydrocarbon - Limit : 60 Result : 17 PASS
Carbon Monoxide - Limit : .33 Result : 0.0 PASS
NO ppm - Limit 675 Result : 450 PASS
RPM : 2815
IDLE 709 RPM
Hydrocarbon - Limit : 200 Result : 59
Carbon Monoxide - Limit : 1.00 Result : 0.08
So this shows, 211 000KM, leaky valve seals, a cracked manifold and a 2.8 running extremely rich can still be a clean driving vehicle.. Although, the cat has less than 10k, and the Flowmaster 80 series muffler has less than 100 km's on it..
Carbon Monoxide - Limit : .33 Result : 0.0 PASS
NO ppm - Limit 675 Result : 450 PASS
RPM : 2815
IDLE 709 RPM
Hydrocarbon - Limit : 200 Result : 59
Carbon Monoxide - Limit : 1.00 Result : 0.08
So this shows, 211 000KM, leaky valve seals, a cracked manifold and a 2.8 running extremely rich can still be a clean driving vehicle.. Although, the cat has less than 10k, and the Flowmaster 80 series muffler has less than 100 km's on it..
#2
Supreme Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Castaic, CA
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1988 Camaro RS
Engine: 2.8L of Raw POWER!!!
Transmission: Stick Shift
Axle/Gears: 3.42's
Re: Just wanted to say.. The 2.8 passed the 2008 Ontario E-test.. Results are..
Your limits at idle are way higher than we have here in CA.
Congrats on passing.
BTW, you're not actually running rich at all. Carbon monoxide is your rich indicator and with numbers like you have, I would actually say you're running a little on the lean side, not too bad, but just a smidge.
Congrats on passing.
BTW, you're not actually running rich at all. Carbon monoxide is your rich indicator and with numbers like you have, I would actually say you're running a little on the lean side, not too bad, but just a smidge.
#3
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Windsor Ontario
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 1987 Firebird Formula
Engine: 2004 LQ4
Transmission: T-5 WC
Axle/Gears: 3.42
Re: Just wanted to say.. The 2.8 passed the 2008 Ontario E-test.. Results are..
It looked to be running rich, after I redid the exhaust there was black runny marks everywhere.. Weird cars...
#4
Supreme Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Castaic, CA
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1988 Camaro RS
Engine: 2.8L of Raw POWER!!!
Transmission: Stick Shift
Axle/Gears: 3.42's
Re: Just wanted to say.. The 2.8 passed the 2008 Ontario E-test.. Results are..
The black is not uncommon, it's made up mostly of impurities in the fuel, not actually fuel. Some areas are worse than others depending on the fuel being used there.
We see it a lot in California with the fuel blends we use here. It has a lot to do with the detergents that "clean" the gunk off valves and other engine parts. The solvents get it off the valves, suspend it in the air charge and it gets shot out the exhaust, cools and settles in the exhaust pipe. Most of the time, it's in the low spots.
If you ever get the chance to crawl under a newer car, look for the drain holes that are specifically placed in the low spots to allow that stuff and water to get out before it solidifies.
We see it a lot in California with the fuel blends we use here. It has a lot to do with the detergents that "clean" the gunk off valves and other engine parts. The solvents get it off the valves, suspend it in the air charge and it gets shot out the exhaust, cools and settles in the exhaust pipe. Most of the time, it's in the low spots.
If you ever get the chance to crawl under a newer car, look for the drain holes that are specifically placed in the low spots to allow that stuff and water to get out before it solidifies.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post