Pollution from a HT Engine

Discussion in 'General Questions' started by dwsutton, Aug 4, 2008.

  1. dwsutton

    dwsutton Member

    I have read from a few different sources about the "carbon footprint" from a 2 cycle engine and Im having a hard time believing that an engine that gets such high mpg could actually pollute as much as a vehicle getting 20 mpg. I have a Ford 7.3l Diesel that gets 14 mpg on a good day. If fitted with a C. Converter is the output as bad as they say ? Does anyone have concrete numbers besides some study in Sweden that is often mentioned but no real numbers given other than " it is worse that a passenger vehicle" Im really having a hard time buying that. I have operated my bike for 300 miles and used less than 2 gallons of mixed fuel - how could that pollute more than the average of vehicles on the road when you factor in trucks like mine and Joe Bob's 1981 Ford pick up ?? How much pollution could be produced from two gallons of fuel ? Im not buying it . Anyone got any real numbers ?


  2. BoltsMissing

    BoltsMissing Active Member

    In layman's terms, the whole picture can be observed.

    How much pollution to produce 1 complete truck from raw materials ?
    Transporting these materials, manufacture, life of the vehicle and how much fuel it used, then back to the re-cycle process.

    And then compare the same process to produce a bicycle, HT, it's total life till it "dies" and back to re-cyclers the same as a truck or even passenger motor car.

    If those stats. are ever possible and made available, I don't think ya need to be a rocket scientist for a guess.
  3. ChinaPhil

    ChinaPhil New Member

  4. dwsutton

    dwsutton Member

    wonder how my 90 Ford 7.3 Diesel would fall within that as it doesn't even have to be emission tested ?
  5. darwin

    darwin Well-Known Member

    Its simple to figure, 2 strokes throw the oil out into the air while 4 strokes keep it in the crankcase.
  6. GTscoob

    GTscoob New Member

    Ha, ideally. And then there are the cars with worn piston rings and tons of blowby that also burn through 1qt every 3000 miles.

    I think if you really were concerned about the environment, get yourself a wideband 02 sensor and exhaust gas temperature gauge. Mount them into your tailpipe and use them to optimize your carb tuning. I'll tell you right now, emissions is less of a matter of the engine and more of how it runs. The fact that these motors are carburated doesnt help either as a carb is really just one massive fuel leak (well fuel/oil on a 2-stroke).

    My WRX will pass a sniffer test running catless and will fail an OBDII test but it runs completely clean because its tuned perfectly. Most cars on the road run stupidly rich and will pick up gas mileage and performance if the ECU is reflashed with a solid tune. Keep in mind I mean a real tune, and not just a 'tune-up'.

    Emissions in the US are a joke. The CARB is just a buncha of corrupt hippies out in California mandating emissions standards with no regards to design lifespans of vehicles or any knowledge of the auto industry.
  7. BoltsMissing

    BoltsMissing Active Member

    Again I remind readers, to me I can only observe and say an opinion as layman.
    It seems to me no matter what laws,maths, taxes and tweaks are tried and errored, dare I say if you have large manufacturing companies with share holders, and share holders are in it for the math/profit/more profit than the last "record profit", and mathematically speaking, products now cannot be made to last or you'll upset the share holders.

    So if let's say Company A manufactures quality spanners that last a life time and the spanner set I purchase today will be passed on to my kids after 35 years of trusted use.

    Share holders won't hear of it !

    Company B manufactures similar spanner sets and various light, but essential tools but in time they break.
    Similar type of tools of an era gone by lasted a couple generations if not more.

    We have a vice, the brand name is DAWN, and it was bought in 1963, from Myers. It's still in use today and going strong, and rather heavy.

    I just threw out a newer vice bought 5 years ago, the threads stripped, it will not grip.

    So, I don't buy this carbon foortprint gas bagging either, it's all too obvious the govs. and big bizines are just too quick to jump on this gravy train once again.
    Ofcourse, we are powerless to do much about it, the gluttons with the money and the media occupy the sheeple's minds.

    When will it all come to it's senses ?

    I posted these pictures to show my observations as stated.
    The spanner set, made in some developing nations cost $11.95
    The foot pump cost $20.00
    I have to spend another $11.95 and another $20.00 top replace the broken and essential tools.
    What if these tools were bought at the same price, lasted a couple of generations and the $31.95 was spent elsewhere except back to same company B, owned by share holders.

    The entire system of things is a total farce. Make things to last and do the math on that scale to and see what the "carbon footprint" leads to.

    Attached Files:

  8. loquin

    loquin Active Member

    two stroke engines, in particular, are bad in hydrocarbon emissions. Older design, 2-stroke engines pump up to 25 percent of the fuel, unburned, right through the engine. (the intake and exhaust ports are opened simultaneously, and a portion of the fuel/air mix short-circuits straight through.) In addition, much of the lubricating oil in the mix remains unburned.

    However, modern designs can alleviate some of the issues. Either by the use of improved scavenging, or by the use of catalytic converters, hydrocarbon emissions can be reduced to 5% or less, which will enable 2-stroke engines to meet CARBII emission standards. The Mitsubishi TLE-43, for instance, opens a secondary air port initially, so that air (only) enters the combustion chamber first. Clean air is thus carried out the exhaust port, rather than a fuel-air mix. This allows the TLE-43 to meet CARBII emissions without a catalytic converter.

    OK. Since the motor meets CARBII emissions, it should pollute less than a car, right?

    "Not so fast, Pilgrim!" CARBII emissions are VERY lax in regards to small engines, as opposed to EPA auto emissions. Computer controlled emissions controls, which aren't feasible for small engines, are MUCH less polluting (per gallon of fuel consumed) than a small engine which meets CARBII emissions standards. And, even though a motorized bike with a CARBII approved engine gets ten times more miles per gallon than an auto, it can still release up to 8 times the emissions of a car, per mile.

    Ref http://www.motoredbikes.com/showpost.php?p=98774&postcount=78
  9. Skyliner70cc

    Skyliner70cc Active Member

    Yep, two strokes are kinda nasty with respect to emissions.

    There was an article several years ago about auto technology which allowed a prototype Honda civic to actually clean the air when driven. It had a special radiator that acted as a catlytic convertor to clean ozone, and NOX, while it was driven. Its net effect was negative pollution (cleaner air) not counting CO2 which isn't a pollutant.
  10. skyl4rk

    skyl4rk Guest

  11. dwsutton

    dwsutton Member

    So, do the results of the Spooky test fly in the face of the small 2 cycle being a smoke belching monster ? Yeah, the motor for it size seemed to put out comparable levels as a car however what about VOLUME of exhaust ? Has to be way more than a 2 inch muffler on a car. After this result Im just not sold that adjusted correctly these HT's are as bad as all that.
  12. BoltsMissing

    BoltsMissing Active Member

    Sutton, don't understand what ya on about now.
    Originaly you posted that ya not buying the fact a HT produces "alarming" pollution, then Spooky Tooth gets a test done and passes, and unless I'm reading this wrong, if I am, apologies, if due, but ya seem to be saying that ya don't buy the Spooky Tooth test either ?

    I posted from a "look at the big picture" angle to, "TOTAL view from raw materials to product death" angle.
    My angle is the TOTAL concept of production where things that CAN last a lifetime and more, rather than what the Japs. started to do in the 70's, to make cars last 5 years with inherited rust problems etc, so we are forced to renew the car or products. This is where one of, if not THE root causes of pollution originates from.

    So if a WHOLE global concept, IF ( and I doubt IF ever) industry changes and simply add common sense instead of perpetual profiteering in the way products are manufactured, then no matter what the 2 stroke, ya diesal and ya 4 stroke's emissions are, because IF only a car ( hypothetically) can be built to last longer, lets say, 20 years ? before it starts to rust, then that is 3 cars LESS to produce.
    So 20 million people by 20 million cars on average every 20 years. Not 20 million people having to buy 80 million cars.
    That's 60 million automobiles that did not really HAVE to see the light of day.
    How many tons of raw product could have stayed in the ground and less pollution in our rivers ?

    I'm no greeny and most of the greenies **** me off anyway, but from a practical common sense point of view I'm ****ed off because I have to buy the same tools as posted, again ! due to this ridiculous concept of not making them last a life time or "industry will go out of biziness" DOGSBOLOCKS!

    The principles are wrong, in my laymans opinion.

    Like I mentioned before, the DAWN brand name vice bought in 1963 has outlasted a NO-BRAND-NAME vice made 2003.
    Fortunately I don't have to buy another vice, the point is, how many of these vices have broken by now, and have to be repurchased by others, unessescarily ?
    So therefore,
    The factory making the vices has to dig up more raw material and the cycle goes on again to manufacture another breakable vice so it don't last 3 or more generations.

    THERE'S the root cause the greenies need to go dig, not mess with the consumer who has a dwindling choice and is forced to focus on minute dogsbollocks like exhaust emissions of a 2 stroke (therefore missing the obvious), where as we would not require a 2-stroke if cars were made to last longer in the first place therefore lesseining the damand on oil to re-manufacture the same.
    It's another one of those, dare I say it, c..co..con..spi..ra..cy...thangs !

    Unfortunately,the reality is no matter what I say, no matter what anyone educated with the enitre alphabet after their name says, it will not change for long while yet to come because we all want a piece of the $action$.
  13. dwsutton

    dwsutton Member

    Umm no- the point I was trying to make is that the Spooky test seemed to contradict that the 2 cycles are far more damaging to the enviroment than a vehicle. I would say that conclusion with certificate was bullet proof. While I hear that there are Hondas that are acting as air cleaners, I would say that that is not the norm. I know what you mean about quality but Im not trying to address that - just the raw exhaust numbers and the general belief that the two straokes are evil according to the greenies.

    The big picture you are painting I agree with - what if things lasted longer and how much would THAT save ? A unreal amount of raw materials and fuel as you say.

  14. BoltsMissing

    BoltsMissing Active Member

  15. arceeguy

    arceeguy Active Member

    It may pass a "sniffer" test, but you are not running "completely clean" without the catalyst. If anything, your reflashed ECU is polluting more than the original firmware, but it is giving you better performance because of more aggressive boost/timing curves and is probably more liberal about running a rich mixture during WOT operation than the stock programming. This is done to control detonation, but it also pollutes more. (as you know, lean mixtures and high boost are a recipe for disaster) I guarantee your WRX leaves a visible smoke trail (soot from the rich mixture) when you are WOT. Cars do not run "stupidly rich" with the stock firmware. The whole point of the ECU is to monitor all engine parameters and instantaneously adjust mixture for near perfect combustion in all operating conditions.

    If you ride a motored bike to conserve fuel, you are on the right track. If you ride a motorized bike to pollute less, you can say that you produce less CO2 than a car, but you are releasing more of other pollutants in the air. Personally, I think the fuel savings of a motorized bike, scooter, or small motorcycle trumps the additional emissions. I think that motorcycle engines (and motored bike and scooters) that are less than 250cc should be exempt from emission standards. This will keep them simple and cheap. Last thing we need are fuel injected 50cc engines. The Honda Ruckus scooter has PGM-FI in some markets, and it ain't a cheap little scooter.
  16. Skyliner70cc

    Skyliner70cc Active Member

    One test by a party with a financial stake in the test does not make the rule. The test just doesn't pass the simplest measures for validity.

    2 strokes do pollute more than 4 strokes, it is a fact that is undisputed. I personally think the test was bogus since 20:1 oil ratio is pretty smokey. The EPA doesn't make this stuff up.

    Twenty-five percent of the fuel and required oil that conventional two-strokes use most of it unburned is emitted directly into the air or water if used on a boat. According to the EPA, two-stroke engines discharge as much as 30 percent of their fuel and oil unburned directly into the air or water for powerboats.

    The EPA estimates that one hour of operation by a 70-horsepower two-stroke motor emits the same amount of hydrocarbon pollution as driving 5,000 miles in a modern automobile
  17. dwsutton

    dwsutton Member

    Well if the EPA said that ........ wait, they are part of the GOVERNMENT. This is also the same GOVERNMENT that said - STOP, dont eat that tomato !!!!!!!

    The Food and Drug Administration is expanding its warning to consumers nationwide that a salmonellosis outbreak has been linked to consumption of round tomatoes, and products containing these raw, red tomatoes.

    Then Later in August -

    The Food and Drug Administration declared on Thursday that it is again safe to eat all tomatoes now on sale in the U.S., canceling its warning in June that some tomatoes were the cause of a still-unsolved outbreak of salmonella poisoning..............................

    restaurants and supermarkets pulled tomatoes from shelves and refrigerators; the halt in sales has cost an estimated $40 million in lost purchases.

    So excuse me if I don't blindly accept the 5000 mile comparison just because the E.P.A. threw some numbers out there. I do accept that Spookytooth did actually test a HT engine and got the certificate.

    arceeguy - that is a great way to look at things and sounds like a great deal of common sense as far as the big picture.

  18. wavygravy

    wavygravy Guest

    happytime evolution! ah its a wonderful thing! please china build it to last!
  19. duivendyk

    duivendyk Guest

    I wonder how the Mitsu TLE 43 "clean?" 2 stroke compares with the Honda GXH 50 4 stroke.All HT engines are probably absolutely awful.
  20. Tom

    Tom Active Member

    As far as actual "Carbon Footprint" goes, I am under the impression that the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere is directly related to the amount of fuel/oil you are burning.

    ...so, getting 100mpg on your mb is better than getting 14mpg in your truck.