[xj40] Drive Clean - Emission Testing in Ontario (Canada)

XJ40
1

Has anyone else noticed that our cars are actually being emission tested
in Ontario to specs which are tighter than much newer cars are tested to?
In looking at the documentation it appears that cars from 1992 thru 2000 are
being tested at tighter specs than they should be.

Example of test spec for NOX (for a car with a ETW of 1701kg/4250lbs)
1984-1987 - 845
1988-1991 - 548 ppm
1992-1995 - 365
1996-2000 - 365
2001-2002 - 474
2003-2004 - 420
2004+ - 365

They claim that cars less than 6years old have a 99% pass rate so they have
removed them from the testing and going to concentrate on the older cars
because
they fail more often. Not surprising since we are being tested to 2004+
specs.

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

2

In reply to a message from Dave sent Wed 24 Oct 2007:

Hi Dave My last test was 2006 and it was the first it ever failed
after some work it got through with the following readings. RPM
2046. HC ppm limit 50 reading 48. CO% limit0.28 reading 0.26 . The
NO ppm limit 0548 reading 162. The numbers you gave place my car as
a 1989 and the nox at 548 am I reading it correctly. Regards John.–
John. Walsh. Purrrrr 89 vdp
bowmanville ontario, Canada
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

3

In reply to a message from Dave sent Wed 24 Oct 2007:

Interesting comment, looked back at my last result for a 92 and
got131ppm- didnot realise we were bieng discriminated against but
at present no problem . Richard–
Richard Hampton
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

4

Mine is running a bit high but still in the limit.

What made me question how they were being tested is my much newer car (2000)
had a higher limit.
When I investigated in looking at specs on the DriveClean site I found the
difference was because of vehicle weight.

However when I dug deeper I reliazed that both my cars were being tested to
levels significantly lower than newer cars.

I was looking at their drive clean guide (Drive Clean Guide)
http://www.driveclean.com/info/download.html

First if you go to page 11 of the pdf document you will see that it says to
use column 41 from table 9 for vehicles from 92+ for the NOX values

Now if you go to table 9-NOX on page 13 you will see that it says for
2001-2002 mulitiply the value by 1.3.
For 2003-2004 multiply by 1.15 and for 2004+ use the value. However it says
nothing about 1992 thru 2000 vehicles.
That means they use a unadjusted value for those cars which means they are
being tested to 2004+ levels. This is applicable to all three specs.

What irritates me about this is they are planning to introduce annual
testing for cars over 12 years old next year.
At the same time they are extending the no-test required from 3 to 6 years
for new cars because they pass 99% of the time.
Well its not surprising that older cars fail more. They are being tested to
higher levels than new cars. To me it looks like an error which would make
many of their assumptions questionable.

I am curious. Does your Canadian car have and air pump and EGR valve
system. Mine appears to have neither and it looks like it never did. Their
is no port on the exhaust for a EGR valve. Its always passed the emission
test.----- Original Message -----
From: “Richard Hampton” blfd@sprint.ca
To: xj40@jag-lovers.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 4:50 PM
Subject: Re: [xj40] Drive Clean - Emission Testing in Ontario (Canada).

In reply to a message from Dave sent Wed 24 Oct 2007:

Interesting comment, looked back at my last result for a 92 and
got131ppm- didnot realise we were bieng discriminated against but
at present no problem . Richard

Richard Hampton
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting
services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On
Line Books and more !

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

5

The numbers for 1989 agree with what you and I indicate as a spec of 548.

For my 1992 like I was tested in 2003 with the following
HC limit 58 reading 58
CO limit .32 reading 0.31
NO limit 420 reading 320

In my test in 2006 (it really should have been tested in fall of 2005 but I
took it off the road for winter)
I got the following
HC Limit 50 reading 20
CO Limit 0.28 reading 0.09
NO Limit 365 reading 365

The improvement in HC and CO between 2003 and 2006 was the replacement of
the front Cat.
This year I replaced the second Cat and hope it will help with the NOx. I
have a test scheduled in a week so I will see how things will go.
As you can see I am a bit worried about the NOx readings and hoping the new
cat will bring it down.

See the other email I sent out which explains how to calculate the numbers.

The Specs which I think are just plain wrong (or deliberately skewed) are
for all cars from 1992 thu 2000. Those cars are being tested to specs
equivalent to cars
from 2004+. Cars from 2001 thru 2003 are being tested to levels
significantly looser than what the 92 thru 2000 cars are being tested.

The main thing that bugs me about this is that they are extending the
no-test years for newer cars from 3 to 6 years and proposing that cars
12years or older need testing annually. The reason they say they are
extending the no-test years is that those cars pass 99% of the time. Not
surprising they are testing them to less strict specs than the older cars.

If my car was being tested as a 2001 the limit would be 474 rather than
365.

What did you do to improve your readings? Your NOx were way off
originally.

Does your car have an air pump or EGR system. I don’t think the air pump
was required in Canada and mine does not seem to have an EGR valve and no
port on the manifold where one would go so I assume it never had one.
Without an EGR I am not sure how they would control the NOx. All of the
manuals I have show an EGR system.----- Original Message -----
From: “h s law” covjag1@yahoo.ca
To: xj40@jag-lovers.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 3:40 PM
Subject: Re: [xj40] Drive Clean - Emission Testing in Ontario (Canada).

In reply to a message from Dave sent Wed 24 Oct 2007:

Hi Dave My last test was 2006 and it was the first it ever failed
after some work it got through with the following readings. RPM
2046. HC ppm limit 50 reading 48. CO% limit0.28 reading 0.26 . The
NO ppm limit 0548 reading 162. The numbers you gave place my car as
a 1989 and the nox at 548 am I reading it correctly. Regards John.

John. Walsh. Purrrrr 89 vdp
bowmanville ontario, Canada
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting
services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On
Line Books and more !

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

6

In reply to a message from Dave sent Thu 25 Oct 2007:

Dave . You have one hell of a memory to recall the Nox failed me.
The items that changed the nos. were a new thermostat which was the
first in 17 years. The filters and oil had been changed before the
fail as was the ox sensor, and then I discovered that the plugs
installed earlier were Champion RC9YCC instead of RC9YC. I had
never noticed the extra ‘‘C’’. You may recall sometime earlier I
requested help regarding ‘‘white plugs’’, so I belive that the error
in the plug no. was the culprit for the fail. Regards John.–
John. Walsh. Purrrrr 89 vdp
bowmanville ontario, Canada
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

7

What is interesting is I had my 1992 in for its emission test today and it
passed easily. However however when I looked at the paper work it had N/A
for the NOx limit. Remember that I was a bit concerned about this spec
because at the last test it was on the limit. I did some repairs which I
hoped would correct the reading.

When I inquired about why the limit was now N/A (ie not available) I was
informed that they are no longer allowed to do the dyno test on the Jaguar
XJ line of cars because of risk to the transmission.

Instead they do a 2 speed idle test, one at idle and the other at 2500rpm.
that means the car is now only tested for HC and CO and not NOx. My HC and
CO were excellent.

Of course now I wonder what risk to the transmission they are referring to
and what the fact that my car has already had two dyno tests done.

I can’t figure out why a dyno could cause an issue? Whats the difference
to the car if the rear wheel as driving the car forward or spinning loaded
rollers?
In fact I am a bit more worried about running the engine at 2500 for a
period of time rather than the dyno.----- Original Message -----
From: “h s law” covjag1@yahoo.ca
To: xj40@jag-lovers.org
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [xj40] Drive Clean - Emission Testing in Ontario (Canada).

In reply to a message from Dave sent Thu 25 Oct 2007:

Dave . You have one hell of a memory to recall the Nox failed me.
The items that changed the nos. were a new thermostat which was the
first in 17 years. The filters and oil had been changed before the
fail as was the ox sensor, and then I discovered that the plugs
installed earlier were Champion RC9YCC instead of RC9YC. I had
never noticed the extra ‘‘C’’. You may recall sometime earlier I
requested help regarding ‘‘white plugs’’, so I belive that the error
in the plug no. was the culprit for the fail. Regards John.

John. Walsh. Purrrrr 89 vdp
bowmanville ontario, Canada
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting
services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On
Line Books and more !

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

8

In reply to a message from Dave sent Tue 30 Oct 2007:

Dave, the issue was with the early 4HP22 transmissions. They were
known to blow internal seals if run over 2000 rpm in neutral. Never
heard of this problem with the 4HP24. So I think your tester has it
backwards.They should be run in gear on the dyno. I’m in
Massachusetts and they run my 88 on a dyno with no problems. Now my
Audi A6Q receives the static idle test you described because the
dyno can’t take all 4 driving wheels. Last time the Jag was tested
the tester commented that the readings were all so low I could
breath the exhaust,lol.
Jim Moore(88XJ40)–
The original message included these comments:

When I inquired about why the limit was now N/A (ie not available) I was
informed that they are no longer allowed to do the dyno test on the Jaguar
XJ line of cars because of risk to the transmission.
Instead they do a 2 speed idle test, one at idle and the other at 2500rpm.
that means the car is now only tested for HC and CO and not NOx. My HC and
CO were excellent.
Of course now I wonder what risk to the transmission they are referring to
and what the fact that my car has already had two dyno tests done.
I can’t figure out why a dyno could cause an issue? Whats the difference
to the car if the rear wheel as driving the car forward or spinning loaded
rollers?

–
James Moore
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

9

This was the same place which has tested my car twice before with the dyno.
They told me that they have been given instructions that they cannot test
the XJ6 on the dyno.
They get there info from the provinces computer system so something changed
from last year.

The test station now has different specs for the alternative test which are
different from the dyno test spec.----- Original Message -----
From: “James Moore” gasshauler@aol.com
To: xj40@jag-lovers.org
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [xj40] Drive Clean - Emission Testing in Ontario (Canada).

In reply to a message from Dave sent Tue 30 Oct 2007:

Dave, the issue was with the early 4HP22 transmissions. They were
known to blow internal seals if run over 2000 rpm in neutral. Never
heard of this problem with the 4HP24. So I think your tester has it
backwards.They should be run in gear on the dyno. I’m in
Massachusetts and they run my 88 on a dyno with no problems. Now my
Audi A6Q receives the static idle test you described because the
dyno can’t take all 4 driving wheels. Last time the Jag was tested
the tester commented that the readings were all so low I could
breath the exhaust,lol.
Jim Moore(88XJ40)

The original message included these comments:

When I inquired about why the limit was now N/A (ie not available) I was
informed that they are no longer allowed to do the dyno test on the
Jaguar
XJ line of cars because of risk to the transmission.
Instead they do a 2 speed idle test, one at idle and the other at
2500rpm.
that means the car is now only tested for HC and CO and not NOx. My HC
and
CO were excellent.
Of course now I wonder what risk to the transmission they are referring
to
and what the fact that my car has already had two dyno tests done.
I can’t figure out why a dyno could cause an issue? Whats the
difference
to the car if the rear wheel as driving the car forward or spinning
loaded
rollers?

–
James Moore
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting
services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On
Line Books and more !

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

10

In reply to a message from Dave sent Tue 30 Oct 2007:

Dave. No more dyno testing ‘‘music to my ears’’. I have looked at
2004/2006 reports and notice that the ‘‘Curb idle’’ Nox had been
marked n/a in each, but in 2000/2002 reports they were curb idle
limit 712, why were they measuring nox at curb in 2000/2002 and not
now. John–
John. Walsh. Purrrrr 89 vdp
bowmanville ontario, Canada
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

11

None of my tests indicate a value for NOx at Curb idle even on my 2000
Taurus.
I am confused however about how a dyno could risk a 2 wheel drive car. I
wonder if they got the computer confused with the 4 wheel drive Jags or
something.

The alternative test they are running is called “a two speed idle tailpipe
emission test” which tests the car out of gear at idle and at 2500.
It only tested for HC and CO and not for NOx and is normally used for 4
wheel drive vehicles.

The limits for this test are also a bit wider than for the dyno test.

Dyno test in 2005
ASM2525
HC ppm limit 50
CO% 0.28
NO ppm 365

Two Speed idle test in 2007
2500 rpm
HC ppm limit 200
CO% 1.00
NO ppm N/A

The limits for the curb idle were the same for both tests methods.----- Original Message -----
From: “h s law” covjag1@yahoo.ca
To: xj40@jag-lovers.org
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:44 PM
Subject: Re: [xj40] Drive Clean - Emission Testing in Ontario (Canada).

In reply to a message from Dave sent Tue 30 Oct 2007:

Dave. No more dyno testing ‘‘music to my ears’’. I have looked at
2004/2006 reports and notice that the ‘‘Curb idle’’ Nox had been
marked n/a in each, but in 2000/2002 reports they were curb idle
limit 712, why were they measuring nox at curb in 2000/2002 and not
now. John

John. Walsh. Purrrrr 89 vdp
bowmanville ontario, Canada
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting
services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On
Line Books and more !

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

12

I wouldn’t get too happy. I was able to chat to a person at the driveclean
program and it appears they sent out a bulletin which quite confused some of
the test stations.
The bulletin referred to no dyno testing for the Jaguar x-type. Many shops
don’t seem to know that the x-type is a model to itself and its 4WD. It of
course can’t go on the dyno.
That means most likely when we get tested we will be back on the dyno. Even
though my cars was not tested corrrectly the pass status stands. The HC and
CO were well in spec anyway but I have no idea about the NOx since it wasn’t
tested. They did indicate I could have it retested on the dyno for free
without any risk to the pass status.

Its also interesting to note that cars 1992+ are all being tested to the
same specs. Does this mean there has been no improvements in emissions in
the last 15 years?----- Original Message -----
From: “h s law” covjag1@yahoo.ca
To: xj40@jag-lovers.org
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:44 PM
Subject: Re: [xj40] Drive Clean - Emission Testing in Ontario (Canada).

In reply to a message from Dave sent Tue 30 Oct 2007:

Dave. No more dyno testing ‘‘music to my ears’’. I have looked at
2004/2006 reports and notice that the ‘‘Curb idle’’ Nox had been
marked n/a in each, but in 2000/2002 reports they were curb idle
limit 712, why were they measuring nox at curb in 2000/2002 and not
now. John

John. Walsh. Purrrrr 89 vdp
bowmanville ontario, Canada
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting
services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On
Line Books and more !

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !