ADVICE NEEDED FOR NEW ENGINE

[Clone TIE Pilot]

An interesting discussion. I agree with the 'clean tailpipe' crowd. If the emissions are what they should be, no evap issues, what is wrong with eliminating all the junk, legal issues aside? I had my 1981 Malibu wagon with Chevy 229 V-6 and it would never pass emissions. I rebuilt the CCC Dual-jet carb to death- it never ran clean enough. Everything else was dead stock, evap, CAT, complete CCC system. It was doomed to fail. I replaced the 229 with a 1976 Pontiac 350 w/2GC carb that I reworked to run lean and clean. 1976 HEI ignition, stock CAT, stock charcoal canister, EGR, and it passed the tailpipe sniffer like a champ. At the time, that was all that was required to pass. No one ever looked under the hood. Technically illegal, but realistically better than the stock arrangement. Years later, I was using a Pontiac 400, but emissions had tightened up. I just put a CAT on each of the dual exhausts and that passed too.

I'm not saying that everyone has the skills to accomplish that, but if they did, why not? Let's say you replaced a worn out 40 year old engine with a fairly new engine complete with OBD2 and all the hardware that it needed. It would run 100% cleaner than the 40 year old junker, yet you are illegal. Nothing would be there that came with the car.

California has the right idea. Let's say you have a really old car, 1930's to 1950's way back before any emissions. If you place a modern engine in the car, it must conform to the emissions regs of the engine's year of manufacture. So a 1979 350 would need to pass 1979 emissions regs. Makes sense, right? They are fine with you upgrading the emissions, but not with using an older engine with NO emissions hardware.

I also agree with states like mine [NY] that exempt cars 25 years or older. Anyone still running a 25 year old car is not negligent about tune-ups or emissions. There are so few of them that are seldom even driven, what is the harm? Instead, I think the fleets of commuter cars that slog back and forth every day should all be zero emissions vehicles. Eventually there would be no pollution from vehicles at all.

Just to be clear, its 100% legal to install a more modern engine into an older car as long as you install all of the newer engine's emissions gear. Basically the car must now meet the emissions standards of the newer motor year instead of the vehicle year. Problem sometimes is that newer emission systems are not always backwards compatible with older cars creating challenges. That and you can't swap truck engines into cars or vise versa because they are different tiers. Moreover, its illegal to install a motor configuration that is older than the vehicle. You can use an older block but the completed motor configuration must meet same year or newer than the vehicle year.

The CCC carb runs much closer to stoichiometric than any pure mechanical carb can. Only thing that is closer is EFI. Its also the only variable mixture carb as its lean during idle and cruise and richer for high throttle/ passing power. Occasionally carburetors of all makes may have a hard to diagnose manufacturering defect. Both Lars and Cliff commented they have a few times found problem Qjets with passageways that were not completely drilled or blocked by broken factory drill bits. Obviously a car with such a carb would be a lemon and most mechanics would miss it.

Most of the time I found CCC problems are usually caused by underlying engine problems and not by the computer system itself. The only real downside to CCC is that it and EFI are less tolerant of underlying engine problems than mechanical carbs. Vacuum leaks, exhaust leaks, and oil burning will send any computer into a tizzy. Anymore most stock replacement fuel pumps put out much higher PSI than the originals, overpowering the fuel floats making it necessary to retrofit a fuel pressure regulator.

The ECM can only do so much, it can't completely compensate an underlying engine issue or series of issues. It took me awhile to get my CCC straightened out which ended up being engine issues. A warped intake manifold causing a nasty vacuum leak, exhaust leak causing a false lean reading to the O2 sensor, bad valve stem seals causing a false rich reading, and the replacement fuel pump putting out too much PSI causing rich issues. Its a wonder the engine even ran lol.

 

[Bonnewagon]

Just to be clear, its 100% legal to install a more modern engine into an older car as long as you install all of the newer engine's emissions gear

There was a guy that lived across the street from my Daughter. He was an NYPD mechanic. He had a 1967 Camaro under a tarp that caught my attention immediately. As I spoke to him he revealed that he was putting an LS engine in the car. What was confounding him was the amount of stuff that had to be retro-fitted for the LS. He thought he could just remove all the emissions and computer stuff, and convert to old school. Nope. The electronic transmission was especially problematic. I don't know if there is a kit to convert to a non-electronic T-400 or something, but he was bitching about the cost and complexity of everything. I offered to help him find an old school Chevy engine/trans but he knew nothing about carburetors or distributors. That just isn't part of today's mechanics skill set.

 

[pagrunt]

The more I read this thread it reminds me back to the ancient times of the '80's & the articles on emissions & engine swaps in the former form ot Hot Rod Magazine. They did dig into what was what with swaps in the federal eye & state level. The thing back then was in some states emissions was set by the year of the chassis, others actully used the year of the engine. A very few didn't push the issue. Some almost made it a really fine line issue back then. Of course there was California which only controlled emissions within their boarders back then. Even the feds weren't looking under the hoods on the average guy. The possiblities of tighter laws & regulations were brought up along with laws that did & didn't get passed down the road after the issues were published. The writers did bring along ideas to help with keeping the air clean while still being a hot rodder, built street/strip cars with dual cats to show one can still have power, went to the aftermarket to see what they were working on along with what was going on with getting CARB numbers on as much go fast parts as possible. Hot Rod also pushed projects through emission testing to see if things worked or not. Of course back then there were more cars that were preferred for hot rodding than now that were daily drivers than today so we don't have write ups on how to slap a Pontiac 400 into a '84 Grand Prix & see what power that can be squeezed out of it while still able to make the emissions meet or beat the needed results. Then again today most testing can be done by pluging in a computer to see what the cars has to say which our cars in their original forms could never do. We are a minority that have a way smaller foot print in the emission world which if we all moth balled our cars there still wouldn't affect things. To be honest I have only come across one time a state pushed emission laws on someone & it was that one guy from NJ who deleted his diesel truck (think it was a Ram), tried to sell it but NJ didn't allow it as if I remembered it caught in thier radar as it was on the web showing off the delete before he wanted to sell it. In the end he had the truck crushed cause of the pressure from NJ who wanted it crushed anyways. There are states that won't push it that far but would just fail the car for inspection for those who have to have one. In the end, most of use will take the gamble doing engine swaps & modifications as we see fit to our vision of the project. I say do your research how your state laws are worded & the limits on how they enforce them as these are not laws an average person will know.

 

[86LK]

Just to be clear, its 100% legal to install a more modern engine into an older car as long as you install all of the newer engine's emissions gear. Basically the car must now meet the emissions standards of the newer motor year instead of the vehicle year. Problem sometimes is that newer emission systems are not always backwards compatible with older cars creating challenges. That and you can't swap truck engines into cars or vise versa because they are different tiers. Moreover, its illegal to install a motor configuration that is older than the vehicle. You can use an older block but the completed motor configuration must meet same year or newer than the vehicle year.

The CCC carb runs much closer to stoichiometric than any pure mechanical carb can. Only thing that is closer is EFI. Its also the only variable mixture carb as its lean during idle and cruise and richer for high throttle/ passing power. Occasionally carburetors of all makes may have a hard to diagnose manufacturering defect. Both Lars and Cliff commented they have a few times found problem Qjets with passageways that were not completely drilled or blocked by broken factory drill bits. Obviously a car with such a carb would be a lemon and most mechanics would miss it.

Most of the time I found CCC problems are usually caused by underlying engine problems and not by the computer system itself. The only real downside to CCC is that it and EFI are less tolerant of underlying engine problems than mechanical carbs. Vacuum leaks, exhaust leaks, and oil burning will send any computer into a tizzy. Anymore most stock replacement fuel pumps put out much higher PSI than the originals, overpowering the fuel floats making it necessary to retrofit a fuel pressure regulator.

The ECM can only do so much, it can't completely compensate an underlying engine issue or series of issues. It took me awhile to get my CCC straightened out which ended up being engine issues. A warped intake manifold causing a nasty vacuum leak, exhaust leak causing a false lean reading to the O2 sensor, bad valve stem seals causing a false rich reading, and the replacement fuel pump putting out too much PSI causing rich issues. Its a wonder the engine even ran lol.

usually the only difference is the intake manifold. it usually being taller to increase the runner length to generate more torque (at least on modern motors). I doubt the older truck engines had different camshafts in them but you never know

 

[Clone TIE Pilot]

usually the only difference is the intake manifold. it usually being taller to increase the runner length to generate more torque (at least on modern motors). I doubt the older truck engines had different camshafts in them but you never know

Truck engines commonly have cams ground for more torque besides intakes with longer runners. Big thing is truck engines often had more lax emissions gear compared to cars. Basically trucks have less strict regulations so they can burn dirter than a car of the same year. Its partly why most manufacturers mainly make truck based vehicles in the US anymore, the emissions are easier along with more lax MPG requirements.

80s GM trucks don't have CCC, not even in the US while GM cars did. The trucks had a weird dual stage accerator pump instead of a M/C solenoid and TPS found in cars. They probably don't want people converting their cars from a stricter car emissions setup to a more lax truck emissions setup.

 

[doood]

I'm considering something like this for my cutlass.... (oldmobile version). ECU to control timing, maintain AFR, lock up converter.

 

[86LK]

Truck engines commonly have cams ground for more torque besides intakes with longer runners. Big thing is truck engines often had more lax emissions gear compared to cars. Basically trucks have less strict regulations so they can burn dirter than a car of the same year. Its partly why most manufacturers mainly make truck based vehicles in the US anymore, the emissions are easier along with more lax MPG requirements.

80s GM trucks don't have CCC, not even in the US while GM cars did. The trucks had a weird dual stage accerator pump instead of a M/C solenoid and TPS found in cars. They probably don't want people converting their cars from a stricter car emissions setup to a more lax truck emissions setup.

which makes it confusing because the v8 engines had a CCC carb while the v6 engines had TBI

Site Maintenance

p13-14
p56 has a reference to ElCamino models (in the truck pdf)
p60 engines, engine specs starting on p64
p80 LG4 305ci specs
p83 ..... the compression ratios are different in at least 1 case

Site Maintenance

Site Maintenance

 

[SS_Malibu]

Those are some neck snapping numbers right there

 

[Clone TIE Pilot]

which makes it confusing because the v8 engines had a CCC carb while the v6 engines had TBI

Site Maintenance

p13-14
p56 has a reference to ElCamino models (in the truck pdf)
p60 engines, engine specs starting on p64
p80 LG4 305ci specs
p83 ..... the compression ratios are different in at least 1 case

View attachment 254245

Site Maintenance

Site Maintenance

I kind of suspect that the V6 engines may burn dirter than the V8s. When I swapped the Buick V6 out for the Chevy 305, I noticed the V6 used a much longer cat converter than the V8. This suggests the V6 needed more converter to clean its exhaust than the V8. However, it could also be the carbs as 2 bbls are a compromise design. The Dualjet barrels are larger than the primaries of a Qjet. Its been said that Qjets are actually more gas efficient than a Dualjet if you keep the secondaries closed. This is due to the primaries being smaller and more efficient for low speed operation. Dual jets sacrifice a little low end to improve their top end a little with its 2 bores.

 

[scoti]

In related news......

"Leno's Law:" New Bill Would Exempt California Classics from Smog Checks - Hagerty Media

Backed by Jay Leno, Senate Bill 712 would "fully exempt" any vehicle made at least 35 years ago, if it were insured as a collector vehicle.

www.hagerty.com