Pollution Equipment

Help Support 7173Mustangs.com:

goodnigh

VIP Members
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
4,267
Reaction score
55
Location
San Jose, CA
My Car
1971 M-code Grande
What pollution equipment would have come with a 1971 Mustang sold

by a California dealership? My car has a PCV valve and evaporation

canister, that's it. I keep seeing info about additional equipment.

The current engine is not the one that was sold with the car.

mike

 
Last edited by a moderator:
K

Kit Sullivan

Guest
Different engines had different combinations of emissions equipment, and "California" and "High Altitude ( Denver area)" cars had even more.

There were several thermostatically-controlled air and coolant "trees", switches and other devices that many don't think about when they think of "emissions equipment".

It is daunting to correctly replicate a complete OEM emission system set-up on a 45 year old car that has had most or all of it disconected, bypassed ir removed.

 

72HCODE

"My World is Fire and Blood"
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
3,091
Reaction score
53
Location
New York
My Car
72 Mach 1.
it gets a little tricky....

I've heard people say it depended in where in California it was sold.

if it was all done up for emissions for 71.

could of had:

Smog pump

spark delay valve

distributor modulator

you would have to look for evidence behind the dash and on the firewall.

mounting holes on the firewall, extra wiring harness connectors for the distributor modulator.

if the car had a dual diaphragm distributor verse a single

now i have never seen a 71 or 72 with a EGR, 73 yes, but i'm not sure even very 72 cars would of had them.

smog pumps is another thing; i'm not sure 70-73 cars used them, i know i've seen them pre 1970... but i'm not sure if the new 351 engine required them. i have never seen one on a 71-72 car but i'm not saying they didn't exist.

what i have seen, is: DVCV, the spark control module, spark delay valve, dual diaphragm distributor, PCV, speed sensor.

Don over at OMS has seen way more then most of us. fire him a pm and see what he says as well.

another area of confusion.... Cougars and trucks had different emissions combinations as well. since the cougar is very like a mustang there could be confusion as to what a mustang came configured like.

mustangs didn't get a fan clutch, but cougars did.

 

rpmcarter

VIP Members
Joined
Feb 12, 2011
Messages
3,150
Reaction score
5
Location
in a VAN down by the RIVER !!!
My Car
71 Mustang Mach I
351c 2v
highly optioned

67 Mustang Convertible
1 of 35 Diamond Blue
Survivor
finding these items will be near impossible to locate. duplication is not worth your time or money. If someone has it your lucky if you can afford it you have more money than most to dispose.

The California cars had all the above and front to back returns, to the fuel cell. The fuel cell itself had a bladder installed in it, near impossible to duplicate along with a unit mounted in the trunk to provide air flow to the tank and returns to the front.

kinda cool stuff but not really. True Gubmint disaster.

 

rocket366

VIP Members
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
14
Location
Martinez, CA
My Car
73 Coupe 351c
The original smog equipment for my 73 is at Turk Island a

super nice landfill in Newark, CA.

Back in the day those parts were the first thing that got S Canned.

Good Luck on your search for those parts.

Regards

Paul

 
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
5,922
Reaction score
76
Location
Oklahoma
My Car
1971 Boss 351
1971 Mustang Sportsroof
1972 Q Code 4-speed conv.
While this info doesn't answer your question - it does speak to some of the Federal requirements that heavily effected our cars.

http://www.pawalaw.com/cases/auto-fearmongering.php

Catalytic Converters

1970: Congress considers legislation --the Clean Air Act -- to require the reduction of smog-forming and other pollutants by 90 percent by 1975-76.

During consideration of the Clean Air Act, the Automobile Manufacturers' Association lobbies against the bill and sends a memo to Congress stating:

"It presently appears that it will simply not be possible for vehicle manufacturers to achieve the control levels specified in the bill with any fossil fuel-burning engine-including steam, gas turbines, etc., as well as internal combustion engines. All technology known to the automobile industry indicates this to be the fact. In view of this, manufacturers unable to meet the control levels specified in the bill would be forced to shut down, unless provided with emergency standards relaxation by Congress. "

Click here to read the 1970 Memorandum by AMA.

Dec. 31, 1970: Clean Air Act enacted

1970-73: GM, Ford and Chrysler oppose the requirements to use catalytic converters. GM is the primary opponent of mandatory catalysts. All three companies seek an extension of time from EPA.

April, 1972 Ford claims that to deny the automakers more time to comply with these limits "would shut down a major portion of the automotive industry and wreak havoc upon the American economy."

May, 1972. EPA denies the extension of time. The Big Three appeal to federal court, which orders EPA, in February, 1973, to reconsider the manufacturers' claims of economic harm under a less stringent standard of evidence.

March, 1973. GM testifies at an EPA hearing that "if GM is forced to introduce catalytic converter systems across-the board on 1975 models, the prospect of an unreasonable risk of business catastrophe and massive difficulties with these vehicles in the hands of the public must be faced. It is conceivable that complete stoppage of the entire production could occur, with the obvious tremendous loss to the company, shareholders, employees, suppliers, and communities. Short of that ultimate risk, there is a distinct possibility of varying degrees of interruption, with sizable dislocations"

Click here read the 1973 EPA transcript (PDF).

1973: Chrysler President John J. Riccardo calls the Clean Air Act limits "beyond the capability of known technology."

May, 1973: EPA agrees to relax the Clean Air Act standards for two years and states that the decision is based primarily on industry's claims of dire economic consequences.

Six weeks later, GM, finding the devices work just fine and also increase fuel economy by 20-30 percent, announces that all of its 1975 models will be equipped with catalytic converters.

In the early 1970s as all this was going on, the President of GM was Edward Cole. Cole had called on oil companies in January, 1970 at a speech to the Society of Automotive Engineers to take the lead out of gasoline to facilitate the use of catalytic converters and said that starting with model year 1971 all GM cars would be able to run on unleaded gasoline. Yet his company spent the next thee years fighting against catalytic converters until its sudden announcement -- after obtaining its requested slow-down of the rules -- that catalytic converters were ready to go. He has a son named David Cole who, according to a 1990 Washington Post article is "director of an independent auto research center at the University of Michigan." Is this the same David Cole with a nearly identical professional affiliation who prophecies economic doom in the January 27, 2009 New York Times if the car companies are forced to comply with the California greenhouse gas emissions rules?

Sources: Michael Weisskopf, Auto-Pollution Debate Has Ring of the Past, Despite Success, Detroit Resists, Washington Post, March 26, 1990; Clarence M. Ditlow, Fedeal Regulation of Motor Vehicle Emissions Under the Clean Air Amendments of 1970, 4 Ecology Law Quarterly 495 (1975).

Ray


Emissions Systems Components

1.1 Introduction

When the first emission controls were first introduced back in the late 1960s, they were

primarily "add-on" components that solved a particular emission need. When positive

crankcase ventilation (PCV) became standard in 1968, the recycling of crankcase

vapors eliminated blowby emissions as a major source of automotive pollution. When

evaporative emission controls were added in 1971, charcoal canisters and sealed fuel

systems eliminated fuel vapors as another factor that contributed to air pollution.

Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) was added in 1973, which lowered harmful oxides of

nitrogen (NOX) emissions. But the most significant add-on came in 1975 when the auto

makers were required to install catalytic converters on all new cars.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

goodnigh

VIP Members
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
4,267
Reaction score
55
Location
San Jose, CA
My Car
1971 M-code Grande
Check out the AMA Specifications for 1971 Mustang in our WIKI:

http://www.7173mustangs.com/attachment.php?aid=18385

Page 12 lists the emissions equipment and configurations for different engines.

I hope it helps. I didn't see much for other than for the 1971 429 engines.

Ray
Thanks Ray,

My car is stock then. Basically nothing.

mike

 

c9zx

VIP Members
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
5,340
Reaction score
273
Location
Mustang, OK.
My Car
1972 Mach 1 Q code
2007 GT
1969 Cougar Eliminator B302
CSX 7000 Shelby Cobra FIA
2020 Edge ST
2002 F250 V10
Mike, the California 72s had several "emissions" parts different from the other states. For example the intake air was feed from the front of the car through a plastic, rectangular tube that transitioned to a round flexible tube on the snorkel. Because of this, the snorkel inlet was more straight on the end to allow the flexible tube to be stapled to the snorkel inlet. I can't find any thing that discusses 1971 California differences. However, I recently helped a friend with a 1966 289 California Mustang that had a smog pump system so, there may be differences. Someone knows what differences existed in 1971 for California cars, it isn't me or anyone I know. If you uncover the differences please post what you find out. I think it would benefit anyone wanting to do a 1971 California concours restoration and I'm curious as well.

Chuck

 
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
5,922
Reaction score
76
Location
Oklahoma
My Car
1971 Boss 351
1971 Mustang Sportsroof
1972 Q Code 4-speed conv.
Calling all/any low mileage and original California Mustangs!

Gotta be one somewhere! For 72 I think the factory invoice calls out "NOX Emission System" for California sold cars. 73 California cars have "California Emissions Testing" listed on invoice

http://www.7173mustangs.com/thread-marti-deluxe-report--13782?page=2

accompanied by a California Emissions sticker usually applied to the driver's side passenger window. If I remember correctly the 72 Cali cars had a similar sticker as well. I posted pics of the stickers on here somewhere!!!!

EDIT FOUND them both -- pn on bottom of sticker helps ident year:

For 1973>>

1973 Exhaust Emission Control placement.JPG

For 1972>>

1972 Ford California Emmisions Control Window Sticker.jpg

http://www.7173mustangs.com/thread-eminger-report-questions?page=3

Ray

 

cazsper

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
1,066
Reaction score
2
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
My Car
1968 Coupe: 393w, TKO-600, Maier Racing springs, Global West suspension, Currie 9in with forged axles, 3.50 gears, Trutrac, Baer brakes front/rear
1973 Mach-1: 351c 4V, C-6, 3.73:1 gears and a long "To Do" list..
All that emissions equipment is crazy. I live in California also. When I got my '68 coupe, i had to smog it. Being an auto (then) it didn't have to have a smog pump. If it was annual, it would have had to have the smog pump. Also, if you were the original owner, you didn't have to run a NOX kit, but once it changed hands, it had to. What I did, was just told them that my dad was the original owner. Then they didn't make me get the NOX kit.. Freakin' California.

 

OMS

Vendors
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
4,559
Reaction score
150
Location
ohio
My Car
xxx
What pollution equipment would have come with a 1971 Mustang sold

by a California dealership? My car has a PCV valve and evaporation

canister, that's it. I keep seeing info about additional equipment.

The current engine is not the one that was sold with the car.

mike
Mike, I think for 71 it was the canister and PCV

I just sold my early 71 M code auto CA Grande - your cars twin but with a C6

That's all it had

I have never seen a 71-3 with a fuel cell from the factory

 
Last edited by a moderator:

rpmcarter

VIP Members
Joined
Feb 12, 2011
Messages
3,150
Reaction score
5
Location
in a VAN down by the RIVER !!!
My Car
71 Mustang Mach I
351c 2v
highly optioned

67 Mustang Convertible
1 of 35 Diamond Blue
Survivor
All that emissions equipment is crazy. I live in California also. When I got my '68 coupe, i had to smog it. Being an auto (then) it didn't have to have a smog pump. If it was annual, it would have had to have the smog pump. Also, if you were the original owner, you didn't have to run a NOX kit, but once it changed hands, it had to. What I did, was just told them that my dad was the original owner. Then they didn't make me get the NOX kit.. Freakin' California.
In your case a 68 may only have 2 items for compliance, the stuff hit the fan in 71

even more interesting is the Gubmint forces Mercury to adhere to a higher standard than Mustang since it ONLY had a canister and valve. Hmmm so if you were a dealer back then what was the cost of the sale vs your Mercury competitor? More privilege for one dealer vs another? I dont buy it. My Cougar was loaded with the crap so the way I see the thread, post point to FORD had leverage. If they were following the law. it amounts to trade practices and lawsuits. Dont see any of those so I'm not sold on what the truth is here.

 

OMS

Vendors
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
4,559
Reaction score
150
Location
ohio
My Car
xxx
Mike just found the marti for a 71 M code Grande I had

On the order list it shows

NOX Emission System

Car was built on 9/70

Dealer in Fullerton Ca

Don

 

goodnigh

VIP Members
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
4,267
Reaction score
55
Location
San Jose, CA
My Car
1971 M-code Grande
Mike just found the marti for a 71 M code Grande I had

On the order list it shows

NOX Emission System

Car was built on 9/70

Dealer in Fullerton Ca

Don
Hi Don,

I just checked my Marti, Eminger and window sticker, there is

no mention of a NOX system.

My car was old in San Jose April 2nd.

mike

 
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
5,922
Reaction score
76
Location
Oklahoma
My Car
1971 Boss 351
1971 Mustang Sportsroof
1972 Q Code 4-speed conv.
Can you imagine trying to concourse restore a mid 75 and later vehicle and being forced to put on catalytic converters? I am glad we don't have to &*(^$ with that. In 75 we bought a new Blazer and ordered it with the 350 4V. It did not require catalytic converter because the Blazer was rated as a truck (greater than or equal to 5/8 ton rating vs. 1/4 ton for many pickups.

Sifting through my literature I am looking for a "Shop Tips" with specific emissions information. I have not found it yet but if anyone else has time - please research. Ford also would put out specific manual/literature with specific topics. The might have been an "Emissions" version printed back then...

EDIT: Here is one of the online scans of the Ford "Shop Tips" concerning emission controls.

http://www.mustangtek.com/Library6/ShopTips9-7.html

ShopTips9-7_001.jpg

There are more around the same time period. This site has many similar scans and other cool stuff:

http://www.mustangtek.com/

Ray

 

72HCODE

"My World is Fire and Blood"
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
3,091
Reaction score
53
Location
New York
My Car
72 Mach 1.
really hard to find info on a NOx emissions system.

i did some research apparently this was Nox emissions on a 1971 mustang:

---------------

IIRC the NOX was a Calif. smog retrofit to reduce emissions.

Besides the lovely window and air cleaner stickers the

timing was retarded and the vacuum advance was plugged. This

was done to try and reduce exhaust emissions. The NOX kit consisted of 2 rubber plugs to remove the vacuum advance line and 2 stickers. One sticker had to be placed in the engine bay and the other on the dash. Without the stickers permanently attached, they wouldn't SMOG the car. A dealer invoice has a $30.77 line item for a NOX Emission System.

-------------

on 428CJ cars, they did have to have a smog pump system(thermactor) installed to pass cali CARB requirements.

-----

so this is apparently what a NOx means on the dealer invoice.

NOx reduction requires the timing to be retarded because retarded timing increased exhaust manifold heat which burned off Nitrogen oxide,, but increased manifold heat and retarded timing would of increased CO2 emissions. looks like they traded one problem for another before EGRs came out.

 

c9zx

VIP Members
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
5,340
Reaction score
273
Location
Mustang, OK.
My Car
1972 Mach 1 Q code
2007 GT
1969 Cougar Eliminator B302
CSX 7000 Shelby Cobra FIA
2020 Edge ST
2002 F250 V10
I guess they never calculated total emissions. The things that EPA required resulted in great reductions in gas mileage and therefore increased emissions. A 1968 302 would get 23 mpg. By 1977 that number was more like 17. Another fine example of what happens when the government says they know best are going to save us from ourselves. Chuck

 

rpmcarter

VIP Members
Joined
Feb 12, 2011
Messages
3,150
Reaction score
5
Location
in a VAN down by the RIVER !!!
My Car
71 Mustang Mach I
351c 2v
highly optioned

67 Mustang Convertible
1 of 35 Diamond Blue
Survivor
I find it ODD that all the components piece by piece would be listed on a Marti report as well. Seems unrealistic to me. After all it was Mr. Marti that called me out on the "truth" when I gave him the codes /paint code on my 67 stating that it didnt exist and that I had MIS-READ what was probably a scuffed up data tag. if any of you saw the data tag your 1st grader could read it. So I had to INSIST that he run the information as I provided it and I would accept FULL RESPONSIBILITY for the results and pay for the service no questions ask.

Sure enough it comes back with 35 being painted that color in 67 and the jackleg never apologized for being rude either.

 

Latest posts

Top