K series Miata swap
07-27-2015, 09:27 PM
#881
yeah i just tried to test fit the upper portion of a stock tsx manifold into my 93 so i could run it while i wait for my kmiata big tube header, it hits the frame big time. Custom exhaust only. Not to mention wiring in a NA is 90% more involved than wiring into a NB
Reply
0
0
07-28-2015, 11:29 PM
#883
Supporting Vendor
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 635
Total Cats: 322
Good info guys. As you can guess, we get a lot of questions about CARB certification. It's not cheap, but we may look into the details in the future.
We've sold plenty of swap kits to guys in CA already, but mainly for race car duty.
Josh, I know Andy Hollis ran the factory exhaust manifold with a little trimming on his NB. Does it look like it could be trimmed to work in an NA?
We've sold plenty of swap kits to guys in CA already, but mainly for race car duty.
Josh, I know Andy Hollis ran the factory exhaust manifold with a little trimming on his NB. Does it look like it could be trimmed to work in an NA?
__________________
KPower Industries
Home of the original KMiata Swap
K24 NC swap is coming in 2024! Learn more
info@kpower.industries
Follow us on Facebook and Instagram
KPower Industries
Home of the original KMiata Swap
K24 NC swap is coming in 2024! Learn more
info@kpower.industries
Follow us on Facebook and Instagram
Reply
0
0
07-28-2015, 11:54 PM
#884
So I seem to remember motoiq.com did an LS3 E-Rod swap into some car (yup, 3rd Gen RX-7). The kit included a set of cats that need to be welded in, and are required to be in certain locations, per the GM emission specs.
Here's the link to all the build entries:
Mazda V8 RX7
Here's where they built the exhaust:
http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticl...e-exhaust.aspx
And here's the one where they went for CARB cert or whatever:
http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticl...alifornia.aspx
Those links might provide some info/help.
Here's the link to all the build entries:
Mazda V8 RX7
Here's where they built the exhaust:
http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticl...e-exhaust.aspx
And here's the one where they went for CARB cert or whatever:
http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticl...alifornia.aspx
Those links might provide some info/help.
Last edited by czubaka; 07-28-2015 at 11:58 PM. Reason: Added/fixed links
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 11:46 AM
#888
<p>
</p><p> </p><p>If you are a SEMA member they are working on CARB cert level emissions dyno and equipment. It should be complete by the end of this year. I think you can do preliminary testing there before going to the actual lab to attain the CARB EO cert. </p>
Good info guys. As you can guess, we get a lot of questions about CARB certification. It's not cheap, but we may look into the details in the future. We've sold plenty of swap kits to guys in CA already, but mainly for race car duty. Josh, I know Andy Hollis ran the factory exhaust manifold with a little trimming on his NB. Does it look like it could be trimmed to work in an NA?
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 12:53 PM
#889
Elite Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,642
Total Cats: 36
I say this as a person not affiliated with anything ever in any way and having no intention of ever visiting California, much less living there or registering a vehicle.
How much attention do emissions inspectors pay to the diagrams in the engine bay?
Here its sort of a joke, they barley glance at the stuff. I have had 100% compliant vehicles and they sort of just look at it, look at the stupid sticker, scratch their heads, and move on to the sniffer test. Eevn in the case of a K swap where the exhaust and intake are reversed, I can absolutely see some creative heat shields and a lot of vac lines routed per the sticker doing the job just fine for visual inspection. Valve cover with a Mazda logo would be a nice touch.
Point being, if you have an NA, and it passes a sniffer, and looks like a stock engine with a bunch of vac lines all the hell over the engine bay, will it pass?
How much attention do emissions inspectors pay to the diagrams in the engine bay?
Here its sort of a joke, they barley glance at the stuff. I have had 100% compliant vehicles and they sort of just look at it, look at the stupid sticker, scratch their heads, and move on to the sniffer test. Eevn in the case of a K swap where the exhaust and intake are reversed, I can absolutely see some creative heat shields and a lot of vac lines routed per the sticker doing the job just fine for visual inspection. Valve cover with a Mazda logo would be a nice touch.
Point being, if you have an NA, and it passes a sniffer, and looks like a stock engine with a bunch of vac lines all the hell over the engine bay, will it pass?
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 01:22 PM
#890
Elite Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,642
Total Cats: 36
How sad is this anyway?
Many people are trying to replace old engines with far more modern/clean burning/efficient engines, with CATs and better than factory tuning and having a hard time of it. Because of people who are ostensibly doing the things they do for the sake of air quality and the environment.
The world can: Junk an old car and build a new one, or put the same spec engine in the old and keep it running. Or it can take an existing engine that's much cleaner, put it in the existing chassis, and have minimal resources consumed for a cleaner car. Its not like we are trying to put an over-fueled GM 6.5L diesel without any emissions equipment into a Prius for ****'s sake.
If they really gave a damn about their stated goal they would have a set of rules regarding the presence of CATs, EGR, and how those systems should be done. As in, 'cat should be within 3 feet of cylinder head'. As in, 'factory number of cats required'. As in, 'factory number of 02 sensors required'. Not a blanket stupid set of policies about OEM junk that does not work all that well from the factory in a lot of cases, then a cumbersome process dependent on how much some referee likes you to enforce it and allow any changes as needed. Seriously, its sad that we are beyond even pointing out how absolutely idiotic this entire cumbersome process is. I would love to see the emissions from a healthy NA 130 HP BP vs a healthy bolt-ons 230 HP K24a2. My guess is that its not exactly a major cause of global ******* climate change or local smog and particulates.
Many people are trying to replace old engines with far more modern/clean burning/efficient engines, with CATs and better than factory tuning and having a hard time of it. Because of people who are ostensibly doing the things they do for the sake of air quality and the environment.
The world can: Junk an old car and build a new one, or put the same spec engine in the old and keep it running. Or it can take an existing engine that's much cleaner, put it in the existing chassis, and have minimal resources consumed for a cleaner car. Its not like we are trying to put an over-fueled GM 6.5L diesel without any emissions equipment into a Prius for ****'s sake.
If they really gave a damn about their stated goal they would have a set of rules regarding the presence of CATs, EGR, and how those systems should be done. As in, 'cat should be within 3 feet of cylinder head'. As in, 'factory number of cats required'. As in, 'factory number of 02 sensors required'. Not a blanket stupid set of policies about OEM junk that does not work all that well from the factory in a lot of cases, then a cumbersome process dependent on how much some referee likes you to enforce it and allow any changes as needed. Seriously, its sad that we are beyond even pointing out how absolutely idiotic this entire cumbersome process is. I would love to see the emissions from a healthy NA 130 HP BP vs a healthy bolt-ons 230 HP K24a2. My guess is that its not exactly a major cause of global ******* climate change or local smog and particulates.
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 01:59 PM
#891
One has to grasp the entire sphere of engine swaps and modifications for every vehicle and how many are poorly conceived and executed to understand why there is a specific set of regulations for DIY. That the potential exists for a resourceful and skilled company or individual to BAR just about anything, is a blessing.
__________________
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 02:07 PM
#892
Newb
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 10
Total Cats: 0
How sad is this anyway?
Many people are trying to replace old engines with far more modern/clean burning/efficient engines, with CATs and better than factory tuning and having a hard time of it. Because of people who are ostensibly doing the things they do for the sake of air quality and the environment.
The world can: Junk an old car and build a new one, or put the same spec engine in the old and keep it running. Or it can take an existing engine that's much cleaner, put it in the existing chassis, and have minimal resources consumed for a cleaner car. Its not like we are trying to put an over-fueled GM 6.5L diesel without any emissions equipment into a Prius for ****'s sake.
If they really gave a damn about their stated goal they would have a set of rules regarding the presence of CATs, EGR, and how those systems should be done. As in, 'cat should be within 3 feet of cylinder head'. As in, 'factory number of cats required'. As in, 'factory number of 02 sensors required'. Not a blanket stupid set of policies about OEM junk that does not work all that well from the factory in a lot of cases, then a cumbersome process dependent on how much some referee likes you to enforce it and allow any changes as needed. Seriously, its sad that we are beyond even pointing out how absolutely idiotic this entire cumbersome process is. I would love to see the emissions from a healthy NA 130 HP BP vs a healthy bolt-ons 230 HP K24a2. My guess is that its not exactly a major cause of global ******* climate change or local smog and particulates.
Many people are trying to replace old engines with far more modern/clean burning/efficient engines, with CATs and better than factory tuning and having a hard time of it. Because of people who are ostensibly doing the things they do for the sake of air quality and the environment.
The world can: Junk an old car and build a new one, or put the same spec engine in the old and keep it running. Or it can take an existing engine that's much cleaner, put it in the existing chassis, and have minimal resources consumed for a cleaner car. Its not like we are trying to put an over-fueled GM 6.5L diesel without any emissions equipment into a Prius for ****'s sake.
If they really gave a damn about their stated goal they would have a set of rules regarding the presence of CATs, EGR, and how those systems should be done. As in, 'cat should be within 3 feet of cylinder head'. As in, 'factory number of cats required'. As in, 'factory number of 02 sensors required'. Not a blanket stupid set of policies about OEM junk that does not work all that well from the factory in a lot of cases, then a cumbersome process dependent on how much some referee likes you to enforce it and allow any changes as needed. Seriously, its sad that we are beyond even pointing out how absolutely idiotic this entire cumbersome process is. I would love to see the emissions from a healthy NA 130 HP BP vs a healthy bolt-ons 230 HP K24a2. My guess is that its not exactly a major cause of global ******* climate change or local smog and particulates.
Even if a small number of "enthusiasts" do make their cars less efficient than OEM, what is the impact on the total particulate output. Very small I would imagine.
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 02:07 PM
#893
<p>I agree that the smog regulations are a necessity and Calfiornia's CARB have paved the way for an incredible reduction of vehicle emissions over the part 40 years. It's standards are now implemented almost globally in some shape or form to help reduce vehicle emissions. </p><p> </p><p>As much as we bitch and complain about it we couldn't live without it (or wouldn't want to at least). Even though there are capable people who can build vehicle that meet or exceed the existing emissions output specs and pass the bi-annual sniffer test there are many more idiots that will bypass the emissions requirements in engine swaps and there lies our problem and why the process is so complicated. </p>
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 02:13 PM
#894
<p></p><p> </p><p>Replacing your CAT with test pipes increases it's pollutant output by over 40x. I'd say it can be significant. </p><p> </p><p>But yes, I agree that the sniffer judge could reduce the number of careless idiots modding cars out there. </p>
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 06:32 PM
#896
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: TAMPA, FL
Posts: 817
Total Cats: 20
As a former Californian, I have to say that the problem isn't that CA has rules about smog. Fine, have rules. It's that the rules they have chosen are utterly retarded and don't help. And I reject the notion that CARB reduced CA's smog problem. Cars just got better. If CARB was the answer, why does FL (which has no rules whatsoever) have no smog problem anywhere in the state?
The best way to control smog is to test emissions at idle and under load. And then run a program to replace/fix failing vehicles owned by poor people, which is half the problem. Sooty, 15 year old hondas with worn valve guides are a much bigger problem than all the catless turbo miatas on this site. How about 18 wheelers? Do they magically stop polluting when they're registered out of state?
The "everything must be stock or carb certified" rule is stupid. I saw many shitty running stock engines go through smog without any problems when I was there, but if you've got a non-approved part or some of your wires or hoses are different, you autofail, even if your emissions numbers are good. And what's extra sad is that most of the CARB certified options are crap when it comes to tuning- it's mostly a way to protect aftermarket manufacturers from competition.
The "you must use your year engine or newer" rule is also stupid. Who really thinks that swapping a 96 engine into a 2005 miata is going to harm emissions? What about a 96 miata with a 94 block and a 99 head? How about a 2003 LSx V8? All this does is needlessly complicate a lot of car projects. If the car is running properly and isn't some sort of gross polluter, who gives a **** what exact year it is from?
The "97+ must use OBD2 rule" is also stupid. Factory computers are easy to fool. Factory computers can be run in parallel with race computers. The OBD-2 portion of factory computers can be emulated with a ******* arduino these days. And again, the guys doing this stuff aren't polluting anyway.
The best way to control smog is to test emissions at idle and under load. And then run a program to replace/fix failing vehicles owned by poor people, which is half the problem. Sooty, 15 year old hondas with worn valve guides are a much bigger problem than all the catless turbo miatas on this site. How about 18 wheelers? Do they magically stop polluting when they're registered out of state?
The "everything must be stock or carb certified" rule is stupid. I saw many shitty running stock engines go through smog without any problems when I was there, but if you've got a non-approved part or some of your wires or hoses are different, you autofail, even if your emissions numbers are good. And what's extra sad is that most of the CARB certified options are crap when it comes to tuning- it's mostly a way to protect aftermarket manufacturers from competition.
The "you must use your year engine or newer" rule is also stupid. Who really thinks that swapping a 96 engine into a 2005 miata is going to harm emissions? What about a 96 miata with a 94 block and a 99 head? How about a 2003 LSx V8? All this does is needlessly complicate a lot of car projects. If the car is running properly and isn't some sort of gross polluter, who gives a **** what exact year it is from?
The "97+ must use OBD2 rule" is also stupid. Factory computers are easy to fool. Factory computers can be run in parallel with race computers. The OBD-2 portion of factory computers can be emulated with a ******* arduino these days. And again, the guys doing this stuff aren't polluting anyway.
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 07:22 PM
#897
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Posts: 7,951
Total Cats: 1,004
<p>Well, you see, the Miami Valley has had large pollution problems because the smog gets trapped between the mountains......</p><p> </p><p>Oh, there isn't a Miami valley?</p><p>No valleys to speak of?</p><p> </p><p>You mean the state is flat, and surrounded by water on both sides? And there's a huge, largely uninhabited swamp in the middle of it?</p><p> </p><p>Maybe that's why there's not major air quality problems in Florida 
</p>
</p>
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 07:32 PM
#899
SADFab Destructive Testing Engineer
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Beaverton, USA
Posts: 18,642
Total Cats: 1,866
<p>
</p><p>Why I miss props</p>
</p><p>Well, you see, the Miami Valley has had large pollution problems because the smog gets trapped between the mountains......</p><p>Oh, there isn't a Miami valley?</p><p>No valleys to speak of?</p><p>You mean the state is flat, and surrounded by water on both sides? And there's a huge, largely uninhabited swamp in the middle of it?</p><p>Maybe that's why there's not major air quality problems in Florida <img alt="" src="images/smilies/dunno.gif" title="Dunno" /></p><p>
Reply
0
0
07-29-2015, 07:33 PM
#900
<p>
</p><p> </p><p>We are really de-railing this thread but I'm a calibrations engineer who does CARB testing emissions work for my company and I can't leave this unresponded. </p><p> </p><p>CARB <u><strong>IS</strong></u> 100% responsible for the reduction of LAs smog. The amount of emissions has dropped year after year from the stringent laws they put on automakers and requirements for HC, NOX and CO emissions. These requirments <strong>FORCE</strong> manufactures to come up with technologies such as the 2 way and later 3 way cat converters, narrowband closed loop O2 sensor control, EGR, EVAP, Exhaust gas coolant warming, and a host of other emissions control devices. You think automaker voluntarily decided to spend a whole bunch of R&D money and increase the cost of their cars to reduce their emissions? They have no incentive at all to do that. It's the CARB, EPA, EU and other legislation that enforced these requirements to reduce pollutants. </p><p> </p><p>LA Smog is particularly bad due to it population density and it being in a valley where the mountain trap alot of the pollutants. FL might no have these geographical contributions but mostly they don't have as much smog because the CARB legislation has been adopted by over half of the united states now and all car manufacturers make their cars to just about the CARB spec. </p><p> </p><p>The newer engine rule is because year by year the amount of pollutants a car is allowed to emit is reduced (LEVI, LEVII, ULEV, SUELV, etc.) a 2010 super ultra low emissions (SULEV) engine has about 1/10th the emissions output of a low emissions Vehicle I (LEVI). So putting LEV1 engine in a vehicle that required the SULEV spec engine is polluting 10 times as much. </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>
As a former Californian, I have to say that the problem isn't that CA has rules about smog. Fine, have rules. It's that the rules they have chosen are utterly retarded and don't help. <strong>And I reject the notion that CARB reduced CA's smog problem</strong>. Cars just got better. If CARB was the answer, why does FL (which has no rules whatsoever) have no smog problem anywhere in the state? The best way to control smog is to test emissions at idle and under load. And then run a program to replace/fix failing vehicles owned by poor people, which is half the problem. Sooty, 15 year old hondas with worn valve guides are a much bigger problem than all the catless turbo miatas on this site. How about 18 wheelers? Do they magically stop polluting when they're registered out of state? The "everything must be stock or carb certified" rule is stupid. I saw many shitty running stock engines go through smog without any problems when I was there, but if you've got a non-approved part or some of your wires or hoses are different, you autofail, even if your emissions numbers are good. And what's extra sad is that most of the CARB certified options are crap when it comes to tuning- it's mostly a way to protect aftermarket manufacturers from competition. The "you must use your year engine or newer" rule is also stupid. Who really thinks that swapping a 96 engine into a 2005 miata is going to harm emissions? What about a 96 miata with a 94 block and a 99 head? How about a 2003 LSx V8? All this does is needlessly complicate a lot of car projects. If the car is running properly and isn't some sort of gross polluter, who gives a **** what exact year it is from? The "97+ must use OBD2 rule" is also stupid. Factory computers are easy to fool. Factory computers can be run in parallel with race computers. The OBD-2 portion of factory computers can be emulated with a ******* arduino these days. And again, the guys doing this stuff aren't polluting anyway.
Reply
0
0
