"Take it in, smog it, done". Ya, maybe in your county but were talking Santa Clara County.
I've had only one problem in San Jose. There was only one station back in 2001 that turned down my Fiero because it had a K&N filter on the LT1 V8 conversion. They said they would not touch it. But I took to another station and had no problems. I still get it smogged in San Jose every two years without issues.
[This message has been edited by cyrus88 (edited 07-10-2015).]
Your car is 10 minutes because they are not checking all your of smog equipment, checking for an SES light, checking cat OE numbers, jumpering the ALDL, checking timing, doing a roller test, checking your gas cap and doing an exhaustive evap test!
On another note, there is another reason why smog shops hate cars like mine. They have to spend way more time on it yet only make just a little bit more money on it. Kit
Your car is 10 minutes because they are not checking all . . .
I know they don't do all that, which was a pleasant surprise because Cali has actually become less anal retentive about cars newer than 2000.
Incidentally, they did all the tests 2 years ago on the same Jetta, at the same station, and they even failed it because the oil dipstick tube was cracked (the tech said it was part of the PCV system and it would leak oil fumes). So I replaced the dipstick tube and took it back and it passed on free retest.
I had easy access to this smog so I'm posting it here for comparison.
This is the last unexpected fail I've ever received (I never expected my '84 T/A to pass ), back in 2001, immediately after swapping a 16v motor into my 8v Saab. As you can see from the report it's smogged as a 1985 Saab, which is the year of the motor.
2001 15mph max are HC:138 CO:0.85 NOx:1169 2015 15mph max are HC:95 CO:0.58 NOx:1136
2001 25mph max are HC:113 CO:0.65 NOx:1029 2015 25mph max are HC:77 CO:0.44 NOx:966
In nearly 15 years HC and CO have been cut by 30% and NOx by 3-6%, so it looks like the first two are at the limits of the cutpoint revision law and NOx is not even close. Why? Because statistical analysis shows HC and CO numbers are being met by most cars and the cut was warranted. NOx however was not cut because Saabs couldn't reliably make lower numbers. The likely reason for that is old Saabs don't have EGR or advanced timing controls, so they have a hard time dealing with NOx.
You can see the analysis->adjustment cycle in action here - it's not some ongoing cut designed to make it impossible to keep old cars on the road. It is a cut designed to keep cars closer to an optimal state of tune. As I mentioned, this is the last fail I've ever gotten on a Saab - not the 2001 numbers or the 2015 numbers or anything in the middle. A good running car *flies* through the test.
Your car is 10 minutes because they are not checking all your of smog equipment, checking for an SES light, checking cat OE numbers, jumpering the ALDL, checking timing, doing a roller test, checking your gas cap and doing an exhaustive evap test!
That's what i used to see too. From my experience, there are 2 reasons why you guys are seeing such differences: different parts of CA have different smog requirements, and the mechanics (and most businesses) i've dealt with in CA are "individuals" - they do the kind of job they wanna do depending on how they feel that day.
"It's a cut designed to keep cars closer to an optimal state of tune". That's what you call the bringing in of max numbers? I call it by another name....." setting up older cars for failure". Let's get real here. My Fiero is 29+ years old and runs good but it's only going to meet a specific standard of pollutants. 190K miles tends to wear out rings, valve guides, etc. Contrary to that logic, the numbers should be relaxed due to mileage, age, wear and tear, etc., not brought in to make it run more optimally. Kit
That's what i used to see too. From my experience, there are 2 reasons why you guys are seeing such differences: different parts of CA have different smog requirements, and the mechanics (and most businesses) i've dealt with in CA are "individuals" - they do the kind of job they wanna do depending on how they feel that day.
There are only two different requirements, "enhanced" and "non enhanced." I actually have no knowledge of what the difference is anymore - and the VLT only reflects one standard. :shrug:
"It's a cut designed to keep cars closer to an optimal state of tune". That's what you call the bringing in of max numbers? I call it by another name....." setting up older cars for failure". Let's get real here. My Fiero is 29+ years old and runs good but it's only going to meet a specific standard of pollutants. 190K miles tends to wear out rings, valve guides, etc. Contrary to that logic, the numbers should be relaxed due to mileage, age, wear and tear, etc., not brought in to make it run more optimally. Kit
I don't think you are reading what I am writing.
ALL Fieros are 29 years old and have the same wear. All Fieros in X state of tune will be putting out similar numbers. The cutpoints reflect an optimal state of tune versus other Fieros that have been smogged, not some academic optimal of 0. If most Fieros are in poor shape, the numbers will go up to reflect the median. If most Fieros are in good shape the numbers will go down to reflect that median. That is why Saab 900s have a NOx cutpoint of almost double what a Fiero does - a Fiero has tools to manage NOx and Saabs don't. They aren't reducing NOx cutpoints because that would cause every single Saab to fail. Instead, the cutpoint targets numbers that most Saabs are able to meet (and all of mine do, and have, easily).
The changes are not arbitrary or predatory, they reflect actual test results from samples of those specific vehicles. If your car smogs close to the max, that means it's in poorer shape than most other FIeros on the road. The cutpoints are a bell curve with the ends getting lopped off periodically. All the C students will pass, all the F students will fail. You're a C student, right?
On another note.. I took my car in to a shop this morning and it passed. Here are the numbers: HC is 20 at 15 mph & 2 at 25 mph CO is 0.03 at at 15 mph & 0.00 at 25 mph NO is 136 at 15 mph & 679 at 25 mph
Only last number is near the limit (685 is the limit for nox at 25 mph) Any suggestions to reduce Nox?? Kit
A C student is an average student - the fattest part of the bell curve. That is, where the smog cutpoints are aimed, roughly.
As you can see from your results, even a 29 year old car with nearly 200,000 miles can make the numbers.
NOx is a byproduct of combustion temperatures, and as such is a natural result of ignition. Excess NOx comes into play when you've got an overly lean mixture, carbon deposits insulating the combustion chambers or a less than ideal cooling system. NOx skyrockets with over-advanced ignitions. NOx is controlled by EGR and the cat, so if your EGR system is clogged or your cat is old, they could be the culprit. Since your HC numbers are very favorable, chances are the cat is fine. Personally, since NOx isn't directly controlled by the state of your tune, I would not really worry about it. If you passed, you passed, and there is no inherent reason to think there is a problem based on that. My XR4Ti (pictured above) has been very near the limit for seven years now. Remember, the limits are based on what other cars turn in so if you're getting passed your car is behaving like others.
Speaking of, I also have easy access to smog reports from my XR4Ti - including the first one I ever got in 2005 when I bought it, and last December:
The cutpoints were exactly the same in April of 2005 as December of 2014 - zero change! Thinking about it, I suspect the adjustment in cutpoints for my 1980 Saab was a result of the 2001 revision I mentioned above. I will try and find a smog from a middle point when I can - I bet we'll see no changes between 2003 and 2015. The only other car I owned for this long was my '95 Alfa 164Q, which I sold a couple years ago. I don't think I have any of its paperwork left.
[This message has been edited by thesameguy (edited 07-11-2015).]
Cali, is setting themselves up for a class action lawsuit that they will not win.. you see they are sneaky and every few years up what the model year emissions for that year is.. forcing vehicles to try to pass emission standards that they were never designed to .. if you know of a shop that saves the data, you'll see that what the emissions standard a 1986 model had to meet to pass.. in 1986, and what it has become as years gave gone by, you can't set standards for vehicles of a model year and then keep moving the goal post after the fact.. That's why so many are failing, and cali will get hammered on it soon..
I'm in E.Furgal corner. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already. The older cars were built to meet Federal emission specs and the manufacturers went as far as to bow-down & produce a more stringent spec for CA destined cars which were meant. Then 20 some years later I'm reading CA expects that same car that met their own version of emission standards to now meet an even higher standard. This is ludicrous. Rather than pick on the car owner maybe CA should go back to GM, Ford, etc. and tell them to retrofit these cars "That MET CA SPEC" and send us "CA" the bill.
That analogy about leaded paint on an older house was not something that was mandated by the Fed's at that time. And of course no one is going to use it today let alone being able find it and purchase it. It's no different than leaded solder being used to sweat copper pipes. That's all we ever used for years until it was banned.
Now can you imagine all those customers, households and owners of high rise buildings having to call their builder/contractor and pay to have the lead removed from every joint, valve and fitting, most of which are hidden in the structure?
Now these same brilliant people in charge looking out for our health and saftey, via auto emission standards, have gotten rid of the lead in our homes and replaced it with a bigger threat. These compact fluorescent bulbs (made in China) which contain mercury which poses a significant cancer risk to you and your children.
This link will scare you and perhaps wake some of us up. End of rant......
------------------ "Kilgore Trout once wrote a short story which was a dialogue between two pieces of yeast. They were discussing the possible purposes of life as they ate sugar and suffocated in their own excrement. Because of their limited intelligence, they never came close to guessing that they were making champagne." - Kurt Vonnegut
Originally posted by Spoon: I'm in E.Furgal corner. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already. The older cars were built to meet Federal emission specs and the manufacturers went as far as to bow-down & produce a more stringent spec for CA destined cars which were meant. Then 20 some years later I'm reading CA expects that same car that met their own version of emission standards to now meet an even higher standard. This is ludicrous. Rather than pick on the car owner maybe CA should go back to GM, Ford, etc. and tell them to retrofit these cars "That MET CA SPEC" and send us "CA" the bill.
That analogy about leaded paint on an older house was not something that was mandated by the Fed's at that time. And of course no one is going to use it today let alone being able find it and purchase it. It's no different than leaded solder being used to sweat copper pipes. That's all we ever used for years until it was banned.
Now can you imagine all those customers, households and owners of high rise buildings having to call their builder/contractor and pay to have the lead removed from every joint, valve and fitting, most of which are hidden in the structure?
Now these same brilliant people in charge looking out for our health and saftey, via auto emission standards, have gotten rid of the lead in our homes and replaced it with a bigger threat. These compact fluorescent bulbs (made in China) which contain mercury which poses a significant cancer risk to you and your children.
This link will scare you and perhaps wake some of us up. End of rant......
Older things being made under a lack of certain regulations, or for certain specified regulations, doesn't mean those specified regulations are still valid in the modern world.
Your cell phone, television, and computer monitor all contain mercury too. Got a digital or smartwatch? Mercury. Eat fish? Mercury. Wireless network, cell phones, XM, GPS, microwave? Plenty of electromagnetic radiation there. A really old watch? Might have Strontium-90 in it.
Just because the feds didn't mandate the use of lead paint, doesn't mean the paint and houses weren't manufactured to follow regulations at the existing time. It is the same with the Fiero. Maybe aerosol cans would be a better analogy for you? Aerosols made in the 80s were made under different regulations than ones made today. If you've got a 30 year old can of hair spray laying around that hasn't degraded and could still be used today, it would still not necessarily be legal to expel the contents, as a result of a change in environmental regulations which occurred after its manufacture.
Since 1959, the world population has increased by almost 2.5 times. California had the CARB before we even had Federal regulations on emissions. The limits for emissions change all the time, because the world changes. It is not still 1987, and the air quality of the world is not the same as it was then. Expecting the same regulations to still be valid is just untenable.
And yes, if during a home inspection, the lead content of water passing through those pipes measured too high, I would expect that the owner would need to have that fixed, before any buyer would purchase the home. Those measurements would have to meet the regulations of today, and not whatever they were in the 50s when the house was built.
Proper maintenance of a vehicle, and installation of equipment manufactured to modern regulations, will result in a passing vehicle with emissions within the allowable range of the modern regulations.
What do you think is going to happen when burning of fossil fuels is just outright banned entirely, and becomes too expensive? Either owners will need to retrofit their vehicles to run on pure renewable bio fuels, or to be converted to electric, or they'll get traded in on a new car, and sent to be recycled.
Originally posted by Spoon: I'm in E.Furgal corner. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already. The older cars were built to meet Federal emission specs and the manufacturers went as far as to bow-down & produce a more stringent spec for CA destined cars which were meant. Then 20 some years later I'm reading CA expects that same car that met their own version of emission standards to now meet an even higher standard. This is ludicrous. Rather than pick on the car owner maybe CA should go back to GM, Ford, etc. and tell them to retrofit these cars "That MET CA SPEC" and send us "CA" the bill.
Did you just read Furgal's rant and then chime in, or actually read the thread?
The cutpoints are based on actual, historical identical vehicle performance, not some made-up target. They are based on numbers the vast majority of cars are already meeting, not some idealized target. They are based on statistical analysis of what's happening, not what's possible. The cutpoints are not only entirely meetable, they are factually and statistically being met. Most cars pass. Only the worst fail. It isn't difficult, it isn't unrealistic, it isn't unfair. It's a completely valid and appropriate way to help ensure that old cars are kept in a reasonable (not even ideal!) state of tune. I just cannot wrap my head around what is so difficult or outrageous about this process.
Originally posted by thesameguy: Did you just read Furgal's rant and then chime in, or actually read the thread?
The cutpoints are based on actual, historical identical vehicle performance, not some made-up target. They are based on numbers the vast majority of cars are already meeting, not some idealized target. They are based on statistical analysis of what's happening, not what's possible. The cutpoints are not only entirely meetable, they are factually and statistically being met. Most cars pass. Only the worst fail. It isn't difficult, it isn't unrealistic, it isn't unfair. It's a completely valid and appropriate way to help ensure that old cars are kept in a reasonable (not even ideal!) state of tune. I just cannot wrap my head around what is so difficult or outrageous about this process.
I will also add that Furgal's position "they up the emissions every few years" is false. The BAR says it's false, and I've shown that it's false. I can't fathom how someone can agree with an assertion that's based on a false premise!
I will also add that Furgal's position "they up the emissions every few years" is false. The BAR says it's false, and I've shown that it's false. I can't fathom how someone can agree with an assertion that's based on a false premise!
But but but, catalytic converters cause fires! Especially on Fieros. Those things catch fire. Everyone knows that!
There is a lot of "truthiness" going around about Cali emissions, especially from people that don't live there. I like the fact that there is emission testing because there's a lot of cars in Cali and I would like to breath some clean air. I just wish the FAIL criteria on emissions would be just based on what's coming out the tailpipe (given that there are no fuel leaks, or non functioning PCVs).
There is a lot of "truthiness" going around about Cali emissions, especially from people that don't live there. I like the fact that there is emission testing because there's a lot of cars in Cali and I would like to breath some clean air. I just wish the FAIL criteria on emissions would be just based on what's coming out the tailpipe (given that there are no fuel leaks, or non functioning PCVs).
Totally agreed. A friend of mine who works at CARB suggests this may very well happen - the economics of the <'99 smog intensity makes less sense with every passing day. Now that Y2K cars just have a computer test, there will be less incentive for shops to maintain everything needed to handle old cars. At some point, they will have to accept that there just aren't adequate incentives for such rigorous testing on old cars and reduce or drop them. That'll be nice if & when it happens. In the interim, I'm not stressing and I am enjoying the ever-improving air quality. A trade well worth making.
I remembered this thread while getting the Fiero smogged this year, so I thought I would post my results... both as an indicator of what a Fiero's smog check might look like, and as an indicator as to how the limits changed in two years (the limits did not change, again).
This is an '87 GT, with a quiet ( ) 3.4pr swap. The car has 110k on it, no idea on the engine whatsoever. Prior to this smog, I replaced the exhaust manifolds as my original front manifold had two serious broken welds, it was almost broken in half.
On the left is the current smog, an easy pass. On the right is a previous major failure - huge NOx readings due to massive exhaust leaks. The three month gap between the tests is how long it took WCF to make the manifolds.
I don't feel there is anything particularly special about this car - it's a nicely maintained but run of the mill Fiero. I have put a bunch of work into brakes, suspension, and tires but mostly neglected the engine as I've had my eye on a swap. Aside from oil changes and replacing a failed coil pickup, I've done sod all for it. Even still, not even remotely a challenge to get through smog.
I just today had my 85 (w/3.4 pr) tested...Passed without even coming close to the limits...But I had replaced the cat because it was poisoned a while back when the engine started running extremely poorly.....After swapping out Ignition modules, TPS, MAP, etc, I happened to pull the coil wire off of the CAP rather than the coil...Green! Extremely corroded...Replaced the cap and coil wire and she ran good again....If anyone in the bay area needs a smog test try Dan at Pro Smog on Washington in San Leandro...The guy A) knows what he is doing and is completely honest. Dan(The owner) took approx' 30 minutes to do the whole thing.
I have found a lot of the connectors in the Fiero's engine bay haven't aged well. When I replaced my coil pickup I also replaced the connectors there are they were all in some state of failure. When I just did the manifolds, I also replaced the TPS, IAC, MAP, ECT, and fan switch connector as they were broken or damaged as well. Not so many original connectors left in there. Some I was able to get away with just replacing the body, but most required replacing terminals as well due to corrosion. I guess they hadn't quite got that figured out in the '80s.
Having spent most of my life in Ohio, in a county that couldn't care less if your car was literally held together with toothpicks, bubble gum, and duct tape, I'm glad I've never had to deal with emissions testing. I did spend some time in CA though (which I'm glad I kept my OH plates while there), and my impression was that for a state that prides itself on a deep car culture, they really seem to want to punish those of us who are just trying to preserve and enjoy a piece of history. The only thing that drove me more insane than CA was that Hawaii didn't want to recognize my out-of-state plates w/o paying a hefty fee and submitting to their safety inspections, which, of course, my then 25 yr old work in progress rust belt car had some difficulty passing as it was its first inspection ever. HI was nice for the scenery (outside of Honolulu), but it's nice to finally live somewhere where for the most part, the govt. leaves me (and my car) alone and I have a lot more road to enjoy, in many cases all to myself.
One thing I would like to point out about CA smog controls....The winds basically blow west to east....So We get (Relatively) fresh air from off the pacific...But OUR air(And smog) travel to the east.....You guys to the east can be thankful we are trying to get a handle on vehicle emissions....although I know some people still believe that smoking cigs doesn't cause cancer...
I do wish we had real vehicle >safety< inspections here in CA like some states have- I see some cars that would not even qualify as a junk yard car....
That's cool - I imagine smog checking "busted old heaps" all day it's pretty exciting when something unusual comes in and doesn't complicate your day.
When I had mine in, I pulled in behind a F430 and in front of a Bentley Arnage. The area I'm in is "nice" but usually not that uppity. You see some nicer Porsches and such, but rarely those six figure cars. An unlikely group of people emerged from the Bentley - like, a fat balding guy in cargo shorts and a too-small t-shirt and two unkempt kids - and they stood by the window while the Fiero and the Ferrari were getting tested. The older of the two kids said "That's the kind of car I want when I turn 16." The older guy said "I don't think you're getting a Ferrari." "No," the kid said, "the silver one."
Personally, I think I would have taken the Ferrari, but overhearing the exchange made me giggle. Would have really sucked to have the smog guy announce "Sorry, bro, it failed." LOL
PS - The F430 sounded fantastic even just getting smog tested.
[This message has been edited by thesameguy (edited 05-17-2017).]
Last year I took my 88GT into a smog shop I have used several times before. I got this tech with an attitude. I went off for a quick bite and was surprised to see the car already parked when I returned. So the guy tells me he can't smog it because it has an aftermarket Holley. I told him it was stock that way. He practically called me a liar told me I would have to provide proof from the dealer. A little later I found out the trunk popper was broken. I'm sure he pushed too hard on the wrong end. No way to prove it of course but I am never going back there again.
Originally posted by thesameguy: Personally, I think I would have taken the Ferrari, but overhearing the exchange made me giggle. Would have really sucked to have the smog guy announce "Sorry, bro, it failed." LOL
PS - The F430 sounded fantastic even just getting smog tested.
The biggest problem with all of those expensive cars is....YOU can't AFFORD to pay for the maintenance....A neighbor of my Father's had a 308 back in the late 80s...He had it tuned up....$1700 and no guarantee! (He wasn't happy with the tune up, either!) My Father was in the Highland touring club back in the 50s- mainly British sportscars- and one of the members "Made it big"...So he came by with his new Ferrari to let the guys check it out...My Father and his friend noticed that the roof was uneven from one side to the other! I like mass produced cars...100,000 cars and all the parts interchange- THAT is impressive!
I used to live in Cali and know when I left they were working on changing the 25 years or older non-smog law because 80's cars were coming fast up on that 25 year mark. They had also just changed the law so new vehicles only needed to be smogged every other year and I think if I recall correctly, the dyno test was being done when we moved away.
Here in Utah we have emissions testing because of the inversion. It's typically a winter problem but that doesn't mean it's not a good idea to try to prevent harmful emissions year round. Still, it's not hard to pass a emissions test here. From what I've been able to gather, there isn't much to the emissions test except hooking up a OBD scanner and making sure all smog equipment is present, ready and working properly. So, if you have a CES light on, you fail. If you clear the light and drive over to test? You fail as your computer will not show the sensors ready yet. That only happens typically after between 30 and 50 miles of driving and if you had a light it will most likely pop up as soon as all sensors and systems are ready again. Basically, keep your car running right and you shouldn't have a problem passing smog here. I have no idea what it's like for pre OBD vehicles though as I've never owned one here.
My funny story on emissions testing my 88 Mera in WI. Years ago they dd the tail pipe test. Later they went to the dyno but I always talked to the supervisor and they allowed me to do a tailpipe test only, no dyno. This happened when the just did the tailpipe test. I pulled in and the guy takes my paper and puts the test pipes in my exhaust pipes. He goes in the room and starts the test. He looks at the paper and sees it is a 88 Fiero. He comes running out and pulls the test pipes out of my exhaust. He tells me this is a 308 Ferrari. Why does this test sheet say 88 Fiero with a stern look on his face. I tell him this is an 88 Fiero. I open the rear deck lid and show him the 2.8. I pull out a Mera brochure and show him it is a Mera. So we talk for a length of time as he is a car guy and more than interested in my 88 Mera. After a length of time he says OK you are done. I asked him about the test. He says you passed. Well duh, the sniffers have been on the ground the whole time pulling in fresh air.
I was reading an article the other day and Texas is looking to eliminate smog testing all together...looks like we are moving the other direction! I have my speculations why, but if I state them here...I will have a bunch of people wanting to argue about it.
quote
Originally posted by Kitskaboodle:
I took my Fiero to Green Star Smog at the corner of Keyes and 5th street?? Right next door to "Super Cheap Tires". Don't go there! On another subject, I'm getting damn depressed hearing all these guys saying they have never even been to a smog shop. Mark my words.......there's coming a day when YOUR state is gonna tighten the noose on your Fiero. And it aint gonna be pretty. Kit
A number of years ago the CA legislature was looking at two different routes; A) The bi-annual testing at a smog station that was already in place or, B) To have Smog sensors w/camera along the different highways that would basically only go after the cheaters and broken cars.
I thought that the sensors route would be better- for most people- of course, the ones who install the smog equipment only for testing would be screwed.....Although I don't particularly like all the smog equipment, I prefer to be able to breath.....Back in the 70s, we could tell when we crossed the CA/OR border because you could smell the exhaust in OR. It's much better now, and in CA there are a lot of hot rodders who take off the equipment between testing- even tho sometimes their engine then runs like crap.
My 99 Firebird Formula would run a 13.5 1/4, get 31 mpg highway, and was qualified as a ultra-low emission vehicle.
Im in san jose. I took my kit car to smog hut on n 4th and gish. It gave him tons of trouble, he never worked on a car that old. First he told me to go change my cat. Second time around he passed everything but the timing check. Third time he just passed it, tired of dealing w it lol. I dont really mind smog stuff as long as its not killing the power. Like the 100hp v8s of the late 70s. Tards around here like to steal the cats off cars at night. My cuz and his neighbors got a bad morning when he left for work that day. lol
OK..This is slightly sideways to the thread; Back in 1980 my HS buddy and I were talking....He stated, "I wish I was driving back in the sixties when we had muscle cars- We'll never have any powerful cars ever again!"
I had been doing some reading and had realized something, so I told him, 'You have no idea...We WILL have muscle cars again- and they will be better than anything we had before!" Two years later the opening shot in the modern muscle car wars was fired- The 1982 Mustang GT with 167 hp...Not much by today's standards, but it was the first INCREASE in power since 1971.
The stuff I was reading had led me to realize; A) How does an engine make more power? >>>>Make it more efficient....B) How do you make an engine use less fuel? >>>>Make it more efficient....C) How do you make an engine cleaner? >>>>>That's right! Make it more efficient! These goals are not at cross purposes. It wasn't any one article- it was a number of articles and the cumulative effect of the information....I wish I could have invested in this somehow...One of the few times in my life I knew the answer and almost no one else did.....
[This message has been edited by cvxjet (edited 05-21-2017).]
Kit, The last time I had my 88GT smoged in Santa Clara was 2010. The limit on the NO was Max 799 at 15MPH and Max 738 at 25MPH. So you can see the test limits are indeed tightening up over time making it harder to pass. One thing that has an effect on NO readings is timing. Make sure your timing is right on.
Also, I used SC Test Only 3295 El Camino Real #8,9. They never gave me any problems. Also, If you are worried about not passing, you can do a pre-test for $25. This will tell you if you will or will not pass without it being recorded to DMV. If the readings look OK, then have them do the official test and avoid any fail for somg that is recorded to DMV.
I have been enjoying not having to smog my car here in Lake County. Test is only required when there is a change of ownership. Imagine that here in CA where they are so concerned about pollution. A county that you can drive a car the whole life of the car with one initial smog test only.
Im in san jose. I took my kit car to smog hut on n 4th and gish. It gave him tons of trouble, he never worked on a car that old. First he told me to go change my cat. Second time around he passed everything but the timing check. Third time he just passed it, tired of dealing w it lol. I dont really mind smog stuff as long as its not killing the power. Like the 100hp v8s of the late 70s. Tards around here like to steal the cats off cars at night. My cuz and his neighbors got a bad morning when he left for work that day. lol
shem
shem
LOL that was where I took mine. So they had done and passed one before, should have been familiar with it unless it was a different tech, which would be odd since it seemed like a 1-man operation.
I had my former '86 GT tested in NJ when they added the dyno test. I let them get the whole front end strapped down on the dyno before I told them it was RWD. None of them believed me, even after I popped the decklid and showed them the engine in the back. They tried to tell me it was still FWD. Really? OK, go for it, but don't burn up my clutch. They went for it, but they just couldn't get the front wheels to spin. It passed the sniffer, but they failed me for a bad gas cap and gave it back with the parking brake on.
), back in 2001, immediately after swapping a 16v motor into my 8v Saab. As you can see from the report it's smogged as a 1985 Saab, which is the year of the motor. 
Let's get real here. My Fiero is 29+ years old and runs good but it's only going to meet a specific standard of pollutants. 190K miles tends to wear out rings, valve guides, etc. Contrary to that logic, the numbers should be relaxed due to mileage, age, wear and tear, etc., not brought in to make it run more optimally.
