From owner-fsj-digest-at-digest.net Mon Oct 4 09:04:05 1999 From: fsj-digest fsj-digest Monday, October 4 1999 Volume 01 : Number 568 Forum for Discussion of Full Sized SJ Series Jeeps Brian Colucci Digest Coordinator Contents: Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs Re: fsj: Emissions Problem fsj: back from Portland... Re: fsj: back from Portland... fsj: have I got a MBz/Jeep deal for YOU! :) fsj: Re: Emissions Problem Re: fsj: Re: Emissions Problem Re: fsj: have I got a MBz/Jeep deal for YOU! :) Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs FSJ Digest Home Page: http://www.digest.net/jeeps/fsj/ Send submissions to fsj-digest-at-digest.net Send administrative requests to fsj-digest-request-at-digest.net To unsubscribe, include the word unsubscribe by itself in the body of the message, unless you are sending the request from a different address than the one that appears on the list. Include the word help in a message to fsj-digest-request to get a list of other majordomo commands. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 21:25:16 -0700 From: john Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs then we'll have to lend you the video... john At 10:47 PM 10/1/99 EDT, you wrote: >In a message dated 10/1/1999 7:26:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >john-at-wagoneers.com(WAstatenospam) writes: > >> says who? K&N? they cite incredible flow rates... way more than any engine >> needs... but I could duplicate it with NO air filter. :) and it'd be only >> slightly worse. :) > >Says David Vizard in "How to Build Horsepower, Volume 2, Carburetors and >Intake Manifolds". > >> flow rate is not what you should be looking at. If you do the math you >> don't need that much flow for a 360 V8! > >Quite so. > >>Sure a K&N flows more, big deal, >> it stops birds, small animals and the stray leaf... but lets everything >> else through! :) > >According to Mr. Vizard, in steady-state filtration tests the K&N fell >slightly below (97.5% efficiency) the best paper element (99% efficiency) and >way better than the worst paper element (90% efficiency). The foam filters >weren't even in the running. However, the K&N was tested with a handicap >because it's designed to work under real-world conditions of pulsing flow >-not steady state.. > >> check this chart out: >> http://www.wagoneers.com/AMSOIL/Filter_INFORMATION/air-filters-chart.jpg > >There's not enough documentation with that chart for me to get anything >meaningful out of it. > >Ben Williams >'71 Wagoneer > > > > - ------------------------------------------------------- john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com ...don't leave life without Jesus, please! Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... Washington has laws prohibiting unsolicited commercial email, aka: SPAM. $500 per message. I report abuse. - -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 21:31:21 -0700 From: john Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs right on! :) john At 07:10 PM 10/2/99 EDT, OrigamiTB-at-aol.com wrote: >Here's what Ed Hackett at The Desert Research Institute in Reno wrote >about K&N air filters: > >> K&Ns are great for airflow, which is what they were designed for. >> Their original application was on racing engines, where airflow is >> important and ultimate engine life was of little concern. They are >> not as good at filtering as paper or oiled foam types. > >He tested Amsoil and Uni oiled-foam filters against paper, oil bath, >and K&N (oiled gauze) filters using an SAE test method, and only the >oil bath type scored higher than Amsoil in the categories of >"dust-holding capacity", "load-up characteristic", and >"backfire characteristic". The Amsoil and Uni filters shared top scores >in the categories of "large-particle efficiency", "small-particle efficiency", >"airflow capacity", and "cleanability". See the test results at > >http://www.roadkill.com/~davet/moto/air.filters.html > >++ Cornel Ormsby ++ >running K&N's on my old Suzuki GT750 > - ------------------------------------------------------- john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com ...don't leave life without Jesus, please! Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... Washington has laws prohibiting unsolicited commercial email, aka: SPAM. $500 per message. I report abuse. - -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 21:38:26 -0700 From: john Subject: Re: fsj: Emissions Problem try new plugs, new wires, and replace all the vacuum lines... a high flow cat is a good idea... john At 07:02 PM 10/2/99 EDT, UrbFarmer-at-aol.com wrote: >Well, the "Res Runner" has been hauling my behind to work for the last week >or so. I took it out after the tranny/tsfr case swap and it overheated like >no-body's business. So I swapped out the spare radiator I had in the garage, >cleaned the AC condenser (I don't know why I left that in there 'cause I have >no compressor!), put on the tranny cooler I had in the box since last summer, >and filled her up with good coolant. Doesn't go beyond half of the gauge on >a hot day now. Wah Hoo! >So today I took her down to the emmissions testing station here in >illi-noise. The old girl failed hydrocarbons (543, max 220ppm) and monoxide >(1.9, max 1.2%) miserably. The tech that checked it had to call a supervisor >since mine was FULL TIME 4WD! No Dyno for me! When I got home, I adjusted >the idle screws and I think it is probably better but not good enough for '81 >emmission standards. When I got the old girl, she didn't have a catalytic >converter or smog pump. I'm probably going to put a cat back on the exhaust >before I attempt another test. I'll probably get a high performance one from >JC Whitney or the parts store. > >Do you think that it enough or should I be looking for an air pump too? >Anything else I can do? I just hate taking the wag to a shop, she's my baby. >Sorry to run on so long. >--Vince >'81 Wag (360, 727, np219) > - ------------------------------------------------------- john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com ...don't leave life without Jesus, please! Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... Washington has laws prohibiting unsolicited commercial email, aka: SPAM. $500 per message. I report abuse. - -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 21:44:13 -0700 From: john Subject: fsj: back from Portland... ...empty Tow Dolly. didn't buy it. (the 79 300SD) too much needed to be done. it was sitting with the driver's window open for two years... the paint was faded, the interior laden with dust and mold... the motor cranked but even with ether wouldn't pop... :( The body was ok, straight mostly... glass was all good. tires bald... brakes sticking... it was a big, old, dirty, ugly, heavy non-operational problem representing lots of work needed... :( oh well... $70 for the tow dolly and a couple of tanks of gas for the little wagoneer... could have been worse... I could have brought it home and spent lots of money on it... :) I'm trying to figure out how I can convince the wife I need that 80 J10 Honcho... :) Maybe I'll just have to sell Fritz... john - ------------------------------------------------------- john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com ...don't leave life without Jesus, please! Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... Washington has laws prohibiting unsolicited commercial email, aka: SPAM. $500 per message. I report abuse. - -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 22:45:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Carnuck-at-webtv.net (James Blair) Subject: Re: fsj: back from Portland... A: Schell mail is Seattle Mayor's online email ...empty Tow Dolly. didn't buy it. (the 79 300SD) too much needed to be done. it was sitting with the driver's window open for two years... the paint was faded, the interior laden with dust and mold... the motor cranked but even with ether wouldn't pop... :( =A0 A: Did it wind real easy? If it did, then it's timing went south, or the pump died. The body was ok, straight mostly... glass was all good. tires bald... brakes sticking... it was a big, old, dirty, ugly, heavy non-operational problem representing lots of work needed... :( oh well... =A0 $70 for the tow dolly and a couple of tanks of gas for the little wagoneer... could have been worse... I could have brought it home and spent lots of money on it... :) I'm trying to figure out how I can convince the wife I need that 80 J10 Honcho... :) Maybe I'll just have to sell Fritz... john A: Time to advertise on Ebay! (or classified 2000, or trader-online) Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee 4 dr 4.2L six, 999 AT, Manual hubs Stop the Chemtrails! My Homepage: http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html FREE Online Photo Album: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=3D13998&Auth=3Dfalse ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 08:32:21 -0700 From: john Subject: fsj: have I got a MBz/Jeep deal for YOU! :) Create your OWN Benzilla project! For $350 you can buy that 79 300SD I looked at yesterday and mount it on the 4x4 chassis of your choice, AND I'll buy the engine and tranny out of the Benz from you for $350! So it costs you nothing to get the body, but a little time and towing... Let me know. I'll need the engine and all associated hardware, mounts, plumbing driveshaft and rear end to swap mine over to a turbo Diesel... the only problem is I'll have to rebuild everythign first... :( john - ------------------------------------------------------- john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com ...don't leave life without Jesus, please! Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... Washington has laws prohibiting unsolicited commercial email, aka: SPAM. $500 per message. I report abuse. - -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 13:12:04 EDT From: OrigamiTB-at-aol.com Subject: fsj: Re: Emissions Problem On Sat, 2 Oct, Vince (UrbFarmer-at-aol.com) wrote about his '81 Wag: > The old girl failed hydrocarbons (543, max 220ppm) and monoxide > (1.9, max 1.2%) miserably. > When I got the old girl, she didn't have a catalytic converter or > smog pump. I'm probably going to put a cat back on the exhaust > before I attempt another test. I'll probably get a high performance > one from JC Whitney or the parts store. > > Do you think that it enough or should I be looking for an air pump too? The cat-con by itself will help reduce HC and CO, but it'll work a lot better with an air-pump than without. ++ Cornel Ormsby ++ Wagoneering in Las Vegas ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 12:58:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Carnuck-at-webtv.net (James Blair) Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Emissions Problem A: The new high performance catalytic converters are non-aerobic, which means they don't need an air pump. All the air pumps did before they attached a converter that needed one, was thin out the exhaust so the vehicles could meet emission standards. They were designed on the pseudo-science that by pumping air into the exhaust, that somehow the hydrocarbons would keep burning. We did tests in the University automotive class that I got my mechanic's license through. We measured 5 gallons of fuel, and ran it through a GM 350 with air pump, and collected the exhaust in one of those weather balloons, which was measured by I/R. We took into account for the added volume by the air pump (we added a bag to catch and calculate the airpump volume) In the end, when we ran the engine without the air pump under load, the fuel lasted 3-5% longer, and the output of HC solids, and NOx, as well as other gases like CO and CO2 were similar over the long run. The only thing the added air did was thin the overall volume of exhaust, just like an exhaust leak would. These were loaded tests, which approxiamate real life more than the idle mix tests at emissions do. (If we cleared the idiots that caused blocked traffic off the roads, no-one would be sitting idling in town, wasting fuel and adding pollution ) On Sat, 2 Oct, Vince (UrbFarmer-at-aol.com) wrote about his '81 Wag: The old girl failed hydrocarbons (543, max 220ppm) and monoxide (1.9, max 1.2%) miserably. When I got the old girl, she didn't have a catalytic converter or smog pump. I'm probably going to put a cat back on the exhaust before I attempt another test. I'll probably get a high performance one from JC Whitney or the parts store. Do you think that it enough or should I be looking for an air pump too? The cat-con by itself will help reduce HC and CO, but it'll work a lot better with an air-pump than without. ++ Cornel Ormsby ++ Wagoneering in Las Vegas Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee 4 dr 4.2L six, 999 AT, Manual hubs Stop the Chemtrails! My Homepage: http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html FREE Online Photo Album: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=13998&Auth=false ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 13:02:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Carnuck-at-webtv.net (James Blair) Subject: Re: fsj: have I got a MBz/Jeep deal for YOU! :) A: If I did that, my wife would have me committed, divorce me, or insist that I (shudder) put a GM engine in the MB! Can you spell AAARRRRGGGGHHHHH? John wrote: Create your OWN Benzilla project! For $350 you can buy that 79 300SD I looked at yesterday and mount it on the 4x4 chassis of your choice, AND I'll buy the engine and tranny out of the Benz from you for $350! So it costs you nothing to get the body, but a little time and towing... Let me know. I'll need the engine and all associated hardware, mounts, plumbing driveshaft and rear end to swap mine over to a turbo Diesel... the only problem is I'll have to rebuild everythign first... :( john Jim Blair, Seattle WA 1983 Cherokee 4 dr 4.2L six, 999 AT, Manual hubs Stop the Chemtrails! My Homepage: http://homepages.go.com/~carnuck/carnuck.html FREE Online Photo Album: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=13998&Auth=false ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 19:17:39 EDT From: Brazzadog-at-aol.com Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs And Amsoil's propaganda is more credible than K&N's? Ben Williams '71 Wagoneer In a message dated 10/2/1999 9:29:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time, john-at-wagoneers.com(WAstatenospam) writes: > then we'll have to lend you the video... > > john > > > At 10:47 PM 10/1/99 EDT, you wrote: > >In a message dated 10/1/1999 7:26:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > >john-at-wagoneers.com(WAstatenospam) writes: > > > >> says who? K&N? they cite incredible flow rates... way more than any > engine > >> needs... but I could duplicate it with NO air filter. :) and it'd be > only > >> slightly worse. :) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 19:32:35 EDT From: Brazzadog-at-aol.com Subject: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs Well that definitely doesn't look good for K&N. So we've got 2 independent tests that reach opposite conclusions. Anybody wanna go for 2 out of 3? Ben Williams '71 Wagoneer OrigamiTB-at-aol.com wrote: >Here's what Ed Hackett at The Desert Research Institute in Reno wrote >about K&N air filters: > >> K&Ns are great for airflow, which is what they were designed for. >> Their original application was on racing engines, where airflow is >> important and ultimate engine life was of little concern. They are >> not as good at filtering as paper or oiled foam types. > >He tested Amsoil and Uni oiled-foam filters against paper, oil bath, >and K&N (oiled gauze) filters using an SAE test method, and only the >oil bath type scored higher than Amsoil in the categories of >"dust-holding capacity", "load-up characteristic", and >"backfire characteristic". The Amsoil and Uni filters shared top scores >in the categories of "large-particle efficiency", "small-particle efficiency", >"airflow capacity", and "cleanability". See the test results at > >http://www.roadkill.com/~davet/moto/air.filters.html. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 18:31:36 -0700 From: john Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs :) depends on what you're testing for I guess... air flow? or protection? or durability? or maintainability? or initial cost? I have owned K&N, and know what a pain they are to clean. If I were to buy a truck or car with one in it, I'd remove it and replace it with an AMSOIL filter immediately. (Or wrap the filter with amsoil filter material... :) there's more to the equation than simply letting air pass through it. :) john At 07:32 PM 10/3/99 EDT, Brazzadog-at-aol.com wrote: >Well that definitely doesn't look good for K&N. So we've got 2 independent >tests that reach opposite conclusions. Anybody wanna go for 2 out of 3? > >Ben Williams >'71 Wagoneer > >OrigamiTB-at-aol.com wrote: > >>Here's what Ed Hackett at The Desert Research Institute in Reno wrote >>about K&N air filters: >> >>> K&Ns are great for airflow, which is what they were designed for. >>> Their original application was on racing engines, where airflow is >>> important and ultimate engine life was of little concern. They are >>> not as good at filtering as paper or oiled foam types. >> >>He tested Amsoil and Uni oiled-foam filters against paper, oil bath, >>and K&N (oiled gauze) filters using an SAE test method, and only the >>oil bath type scored higher than Amsoil in the categories of >>"dust-holding capacity", "load-up characteristic", and >>"backfire characteristic". The Amsoil and Uni filters shared top scores >>in the categories of "large-particle efficiency", "small-particle >efficiency", >>"airflow capacity", and "cleanability". See the test results at >> >>http://www.roadkill.com/~davet/moto/air.filters.html. > - ------------------------------------------------------- john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com ...don't leave life without Jesus, please! Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... Washington has laws prohibiting unsolicited commercial email, aka: SPAM. $500 per message. I report abuse. - -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 18:37:07 -0700 From: john Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs >And Amsoil's propaganda is more credible than K&N's? > >Ben Williams I had a minor run in with amsoil's "new" marketing crew at a business meeting a few years back. Seems they were "cooking" the books themselves. And they were caught redhanded by a few trade journals and Redline and dealers like myself.... Since then they seem to have gone back to the facts based on established standards. The problem, from a marketing standpoint, is that all the products are getting so good now that it's hard to differentiate one from another, so they "pushed" the test parameters in one or two areas to make themselves look better... not unethical, but certainly one that was outside of the standards of the business, and made it hard to compare one product to the others... so, to answer your question, (after reading K&N propaganda), is to say the amsoil tech sheets based on indepent lab results are... :) Comparing marketing hype to marketing hype I'd throw in the towel... :) john - ------------------------------------------------------- john-at-wagoneers.com http://www.wagoneers.com ...don't leave life without Jesus, please! Snohomish, WA - where Jeeps don't rust, they mold... Washington has laws prohibiting unsolicited commercial email, aka: SPAM. $500 per message. I report abuse. - -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 22:19:26 EDT From: Brazzadog-at-aol.com Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs In a message dated 10/3/1999 6:43:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time, john-at-wagoneers.com(WAstatenospam) writes: > so, to answer your question, (after reading K&N propaganda), is to say > the amsoil tech sheets based on indepent lab results are... :) Comparing > marketing hype to marketing hype I'd throw in the towel... :) LOL. OK. I'll stick with my K&N until it "wears out". Ben Williams '71 Wagoneer ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 09:00:26 -0700 (PDT) From: john Subject: Re: fsj: Re: Trouble with Carbs if I buy that 80 honcho I'll be throwing one out... :) john On Sun, 3 Oct 1999 Brazzadog-at-aol.com wrote: >-->In a message dated 10/3/1999 6:43:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >-->john-at-wagoneers.com(WAstatenospam) writes: >--> >-->> so, to answer your question, (after reading K&N propaganda), is to say >-->> the amsoil tech sheets based on indepent lab results are... :) Comparing >-->> marketing hype to marketing hype I'd throw in the towel... :) >--> >-->LOL. OK. I'll stick with my K&N until it "wears out". >--> >-->Ben Williams >-->'71 Wagoneer >--> ---- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- john-at-wagoneers.com **** http://wagoneers.com don't leave life without Jesus, please... Snohomish, Washington USA NOTE: Washington State has anti-spam laws: $500 per occurrence. (spam is unsolicitied commercial email.) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of fsj-digest V1 #568 *************************