67 dart emissions

[inkjunkie]

I dumped a gallon or so of alcohol (believe it was grain but...) into a few gallons of gas on my one truck, some old geezer suggested it. Leaned it out enough to pass. Was told by one of the employees at the sniffer station that there equipment will pick certain additives up. I thought that the law had finally been settled about the collectors insurance? Last I looked it was on the States web site....Did some digging around, looks like if you have collectors insurance you are exempt?

http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/air/vei/motor.html

 

[805moparkid]

I dumped a gallon or so of alcohol (believe it was grain but...) into a few gallons of gas on my one truck, some old geezer suggested it. Leaned it out enough to pass. Was told by one of the employees at the sniffer station that there equipment will pick certain additives up. I thought that the law had finally been settled about the collectors insurance? Last I looked it was on the States web site....Did some digging around, looks like if you have collectors insurance you are exempt?

http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/air/vei/motor.html

yep...

 

[Purple Haze]

And if the EPA would get off there arse you would not have to worry about it.

Mopars Unlimited of Arizona Club News
UPDATED! Arizona Emissions Bill Signed Into Law

November, 2011 - Legislation to exempt all vehicles manufactured in the 1974 model year and earlier from the state’s mandatory biennial emissions inspection program was signed into law by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. Under previous law, only vehicles manufactured in 1966 and earlier and “collectibles” were exempt.
The governor’s signature acknowledges the relatively minimal environmental impact of older vehicles, such as the historic cars targeted for this exemption. These vehicles constitute a small portion of the vehicle fleet and are well-maintained and infrequently operated.
AZ Senate Bill 1324 or SB1324. Titled; Vehicle Emissions Testing; Older Vehicles passed into law and was signed by the Governor on 4-18-11.
AZ’s existing emission test exemption laws are for vehicles 15 years and older with “Collectable Vehicle” insurance and all vehicles 1966 or older.
Senator Antenori of Tucson proposed SB1324 on behalf of vehicles 25 years and older who cannot qualify for regular “Collectable Vehicle” insurance coverage for various reasons such as they simply only have a car-port and not a garage as required by CV policies. Other CV policy issues like restricted use and limited mileage also excludes some collectable vehicles that truly need exempting.
Major authenticity issues are also caused by the mechanical modifications and equipment upgrades needed to get some limited-use cars to pass the annual test. These modifications end up penalizing them in Car Club Judging which makes them less desirable and lowers their resale value to collectors.
SB1324 was initially strongly opposed by stakeholders such as the AzDEQ who use the air-quality improvements they claim from E-testing these older vehicles to balance AZ’s “State Implementation Plan” or SIP to the US-EPA. Also, E-test contractor Gordon-Darby objected to losing almost $2 million in annual income from testing these apx. 65,000 vehicles each year. Joining the opposition’s chorus were various environmental groups who want even more government regulation.
Over the course of the 2011 AZ Legislative Session, Senator Antenori and the AAHC’s Legislative Liaison Bill Gilmore both agreed to a compromise amendment that would allow all vehicles 1974 and older to become exempt from E-testing. This amended bill easily passed through both the AZ House and Senate with 2/3 majorities
Current status; Waiting for the US-EPA to sign-off on the AZDEQ’s adjusted State Implementation Plan. It may take as long as 2 years to be approved.

 

[RLF Cuda]

There has been much discussion about tuning for emissions, something that everyone faces in all states to some degree or another. Even in Colorado there was an emissions check before I got my 5 year classic license plate. Tuning to meet emissions standards is not hard, but it requires a sound engine to begin with. 360 heads on a 273 may lower compression enough to hurt combustion efficiency. Run a compression test and a leak down test to be sure the engine itself is sound. Make sure all cylinders are firing and that there is no bounce in the timing at idle or any RPM. This means plugs, points, wires, cap and rotor are all sound and working. Make sure there is no play in the distributor shaft and that the advance plate is clean and functiong (both vacuum and mechanical advance).And I stand by my point that more advance improves HC/CO emissions. The reduced timing in the late '60's and early '70's was done to reduce NOx emission as NOx goes up quickly as combustion temperature rises above 2200°F. Reducing timing to 0° or so reduced NOx. But in increased HC/CO. Improved combustion efficiency reduces these emissions which helps you meet tailpipe sniffing emissions tests. Plus increased ignition advance (to the point where knock is not heard though) increases fuel efficiency tremendously. I got my '67 383 4sp to pass '78 emissions standards in California, but it was a new tight build with 10.5:1 compression and a 284/484 Isky cam. I ran 10° initial advance and 37° total advance with a fairly steep advance curve all in at 2200 RPM. This engine would idle down to 400 rpm smoothly, a sign of good ignition and correct A/F ratio at idle.Hope this helps, and good luck.

 

[Lonewolf3165]

I can tell you from experience that if you take it to a shop they will set it up to pass take it through for you and when they come back set everything back where it was and not tell you anything. I found that with my old F250 the timing had to be set at factory specs and the carb leaned. If you take it to a shop take it somewhere were they will tell you how to set it up or you will be paying $100 every year. Where in AZ are you, may be able to help.

Maybe that's because it won't run the same way tuned for emissions as the way you had it tuned before & they didn't want to hear complaints about why it didn't run the same when you picked it up.

It's pretty simple. Find out what your initial timing was at, count the # of turns the mixture screws were set to, make the adjustments to pass & then afterwards just go back & readjust the timing & mixture to where it was if that's how you liked it. If it's more involved then that you will need a qualified technician to work on it.

 

[Lonewolf3165]

...And I stand by my point that more advance improves HC/CO emissions. The reduced timing in the late '60's and early '70's was done to reduce NOx emission as NOx goes up quickly as combustion temperature rises above 2200°F. Reducing timing to 0° or so reduced NOx. But in increased HC/CO. Improved combustion efficiency reduces these emissions which helps you meet tailpipe sniffing emissions tests. Plus increased ignition advance (to the point where knock is not heard though) increases fuel efficiency tremendously. I got my '67 383 4sp to pass '78 emissions standards in California, but it was a new tight build with 10.5:1 compression and a 284/484 Isky cam. I ran 10° initial advance and 37° total advance with a fairly steep advance curve all in at 2200 RPM. This engine would idle down to 400 rpm smoothly, a sign of good ignition and correct A/F ratio at idle.Hope this helps, and good luck.

I agree with most of what you say with the exception of the ignition timing.
Put it on an exhaust analyzer & watch what happens. I promise you adding advance to it will not improve the HC/CO if it is already set correctly. I've been doing Emissions testing & repair as a state ceritfied technician since 1984 & I can't begin to count the # of cars that came in too far advanced & failed for hi HC or CO, & yes NOx too, that as soon as I reduced the amount of advance in it they came into range. Even a lot of cars with the timing set to specs that probably had weak catalytic converters on them would fall into spec with less advance. I should state that in my comment I assumed the test is an idle speed test being performed & not a loaded test. But either way just throwing more advance at it isn't the answer regardless of the test. Ultimately it requires all aspects set right to run efficiently. A/F ratio, timing & mechanical condition. I agree the 360 heads may be too much for the 273. Again that's why I say take it to a shop & make the adjustments on a gas analyzer. $100 isn't much to solve a problem & know better where it stands.

 

[nitrojunkee]

There has been much discussion about tuning for emissions, something that everyone faces in all states to some degree or another. Even in Colorado there was an emissions check before I got my 5 year classic license plate. Tuning to meet emissions standards is not hard, but it requires a sound engine to begin with. 360 heads on a 273 may lower compression enough to hurt combustion efficiency. Run a compression test and a leak down test to be sure the engine itself is sound. Make sure all cylinders are firing and that there is no bounce in the timing at idle or any RPM. This means plugs, points, wires, cap and rotor are all sound and working. Make sure there is no play in the distributor shaft and that the advance plate is clean and functiong (both vacuum and mechanical advance).And I stand by my point that more advance improves HC/CO emissions. The reduced timing in the late '60's and early '70's was done to reduce NOx emission as NOx goes up quickly as combustion temperature rises above 2200°F. Reducing timing to 0° or so reduced NOx. But in increased HC/CO. Improved combustion efficiency reduces these emissions which helps you meet tailpipe sniffing emissions tests. Plus increased ignition advance (to the point where knock is not heard though) increases fuel efficiency tremendously. I got my '67 383 4sp to pass '78 emissions standards in California, but it was a new tight build with 10.5:1 compression and a 284/484 Isky cam. I ran 10° initial advance and 37° total advance with a fairly steep advance curve all in at 2200 RPM. This engine would idle down to 400 rpm smoothly, a sign of good ignition and correct A/F ratio at idle.Hope this helps, and good luck.

Yep. That was one of the annoying things I had to deal with my '05 Mustang. Pulling the headers and o/r h-pipe off every two years to get it to pass smog, then swapping it all back out again after. HUGE pain in the arse!

That's the nice thing about the '67 Dart. Didn't have to get emissions on it here in CO if I went with the Collector plates right off the bat. Had to pay for 5 years up front, but WELL worth it!