Thanks for that Dave. I agree with you.
No engineers in the House of Commons, suspect the same in the EU. I looked for the Ford Mondeo V6 in the list but couldn't find it. Do not understand why a Morgan is deemed to have the same CO2 emissions as the donor car. Cheers, Brian On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Dave Wellings <[email protected] > wrote: > **** > > Brian**** > > ** ** > > Look on Pager 97 & 98 – the official manufacturers figs. All Mogs are 1.05. > **** > > ** ** > > http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/repository/Emissions%2017th%20Edition.pdf**** > > ** ** > > What I really don’t understand, is why the upper Lambda matters, when it’s > the weak measure, and if the CO and HC is OK, a fail on this measure seems > bizarre.**** > > ** ** > > Dave**** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Brian Cowell [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* 29 May 2012 16:52 > *To:* mogtalk2 > *Subject:* Re: [mogtalk2] Sweating at the MOT**** > > ** ** > > Dave, Jon**** > > **** > > I've come late to this.**** > > I think that you both and I have Mk I Roadsters.**** > > **** > > lambda readings are (all at speeds of about 2700 rpm):**** > > **** > > Nov 2009 & Nov 2010: 1.01, the bounds being 0.97 and 1.03.**** > > All figures given to 2 decimal places.**** > > **** > > Nov 2011: 1.003, the bounds being given as 0.970 and 1.030.**** > > **** > > I take the car to the Factory (who use Malvern Motor Services) for its MOT. > **** > > **** > > Petrol used is Shell V Power, although used Shell Premium for some of the > time.**** > > **** > > Cheers**** > > **** > > Brian of SpotMog**** > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:52 PM, Martyn J Culling < > [email protected]> wrote:**** > > Jon**** > > Perhaps not a good idea to ask the tester, as you got pass figures, but I > wonder what the experimental error is here. Your figure this year is less > than 0.5% different to last year which to a lot of measuring methods is the > same thing! **** > > ****Woodstock**** of course is much pre-catalyst and just does not have > to emit “excessive” smoke. Likewise the three wheeler.**** > > rgds Martyn**** > > **** > > *From:* Jon Mark [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* 22 May 2012 20:59 > *To:* mogtalk2 > *Subject:* RE: [mogtalk2] Sweating at the MOT**** > > **** > > Dave, interesting info**** > > **** > > My Roadster passed it’s test today & I was just comparing last year > emissions whilst I file the test cert (which is a recipe for forgeries, > there’s no special text, or watermark & it’s just printed on white > photocopier paper – bonkers)**** > > **** > > Lambda this year 1.03**** > > Last year 1.025**** > > 2010 1.024**** > > 2009 1.018 **** > > Do they ‘wear’ out ? or is it just with price watching on petrol, I put > more supermarket stuff in than I used to ?**** > > Although it’s the first test since being ‘chipped’**** > > **** > > Regards,**** > > Jon **** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Dave Wellings > [mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] > > *Sent:* 22 May 2012 20:29 > *To:* mogtalk2 > *Subject:* [mogtalk2] Sweating at the MOT**** > > **** > > Some of you will no doubt know all about this, but here is my story from > yesterday, just posted on Talkmorgan.**** > > **** > > MOT today. The form has now been dumbed down. Instead of the green hard to > forge certificate, it's a simple white page print out, with any advisories > on the right hand side. > > What's more interesting, and worrying is the Lambda requirement. This > measures the fuel/air ratio at the tailpipe, and is between two parameters, > which for my Morgan is (allegedly) 0.9 to 1.03. This is a very narrow band. > On the screen, this displays as a red band with a narrow green pass band. > The measure is shown as a white bar, and is taken at a prescribed 'fast > idle' - just under 3000rpm. It was a struggle to get below 1.03. After a > couple of attempts the tester managed 1.025. A high reading indicates a > leak in the exhaust system, but both tailpipes produced the same effect. > There is no obvious leak, but the Lambda shows a weak mixture. > On checking last years result, it was 1.024, so that was right at the top > end. The machine can't be conned, so exceed the limit and you will fail.** > ** > ------------------------------------------- View posts on The Mail Archive http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/] Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=22459785&id_secret=22459785-4a39ddf8 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
