David Massey wrote:
> How many times has someone decided to "get rid of all this
> smog junk and get back all the original power" and proceed to
> rip out the smog pump, the EGR, the PCV, and everything else
> he doesn't understand and find out that not only does the car
> not have any more power but the drivability has also suffered.
Trevor Boicey wrote:
> You know, the pollution equipment didn't make the car
>run like that when it was new. You could also fix the
>problem rather than just pulling parts off the car until
>it runs correctly and then blaming the government because
>you are too lazy to learn about your car.
David, Trevor,
I like to think that many owners who remove the emissions control
(I am in that group that would LIKE to remove the emissions control)
do so for other reasons. I find that the emissions control stuff
clutter the engine bay, and add a degree of complexity to the car
that is out of character with our simple-yet-rugged TRs. And it is not
just the emissions control stuff. Seat-belt interlocks and warning buzzers,
brake pad wear indicators, profligate running lights are examples of
other "features" that just add complexity and expense during restoration.
One question. I do not understand why removel of the EGR
valve would cause a car to run worse, as your note indicates (I
understand why removing the PCV would contribute to running problems,
and I think I can understand why removal of the air pump could
cause problems). I understand how they work, and why they are there,
but dont follow the argument that removal of the EGR will not be
benefical for good running. Could someone enlighten me please?
Thanks in advance,
Shane Ingate in San Diego
|