Well, I might as well start a new thread on this since it will go on for a bit.

I spent some time on the phone with a gentleman in the Smog Operations section of BAR. We drilled down on the transmission
issue until we were both blue.

Goal #1 was to understand what was required to put a SBC V8 on a Fiero compatable automatic transmission. By compatable,
I mean a transverse transaxle that will bolt to the cradle and generally a THM125C, 440-4, 4T60, 4T60E, 4T80E.

Goal #2 was to understand what was required to put a SBC V8 on a Fiero compatable manual transmission. By compatable,
I mean a transverse transaxle that will bolt to the cradle and generally a Muncie 4spd, Isuzu 5sp or Getrag/NV 5 spd.

The answer is: The trans does matter and the trans is considered part of the swap and it has to have identical functionality.

The key phrase is "identical functionality of the transmission". Herein lies the problem. What does that mean? In the worst sense
it means that the only transmission that has the same functionality is *that transmission.* A 4L60E is only identical to a 4L60E
and not a 4T60E. In fact, only a 4L60E with the exact gear ratios would match. Ok, that makes our case bad.

So, we discussed this: For a manual there are typically two items, the VSS and possibly CAGS. Fiero's didn't have CAGS
but CAGS was used on the V8's, but for economy, not emissions. For an automatic, there is the VSS, shift control solenoids,
shift quality (pressure) and TCC. Depending on the year, the ECM can check for TCC slip (so the gear ratios matter) but when
it throws an error code, it doesn't turn on the SES because the error is drivability and not emissions.

Their view: If the ECM has a wire to something on the trans, that thing better be there. Also, you can't drill a hole in the trans
and add it (his words). We realized we were both really looking for the same thing and that was the trans sends the correct signals
and takes the correct commands from the ECM (where there is ECM control of that function). Shift control, shift quality (pressure) and TCC.

The gentleman conceded that certain Fiero compatable transmissions (but not necessarily a Fiero transmision) *might* have that
required functionality and is willing to openly review a couple of proposals. The gear ratios might be questionable but that open for
now. For a manual, the shift light would be wrong but from an emissions standpoint, it might not matter enough to disallow. For
an automatic, they are well aware the the ECM can control the shift points and that is emssions related. That might cause a problems.

One problem in all of this is the fact that there is a lot detailed list of requirements for the engine, but not for the trans. They
depend on the ECM wiring to make the trans call but they still know that just because the the trans has the same sensors
and controls, that doesn't mean it has the same functionality. The other problem is that they can't be experts on every single
engine/trans combo put out by every company since the dawn of time. In some ways they depend on the expertise of the swapper
to give them enough detail to apply the rules. When you don't they are left with only one choice and that is to reject it. Logic
doesn't matter, technical details do.

That leaves me here: I was asked to write up a couple of specific swap combos and submit them in writing. To set a baseline
that will allow for extending the answers to other swaps I selected:

#1 89 5.7V TPI Manual Transmission + Fiero Getrag - Issues: Both have VSS sensors, but TPI uses CAGS.

#2 91 5.7L TPI Automatic Transmission + 4T60E - Issues: Both have VSS, shift control and TCC. Gear ratios are different.
TCC Slip error will be produced by the ECM. But what the hey. Let's see if they catch this. The SES won't come on since it's not emissions related.

#3 87 5.0L TBI Manual Transmission + Getrag - Issues: VSS only on both. Should fly. If approved it should be extendable to earlier carb engines.

#4 87 TBI 5.0L Automatic Transmission + 4T60/440-4 Four Spd Auto. - Issues: Both have VSS, both use 3rd/4th gear switch and
TCC. No shift control.

OBDII? Later.....Big can of worms.

I'll keep you posted. This will take a week or so to walk through with them.

A final note: He didn't tell me to get lost and said they would walk through the examples to see if they meet the needs of the law.
He *is* tired of being beaten up by people that say they are not giving consistent answers. I explained that I was only trying to
drill down beyond the catch phrases to understand what is needed since the details on the trans are sparse at best. I wanted to
know what "identical functionality" meant and after I pressed him, he realized that it didn't give me any specific details and allowed
them a huge loophole. At that point he said to give him some examples and they would review them, apply the laws and see
what the fallout would be. As usually, they were once again reasonable.

If they bless this, then I will hit them with the exhaust requirements.

Finally, for those of you right now feeling compelled to type "smog nazi" responses, please don't and keep this thread for the
purpose of the recertification. If you can't control yourself, go ahead and do it but please give me enough negatives so
I'm banned and I will move on. I'm not going through this torture for my health.

[This message has been edited by TK (edited 01-27-2004).]

When I got my LT-1 with OBD-II and fiero manual tranny certified in 2001, I had no problems with the Referee Station. I kept all of the OBD-II components, and I had to use stock exhaust manifolds (which I did) or an aftermarket manifold with a CARB#. The engine was originally from an automatic Camaro, but I took all of the wires for the trans controls out from the connectors that plug directly into the PCM, pin by pin. I also spliced the VSS signal wire from the fiero to the LT-1 VSS input sice they both used the same type of signal. The car passed visual and smog inspection. If you are going to use an engine from an auto donor and you want to use it with a manual fiero, just don't tell the referee that the donor engine is from an automatic. Better yet, don't tell them anything unless they ask you a specific question. Good luck!

quote Originally posted by cyrus88: When I got my LT-1 with OBD-II and fiero manual tranny certified in 2001, I had no problems with the Referee Station. I kept all of the OBD-II components, and I had to use stock exhaust manifolds (which I did) or an aftermarket manifold with a CARB#. The engine was originally from an automatic Camaro, but I took all of the wires for the trans controls out from the connectors that plug directly into the PCM, pin by pin. I also spliced the VSS signal wire from the fiero to the LT-1 VSS input sice they both used the same type of signal. The car passed visual and smog inspection. If you are going to use an engine from an auto donor and you want to use it with a manual fiero, just don't tell the referee that the donor engine is from an automatic. Better yet, don't tell them anything unless they ask you a specific question. Good luck!

This is a good example. Yours got through and I believe the ref used the basic interpretation of the "functionality rule". I believe this is what they should.

quote Originally posted by TK: If they bless this, then I will hit them with the exhaust requirements.

TK, first off, great work getting the ball rolling on this in a matter in which I think that could very well prove out to be very beneficial to those that are looking for the v8 swap w/ a certification.
A final answer on this from somebody in the upper echelon might finally put an end to the hassles that are faced by those that are trying to get this completed "by the books."

When you do finally get into the exhaust portion, can you ask to see if they are going to require the manifolds that are off the donor car, and if so, are they required to be from the sides of the block to the tail end of the cat converter?

( This is what I was told by the local CARB Ref at the local college when I asked about 8 months ago, but as you know it's all on how they are reading the regs. )

If that is the case, would that not there kill the possibility of the swap getting a CARB Cert? I'm honestly not really familiar w/ the exhaust routing of the SBC's, but I the ones that I have seen, look like they could cause major issues w/ the transversely mounted power plant in the Fiero.

--Mcaanda

[This message has been edited by mcaanda (edited 01-15-2004).]

I want to make sure we distinguish between correct and won't be noticed. You are supposed to use the right manifolds for the year of the engine (which may cover several model years) but they might not notice the wrong manifolds though.

I will get the word on correct then we can decide what might not get noticed.

TK, you have more patience than I do and you are right that logic does not always prevail, especially with government types who seem to think that if they make something very complicated that they then become very important.

Clean air and low emissions is about just that; clean air as a result of low emissions. If clean air was really their purpose, they would check your emissions and tell you if you pass or fail based on the expected emissions for the year of your car. End of discussion. Who cares if you are a 51% stock holder in Van Camps and run on a home made methane gas engine? You either pass or you don’t, no pun intended.

California, and every other state, should be really glad that we are willing to put late model, cleaner burning engines in our 20 year old cars. The alternative is to bring the same 20 year old car to the test station with a clapped-out smoking engine and fail the test. Then you get to file for an exemption because you can’t afford to repair the car because your new motor for the conversion, that would pass the test, is laying in you garage along with all of your money that you thought you were spending on "the repair". When I lived in California, I saw way too many ‘smokers’ that were exempt from the “strict” emissions tests. Before I moved, my truck passed the test in California but it did not pass in Oregon, one of the “49 states”, 600 miles later. That's when I discovered the catalytic converter was empty.

I certainly support having clean air and made sure that my conversion included a catalytic converter and all of the emission devices that were on the donor motor. I took the car to the emissions test station and honestly answered the only question they asked, “Do you have the four cylinder or the six cylinder engine?” Of course I said I had the six cylinder engine. They proceeded to test the car and it passed with about half of the emissions that were allowed for the 2.8 in my ‘87 car. I can live with that without guilt. I could have even been happy if they made me meet the 2003 standard for the new motor.

I applaud you for taking the effort to help others be able to enjoy their cars even longer by doing an engine conversion. We need to remember that it is more about that pleasant guy maintaining the bureaucracy, revenue collecting and justifying his job rather than about clean air. I hope you are not still wondering why California, and many other sates, are broke.

Sorry to rant in your thread, but I couldn’t help myself and you admitted that this thread might go on for a bit.

Good luck with your gallant effort.

------------------
Bill Levin

[This message has been edited by 87GT3800SC5SPD (edited 01-15-2004).]

I wish I could add usefull input on this but I don't have any. I just wanted to say that TK what you are doing is extremelly beneficial to us here in CA. I really want to do a V8 manual swap in CA but have been discouraged because of the bs here. So instead I bought a 3.4 TDC which is sitting in my carport because I find out now I need a CA vehicle the engine came from and the 284 Getrag. So all the work youre doing is really appreciated and I really hope we can get a legal manual V8 conversion. It looks like the LT1 might be it. Or maybe a 5.0 conversion.

------------------
Help, Someone has lit a Fiero in my a#@!

From the times that I've worked with BAR, they are always good about trying to help and I think part of the support is because we are putting newer engines in the cars that are typically cleaner (not that a TPI V8 will be driven in such a way as to pollute less, but let's not quibble)

The only thing I can hope for is a baseline to work from. They're not going to violate any rules but hopefully they wil interpret them in such as way as to keep their jobs and provide us some flexibilty. I'm hoping they will rule that having the correct sensors and controls for the ECM will meet the rules. If so, it will mean we will be somewhat limited in what trans we can use, but there are L and T analogs (4L60E and 4T60E for example) and it should open the door for the Getrags.

The final goal (assuming they buy this), is consistency in the refs. If BAR is going to toss around terms and phrases, they need to be more specific as to what they mean. Examples will help them help us stay within those guildlines and have consistent refs.

It's a can of worms folks.

Terry

We'll see.

[This message has been edited by TK (edited 01-16-2004).]

Will this help any?

Much, much luck terry ...

TK you are my hero!! I have to give you supper big credits for tenacity. I now have more hope than ever. I have been hoping someone living in CA or CO that has the drive to go where no other Fiero owner has gone before. I have seen posts where they say do not argue with the emissions guys but I have found you must, otherwise you just go nowhere fast (or should I say go everywhere slow) I will be watching this post and contributing to it as necessary.

This has to be the best post I have ever seen on this forum,
Christine

------------------

Terry, had I known in advance I would have stopped in Auburn on the way to and from Sugarbowl this week and shook your hand. I will follow this thread closely. You have been an invaluable source of information on this smog req. haze (what the heck, pun intended ) I think I'll hold off on buying that 3.4 TDC engine for now till I see what information you get back from the BAR guys. Thanks again!

quote Originally posted by OutlawFiero: I wish I could add usefull input on this but I don't have any. I just wanted to say that TK what you are doing is extremelly beneficial to us here in CA. I really want to do a V8 manual swap in CA but have been discouraged because of the bs here. So instead I bought a 3.4 TDC which is sitting in my carport because I find out now I need a CA vehicle the engine came from and the 284 Getrag. So all the work youre doing is really appreciated and I really hope we can get a legal manual V8 conversion. It looks like the LT1 might be it. Or maybe a 5.0 conversion.

I really should call up Mike Smith and find out what he said to the CARB to get his 3.4 DOHC certified before I bought it. We used a 1996 3.4DOHC which as far as I know never came mated to a manual. Besides I know a friend of his also did a 3.4DOHC shortly after he did but used a 1992 engine instead, and got CARB cert as well even though both cars are stock fiero getreg 5 speeds. I do know that engine wise he had to have all the smog equipment as well as stock exhaust manifolds.

Thanks for all the education and hard work. I live near you (Roseville), soon to be in Pismo Beach,Ca. I dont post much here because I'm a Kit Car guy... but I do read alot.
I have decieded to finish the car with the 2.8..and then an archie kit 350/350 with the 4 speed muncie. When you are asking your info...could you ask about crate engines...in general do they have the same laws? or do they need to know which car it came from ect...The sbc I want will be injected. I'm thinking it might be cheaper than going used and rebuilding..plus they usually come with a warranty.
P.S. a buddy of mine in town has a sweet smog legal miata with a 5.0L mustang engine. He kept the original sensors and cats...and used the same (manual) transmission that came with the Mustang.
Keep up the great work!!...and if you find out anyone in town that does Archie conversions..(anywhere in Ca)please let me know.
Thanks
MIke

quote Originally posted by Archie: Will this help any?

Sure, I can ask them to look it up as a reference! Thanks!

I am curious if you are referring to F-body TPI's (camaro/firebird) or vette TPI? I am NOT familiar with the vette setups, but I am not aware of any TPI motor in an F-body having CAGS for the tranny. All the way up through 92 they used the T5 behind the 5.0 TPI motors, only in 93 did they go LT1 and t56 with the skipshift 1-4 solenoid.

I have always considered a 90-92 camaro 305 TPI 5spd car as the perfect donor for a v8 fiero in california that was meant for just being driven and fun ... should be smog legal by the book, and in spirit. It's a MAP motor, so easy to work with; they are rated 230hp stock, not a bad combo. throw a set of (smog legal with E.O. number) AFR heads and a smog legal cam into it, and 300hp should be no problem at all. not to mention if that 305 happens to actually be a 302....or a 350.

Its interesting what you can and can't get away with. based on advice from several camaro owners in california who have converted 5.7L 87-92 camaros to T-56 (the 5.7 was never even available with a stick at all except in a limited run firehawk), i converted my 91 5.7 to a t56 (from 700r4). haven't had to smog it...yet... but everyone who has done the swap says that it goes through the dyno check with no problems. maybe a loophole, maybe an exemption for that rare firehawk, who knows...

------------------
88 4cyl 5spd Western Edition
88 Formula 5spd SOLD :( but to be replaced someday.

I can't honestly say if mine met the California Requirements, or if the previous owner found a way around those requirements, but the car was 'street' driven / licensed in CA for a number of years with the V8 in it. Engine came out of a '91 Corvette coupled to stock 5spd Getrag, computer was fabricated and is hybred components of both Corvette/Fiero made by "Mena Street" in LA area.

------------------

http://www.cartsys.com/fiero/cal-engine.wav

quote Originally posted by nick2x88: I am curious if you are referring to F-body TPI's (camaro/firebird) or vette TPI? I am NOT familiar with the vette setups, but I am not aware of any TPI motor in an F-body having CAGS for the tranny. All the way up through 92 they used the T5 behind the 5.0 TPI motors, only in 93 did they go LT1 and t56 with the skipshift 1-4 solenoid. I have always considered a 90-92 camaro 305 TPI 5spd car as the perfect donor for a v8 fiero in california that was meant for just being driven and fun ... should be smog legal by the book, and in spirit. It's a MAP motor, so easy to work with; they are rated 230hp stock, not a bad combo. throw a set of (smog legal with E.O. number) AFR heads and a smog legal cam into it, and 300hp should be no problem at all. not to mention if that 305 happens to actually be a 302....or a 350. Its interesting what you can and can't get away with. based on advice from several camaro owners in california who have converted 5.7L 87-92 camaros to T-56 (the 5.7 was never even available with a stick at all except in a limited run firehawk), i converted my 91 5.7 to a t56 (from 700r4). haven't had to smog it...yet... but everyone who has done the swap says that it goes through the dyno check with no problems. maybe a loophole, maybe an exemption for that rare firehawk, who knows...

I have friends in the same boat (6 speeds into GTA). The test stations don't seem to care about the swap. It's not legal but they don't seem to care. Actually, one station did but the guy just went to another station.

As for CAGS, I just want to make sure we discuss all of the wiring possibilities in case some one goes in with a Vette engine. If it's an issue, then we just make sure it's a Vette engine that came from a Firebird.......

I don't know much about these swaps, But a question poped in my head. Is it possable the use a V8 a 4L80e computer to control a V8 4T80e combo in a Fiero? That tranny is supposed to be a lot stronger, but weight more. I may just hold up to bigger HP engines than are possable now, and with better mileage. Where can I find all of the pinouts for these trannys( and normal voltage/resistance values required)? The new UltraMegaSquirt (when available) will be able to control electronic valvebodies and I would like to be able to pass this info onto the guys working on UMS. This may be a new inexpensive option for engine/drivetrain management for us Fiero-ers.

Thanks
Steve

Some very good information here - all kinds of engine swaps are possible in California if you do your homework first and talk to the right people...

Ok, so I completed the "thesis" for BAR. 4 pages worth. I proposed 5 swaps:

1. 5.0L TBI + 5 spd. (late 80's)
2. 5.0L TPI + 5 spd. (late 80's)
3. 5.7L TPI + 5 spd (only came with 4+3 or 6 spd). (89)
4. 5.7L TPI + non-E automatic (4T60) (91)
5. 5.7L TPI + electronic automatic (4T60E) (93)

From those, I think we can interpret the other combos. I intentionally avoided the LS1/LS6 engines/OBDII for now. If they accept those, I can creep up on the OBDII stuff but I think there will be issues.

There are a couple of problems I can see them coming back with and that is primarily around confusing driveability/EPA mileage requirements with emissions requirements.

1. CAGS (computer assisted gear selection or "Skip-shift" ) is not emssions related and doesn't turn on the SES lamp, but it is connected to the ECM. If they check the wiring, they might question not connecting it. In defense of this, the AC will also throw errors on some cars if the pressure switches aren't connected. If I can fake that and it's ok, then faking CAGS should be ok.

2. TCC slip error. On the E trans, the ECM can calculate the TCC slip RPM. This again is not emissions related and doesn''t turn on the SES, but if they think about it, they will realize the gear ratios won't match between the 4L60E and 4T60E. The E-trans shift points are selected for emissions on top of driveability.

3. 5 spd vs 4+3 or 6 spd. That might not fly.

So, I will submit it tomorrow and see what happens. I don't plan on bring up the cars that got through unless I have too. Even then, I might not for fear of them tracking the cars down and pulling the recertification (I don't know that they would but I'd hate to be the cause of it).

I figure I won't get a response for a bit. If comes fast, that's a bad sign.

One other problem here. What if they reject these and put out the word to the refs to stop blessing them? That would suck.

TK

[This message has been edited by TK (edited 01-20-2004).]

Um whats the 4+3? Does that have something to do with the 4spd? Thats what I personally am truely interested in, can I use my 4spd Getrag with a V8. Theres several '80s 305s and 350s TPIs and TBIs and etc right down the road I just found out, so now my mouth is watering.

4+3 is the stock Vette trans in 85-86 (at least). For the proposals I lumped the Getrags and Isuzus together.

Depending on the response from BAR, I can then drag the 4 spd in if they accept a 5 spd Getrag in place of the 6 spd.

Dudes!!!

For a rundown on smogging engine swaps go to www.jtrpublishing.com and check out "Chevrolet TPI & TBI engine swapping", written by Mike Knell. It addresses single/dual catalytic conveters & exhausts, and is an EXCELLENT general guide to putting anything into ANYTHING!! This guy has been doing smog-legal engine swaps for years! He got his start swapping SBCs into V-12 Jaguars in Texas, and he really knows his stuff! I ran across him when I was putting a 3.4 Camaro motor into a '77 Porsche 924. Anybody who does engine swaps should read his book.

PS: What the Heck is CAGS?

[This message has been edited by Jim Gregory (edited 01-20-2004).]

I've seen that and I can read it again, but I don't believe it addresses our questions. Thanks for the suggestion though!

Terry

Ya, what IS CAGS?

Thanks again for all the efforts Terry! I'm not buying anything till I see what you come up with. Which is probably a good thing, cause theres other things I NEED to spend money on right now, as opposed to WANTing to spend it on. (ie V8s, kits, other car stuff, etc)

quote Originally posted by Fastback 86: Ya, what IS CAGS?

quote Originally posted by Jim Gregory: PS: What the Heck is CAGS?

quote Originally posted by TK: 1. CAGS (computer assisted gear selection or "Skip-shift" ) is not emssions related and doesn't turn on the SES lamp, but it is connected to the ECM. If they check the wiring, they might question not connecting it. In defense of this, the AC will also throw errors on some cars if the pressure switches aren't connected. If I can fake that and it's ok, then faking CAGS should be ok. TK

------------------
A coward dies a thousand deaths..................A soldier dies but once.
Red 86 SE
Yellow 87 GT
Gold 86 SE (wrecked)

[This message has been edited by Fierofreak00 (edited 01-20-2004).]

Oops! Thanks for pointing that out without being a dick about it like some people would, I appreciate that.

quote Originally posted by Fastback 86: Oops! Thanks for pointing that out without being a dick about it like some people would, I appreciate that.

Lol, yeah I know whatcha mean.......

And the results are in. All five will pass. I need to type it all up and I will post it. There are a few details.

Terrry

Very good news indeed. You're doing an awesome job TK, keep it up! When you have time, can you put in the submission for a set up using a 4spd Getrag? I know it shouldn't be any different than the 5spd, but just for technicalitys sake in case a smog ref decides to nit pick. Thanks again for all the work!

I don't think they would care since you aren't obligated to shift into 5th gear and the trans doesn't indicate the gear (although the code can tell).

For the only application with a 32K VSS, the only proposed transmission is an automatic.

In applications where a 32K VSS is required, could a later 5 speeds with the magnetic reluctor VSS work?

Also, does BAR have an opinion about external VSS correction circuits? A divide by 8 circuit could take the 32K signal to a 4K signal. If common sense prevails, the deciding should be whether or not the ECM understands the correct speed, which is simple to verfiy with a scan tool.

------------------
'87 Fiero GT: Low, Sleek, Fast, and Loud
'90 Pontiac 6000 SE AWD: None of the Above

Do that again, only mean it this time

Don't know. That's something you should ask them. The more you ask, the more info you get that you didn't want. If it works and looks fine, I don't think the refs will care.

All I did was establish what was needed to use alternate transmissions. How you correct the VSS should be discussed with BAR.

Terry

[This message has been edited by TK (edited 01-28-2004).]

TK Thanks for all your hard work and research it has helped me a great deal. I am going to go with #5 LT1 with the T460E trans. I will post the swap when we get the engine ready to go in. Darth Fiero is almost done with this same swap. He has also been a big help to me in deciding what engine and trans combo to use. I hope to have it done by the end of May. I plan on having my Fiero in Topeka KS for Wheat Fest in June.

Thanks to all the people that have helped me with good info. Here on Pennock’s,
Christine

------------------

Hope it helps!

Maybe we can get the other people that got recertified or got rejected can post. I'd be curious what you ran up against.

TK

TK-
Question for you. If I go with #3 - 1991 L98 how do they know that the engine came out of that year car? Did that car have to be originally from CA?
Can we use a L98 crate engine and then use all TPI/smog/computer from that year car and say that engine is a 1991 L98 from a trans am? Would they know if I did that?

Thanks for all your work!
-- Brett