Yeah at some point, i intend to invest in a emissions analyser, and learn to
tune the car myself.... one day....
cheers
Joe
___________________________
Dr. Joseph Garner
University of California
Department of Animal Science
One Shields Avenue
Davis
CA 95616
USA
Phone: (530) 754 5291
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Wood [mailto:djw69@idt.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 6:36 PM
> To: MGB
> Subject: Re: wierdest starting problem solved, and carb hearsay
>
>
> Joe,
>
> Sounds like a good decision to me. My 72 doesn't have to go through
> emissions testing anymore. Last time in 92, but the 74's or
> 75's on will
> always have to pass the tests every other year in the
> Portland, Oregon area.
> On the newer cars they don't open the hood, but run the test on a
> dynamometer (sp?) in a rolling road type test. Wish we could
> tune our cars
> on their dyno. For the privilege of being tested we get to
> pay $21 plus
> whatever the renewal fee is for the plates you are running,
> additional $40
> for 2 year renewal unless you want their latest and greatest
> new plates. I
> vividly remember giving my B a thorough tune every other year
> before the
> tests and sometimes it took several tries to pass. Now my
> car is desmogged
> and runs better than ever. Sorry you can't do the same.
>
> P.S. Who's Nina? I only get dogs and stray teenagers
> looking for a place
> to crash following me home.
>
> Dave 72 B a bit North or you.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Garner, Joseph P. <JPGarner@UCDavis.Edu>
> To: MG list (E-mail) <mgs@autox.team.net>
> Date: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:53 PM
> Subject: wierdest starting problem solved, and carb hearsay
>
>
> >Hi everyone,
> >
> >Thank you to everyone who offered advice over the weekend,
> and especially
> >Nina who offered to follow me all the way home!
> >
> >In the end i left the car with my new firend branden the
> mechanic. One new
> >EI, rotor, cap, and coil later and the problem appears to be solved.
> >Certainly the car is running a lot smoother, and possibly even with a
> little
> >more power. $400 as well, all told, though... bugger. I
> guess this means
> >that i have to put off having the carb seen to till next
> month though...
> >double bugger.
> >
> >* change subject
> >
> >I have heard said that a weber carb improves reliability,
> serviceability,
> >and fuel economy. Bear in mind though that in california, you fail
> emissions
> >for non-stock components OR tuning. this means having to pull out the
> weber,
> >replace the entire stock carb, and emissions gear, and have
> it tuned to
> pass
> >smog once every two years, then, replace the weber re-tune
> the engine and
> >spend the intervening period running with an engine that is
> technically
> >ILLEGAL. It all sounds like way too much of a ball-ache. My
> plan is to
> stick
> >with my stock carb, have it professionally overhauled (a job
> beyond my
> >capabilities), have the engine tuned towards fuel-efficiency
> rather than
> >power (i.e. running lean). I'll save the $1000 plus that i
> could spend on a
> >weber, and keep my eye open for an overdrive. I guess this policy is
> >inspired because i do 90% of my driving on the freeway. If i
> spent lots of
> >time in stop-and-go traffic and cold starting, then maybe i
> would have a
> >different plan.
> >
> >cheers
> >
> >Joe.
> >
> >_________________
> >
> >Dr. Joseph Garner
> >Department of Animal Science,
> >University of California,
> >One Shields Avenue,
> >Davis,
> >CA 95616
> >USA
> >
> >tel: + 530 754 5291
> >fax: + 530 752 0175
> >_________________
> >
> >
> >
>
|