CARB-legal LS Swap - It can be done!

[motorheadmike]

Here is how I see it when it comes to swapping engines: If you approach this like a lazy ****tard you are going to be treated accordingly. Durr durr I want an LS and it is better and cleaner because newer - isn't a sound arguement.

However, if you had a full written proposal with part numbers, calibration information, and data to back it up you could create a water tight case that a late-model engine from a truck or car is a suitable replacement for the OEM power plant. But, this takes a lot of effort - and quiet frankly the general public is to busy filling their faces with burgers to put forth such energy, and just sit around an complain.

Does anyone realize that there are only about 10 factory cams used in all non-DoD or VVT Gen III/IV LS -based engines?

Consequently there are cars and trucks that share the same cam between 5.3 (L33), 5.7 (LS1), and 6.0Ls (LQ4 or LQ9). The LS6 in the '01 Z06 and LS2 in the TBSS have the same valve events. They all pollute the same.

On a separate note: Doesn't a plastic late-model Caprice gas tank fit under a G-body? If it does... there are all your emissions controls.

 

[jiho]

I'm afraid I have bad news. In California those donkeys might need an elaborate rig to collect methane from their farts. This could impose an exhaust restriction, impairing performance and reducing fuel economy.

 

[CaliWagon83]

According to the Chevrolet Performance PDF on the E-Rod, it includes a charcoal canister:
http://www.chevrolet.com/content/da...gine-control-system-40-tooth-and-17-tooth.pdf

For the Canadians, it's in Francais, too! 😀

 

[jiho]

if you had a full written proposal with part numbers, calibration information, and data to back it up you could create a water tight case

They do not care. They do not evaluate any "case." All they care about is a "certified configuration." This means documents submitted to them by a manufacturer, stating that testing has been done on a specific setup in a specific year-model vehicle. Only manufacturers can do this, members of the public cannot.

An aftermarket manufacturer can get an "exemption" number for a "configuration modification," you cannot.

An engine is an "emissions part," and a swap is a "configuration modification." This is how GM got "exemption" numbers for E-rods. Otherwise, an engine swap from another year-model "configuration" is "exempt" if a referee puts a sticker for it on your car. The rules for this are whatever the rules are. You cannot make a "case" about it.

That much I do know for sure, from reading the rules, and talking to BAR and a referee supervisor.

It would take a lawsuit, and the lawsuit would likely fail.

 

[Clone TIE Pilot]

It was offered as OE in the ZL1 and CTS-V, so I think it’s smog-legal. In fact, I think the cam profile is relatively conservative. From what I’ve read, forced-induction engines like high-lift, low/no-overlap wide LSA cams, which usually give a pretty smooth idle.

Sorry, I got that confused with the ASA crate engine and ASA cam, which are a N/A setup. GM really likes to use similar titles.

 

[Clone TIE Pilot]

It was offered as OE in the ZL1 and CTS-V, so I think it’s smog-legal. In fact, I think the cam profile is relatively conservative. From what I’ve read, forced-induction engines like high-lift, low/no-overlap wide LSA cams, which usually give a pretty smooth idle.

Sorry, I got that confused with the ASA crate engine and ASA cam, which are a N/A setup.

 

[motorheadmike]

According to the Chevrolet Performance PDF on the E-Rod, it includes a charcoal canister:
http://www.chevrolet.com/content/da...gine-control-system-40-tooth-and-17-tooth.pdf

For the Canadians, it's in Francais, too! 😀

Oui.

They do not care. They do not evaluate any "case." All they care about is a "certified configuration." This means documents submitted to them by a manufacturer, stating that testing has been done on a specific setup in a specific model-year vehicle. Only manufacturers can do this, members of the public cannot.

An aftermarket manufacturer can get an "exemption" number for a "configuration modification," you cannot.

An engine is considered an "emissions part." This is how GM got "exemption" numbers for E-rods. Otherwise, an engine swap from another model-year "configuration" is "exempt" if a referee puts a sticker for it on your car. The rules for this are whatever the rules are. You cannot make a "case" about it.

That much I do know for sure, from reading the rules, and talking to BAR and a referee supervisor.

It would take a lawsuit, and the lawsuit would likely fail.

Well if that is the case than I suppose ya'll better move, eh? There are probably 49 States which suck less on this subject.

 

[CaliWagon83]

Believe me, I've thought about it. Technically, a lot more states have basically adopted the CA smog rules for new cars, but I don't know if that extends to older/vintage vehicles.

 

[motorheadmike]

Believe me, I've thought about it. Technically, a lot more states have basically adopted the CA smog rules for new cars, but I don't know if that extends to older/vintage vehicles.

Register them out of State. Live in a PO box. 😉

 

[jiho]

Technically, a lot more states have basically adopted the CA smog rules for new cars, but I don't know if that extends to older/vintage vehicles.

Check this one out. In Utah (of all places), starting just this year, in certain counties including the Salt Lake City area, a new rule just went into effect. Anything from 1968 through 2012 (!!!) now must have smogcheck every year, forever. Not just every other year, but every year.