no catalytic converter?

[spano Lurker Find all posts View Profile Close spano]

OK guys a quick update....

I had the 5 gas test done today and I have the results.

Below is what was measured and in brackets is the maximum allowable according to what the guy at Transport WA wrote next to my results when I popped in to show him.

IDLE TEST:
CO2 13.90% (<15.6%)
CO 1.20% (<0.5%)
O2 0.78% (>2.5%)
Hexane 208ppm (800ppm)
NOx 52ppm (<100ppm)

CRUISE TEST:
CO2 13.54% (<15.6%)
CO 1.74% (<2.0%)
O2 0.24% (>0.2%)
Hexane 107ppm (<120ppm)
NOx 706ppm (<40ppm) **

As you can see, the last reading of oxides of nitrogen (no load 3000rpm) is off the chart and there lies the problem.

I'm basically back to square one again. The guy said there are only 2 ways that this will pass:
1. Fit a cat - OEM quality
2. Provide proof that the car did not have one fitted from new - from Toyota.

RanJ, now that you've seen this what would you suggest I do next?

Anyone else with anything useful please feel free to chime in!

Cheers, Toby

[AussieAndy Find all posts View Profile Close AussieAndy]

Possibly go and get a parts diagram print out from Toyota spare parts showing the entire exhaust system without the cat converter in it, also make sure the vin is entered into the parts catalog. This is proof from Toyota that the car did not have a cat fitted from factory.

[RanJ Avid PP Poster! Find all posts View Profile Close RanJ]

Yes... there is proof. Right there on that sticker! Also, AussieAndy has a point. Some sort of documentation from Toyota would be good.

Also... if he looks into the diagnostic plug, he would see that the O2 sensor pin is not populated, nor has it ever been. No O2s... No cat.

But seriously... that damn sticker says everything he needs to know. It does not need to comply with ADR37.

[spano Lurker Find all posts View Profile Close spano]

Thanks Andy that is a really good idea. I had previously phoned a couple of Toyota dealers and they list 2 exhausts for the VZJ95R but they do not appear to be VIN specific. I told Toyota customer experience that their previous reponse was not good enough and I wanted my enquiry escalated. We'll see what happens.

RanJ, I know right! There is just no telling them, even after producing the ADR36 material that you helped me out with he still said no. He even tried to tell me that ADR37 didn't start until 2000?? He also made the point again that my compliance plate category and approval code tell him that the vehicle needs a cat to satisfy that requirement as well. Sadly they are not prepared to budge on their stance.

Fortunately I have come up with a solution to get me back on the road.... I managed to get it relicenced in NSW today! They accepted a local inspection report in lieu of a NSW pink slip. I would have just done that in the first place had I known what I was up against in WA. As it turns out I have an address in NSW and was able to use that.

This gives me time to sort it without any pressure.

[RanJ Avid PP Poster! Find all posts View Profile Close RanJ]

DOTARS explains it plain view that it does not need a cat in studies that they did.

If I can refer you to this report in particular... https://infrastructure.gov.au/roads/...ull_report.doc

Page 10

In the case of those 4WDs and light commercials which meet ADR36/00, the technology gap is even more stark, as ADR36/00 is a much less stringent standard than ADR37/01, and vehicles do not even need a catalytic converter to comply with ADR36/00.

Page 20

The ADR36/00 emissions test is quite different from the FTP test in ADR37/01. In order to provide a common basis for comparison, the ADR36/00 vehicles were subjected to the ADR37/01 FTP test cycle. As previously noted, ADR36/00 vehicles are not designed to comply with the ADR37/01 test, and given that many are not fitted with catalytic converters it is likely that they will have relatively high emissions.

Appendix 14 Page 20

The ADR36/00 emissions test is performed using an engine dynamometer at constant rpm, and varying the manifold vacuum (load) over a 9 mode cycle. This is repeated 4 times and the final result in ppm HC and % vol CO is calculated. NOx is not measured. A catalyst is usually not required to comply with the emission limits.

You also need to give him a copy of ADR36/00 https://infrastructure.gov.au/roads/...ign/pdf/36.pdf In the analytical section of what gases are to be tested, it states very clearly which gases and I'm sorry... but NOx is not listed anywhere. Also, in the numerous sections discussing the exhaust and emissions, at not point does it even MENTION a catalyst, let alone if it needs one or not. The ADR was written in 1984 for crying out loud... no one had even heard of them!

[glen_ep Addicted PP Member Find all posts View Profile Close glen_ep]

Thanks Ranj for the awesome information you've been uncovering here. I've been through the drama's which spano is experiencing and it would seem your information *SHOULD* finally clear up all the mis-information. However, I guess it's not always the case, cause there's too many idiots working in the government. I got tired of pulling out my hair and came to the realisation that it's not worth the hassle - because the moment we drive across borders all our certifications mean squat (and you're driving an roadworthy vehicle anyway).

[RanJ Avid PP Poster! Find all posts View Profile Close RanJ]

Technically being an AUSTRALIAN design rule... state laws for an interstate registered vehicle don't mean squat and even if doesn't meet your registered state laws... if you took it to the magistrates court, they'd refer to the ADRs!

But you're right... so much of our laws can be up to the interpretation of the person behind the desk and reality is, they can't be expected to know every rule back to front. Although you'd at least to think that if they were challenged they'd have the decency to verify it.