MGB "Finally, A Fuel-Injected MGB"

[Bret]

Anybody who gets the next issue of MGB Driver the NAMGBR publication, will be teased yet again by the Moss EFI kit.

The article is titled simply; “Finally, a Fuel-Injected MGB”

Marcham Rhoade of the MGB Register, testdrives one of Moss Motor’s three test mules equipped with the EFI kit. The vehicle in question is in fact owned by Harry Haigh the technical services manager for Moss. All & all nothing really new on when it will be made available – but there is a bit more on how the system works and the layout, along with Mr. Rhoade’s comments & general impressions. Nothing bad – all good!

Along with a delivery date - price hasn’t been nailed down yet either. But the hint is it’ll be just under $2000. That’s about $600 more than what they where originally talking about a in late 03 & early 04. But that’s to be expected I guess.

Not saying I won’t consider it the kit for my new engine, but at that price – I will certainly be entertaining other options. But the biggest advantage the Moss EFI kit has is that it is already emissions legal & comes with a CARB certificate. So that’ll help you avoid playing games with the emissions police and might be worth the added cost.

 

[Bruce Bowker]

Would this give more HP and/or better mileage?

Bruce

 

[Bret]

According to Marcham’s article (and Moss) the answer to both is – “YES”.

Although they don’t give numbers you can expect better gas mileage and a “slight” improvement in power. But if I had to guess how much of an improvement depends probably more on the condition of your engine you bolt it up to.

Again I think Moss isn’t marketing this as a “performance enhancer” for a multitude of reasons. But I suspect its to keep the tree huggers off their backs. So for that reason they are mainly focusing on the benefits of their kit as “reliability”, “drivability” and for those of us in unfriendly emissions states (like Kalifornia) – the fact that it is already certified as a smog “legal” (keyword) replacement for the tired old Zenith Stromberg carburetors.

 

[John Moore]

Brett, I know you've been waiting on this for awhile. I'll be interested to see how it works out.

 

[swift6]

[ QUOTE ]
But the biggest advantage the Moss EFI kit has is that it is already emissions legal & comes with a CARB certificate. So that’ll help you avoid playing games with the emissions police and might be worth the added cost.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bret, do you know if it is 50 state legal. CARB certification is only good for California, doesn't make it emissions legal anywhere else.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif

 

[Bret]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the biggest advantage the Moss EFI kit has is that it is already emissions legal & comes with a CARB certificate. So that’ll help you avoid playing games with the emissions police and might be worth the added cost.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bret, do you know if it is 50 state legal. CARB certification is only good for California, doesn't make it emissions legal anywhere else.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

It is my understanding that the CARB certification is universally recognized & accepted in all 50 states. The CARB certification number will tell the emissions testing facility that it is a legal bolt on. If you want to be sure check with your local emissions laws, but I’m pretty sure you shouldn’t have any problems.

 

[Roger]

Finally? I knew a Tecalemit-Jackson kitted MGB in 1969 or thereabouts.......

 

[Bret]

[ QUOTE ]
Finally? I knew a Tecalemit-Jackson kitted MGB in 1969 or thereabouts.......

[/ QUOTE ]

I can only guess that it's not Emissions legal for the later 75-80 ZS equipped MGBs.

 

[Morris]

[ QUOTE ]
But I suspect its to keep the tree huggers off their backs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Being both a tree hugger and a devote to performance, I think it is a shame that there seems to be such a division between theese two ideals. Escpecially since many performance enhancements improve the economy and "cleanliness" of our LBC's.

Still, I suspect the problems you are having with Kalifornia have more to do with beauracracy than tree huggary.

On another topic, I think another reason Moss is not marketing their FI system as a performance enhancer is due to the volumetric efficiency of a stock B motor (the efficiency with which it pulls air/fuel into the combustion chamber). In it's stock configuration, a B motor is already pulling in close to as much air as it can get. To get a "significant" gain in performance would require the EFI unit to mix the fuel so richly that you would not pass a tail-pipe sniff test. Also, the Moss system does not include an O2 sensor. Therefore, they have probably set the EFI unit to err on the side of leanness.

Still, when bolted to a well-maintained motor, I am willing to bet you will see a very pleasing increase in throttle response and a 5-15 top end HP increase.

Just my 2 pence.

Morris

 

[Bret]

Warning minor rant…..

Hey I ain’t saying it’s wrong to be concerned about the environment. But out here in la la land we have a significant amount of the “Looney, Free to Be You & Me, Hug a Tree environmentalist zealots” that would rival even the most fanatical Taliban fighter in their fervor for their cause. To their credit they (unlike most of us car hobbyists) are extremely organized & well financed and have a firm grasp of how Sacramento works. By the same token we have legislators that pander to the environmentalists on one hand and placate the auto industry with the other.

A perfect example of this was what happened during the last major legislative modification to the exempt status for cars over 30 years old from emissions testing. The new smog laws has every car manufactured from 1976 onward being tested indefinitely for as long as you want to register it in Kalifornia. That while many wondered why the automakers where so quite during the debate – only to discover that as part of the deal they got a 4 to 5 year emissions waver for new vehicles.

While not all so called environmentalists are off the chart, opting to be more reasonable and tactful working their causes through the system like adults. But don’t kid yourself there are factions that are extremely militant in their thinking and won’t be happy un everyone is riding around on bicycles primarily. These folks don’t care that your car is a classic or a part of history and could care less what you or I have to say or feel about it.

Ok I'm better now. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

 

[RomanH]

I'm with Bret on this one! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/iagree.gif
The looney tunes that run Illinois require every car and truck from 1968 onward that get standard plates to be emissions tested. No exemptions!
The only exemption is if you opt for antique plates. If you do this it basically means you can't drive your car! You are only allowed 2k miles/yr, can only drive it on the weekends, in parades or for service. Whats the point of owning a car if you can't use it!
I agree that a well maintained auto runs better, lasts longer and pollutes less but how are we to maintain these vehicles if many of the emission control items are no longer available?
Since there are fewer and fewer of these cars on the road every year I think there should be some kind of compromise to this!
Let us also not forget about back in '94 or '95 when the fed EPA was proposing that catalytic converters be retro fitted to all cars! Most of us would not be here right now since we would not have any LBCs for many of their engines would have been cooked! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

[DrEntropy]

RANT #2:

<self-editing>

Welcome to the "Brave New World"

Basil, I saved you the trouble of deleting another of my OT "indescretions."

Profuse apologies... both in advance and retroactive.

 

[swift6]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the biggest advantage the Moss EFI kit has is that it is already emissions legal & comes with a CARB certificate. So that’ll help you avoid playing games with the emissions police and might be worth the added cost.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bret, do you know if it is 50 state legal. CARB certification is only good for California, doesn't make it emissions legal anywhere else.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

It is my understanding that the CARB certification is universally recognized & accepted in all 50 states. The CARB certification number will tell the emissions testing facility that it is a legal bolt on. If you want to be sure check with your local emissions laws, but I’m pretty sure you shouldn’t have any problems.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a common misconception that CARB=50 State legal. It's not. It's only California legal. To be legal in the other 49 states it needs a Federal exemption. There are four emissions categories. Federal, High altitude, Low Altitude and California. The later, California, has it's own category because when the categories were created, California had 20 percent of the cars in the U.S. High and Low Altitude are pretty self explanatory and Federal is just a catch all for everything else. These categories were established by the Federal Government. There also used to be more Federal enforcement. Technically, it is still a violation of Federal Law to alter ANY emissions equipment (not that any of us have ever done that /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif ) But with practically no enforcement on the Federal level, what good is the law. So now it's down to the individual states and then the counties and municipalities within the states.

In Colorado, a CARB certification by itself won't be enough. No Federal exemption, no dice. However, we have several loopholes that can also be exploited.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif

 

[Bret]

Hmmm? Not sure I totally agree with you. Can’t say with 100% certainty about Colorado, but having lived there for 8 years & I never remember there ever having any problems with this issue. Of all the vehicles I owned while living there - the one I should have had problems with was my 67 Barracuda that had all kinds of aftermarket go fast goodies under the hood. But when I had to take her in for smog checks all I ever did was disconnect the vacuum advance from the dizzy and I always passed.

Anyway I’ve been told that CARB “IS” accepted by most states when you take your car to the inspection station. This is because no other state or even the federal government has as strict a system as California’s CARB certification program. It is tedious, expensive and extremely demanding often exceeding federal standards – yet this is the program that most folks seek out when looking for to attach those magic words to the part’s description – “50 State Legal”. As much as I hate the Emissions Nazis here in this loony state – this is where everybody comes to when seeking that acceptance.

A good example is that Summit, Jegs and just about every other mail order catalog that sells bolt on performance products uses the following catch phrases for listed parts:

“50 State Legal” almost always followed up by a CARB number – never seen a listing for a “Fed Number”.
“49 State Legal” - usually an indication that the part isn’t legal in California.
Or they might just list the CARB EO# number period.
“Off Road only” translated as not legal on public highways period.

The time to really be careful is when there isn’t any comment regarding a products legal status. So if you see similar parts with any of the above notices but the one you are considering purchasing is going to be used on a vehicle that you know has to be subjected to a smog test. Your best bet is to move on and pay a little more for another item that does carry some sort of statement as to its emissions legal status and or CARB EO number.

 

[MGA Steve]

[ QUOTE ]
Of all the vehicles I owned while living there - the one I should have had problems with was my 67 Barracuda that had all kinds of aftermarket go fast goodies under the hood. But when I had to take her in for smog checks all I ever did was disconnect the vacuum advance from the dizzy and I always passed.

[/ QUOTE ]That's because '67 and older cars had no pollution control equipment except a PCV valve. As long as the Cuda had no visible smoke with the vac advance disconnected, it passed. In Colorado, 1960 and older cars are not emission tested at all. I have never been required to have my '56 MGA tested as it was originally sold in Colorado and its 3 owners (including me) never moved it out of state. So, in 50 years the MGA has never had an emissions test. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/nopity.gif

On another topic, has anyone put the new Moss supercharger on their MG? Sportscar Craftsman here in Denver has put them on a Spridget and an MGB. Those lucky few who have driven the MGB say it is more fun to drive than a 3.5-liter V-8 MGB. And those who have driven the Spridget say it is so fast, it is dangerous. Ie., so much fun to drive that everyone who has driven it, wants it! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/devilgrin.gif

 

[Morris]

I think you guys missed my point, because I was kinda agreeing with you. What I was trying to say was the "Tree Nazis" are shooting themselves in the foot by restricting all modifications.

I think it has a lot more to do with beuracracy and consolodating political power (environmental issues will get a certain sector out to the polls) than it does any legitimat concern for air quality.

Ultimately, overly restricting older cars has zero lasting impact on air quality. 1) The worst violators don't get their cars inspected anyway and 2) There are so few pre 1980 cars on the road that if you took them all off the road today the affect to air quality would be microscopic.


Still, as long as it LOOKS like you are "protecting the environment" you can get votes, donations, whatever. And it allows you to distract people from the fact that you are doing nothing at all. (besides cashing checks)

But, classic cars not withstanding, environmental law is the best thing to ever happen to auto performance. If not for environmental law, everyone in the country would still be driving push rod, carburatted, gas-guzzling hunks of crap thanks to the lazy, near sighted, dumb butts that run the auto industry. I am fond of the idea that I can go out and buy a 4-cylinder car that cranks out 225hp, gets 27 miles to the gallon, and is classed as a low emissions vehicle.

Finally, I missed the amendment in the Bill of Rights guaranteeing us the right to drive whatever car we want in whatever condition we want. It's a priveledge (in more ways than one) to drive our LBC's. Dealing with the jerks at the inspection statement is small price to pay for all the joy we get from our cars.

Morris

 

[Bret]

[ QUOTE ]
Finally, I missed the amendment in the Bill of Rights guaranteeing us the right to drive whatever car we want in whatever condition we want. It's a priveledge (in more ways than one) to drive our LBC's. Dealing with the jerks at the inspection statement is small price to pay for all the joy we get from our cars.

Morris

[/ QUOTE ]
Morris,

I wasn’t trying to come down on you, only pointing out how upset I was over the this subject. Remember that the way the emissions laws are written here in Kalifornia the only people penalized for owning older vehicles are the hobbyist like ourselves and those that can’t afford anything else but an old clunker.

You said it very well when you pointed out that should our older cars vanish from the roads tomorrow – the impact would be “microscopic” at best. But we shouldn’t be complacent in simply driving our LBCs. and accept the legislation as it stands. As you said it ain’t like these cars are coming back anytime soon and are gradually falling off the map due to normal attrition. They are historically well maintained, driven less and those that ain’t tend to end up being taken off the road. So I don’t see any harm in easing emissions testing for older vehicles.

Bret

 

[Morris]

Agreed!

 

[swift6]

Bret, In regards to our CARB certification being fifty state legal discussion. I have an answer in regards to Colorado. I had a little chat with the state emissions technical department. We were both right, sorta... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazyeyes.gif

I learned that Colorado Emissions testing is Carbon Monoxide based testing for HC/ppm and CO%, and California is more Ozone based testing for HC/ppm, CO% and NOX (ozone). Colorado measures NOX on the test machines but doesn't require a pass/fail for it. When I asked them specifically about a CARB certified part and if it needed anything else to be legal in Colorado, the answer was "It Depends on the part, the car and what the part does on the car." That comment was followed by, "We trying to put some logic back into this, at least as much as we can get away with." The tech rep went on to explain that if the part, in this discussion the throttle body conversion to the MGB, were to make an improvement(more efficient/less polluting) then they would most likely okay it, even without a CARB certification. Although if the part were only a performance/power enhancer that it would not necesarrily be approved.

So, if a car shows up to a test facility and the test has started when the tester discovers the non-factory equipment then he HAS to fail you. Even if it has a CARB certification number. This is not the end of the world though. This failure does not require the removal of the equipment. This type of failure means that you have to schedule an appointment with the technical center. If the tech center finds that it is beneficial then they will issue a Colorado certification to the car and send you back for a retest with this information for the tester. Then as long as there is no visible smoke and it passes the tailpipe sniffer test, your good to go. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif The person I spoke to wanted to point out that they have no desire to rid the roads of older cars. So any improvement to older cars to help emissions are actually welcome in Colorado. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif Oh and one of the tech reps owns three vintage Loti (is that an official plural of Lotus? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/square.gif)

For everybodies information...

As to the rest of the emissions laws in Colorado, there are only a few areas (larger population centers) that require testing, it is by no means state wide. There are also two levels of testing, "basic" and "enhanced". By the end of next year (2006) there will only be the "enhanced" testing areas as they are preparing to end testing in all the "basic" areas. The "enhanced" areas are all in and surrounding the immediate Denver Metro area.

If you live in an emissions controled area and would like a regular "green" Colorado passenger car license plate, then emissions can be required all the way back to horseless carriages. Pre-1975 (essentially pre-catalytic converter) cars do not have visual inspections for any emissions equipment. They only have to pass the tailpipe sniffer test. (So my TR6 can't be failed for triple carbs.) Newer cars have a visual equipment inspection as well as the tailpipe sniffer test.

Now to the loopholes I mentioned in an earlier post. Vehicles exempt from emissions are any pre-1960 vehicle with a collector, antique, Hot Rod or Horseless Carriage license plate already having or if applying for such a plate. Post 1960 cars applying for a "collector" plate (they won't qualify for any of the others) must pass a tailpipe test before the plate will be issued. After that no emissions test is required as long as you own the vehicle, new owners and new plates must test. Farm vehicles are also exempt. The "collector" plate is also on a rolling 25 year standard, not fixed like California as I understand it. So my 1980 TR8 gets to wear a pretty "collector" plate now. Exempting it from any emissions tests while I own it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif Also, there are NO mileage restrictions on any of those specialty plates. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/driving.gif

As stated earlier... by the end of next year, it won't matter for me in Fort Collins, unless a whole lot of bad stuff happens between now and then.

In all, it was a very educational exercise for me, and I hope none of you mind my sharing it with you.