# NJ Inspection/Unitronic Big Turbo Conflict



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

Seems the state's getting smarter and I'm to try a private inspection station to see if I can get this heap to pass state inspection. I was dinked for all the forced blocks that Uni sets in the readiness to pass as "unsupported" by the DMV which raises a red flag and doesn't allow me to pass readiness for the inspection.
I would imagine that Eurodyne and anyone w/ a custom tune will be dealt the same fate.


----------



## dubbin_boho (Dec 4, 2007)

*Re: NJ Inspection/Unitronic Big Turbo Conflict (screwball)*

that's not good http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

*Re: NJ Inspection/Unitronic Big Turbo Conflict (screwball)*

OH NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! REALLY???? I didnt think they could see that stuff.....


----------



## 1.8t67 (Dec 7, 2008)

*Re: NJ Inspection/Unitronic Big Turbo Conflict (screwball)*

you have a non newjooseyaguese version of this? how does the bmv figure out your readiness codes are forced to "pass"?
maybe it's unitronics new business. dealing with the states on identifying modified cars, and providing software to identify modified ecus?










_Modified by 1.8t67 at 3:17 PM 4-7-2010_


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

*Re: NJ Inspection/Unitronic Big Turbo Conflict (1.8t67)*

it wouldnt surprise me in the least..............


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

I don't have those answers although Uni said there's not much that can be done. I don't think this would be limited to their software alone, but I'm no programmer. I'll scan the sheet w/ the blocks that failed later.


----------



## Vegeta Gti (Feb 13, 2003)

*Re: (screwball)*

Va does the same, but unsupported would pass the OBDII check..poop man, bummer to hear..can you get a waiver and go for a tailpipe sniff? cos you can tune/tweak for that to pass


----------



## Yareka (Mar 5, 2002)

*Re: (Vegeta Gti)*

oh wow, this is not good


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 1, 2009)

*Re: NJ Inspection/Unitronic Big Turbo Conflict (1.8t67)*


_Quote, originally posted by *1.8t67* »_you have a non newjooseyaguese version of this? how does the bmv figure out your readiness codes are forced to "pass"?
maybe it's unitronics new business. dealing with the states on identifying modified cars, and providing software to identify modified ecus?









_Modified by 1.8t67 at 3:17 PM 4-7-2010_

The inspection station will clear the readiness status and read them again before a drive cycle has occurred. If the readiness reads "passed" before the car has met the drive cycle criteria they know the emissions electronics were modified.


----------



## 1.8Tjettta01 (Nov 12, 2007)

Buy or rent a stock ecu temporarily??? 2cents


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

*FV-QR*

I can't do that, I'd fail for having most of the emissions stuff yanked out.


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

*FV-QR*

Also the car can be forced to be "smog'd" but that was recommended as the last resort. A private shop should not have the newest software which doesn't pop w/ the unsupported blocks.


----------



## 1.8t67 (Dec 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (screwball)*

when in doubt, call on ben franklin. :money:


----------



## 1.8Tjettta01 (Nov 12, 2007)

So realistically , if you don't have a place who will pass you for lots of $$$ , think your gonna have to put your car back to stock? I know its painful to say and a F that kinda thing. 
No uni settings equals CEL..... sucks..


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

*FV-QR*

looll, Hell no this thing isn't going back to stock, I'll fake a sticker before I go that route.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

*Re: (1.8Tjettta01)*


_Quote, originally posted by *1.8Tjettta01* »_So realistically , if you don't have a place who will pass you for lots of $$$ , think your gonna have to put your car back to stock? I know its painful to say and a F that kinda thing. 
No uni settings equals CEL..... sucks..
Only In Cali will you have problems getting registered, etc without inspection.. I grew up in jersey, now I live in PA.. The worst that will happen is a ticket..


----------



## 1.8Tjettta01 (Nov 12, 2007)

ZIP tie everything back to stock! make it fast! j/k
Which is one of the reason why i won't go big turbo. cause of CA emissions. I vote YES on the fake sticker and it wouldn't be hard to mimic it. you risk a ticket for registration but i think you already know that.
It really sucks uni can't help you much with this.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

*Re: (1.8Tjettta01)*

nope... you can register an uninspected car out here no problem.. you just risk an inspection sticker ticket... no biggie


----------



## 1.8t67 (Dec 7, 2008)

*Re: (dubinsincuwereindiapers)*

whats the word on this chief?


----------



## Oh_My_VR6 (Sep 6, 2004)

*Re: FV-QR (1.8t67)*


_Quote, originally posted by *1.8t67* »_when in doubt, call on ben franklin. :money:

Hahahaha!


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

Nada yet, I need to get my wastegate fixed before I go drop it off to a private place. I don't want these melonheads to test drive the car and it hits 40psi on pump gas.


----------



## IAmTheNacho (Oct 26, 2003)

*Re: (screwball)*


_Quote, originally posted by *screwball* »_Nada yet, I need to get my wastegate fixed before I go drop it off to a private place. I don't want these melonheads to test drive the car and it hits 40psi on pump gas.
Im in the same boat right now. Lucky i can close the cutout and the car will only boost 25psi with the stock catback.


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

thats not good at all man. You can allways regi and inspect it in NY. My shop was clueless on how my car passed readyness when it was plugged in and not even running! lol I explained to them that its hard set to pass. they thought it was the coolest thing. they were a little mom and pop inspection shop though.


----------



## SkootySkoo (Aug 8, 2004)

*Re: (kkkustom)*

Did you really take this to a NJ State Inspection Station? If so why the hell would you do that?







Any modded car goes right to the gas station far far faaar away from the DMV official site. I will be going to get my car inspected next week. 
If you went through the state site the reasons you failed is now on file with the state and a private inspection station really cant do much about it.


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

says who?


----------



## weenerdog3443 (Jul 5, 2007)

*FV-QR*

thank god i live in md... only inspection is when you first buy the car... but emmisions is every 2 years.. just had mine done right after i got my eurodyne maestro and when they plugged it in a lil thing poped up that said that some codes were missing the lady asked me if i had recently done and motor work or pulled the head deck and i was like sure yea and she passed me


----------



## 1.8t67 (Dec 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (weenerdog3443)*

schit, the county i live in, in ohio doesn't have any inspection, or emmisions check. only time you have an inspection is if you're converting a totaled car title to a rebuilt title. even then, they only look for wipers/blinkers/brake lights, etc.


----------



## AudiTToR (Nov 27, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (1.8t67)*


_Quote, originally posted by *1.8t67* »_schit, the county i live in, in ohio doesn't have any inspection, or emmisions check. only time you have an inspection is if you're converting a totaled car title to a rebuilt title. even then, they only look for wipers/blinkers/brake lights, etc.










Same here in Montour County PA....we literally have nothing. I passed with a straight pipe on.....no secondary 02 sensor plugged in, and a check engine light with no maf on revo 550 files from back in the day.

talk about check the lights and slap a sticker on. Oh yea...and the wastegate was vented against the block


----------



## 1.8t67 (Dec 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (AudiTToR)*

thats more than we have. i don't even have to visit the bmv. i can just mail my registration in, and get my sticker. lol. some counties have bi-annual sniff/obd tests. only visual they look for is to see if you have a cat.


----------



## xpxhxoxexnxixxx (May 17, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (1.8t67)*

Screwball mine's almost done..once its finished i have about 3 months till mine is up as well..so let me know what you wind up doing, or Pat as well...a while back i took my K04'd car to a private place in town and paid some $$...but now since i dont have any emissions stuff left i dunno 
good to see the car is running fine http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## dspl1236 (May 30, 2007)

*FV-QR*

if you still have all your wiring for your evap and stuff...plug them all in. plug in n75 or anything like an n75. heck i have used stock injectors plugged into the the sensor spots. the ecu just wants to see something on the line. find ecu...secretly have immo removed...plug in all sensors...pass
clear your codes, drive it for a day and go get it tested plugged in. if not tell them your 4wheel drive so they have to rev your motor to like 3k in neutral doing a sniff test...otherwise hope it passes on the rollers

also if you are low enough... they cant see under your car to to even get to the cat...pass











_Modified by dspl1236 at 3:16 PM 4-15-2010_


----------



## TSTARKZ123 (Oct 1, 2004)

*FV-QR*

Odd. My Eurodyne passed just fine at a State Inspection center (car reg'd in NJ)


----------



## 1.8t67 (Dec 7, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (dspl1236)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dspl1236* »_if you still have all your wiring for your evap and stuff...plug them all in. plug in n75 or anything like an n75. heck i have used stock injectors plugged into the the sensor spots. the ecu just wants to see something on the line. find ecu...secretly have immo removed...plug in all sensors...pass
clear your codes, drive it for a day and go get it tested plugged in. if not tell them your 4wheel drive so they have to rev your motor to like 3k in neutral doing a sniff test...otherwise hope it passes on the rollers

also if you are low enough... they cant see under your car to to even get to the cat...pass








_Modified by dspl1236 at 3:16 PM 4-15-2010_

wow. just wow. if there were a jaw in the wheel barrel icon, i would use it. i don't think you read much of this thread.....


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 20, 2008)

*Re:*

to clarify this has nothing to do with the software!
it will show passed in readiness, but the machine can see past this and also knows whats supposed to be there and not where before it just agreed with what readiness spews out.
so anyone with any software with these new machines will have issues!


----------



## O2VW1.8T (Jul 9, 2003)

*Re: (Yareka)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Yareka* »_oh wow, this is not good








NC doesn't have it yet, I passed my car with all of them set to pass


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

*FV-QR*

Hey Tstark, are you running the usual deletes?
Regarding the visual stuff I'm not terribly concerned. There's an OG from these forums that works at the inspection center nearest to me and he's always helped out where he could w/ this car for years now. He recommended the private shop as they should have the older software which should be OK for me. If not I'll get a sticker somehow, it's not the end of the world. There's still other options yet.


_Modified by screwball at 7:52 PM 4-15-2010_


----------



## TSTARKZ123 (Oct 1, 2004)

*FV-QR*

Yes I have everything deleted but I may have been inspected before these new machines. I went to the station near Rutgers.


----------



## dspl1236 (May 30, 2007)

*FV-QR*


_Quote, originally posted by *1.8t67* »_
wow. just wow. if there were a jaw in the wheel barrel icon, i would use it. i don't think you read much of this thread.....


i read it all. did you? what in my post wows you?
the state sees that the car passes obd2 instantly without the car running. red flag. no pass
I was merely suggesting other ways around the hard programing if all else fails....and i have a few tricks i have done over the years get cars to pass inspection.


_Modified by dspl1236 at 10:09 AM 4-16-2010_


----------



## dspl1236 (May 30, 2007)

*FV-QR*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
*to clarify this has nothing to do with the software!*

*so anyone with any software with these new machines will have issues!*


this is a software issue that will only get worse as more state pick up new methods for looking into the ecu. if the codes are hard programed out or hard programed to pass then it is in the software. but this may be the only way to program this stuff out ...so it is what it is. unless some kind of timing can be programed in, or a mini IF THEN statement can be put in to wait till the ecu sees rpm's before setting the rediness
how does apr program the cc stalk to switch programming or lock out the ecu? how come a few vags i know had extra security programmed in to start their cars? i know of 2 s4's that you must hold the headlight high beam on while pushing both the brake/clutch to start...
I am sure something can be figured out...like i said this is only going to get worse across the country


----------



## fobyulous (Oct 7, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (screwball)*


_Quote, originally posted by *screwball* »_ There's an OG from these forums that works at the inspection center nearest to me and he's always helped out where he could w/ this car for years now. 

are you by any chance talking about Kilmer?


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

*Re: FV-QR (fobyulous)*

Nope, not the guy I'm referring to anyway.


----------



## GLI_jetta (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (screwball)*

Whatever you figure out.. let us know as I might be moving to the NJ area within the next year.. and Im sure Ill be going through the same chit... and theres no way my car will pass...


----------



## The_Critic (Mar 8, 2008)

*Re: Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_to clarify this has nothing to do with the software!
it will show passed in readiness, but the machine can see past this and also knows whats supposed to be there and not where before it just agreed with what readiness spews out.
so anyone with any software with these new machines will have issues!


Really? you don't think all the deleted safeties in the "software" has anything to do with it?


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 20, 2008)

*Re: Re: (The_Critic)*


_Quote, originally posted by *The_Critic* »_
Really? * you don't think all the deleted safeties in the "software" has anything to do with it? *


----------



## The_Critic (Mar 8, 2008)

*Re: Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_


----------



## sledge0001 (Oct 7, 2007)

Correct me if I am wrong but if you were using the Eurodyne Maestro software couldn't you just plug the emissions crap back in undo the auto readiness, drive around a bit and then be good to go??



_Modified by sledge0001 at 9:32 AM 4-19-2010_


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

*Re: NJ Inspection/Unitronic Big Turbo Conflict (screwball)*

Hmm, I went to Kilmer (one near RU) in 2009 and had no issues with Uni.
This is going to suck serious piles of crap if it's true. Hopefully Eurodyne will come up with some magical pill for us.


----------



## veedub-less (Dec 18, 2007)

*Re: NJ Inspection/Unitronic Big Turbo Conflict (IzVW)*

worst comes to worst, go to a junkyard and buy a windshield with a good sticker


----------



## J.Michael.S (Dec 3, 2008)

*Re: NJ Inspection/Unitronic Big Turbo Conflict (veedub-less)*

Yea this is really going to blow. I guess all the software companies will have to go back to the drawing board to make this good for all of us!!


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

*Re: Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_










Hey since you guys have Einstein in your ads, and E=MC2, combine this with your neurons being excited, and you should be able to come up with a solution instantly.

I mean your marketing has EINSTEIN in it, hello this is no problem for you guys right?


----------



## engineerd18t (Dec 12, 2007)

^^ What he said. A friend of mine wondered why does it come up at "not supported" instead of saying "passed". Seems like a simple solution to me.


----------



## Nitestalkerz (Dec 8, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (dspl1236)*

How is it that they are testing the car?? I live in CT, and all they do is plug into the OBD2 jack, check the IM's. All 97 to current has 10 Im's. O2 bank 1, O2 bank 2, cat eff. spark, and on and on. All but Cali cars only reqire 8 out of the IM's to be reading ok. @ are hvac moniter, and forgot the other. But if 8 are ok then u pass. Cali from what I remember does a dyno test ( moving ), then an Idle test wich everyone who modifies fails unless u have a CARB sticker saying cali leagal not 50 state legal. When I lived in San Deigo, I kept my 78 Monte Carlo ( training day ) 3.8 turbo out of a 87 GN. Passed CT but not cali........guess what IM saying is just register the car in Maine, and get a PO box.


----------



## gdoggmoney (Feb 21, 2004)

*Re: (engineerd18t)*


_Quote, originally posted by *engineerd18t* »_^^ What he said. A friend of mine wondered why does it come up at "not supported" instead of saying "passed". Seems like a simple solution to me.

Seriously.
My neurons are excited just seeing that stuff. Damn those guys must be smart with E being Unitronic. 
The unitronic guys are there surfing around motronic ecu's on a wave of electrons exciting neurons around the world.


----------



## dj givv (May 20, 2005)

*Re: (gdoggmoney)*

gotta know someone these days.....


----------



## engineerd18t (Dec 12, 2007)

Any updates on this?


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

I have an appointment at a local place at lunch today. I'll update the thread if anything pops.


----------



## AudiA4_18T (Mar 15, 2006)

*FV-QR*

do that, I need an inspection lol


----------



## liquidvw (Mar 20, 2003)

*Re: (screwball)*


_Quote, originally posted by *screwball* »_I have an appointment at a local place at lunch today. I'll update the thread if anything pops.

I suspect they will see that you already failed the state inspection.


----------



## dj givv (May 20, 2005)

*Re: (liquidvw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *liquidvw* »_
I suspect they will see that you already failed the state inspection. 

x2


----------



## iTech (Dec 29, 2008)

*Re: (dj givv)*

I guess the real question is what the hell is the point of removing all the emissions components in the first place? Does it really make your car go faster to have no evap?....answer is no. I guess the real point is why cant all the software genius's out there make these cars run balls to the wall and still be OBD2 compliant?


----------



## 5P4RK4 (Jun 24, 2004)

*Re: (FiLtHYpOoRdUbS)*


_Quote, originally posted by *FiLtHYpOoRdUbS* »_I guess the real question is what the hell is the point of removing all the emissions components in the first place? Does it really make your car go faster to have no evap?....answer is no. I guess the real point is why cant all the software genius's out there make these cars run balls to the wall and still be OBD2 compliant?

Mostly to clean up the engine bay. If you dont have emissions or inspections like where I live, its nice to be able to delete this crap not only for aesthetics but to simplify the bays. If you delete half of the hoses, you are half as likely to have one leak.


----------



## sledge0001 (Oct 7, 2007)

*Re: (5P4RK4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *5P4RK4* »_
Mostly to clean up the engine bay. If you dont have emissions or inspections like where I live, its nice to be able to delete this crap not only for aesthetics but to simplify the bays. If you delete half of the hoses, you are half as likely to have one leak. 

TRUTH! ^^^


----------



## liquidvw (Mar 20, 2003)

any update on this?


----------



## Dave926 (Mar 30, 2005)

*Re: (liquidvw)*

Regardless if its easier, with modern electronics there is no reason regardless of what power you make or dont for that matter, tpo have a gross polluter.
We arent dealing with carbs anymore.


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

screwball, any updates?


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

Sent PM


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

Anyone else out there in NJ with stories about this? Info?


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Dave926 said:


> Regardless if its easier, with modern electronics there is no reason regardless of what power you make or dont for that matter, tpo have a gross polluter.
> We arent dealing with carbs anymore.


 Hippie.......


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> Hippie.......


 Yeah really. Even with deletes etc most aftermarket ECU cars run just as pollution free as stock ones.


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you can check your readiness with VAG-COM/VCDS if you want to know before inspection.


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

bootymac said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you can check your readiness with VAG-COM/VCDS if you want to know before inspection.


 The problem is that they always say PASSED. So the inspection computer resets them and they still say PASSED. Then it knows there are shenanigans at work and you fail, do not pass go, fuxd.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

IzVW said:


> The problem is that they always say PASSED. So the inspection computer resets them and they still say PASSED. Then it knows there are shenanigans at work and you fail, do not pass go, fuxd.


 The above is correct, NY state in some regions was the first that we heard of doing this. You go in they do the inspection and the software checking your readiness tests automatically clears the codes which resets the readiness tests. It then rescans and checks to see which are pass and which are fail. The system knows on each car which tests should say not installed so anything that doesn't change to failed/test not run and still says pass is a red flag that there was something done to falsify that test. This is all automated not a person doing this so no real way around it other then possibly private garages that may not have updated just yet. 

The other issue that was brought up is that yes it is on record in the state of NJ depending on what is wrong with your car and why you failed you MUST show proof of repair not just go back and try again. Depending on what the issue is as well you MUST go to a certified emissions repair facility to have it done before you can return. So even if you passed again if you don't show proof that you went to one of these shops they can fail you. Even the person doing the work at the certified shop must be certified individually. 

This is exactly why, despite the demands on the forums, we have not done software for vehicles with all this emissions equipment removed. If you don't force the tests in the software then you cannot pass inspection and had we done it we'd be in this same boat with cars failing for having tests forced to pass. We've known for years now, and have brought it up on the forums, that these new emissions tests were coming so we took the stance that we'd rather lose a customer now than have thousands of pissed off customers down the road by forcing them all to pass. 

Also there was a comment previously about registration and inspection. In NJ and many states you renew your registration and then go to inspection. If you fail you can keep driving it and risk a ticket or just never go... I honestly just usually never went since I always had tinted windows, no front plate etc and wasn't worth the hassle I risked the ticket and only got one in 10+ years driving there. In other states including GA where I am located now you must inspect before you renew your registration. If you don't get your car inspected they will not let you renew which would mean that you aren't just driving around with no inspection but also no registration which comes with much heftier fines and penalties including suspending your license. So just not going to inspection isn't that simple for everyone.


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> The above is correct, NY state in some regions was the first that we heard of doing this.


 An excellent post as to whats going on. And I'm kinda sad that my summation of us being fuxd is something you agree 100% with.... lol... 

The key thing's here are with the SAI and EVAP deletes you can have resistors but you still get improper flow failures as far as I can tell unless you use the deletes in the ECU that force readiness. Does anyone have information saying otherwise?


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

IzVW said:


> An excellent post as to whats going on. And I'm kinda sad that my summation of us being fuxd is something you agree 100% with.... lol...
> 
> The key thing's here are with the SAI and EVAP deletes you can have resistors but you still get improper flow failures as far as I can tell unless you use the deletes in the ECU that force readiness. Does anyone have information saying otherwise?


 Yes unfortunately everyone is going to have to agree with your summation. 

There are several ways to modify the ecu as being done now to eliminate codes/tests. These cars are sold around the world some of them don't have certain parts of the emissions equipment installed but they are all running the same hardware in the ecus and same basic code. Many of these just have the DTCs disabled for the items not being installed, no need to even put a resistor in or trick it in anyway its just written out of the code like it was never there. They either display no readiness tests or they all show failed/not installed/test not run. So yes you can technically write them out or clear some codes and use resistors for the rest so that you have no faults. In that case you'd fail for not having your readiness tests passing since the tests will never run. Then if you force them all to pass you end up with this situation. While this isn't being done everywhere it is coming and regions with no current emissions testings may start testing and will probably go to the latest systems that do this.


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> Yes unfortunately everyone is going to have to agree with your summation.


 Every time you agree with me about this it makes me more sad. Stop.  

So unless pretty much all the BT ECU's code changes to have some sort of "we stay at the default readiness till 2 key turns" or some crap we are all going to fail. 

This is f***ing fantastic news. God how I hate the addiction of modifying cars.....


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

IzVW said:


> So unless pretty much all the BT ECU's code changes to have some sort of "we stay at the default readiness till 2 key turns" or some crap we are all going to fail.


 I can't go into too much detail on it but yes in theory something along those lines would work. Remember all of the tests are simply just checking drive cycles and various readings, these are computer programs written by people and just interpreting data, if you just changed a test looking for X amount of flow after 2 cycles to X=0 as the reading its expecting and getting the test would eventually pass. The problem is that takes A LOT of work and even those who know these ecus like the back of their hands would have to spent countless hours sorting that all out, then what works on one ecu may not work on the next.


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

I think it goes without saying that this is bad news for users and tuning companies in this and possibly other states then. I don't know anyone who has a BT who isn't going to be slaughtered by this. Suuuuuuuux.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

Well both my Mk4 1.8t with a GT2RS and my A3 2.0t with a GT3582R have all of the emissions equipment installed and functional including catalytic converters on both cars. I know on my A3 that even though the current file I have does have the cat test set to pass if I was to go and actually run the tests manually or beat the snot out of the car on backroads it would pass the test. A long highway drive and the airflow over the larger cat doesn't let it get up to temp enough to pass and would eventually switch back to fail however it would get me through an inspection if I did the test and took a quick drive to inspection. A 2.0t bone stock though probably wouldn't pass a tailpipe test in most places they run really dirty. 

A visual inspection on the A3 though might not pass with the open dump and filter right on the turbo, but even with the filter right on the turbo I have rerouted my PCV/catchcan to the inlet and is not vented to atmosphere. I'm in a county with no testing at the moment but moving to one that does soon, luckily all private here so visual inspection is a joke when it comes to those things. 

I know my setups are a bit different then most since I am a tree hugger, I put my deposit on a Nissan Leaf the first day you could


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> I know my setups are a bit different then most since I am a tree hugger, I put my deposit on a Nissan Leaf the first day you could


 Well everyone's setup is different. None of us are alike really. Heck as far as tree hugger I got better MPG's when I was chipped than stock so IMO all tuners are greenies. lol 

The key is that if any ECU software is setting everything to PASSED it doesn't matter if you have all the emissions stuff or not, you are screwed. Big time.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

This is just the suck..................


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

IzVW said:


> Well everyone's setup is different. None of us are alike really. Heck as far as tree hugger I got better MPG's when I was chipped than stock so IMO all tuners are greenies. lol
> 
> The key is that if any ECU software is setting everything to PASSED it doesn't matter if you have all the emissions stuff or not, you are screwed. Big time.


 I know everyones is different I just meant I'm in a small group of people who still have it all including a cat when upgrading turbos, heck we get more calls from people ripping out SAI and evap stuff on stock turbo cars than BT cars. 

Yes I agree again that if it is all set to pass then you are screwed, but even one can be a problem so almost everyone is going to have to revisit this as it expands as it could even be a problem for some with stage 2 software and a test pipe. But the argument here is really you weren't passing anyway.. you have no cat! 

We were actually discussing recently and if we were to offer software for those that want to delete their evap and SAI stuff that it would come with a warning about these new inspection processes and basically just cover our butt saying we told you this was coming and that we warned you, you still chose to rip it all out not really our problem. Obviously in the politest way possible  It's not srewballs fault either really the rules were changed on everyone mid game. Unitronic supplied software for people that they wanted its now biting the customers on the butt and hopefully they don't catch too much grief for giving people what they wanted. I can say though that we are glad that for once not having a product will make our lives much much easier...


----------



## 1.8t67 (Dec 7, 2008)

grain of salt when chris types anything.


----------



## assassym909 (Aug 30, 2008)

I went to inspection about 3 months ago here in nj. I'm running Uni's 630 file and i got thru without any problems (other than the guy stalling my car out 3 times). If your anywhere near the inspection station on Rt130 in Dayton, i would try to go there.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

I dont understand who the fack in their right mind would go to a NJ state inspection station... I grew up in Jersey, and we avoided the state inspection stations like the plague.. Unless you had a minty fresh carr it failed.... Why not just drrop the extra $50 and go to the local gas station?


----------



## assassym909 (Aug 30, 2008)

I drive an 01 jetta, not exactly minty fresh.


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

Whoever is saying go private is missing the point. EVERYONE is going to have the machines that do this at some point and then you are just as screwed as if you went to a public inspection station.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> I dont understand who the fack in their right mind would go to a NJ state inspection station... I grew up in Jersey, and we avoided the state inspection stations like the plague.. Unless you had a minty fresh carr it failed.... Why not just drrop the extra $50 and go to the local gas station?


 Its free vs paying is the main reason and shops can charge whatever they want there, GA has a law that you can't charge more then 25 bucks. Many people are also afraid of the private places saying they failed for things just to try and make a buck so it goes both ways. 

Of the two times in 10+ years I ever inspected my cars I went to the dayton location once who failed me for yellow city lights that were off which were 100% legal, I took them out but when I went back I printed out the law showing they were fine. The next time I went with my mk4 private since I had tint. 

But as stated private places are going to have it soon. All the machines have to be connected to the internet and I believe some even have cameras so they can check in on what car is being tested at random times. Since they are connected to the internet changing to this new test procedure is just a simple update to the software away. It could happen tomorrow it could happen in 6 months. 

My dad will never learn his lesson though and keeps going to the state stations. First in his miata he had to wait 30 minutes for someone small enough to get back from lunch to actual fit in the car. Then in his Freelander they were fighting with him that the car was illegally imported since the hood release was on the passenger side. The next time with the feelander they tried to put it on the rollers which are 2wd only and it went flying off and almost hit the car in front of the guy. Then with his 996C4 they did the same thing luckily he saw the guy doing it this time and stopped him. 

Just from his experiences alone I'd stay clear of them.


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> I dont understand who the fack in their right mind would go to a NJ state inspection station... I grew up in Jersey, and we avoided the state inspection stations like the plague.. Unless you had a minty fresh carr it failed.... Why not just drrop the extra $50 and go to the local gas station?


 Can you read man? I know this isn't as cool as a 16v head flows 10Xs more than an AEB head thread, but still. It's only been in the last few months that things have changed at the MVC, before that you'd go right through w/ the deletes and forced readiness. The guy that inspected my car is an OG from these forums and he had no idea that I'd fail.


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

The private place says no good so I'm off to source a sticker by my own means now. The MVC indeed has me on record for 2yrs from the time I went to NJ inspection w/ my results. After that it's flushed. There's also no time limit to make repairs to the vehicle so while I may be pulled over, I shouldn't be ticketed for having the rejected sticker. It sounds like anyone w/ any of the deletes or mafless software's got to avoid the MVC for inspection from now on.


----------



## thij (Sep 14, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> Well both my Mk4 1.8t with a GT2RS and my A3 2.0t with a GT3582R have all of the emissions equipment installed and functional including catalytic converters on both cars.


Thank you for doing your part to keep our air clean. 

Automobile owners have many responsibilities - to compensate property owners for damages in accidents, to ensure their safety equipment is functional (lights / reflectors, brakes, tires), and to ensure their vehicle is polluting unnecessarily.

Air pollution in areas with high population densities is a real problem. Removing catalytic converters is about as irresponsible as it gets. If the stock catalytic converter is too restrictive for your exhaust system, then it is your responsiblity to obtain a suitable one. Removing the cat (test pipe) or "gutting" it simply isn't acceptable. Removing SAI / EVAP on a stock car isn't either.


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

thij said:


> don't remove emissions controls and DON'T FU***** LITTER!


Really? You come to this technical forum and this is what you have to offer? Go away troll, you aren't helping nor are you making some astounding point as you seem to think you are.


----------



## Don Pisto (Dec 5, 2009)

*It's a government test...*

It's a government test... How hard can it be?

You know is all about taxing the average Joe, from the guy that has to buy the new machine to all the drivers having to pay for a new certification, is an effort to collect money from the government.

Do it like in Cali and cheat the state emissions. How you do it? easy get an accomplice. 

And you might be thinking is different know, well they change the rules we change the game. I would just pay someone with a car like mine to take it in my place, a couple more bills to the guy doing the test to punch in my Vin and you should be good. 

In the case the they can read Vin numbers of the computer (It would be too much for a government test) then again you would pay to the operator. 

this is my hypothesis:

Don't take all the emissions **** out in the first place.

Don't use the software to erase the codes, use the resistor/diode route. Get some sort of switch to operate them and deactivate them when they run the test that reset the codes, when firing up the engine, plug them back in.

I'm not sure if this makes sense or if I explained myself properly. :banghead::screwy:

If it works let me know since I'm in the process of building my big port head and as you all know it doesn't have an EGR port.

:beer: for Bribery.


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

It's a 10K fine in NJ so it's not like stickers or sheisty inspection shops are growing on trees here. Maestro plus putting some of the stuff back seems to be the best course so far. Although I run an AEB head which proves it's own challenges to get through the system.


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

so would i run into these problems if i have a NON wideband ecu, swap to the wideband ecu, and also swap to an AEB head? 

my current motor is AMU.


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

id really like an answer to the swapping ecu's and AEB head transplant issues. 

also, how old does a car have to be before they stop testing it?


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

[email protected] said:


> The above is correct, NY state in some regions was the first that we heard of doing this. You go in they do the inspection and the software checking your readiness tests automatically clears the codes which resets the readiness tests. It then rescans and checks to see which are pass and which are fail. The system knows on each car which tests should say not installed so anything that doesn't change to failed/test not run and still says pass is a red flag that there was something done to falsify that test. This is all automated not a person doing this so no real way around it other then possibly private garages that may not have updated just yet.
> 
> The other issue that was brought up is that yes it is on record in the state of NJ depending on what is wrong with your car and why you failed you MUST show proof of repair not just go back and try again. Depending on what the issue is as well you MUST go to a certified emissions repair facility to have it done before you can return. So even if you passed again if you don't show proof that you went to one of these shops they can fail you. Even the person doing the work at the certified shop must be certified individually.
> 
> ...


 You know, you may excuse my language but when I read all this I kinda had to go and poop because, yes, that's what your messages do to my stomach. You modify cars to go FASTER and help people break just about any state law there is and yet you say you don't want to touch emission things because, oh, it WILL break the law and get people in trouble...PLEASE STOP, you're making me poop and cry at the same time. 

I am just wondering what story you are going to bring up when people that actually WORK figure out how to go around this system. There is no doubt in my mind that both Eurodyne AND Unitronic will come up with something to fool these computers, just as they did in the past, just as they always will do. Feel left behind? Spend less time on forums...more time tuning. 

Chris, I noticed you use every chance you can to post on forum and downgrade other tuning companies and somehow justify REVO failure to keep up with the rest of tuning world. If you don't have something useful to add...why say anything at all? You underestimate intelligence of this forum, you simply think people are stupid. 

ps: don't worry, it's impossible to lose customers you never had so you are safe.


----------



## storx (Dec 6, 2006)

speed51133! said:


> so would i run into these problems if i have a NON wideband ecu, swap to the wideband ecu, and also swap to an AEB head?
> 
> my current motor is AMU.


 if you still have the stock smallport head you be fine.. otherwise.. the wideband upgrade is fine.. there is nothing in the readiness codes that looks for the VVT... just a check light.. and because its resisted out.. your fine..


----------



## Tacosupreme (Jan 22, 2008)

It suxs that the states are getting like this,here in Fl there is no inspection or anything,you just go and get your sticker,does anyone know if they do any inspections in MN? since I'm planning to move there


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

18bora. said:


> I’ve taken all of my cars to the one in Dayton/rt130 and never had a problem, and it’s free.
> 
> John, I would borrow a stock ECU and injectors from someone, reconnect the deleted stuff and give it a try. If you can’t find a stock ECU to borrow you could buy one for $100. I may have stock injectors somewhere around.


 I'm trying to locate the stuff Pat ripped out of the car and I'm sourcing a stock ECU now. I was looking to go with Eurodyne/Maestro to noodle more w/ this stuff if I need to, but I'll try the stock setup before I put the Eurodyne software on there. Vagcom will tell me straight away if I'm no good or not. Uni's tuning suite has no ETA and they offered no concrete help to move forward w/ the inspection issue.


----------



## storx (Dec 6, 2006)

just talked with my buddy from the shop in North Carolina... and he said on the vette forums.. he was told to go by the DMV and get the forms to request a VIN # for a CUSTOM CAR... didn't give a reason.. just told them it was a custom car and needed a VIN#... then he went to state troopers and asked them to do the inspection.. and were really confused cause it already has an VIN but they went ahead and did the inspection and he mentioned its not a stock car anymore to the officer and is used for street series drag racing...so it will not be his primary transportation method.. and mentioned with the new Inspection Laws for emissions it doesn't recognize his engine setup because its not the original engine and if he cant keep it registered then he can no longer compete in the Street class with the car...so the officer asked him what year make and model did the engine come from.. and he said it was crate engine bought from performance catalog with some of the accessory's from the old engine that was removed.. so the officer wrote it up as an custom hot rod.... he said he dropped the forms and the inspection off at the DMV and they said it was all fine when they looked at it.. so they said they would mail him his VIN in the mail for the vehicle.. 

So.. if he gets this new VIN in the mail.. it is no longer a Vette... its registered as an Custom Hot Rod.. and is emission exempt.. just a little FYI that i received on the phone from my buddy... he was telling me all this as i been wanting to put an LS3 V8 in the Audi A4 shell i have.. and i had no idea how i was going to go about registering it and getting it inspected.. so was telling him i wasnt sure i was going to do that anymore.. but after this if it works out.. i am most certain putting the LS3 in the A4 .....


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

mescaline said:


> You know, you may excuse my language but when I read all this I kinda had to go and poop because, yes, that's what your messages do to my stomach. You modify cars to go FASTER and help people break just about any state law there is and yet you say you don't want to touch emission things because, oh, it WILL break the law and get people in trouble...PLEASE STOP, you're making me poop and cry at the same time.


 How does our software help anyone break any laws? Last I checked every current production car that we do software for was capable of breaking every law it could with software even without software. There is nothing illegal about our software in its current form. Modifying code to force readiness codes to pass is not just illegal for the end user but it is illegal for us. IF you have a customer facing a 10K fine for trying to cheat a test or they are given a pass if they tell them who did it for them which route do you think they are going to take? We chose not to risk getting caught up in the legal issues of bypassing emissions equipment. 




> Chris, I noticed you use every chance you can to post on forum and downgrade other tuning companies and somehow justify REVO failure to keep up with the rest of tuning world. If you don't have something useful to add...why say anything at all? You underestimate intelligence of this forum, you simply think people are stupid.


Really that is funny because I tell people on a daily basis to call Eurodyne or Unitronics when they call about applications that we do not cover such as ones being discussed here. I was unaware that recommending customers to our competitors is "downgrading" them. Also where in this post did I "downgrade" the competition?

Failure to keep up with the rest of the tuning world? We are the biggest software tuner in the VW/Audi market. We cover more engines, applications and regions then any other company. How is knowing years a head of time that something like this was coming and making smart business decisions regarding it failure to keep up? I have even posted right here in these forums that these tests are coming that that is why we are not interested in doing software to bypass them. 

How do I underestimate the intelligence of this forum? The fact that you think people are going to listen to your useless babble is underestimating their intelligence.


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

hes just mad you wont give him a solution. 

seriously, some people are not 18yr olds who dont give a crap about the state laws. 

some of us here on the forum are attorneys working for the federal government, and what may be a mundane tast to you (following emissions laws) is just something someone with a family and nice job chooses to comply with. I have enough hasstles dealing with family/work. Finding tricks to clear up my engine bay that requires jumpiong through hoops and crossing my fingers and worrying about fines and tickets is just something id rather not deal with.


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

speed51133! said:


> hes just mad you wont give him a solution.
> 
> seriously, some people are not 18yr olds who dont give a crap about the state laws.
> 
> some of us here on the forum are attorneys working for the federal government, and what may be a mundane tast to you (following emissions laws) is just something someone with a family and nice job chooses to comply with. I have enough hasstles dealing with family/work. Finding tricks to clear up my engine bay that requires jumpiong through hoops and crossing my fingers and worrying about fines and tickets is just something id rather not deal with.


 So why do you feel compelled to leave a comment when none of this applies to you nor would it ever be an issue? My understanding at the time of inspection was that I would fly right through. 

Regarding why myself or a lot of others deleted emissions systems is pretty simple. I have an AEB head which means I'm failing inspection for the EGR delete. I don't run a Maf because I wanted a very simple intake on the car and it rules out the chance of replacing Mafs over and over. The nest of crap under the intake manifold went as well because I'm on a big port manifold. I could still safely run the systems that was initially run off most of that crap. 

I'm behind the curve here because I'm already late w/ my sticker, but this is just another hurdle in owning a BT car. The earlier guys were running their stock chip tunes w/ adjustable fuel pressure regulators and diodes. Upsolute was the only BT equivalent then if it's even fair to call it BT software. Most of doing this crap was held closely to the couple of shops that were even offering turbo kits. When the GT28RS came out it was considered 'Big', lol. Running 12s was a huge milestone and 11s was like superstar status.


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

some aeb's have an egr port...mybe you should use one that does. (or just plug it into the harness) 

my post does apply. people are complaining why revo doesnt support emissions deletes. 

im just backing them up by providing reasons why companies dont, and why some consumers dont want to delete it.


----------



## TooLFan46n2 (Oct 18, 1999)

speed51133! said:


> seriously, some people are not 18yr olds who dont give a crap about the state laws.
> 
> some of us here on the forum are attorneys working for the federal government, and what may be a mundane tast to you (following emissions laws) is just something someone with a family and nice job chooses to comply with. I have enough hasstles dealing with family/work. Finding tricks to clear up my engine bay that requires jumpiong through hoops and crossing my fingers and worrying about fines and tickets is just something id rather not deal with.


 Sounds like you've come a long way since posting threatening pictures of you with handguns :beer: :thumbup: 


As I posted in the other thread there are legal ways to get around this as well. I bought a beater to keep the miles down and have since filed for emissions exemption here in PA (under 5000). If you travel over 5000 miles there are a few very simple unlawful tricks that can be done to keep your mileage under 5000. You can always hook everything back up (if you still have it). I'm not to sure I would rely to heavy on the tuners for a solution. Yes I'm sure it can be done but the VAG community is only 10 years behind everyone else when it comes to software. If we were trying to get Xbox 360's or PS3's to pass emissions I'm sure some whiz would have a fix the following week.


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

ahahahh! 
seriously though, it wasnt a threat, like im gonna find you and shoot you!:sly: 

but i was in the same boat a few years ago with the emissions deal. 

i had torn everything out and did standalone, then after a few years it came time to do an emissions test, and i realised i had no OBD port. 

i honestly thought i was totally screwed, until i pulled some paperwork tricks and told some bs stories to DMV employees. it worked, but it was not fun, i was nervous as hell, and i dont want to do that stuff again. 

the penalty for getting busted is just too steep, just so you can have a cleaner bay.


----------



## White Jetta (Mar 17, 2002)

Everyone should just polish and chrome out their SAI's, EGR's and PCV's, and leave them in place from here on out, i am:beer:


----------



## Cryser (Sep 9, 2009)

how do you polish and chrome a PCV and SRI system, its mostly corrugated plastic?


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

replace the lines with braided hose or hardlines? 

theres always ways.


----------



## White Jetta (Mar 17, 2002)

Cryser said:


> how do you polish and chrome a PCV and SRI system, its mostly corrugated plastic?


 Spray paints are our friends:beer:


----------



## Navydub (Sep 30, 2006)

So glad I'm permanently emissions exempt unless I move back to MD. 

Not living in the state you're registered in ftw


----------



## vwturbowolf (Nov 28, 2003)

i live in md and i went to do my emissions test. 
the last few times i have just talked to the people and gotten exemptions 
i have everything deleted and i do not have software setting readiness, so yes there are codes. so my battery is located behind my drivers seat snd i went right when they opened so i was first in line. sitting there i unplugged my battery, then plugged it in and pulled right up for the test. everything on the test passed except for a freaking #2 02 sensor which i knew was bad. 

i plan on going back and when i fix it. 


on a side note question do all states have excemptions for cars that drive less then 5k miles. 
cuz i rarely drive the car.


----------



## Gonzzz (Apr 27, 2010)

Cant you set readiness thru vagcom? Also, deleting it isnt the way to bypass it. Unitronic should start finding the right offsets so it deletes the DTC code triggers. 

The hard part is finding the trigger. Then you just disable it. I dont know how people debug EDC15 & EDC16 ECU's though. If there was an interface it would be easier. Im not a professional tuner so I wouldnt know.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

DJ Gonzo said:


> Cant you set readiness thru vagcom? Also, deleting it isnt the way to bypass it. Unitronic should start finding the right offsets so it deletes the DTC code triggers.
> 
> The hard part is finding the trigger. Then you just disable it. I dont know how people debug EDC15 & EDC16 ECU's though. If there was an interface it would be easier. Im not a professional tuner so I wouldnt know.


 
There are several issues. Shutting off the DTCs is easy, setting the readiness to pass is easy. That is done in these codes that re being discussed here and that is the entire problem.

These cars have readiness tests set to permanently pass, the new inspection process clears the codes with is supposed to reset readiness, when they reset readiness and now see that they are already passed despite the car not having the time or cycles to run the tests they fail you. 

If the items are deleted then you can't pass the readiness tests regardless of if the DTCs are shut off or not. If they don't force the tests you can't pass with the tests forced you can't pass.


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

how about a timer that forces it to pass the readiness AFTER a certain amount of time has transpired, that would be normal ???


----------



## BlueSleeper (Nov 9, 2002)

speed51133! said:


> how about a timer that forces it to pass the readiness AFTER a certain amount of time has transpired, that would be normal ???


 Something tricky like set all readyness codes to passed if you hit set on the cruise control stalk, otherwise they stay pending or whatever the just cleared status is?


----------



## Oh_My_VR6 (Sep 6, 2004)

Awesome suggestions Bluesleeper and speed5113! :thumbup:


----------



## zrau17 (Apr 21, 2010)

Anyone have any more info on this? I was just about to put in my new ECU with a MAF, n249, n112, and SAI delete. If I do that, by 2012..when I have to get inspected again, is this all leading to me failing? It's a Uni-630 file. 

I guess one option would be just unplug the sensors and what not but leave them in there to plug in later with the old ECU? I HATE NEW JERSEY. 

Plus, as arguable of a comment as it is, with how ****ty the environment already is, what's a few more cars putting out a tad more emissions than they should gonna do? For christ's sake if my friends dad's old Camaro can drive around with literally nothing but a carbureted V8 blowin' straight gas out of the straight pipes, why can't anyone else? For what reason should a car get excepted because it's old...


----------



## ljg335i (Jul 30, 2007)

Same issue here, failed NJ inspection with Uni due to modules being 'Unsupported'. Hoping that a fix is found eventually...


----------



## 03redgti (Feb 18, 2006)

dude just buy stickers and be done with it.


----------



## liquidvw (Mar 20, 2003)

03redgti said:


> dude just buy stickers and be done with it.


 easier said then done. Its not like you can buy these things at 7-11. :screwy:


----------



## Negs (Oct 3, 2010)

Find a shop or a mechanic that that you can get to pass your car Usually like $100 or so. I live in NJ and have been driving for 8 years and never been to a state inspection. Always remember that its not WHAT you know but WHO you know. 
I have no emission systems on my 01 20v and my vagcom says all readiness is passed pretty Crazy right and no unitonics readiness program only apr chip from like 6 years ago. and all my emmisions crap is comin off my mk2 VR build. 
So yea just find a cool mechanic in a rural area and you could be set for a while. but remember good things never last and i know it, always got to source out a friends mechanic or something but there out there just look at the cars you see all day long crap cars with good inspection stickers. So.... 

Don't Let The Man Keep You Down!


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

Negs said:


> Find a shop or a mechanic that that you can get to pass your car Usually like $100 or so. I live in NJ and have been driving for 8 years and never been to a state inspection. Always remember that its not WHAT you know but WHO you know.
> I have no emission systems on my 01 20v and my vagcom says all readiness is passed pretty Crazy right and no unitonics readiness program only apr chip from like 6 years ago. and all my emmisions crap is comin off my mk2 VR build.
> So yea just find a cool mechanic in a rural area and you could be set for a while. but remember good things never last and i know it, always got to source out a friends mechanic or something but there out there just look at the cars you see all day long crap cars with good inspection stickers. So....
> 
> Don't Let The Man Keep You Down!


 When was the last time you went? have you gone since this post was created and had your car tested with the new system? Doesn't matter WHO you know in that case the system itself automatically checks codes and readiness then clears codes and rechecks readiness to ensure they all went to not installed or not yet run. If your software is programmed to set them all to pass all the time then you WILL fail and it has nothing to do how much you paid the guy. 01 and early cars like yours however do not store the VIN in the ecu and therefore the state has no idea what car was run other then did it pass or fail. Not in anyway suggesting it but bringing another car is just about the only way to go with the who you know in NJ from here on out if all your tests are forced to pass all the time. 02plus the vin is stored in the car and ecu so if you tried to bring another car the system would flag it. Some sort of immo defeat direct to that chip which clears the vin MAY work in theory but may also just rewrite itself from the ecu, honestly never tried as that isn't how we did immo defeat. 

Also in NJ the stickers are serialized, as with most states I would assume. The center part with the vin and vehicle info could be faked but the colored part is tracked, if your buddy sells you a sticker he at least has to test something to be entered in the system. Pre OBD II it was easier you could just pull up the shop loaner and toss the sniffer in that if you must. That is not worth 100 bucks for me when I Get 60+ from legit people if I am a shop owner. Private in NJ works well for getting around tint or other odd visual mods, doesn't work so much anymore for the actual emissions part. 

Report back when you've tried since the updated and let everyone know how it goes, that was serious not a challenge or some BS like that, would love to hear if your car truly has everything forced to passed if it went through. This system is going to be in most states in the next few years including states that don't currently have any testing or limited testing by region.

Your mk2 vr6 swap is not an obd II car even if you used an obd II engine they'll just do a tailpipe test, if you pass that it is the only thing that matters, check engine light being on, readiness etc doesn't matter.


----------



## Negs (Oct 3, 2010)

a)I don't have any programming to force pass any readiness, if you read correctly it says "no unitronics readiness program" 

b)The actual car is never inspected, just give my Reg. and Ins. or find a complete fake (you know friends) 

c)I only said my readiness was all passed because i was using my vag com and happened to check readiness values and all were passed IRONICALLY. They have been failed before for sai, evap, ect. as well as always failed for cat test even before the emissions delete. So yea just a crazy fluke i was sharing. 

d)Obviously the car wouldn't pass if the proper tests were performed 

e)Some VR6's are obd II, 96 and up to be exact, mine is a 95 with the obd II port but not all the actual obd II systems, software ect. The donor car even had a good sticker (07\11) from the tailpipe sniffer at the shop the seller worked for. 

f)DMV will do inspection for free if you are legit not $60+ 

g)As for everything else, With all due respect NO S*** 

So yea i was just sharing not challenging or BS, just trying to keep the VW tuner communities moral up and I will update you on my next inspection but my sticker is good until 03\12. 

Try to be a little open minded next time Mr. KnowItAll and remember " A hard head makes for a soft a** "


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

I ended up just buying a sticker after I'd switched to Eurodyne. If I get pulled over and get a nosey cop, that's another story.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

Negs said:


> a)I don't have any programming to force pass any readiness, if you read correctly it says "no unitronics readiness program"
> 
> b)The actual car is never inspected, just give my Reg. and Ins. or find a complete fake (you know friends)
> 
> c)I only said my readiness was all passed because i was using my vag com and happened to check readiness values and all were passed IRONICALLY. They have been failed before for sai, evap, ect. as well as always failed for cat test even before the emissions delete. So yea just a crazy fluke i was sharing.





Negs said:


> I have no emission systems on my 01 20v and my vagcom says all readiness is passed pretty Crazy right


 I read it correctly and there is what you said. Unitronic is NOT the only company that has forced readiness codes to pass. You stated you had APR, i didn't think they forced anything to pass which confused me but the point was that if your tests are forced to pass with ANY software then you would not pass with the new system in NJ, some parts of NY and spreading quickly.

Had you stated they were previously failed and now passed in the first place that would have clarified right from the start that your software probably isn't setting all tests forced to pass and then you would not have a problem. That being the case then nothing about your car has anything to do with this thread. Since your software is not forcing the tests based on what you have said no. 

As for your car not being tested, yes that works great for an 00 or 01, it will NOT work great for an 02+ that has the vin stored in the ECU and cluster that is read out by the computer. You can't bring your moms 07 ML and use that instead since the system will flag it. Again making it no longer who you know. With your 01 you luck out assuming your tests aren't forced to pass. 

When i lived in NJ I just didn't go period, no reason to get a fake or BS it just run no front plate and take the sticker off they think you are from out of state .. I got one ticket in 10 years of driving in NJ for no inspection and it was my jeep which I would have actually taken to inspection but I had lent it to a friend and my brother for almost a year and wasn't even in the state to take. Paid the fine still never went. Between all my cars I went 2 times and that included several years of when it was anual not every 2. Just purely from a legal standpoint i'd rather NOT go then get it fraudulently. 



> d)Obviously the car wouldn't pass if the proper tests were performed


 Actually based on what you have now said your car should pass. Assuming they don't do a visual and your tests actually switch to not passed when the codes are cleared. 



> e)Some VR6's are obd II, 96 and up to be exact, mine is a 95 with the obd II port but not all the actual obd II systems, software ect. The donor car even had a good sticker (07\11) from the tailpipe sniffer at the shop the seller worked for.


 I am 100% aware of what year OBD II started and that there are 95 VR6s which are not OBDII, there are some random cars that are 95s and OBDII, dodge neon I belive is one and paul here has an 850 that seems to be obd II compliant but may not be certified. None of that matters though as you stated you are putting the engine into a mk2 which NONE were OBDII so they wouldn't even think to run the test that way. The only emissions tests that would be done on your MK2 no matter what engine in it would be a gas cap pressure test and a sniffer test, plus if you went to state inspection they would check for a cat. So it doesn't matter if you ripped it all out or not and this has nothing to do with readiness.

Yes if you did have an obd2 Vr6 donor car and properly did the swap and associated paperwork changing the title to that engine then it would actually come up in the system that it needs to have an obd 2 test. But NONE of that even matters since you don't have an obd 2 engine or vehicle. 

I did the paperwork for example on my GFs TJ when she blew the motor and wanted a diesel, her title now states diesel and would be exempt from emissions in every state . That happens to be an example of doing it the right way but really only to make my/her life easier down the road. In the case of an OBD II engine in a non OBD II car updating the title would just make your life harder, well in some cases a car will pass obdII but fail a sniffer so guess it could help. 





> f)DMV will do inspection for free if you are legit not $60+


 Never did I say anything about state for free. I specially stated if I had a shop and i charged 60 bucks for a normal person I'm not going to risk 10s of thousands of dollars in fines, jail and having my business shut down for 40 bucks to help someone rip out their emissions equipment for no reason. 



The bottom line is you can pay someone 1000 bucks and if they plug your car into the system to run it then it will not pass if your tests do not reset, it is no longer a matter of who you know.


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

There's the option to smog the car and put it on the rollers. That was my last option if a sticker couldn't be sought. There's a few members from California that have passed w/ flying colors on BT setups, one of whom made a post about it in the last few weeks. Bejan got his right through too w/ his transformer engine bay that hid all his go fast stuff.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

screwball said:


> There's the option to smog the car and put it on the rollers. That was my last option if a sticker couldn't be sought. There's a few members from California that have passed w/ flying colors on BT setups, one of whom made a post about it in the last few weeks. Bejan got his right through too w/ his transformer engine bay that hid all his go fast stuff.


 
What was that option based on? Is it similar to when you can become exempt for a 2 year block proving the costs of repairs are a hardship or more then the vehicle is worth? Part of the tests are that the obd II port must actually function (that is federal) so just curious what the process would be to get to that point where they say ok you can just do a sniffer. Could be helpful to some although it most likely varies state to state. Not condoning tricking anyone but if it means disabling the obd II before going initially then proving it can't easily or cheaply be fixed so you are then waived and get a sniffer you would probably need to do that from the get go not after you were flagged for tests not reseting as it obviously worked then.

There are some OBD II applications where they require a sniffer test on top of the obd II test, something pops up in the test and tells them to run both. I forget which of my dads cars this happens on, might be the freelander since they tried to run it on the rollers..


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

I"m not entirely sure Chris. I'd have to ask Timmy as he suggested it as a last resort.


----------



## TheBossQ (Aug 15, 2009)

zrau17 said:


> Plus, as arguable of a comment as it is, with how ****ty the environment already is, what's a few more cars putting out a tad more emissions than they should gonna do? For christ's sake if my friends dad's old Camaro can drive around with literally nothing but a carbureted V8 blowin' straight gas out of the straight pipes, why can't anyone else? For what reason should a car get excepted because it's old...


 Ex post facto. It's at the very heart of US Law. Someone purchases a car that meets current laws, then the laws change ... and then what. The car is confiscated? What happens if I purchase a 2010 Audi that meets all current regulations. And then new technology is discovered 4 years from now that would cut all emissions by 98%. Should I be forced to give up my car, even though I did nothing wrong? 

If your dad's old Camaro possesses all factory equipment or appropriate replacement parts, or it simply meets the emissions laws from the period in which it was built, then it's protected by law. 

And your argument about "what's a few more polluters gunna do" is an ignorant argument.


----------



## Negs (Oct 3, 2010)

*Over and Out*

[email protected] you misunderstood what i said and therefore it wasn't necessary to write a 3 paragraph reply bashing me for no reason and assuming i have no knowledge and stating the obvious. 
And nothing i have still said implies that my car will pass it wouldn't pass when i bought it because of the exhaust (Catalytic Converter Readiness Test) and now it has no emissions systems on it so no it wouldn't pass 

and the readiness would switch to "Not Ready" *NOT* "Not Passed" when the codes are cleared and then they would switch to FAIL after the required mileage is driven for the ecu to complete the tests. 
I haven't cleared codes for a bit and do have a CEL on but the readiness said pass and that's why i said "pretty Crazy right" I thought it was stated clearly but apparently not for you. Because no one else felt so strongly about my reply to this thread. So stop acting like the Fun Police and keep in mind assumption is the mother of all F ups 

and have a :beer: or :beer::beer: and relax


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

TheBossQ said:


> Ex post facto. It's at the very heart of US Law. Someone purchases a car that meets current laws, then the laws change ... and then what. The car is confiscated? What happens if I purchase a 2010 Audi that meets all current regulations. And then new technology is discovered 4 years from now that would cut all emissions by 98%. Should I be forced to give up my car, even though I did nothing wrong?


 
While this has happened with many things I have not seen this applied to automobiles especially under your examples. Obviously the ex post facto is the law changing after the fact but the current laws are that the car must meet only requirements at that time and cannot be required to pass more stringent ones. 

To date the only laws that are being added for old car are test procedures, the tests only cover things required of that vehicle at time of manufacture. For example an EX GF had an 88 Corisica in HS I took it in with her for inspection and the only thing it failed for was the gas cap wasn't sealing. The car had only a basic evap system and for it to function did not require a perfectly sealing cap but in 1988 a sealed cap was still required. So even though they didn't test for it in 1992 they did in 1998 and could since it was an existing law in 1988 when it was built. Another example is thresholds of how much a car can pollute in order to pass or fail. While these levels get more stringent what each car must pass has never become more strict to my knowledge compared to what it was required to do when it was produced. 

I know you are for emissions based on the rest of your post, just pointing out that they have not and don't seem to be worried about going back and making new laws that could require you to give up your old car. People always talk about this but I'd be curious to see a US example. A good example of this in the US would be the assault weapons ban, you legally bought it but you were_ supposed_ to surrender it when the law went into affect, I have not come across similar with autos and emissions. 


In these cases everyone removing their emissions equipment legally had to have it and they were testing for it when the car was produced, so not an example of ex post facto, just like they can't (currently) tell your dad his 69 camaro has to have secondairy air to pass.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

Negs said:


> [email protected] you misunderstood what i said


 
How does someone misunderstand something that was never said? I responded to your post exactly as you wrote it and later you came in with more information that had it initially been stated there would have been nothing to misunderstand.

You said (paraphrased) :

"My car passes readiness."

"I have no emissions equipment."

Thinking your software had all tests forced to pass in a thread discussing cars with no emissions equipment with all readiness tests forced to pass is hardly an assumption when that was the only information you provided.

For the record though based on what you ARE saying now if the test is simply being done using the current electronic system in NJ and you arrived with all tests past then codes cleared and they properly reset to not showing passed then you would in fact pass that portion of the test. You have mentioned you have a CEL on which is probably related to the missing emissions parts and that is what you would fail for in NJ as I believe they are still 0 tolerance, which sucks for vw/audis because you can have a code simply stating another module that isn't tested has a problem and fail. In other states using the check, clear, and recheck method you could pass because some allow for DTCs to be stored as long as all tests are passed. My comment regarding passing was only on the current topic of the new testing checking for tests forced to pass which you are now saying is not the case with your vehicle. 

Also not passed vs not run is semantics, the exact wording varies between test equipment and vehicle, I have faxes here from NJ tests stations sent by customers showing NOT PASSED. In some cases readiness tests that are not even activated in a vehicle show as passed and in other say not present.


----------



## TheBossQ (Aug 15, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> I know you are for emissions based on the rest of your post, just pointing out that they have not and don't seem to be worried about going back and making new laws that could require you to give up your old car. People always talk about this but I'd be curious to see a US example. A good example of this in the US would be the assault weapons ban, you legally bought it but you were_ supposed_ to surrender it when the law went into affect, I have not come across similar with autos and emissions.


 I am for emissions testing, but not how it is currently set up. I am against people deleting cats and other emissions equipment. I am actually against grandfathering in 40 year old polluting cars, but it's protected by law so I argue for the right that is protected by law. I am against preventing a car from passing solely based on equipment upgrades, when in the end the concern is always tailpipe emissions. When a well tuned car pollutes less than (or only as much as) a factory car (which should always be the baseline), why should it be failed? 

If someone wants to certify their aftermarket laden car, give them the means to do so. If it costs the original fee plus an extra $150 in testing fees and a marked up registration fee, what enthusiast that has spent $5k-15k tailoring his car to suit his preferences wouldn't pay the fees to ensure he can drive around legally? 

I know I would and so would a lot of other people. 

With regard to the rest of what you wrote, you seemed to expound on what I said ... the way I read it, we're saying the same thing. Ex post facto primarily applies to criminal law and being tried for something you did prior to it being outlawed, but the idea itself permeates through many other areas of law and regulation.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

TheBossQ said:


> I am for emissions testing, but not how it is currently set up. I am against people deleting cats and other emissions equipment. I am actually against grandfathering in 40 year old polluting cars, but it's protected by law so I argue for the right that is protected by law. I am against preventing a car from passing solely based on equipment upgrades, when in the end the concern is always tailpipe emissions. When a well tuned car pollutes less than (or only as much as) a factory car (which should always be the baseline), why should it be failed?
> 
> If someone wants to certify their aftermarket laden car, give them the means to do so. If it costs the original fee plus an extra $150 in testing fees and a marked up registration fee, what enthusiast that has spent $5k-15k tailoring his car to suit his preferences wouldn't pay the fees to ensure he can drive around legally?
> 
> ...


 Great points, on all accounts. 

I don't necessarily see the 40 year old cars as being grandfathered in just by the angle I take on how new emissions standards are added but i understand it really sort of is in a sense. 

The argument in general of why can a 40 year old gas guzzler still pollute but your new gti can't always amuses me, I get the point but the comparison is funny. Are they on the road sure, but how much and what percentage? On your average daily commute how many 40 year old cars with no emissions equipment do you pass everyday? For every 100K miles collectively people are doing here on their gtis with no cats there is probably 2K miles done on an old polluting beater, there are less by volume and most are not daily drivers. So if you took all the pollution the group of decatted brand new cars would pollute more since they are more common. Which is why they aren't as strict on them not worth the resources Or in the case of GA and some other states testing is exempt at a certain age, sure it may pollute but how many and how much are they being used? Me personally if I built some old car that required no cats I'd probably actually put them on even though legally i didn't have to. 

Paying to get your modified car tested seems like a great idea even for a small fee. Sort of what they try to do with CARB but the fees are insane and the requirements along with passing have more to do with who you are and how much money you have then if the part works or not. Some of the things people remove though would be hard to quantify and test for with a simple test and on every car. SAI for example only really comes on when cold and not even every start, hard to test quickly and easily to see if it truly helped. EVAP also, how do you quickly quantify through a test how much fuel vapor is escaping vs being recovered and results would change morning to afternoon. Idea is awesome implementation would be a nightmare, would love to see it worked out... who do we call about this..


----------



## 87vr6 (Jan 17, 2002)

Well here's my UNI results in NC... Just done a month ago... I see on the bottom right of the paper, it says version 1002... But I am new to NC's stuff....


----------



## SkootySkoo (Aug 8, 2004)

Just got myself a fancy red sticker today. Everything passed but all the deletes came up as unsupported (uni 630 w/ deletes). Guess I am just gonna have to make failing a monthly thing.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

I'm late to the discussion and didn't read the whole thread but some tuners are *FORCING* readiness blocks?  Yikes!


----------



## sledge0001 (Oct 7, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> I'm late to the discussion and didn't read the whole thread but some tuners are *FORCING* readiness blocks?  Yikes!


 Can't believe you guys aren't or at least offer the option to those that want it!!! *Bigger Yikes*....


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

sledge0001 said:


> Can't believe you guys aren't or at least offer the option to those that want it!!! *Bigger Yikes*....


The whole *Federal Crime* aspect to it seems to be a compelling reason not too.


----------



## sledge0001 (Oct 7, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> The whole *Federal Crime* aspect to it seems to be a compelling reason not too.



What Federal Crime is there for a tune that isn't made for street use? :laugh:

You gotta be ****tin' me... If that was the case then why doesn't your stage 3 have a CARB# here in Cali? Come on....


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

sledge0001 said:


> What Federal Crime is there for a tune that isn't made for street use?


And you're forcing readiness bits for what reason?


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

to remove CE lights that will put it in a limp mode and drive on a race track with a stock ecu and no emissions garbage.

take your overpriced pipes and bolt-on's out of here with your attitude.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

speed51133! said:


> to remove CE lights that will put it in a limp mode and drive on a race track with a stock ecu and no emissions garbage.
> 
> take your overpriced pipes and bolt-on's out of here with your attitude.


It's fine to remove a CEL from annoying you or one that some how throws you into limp mode, but I can't see on reason why you would need to FORCE readiness to pass, rather than having the test not run and simply fail, especially if you only run the car on the track.

Can you tell me a good reason why?


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

It's all hearsay really until someone accountable for coding these flashes chimes in. I'm sure that'll be "two weeks".


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

just because something has a potential to be used in an illegal way, does not make it illegal to make and sell it across the board.

look at guns. many handguns are made specifically to kill people, however its possible to buy them just for fun, to target shoot, or collect.

same with off road use only stuff....

learn the law.

APR chooses not to make this kind of stuff, yeah, fine.
but dont come in here and hate on people who do make it. 
thats just unprofessional and stupid.
SO, take you overpriced exhaust and 17 thousand dollar supercharger kit, and beat it.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

speed51133! said:


> APR chooses not to make this kind of stuff, yeah, fine.
> but dont come in here and hate on people who do make it.
> thats just unprofessional and stupid.


You're not making any valid points and your occupation is even as "Lawyer"! You should be good at debating and convincing people. Convince me otherwise.

What is the point of forcing readiness bits to pass rather than fail/incomplete?

1. It doesn't change drivability.
2. It doesn't remove remove CEL's.

There is only 1 reason you would do this - to trick an inspection station into passing the car during emissions testing.


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 22, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> You're not making any valid points and your occupation is even as "Lawyer"! You should be good at debating and convincing people. Convince me otherwise.
> 
> What is the point of forcing readiness bits to pass rather than fail/incomplete?
> 
> ...


to get rid of a secondary 02 sensor, just like your stage 2 file can be used with a test pipe to pass emissions...

Your really adding nothing here Arin.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> to get rid of a secondary 02 sensor, just like your stage 2 file can be used with a test pipe to pass emissions...
> 
> Your really adding nothing here Arin.


You don't need to force readiness to get rid of a testpipe cel. We don't.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

speed51133! said:


> just because something has a potential to be used in an illegal way, does not make it illegal to make and sell it across the board.
> 
> look at guns. many handguns are made specifically to kill people, however its possible to buy them just for fun, to target shoot, or collect.
> 
> ...



One should know the law before telling others to learn it, especially someone saying they are a lawyer. 

There is NO reason to write tune with readiness tests forced to pass except for the purpose of defrauding the inspection process. There is not one single legit reason to do this. So there is nothing you can possibly have a reason to design it for. Had there been a legit reason then ok maybe but there isn't, your gun example there is a legit reason to produce guns and supply them to normal people for other purposes, what other purpose is there to a file that forces all readiness to pass. Heck its a disservice because part of readiness being able to run and pass is letting you know the car is working right. VW requires readiness is set on all cars in for warranty work related to the engine to prove the problem was fixed or at least was working when it left. 


Gun companies have produced weapons that had a legit purpose but then were used illegally or in ways not intended and still been sued, fined whatever. Just because they say don't do it if they are found to be responsible for allowing misuse to happen they can be held accountable. 


One company I have dealt with in the past was looking to actually get a downpipe with high flow cat 
CARB approved for an application, not going to say what as it may or may not even be VW related. They were located in California they designed it did some tests and contacted CARB about starting the process. They were given the runaround basically told even if it works we don't want to approve it since others may try and then this complicates testing etc, long story short told don't bother. What came next was they actually said we know you have done the leg work but don't even try producing this for sale in other states or for offroad use only. If we find out you are producing them we will fine you for each one made/sold through your business located in the state of california based solely on the chance it MIGHT end up being used on the street. 


Back to the law since you say you are a lawyer, what is ONE legit legal reason for someone to produce software that forces readiness to pass? Just because I CAN build a fully automatic explosive device launcher doesn't mean I MAY build one and certainly doesn't mean I have a legit application to produce it for. In that case as a manufacture I can't even legally build it without being heavily fined, which as far as I know is actually the same case with this, not everything has to be used to be illegal in many cases just producing it can be illegal. 

Pot has legal uses in some states, heck cocaine is legal with a prescription, but doesn't mean you can just grow them in your front yard next to the tomatoes and claim hey its only for use by those with a prescription..


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

screwball said:


> It's all hearsay really until someone accountable for coding these flashes chimes in. I'm sure that'll be "two weeks".



What needs an actual tuner's in put in this discussion? Anything being discussed here could be verified by a monkey and a laptop. If this was any deeper then what basic diagnostic equipment could do then this thread wouldn't even be here since the state wouldn't have a clue. Anything related to this testing has to be the same and is open source (well you get it if you pay like 50 bucks for the info), nothing is a secret here, you either pass the normal way, don't pass ever , or always pass.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

speed51133! said:


> to remove CE lights that will put it in a limp mode and drive on a race track with a stock ecu and no emissions garbage.
> 
> take your overpriced pipes and bolt-on's out of here with your attitude.



To back up what Arin has said, you asked what crime, he mentioned readiness tests and those have NOTHING to do with what you have said.

So far you nor anyone else has listed ANY reason why one would need to force readiness to pass except for helping people defraud the inspection process.

Shutting off a DTC so it doesn't bother you on your track car is a 100% valid application for claiming something is for "off-road" use only. That does not have anything to do with forcing readiness nor does it have a legit purpose for even off-road. Readiness tests are only for verifying systems are working, if you don't have them because tis off road you do not need the tests to run at all. The ONLY purpose in the world to have readiness tests forced to pass would be to illegally pass emissions.

This is not a hard concept. 


As for CARB and say their stage 3 kit. That is something that is not purposefully tricking inspection systems teh same as ANY other non carb exempt hardware. CARB is a local law not a federal law and with some gray areas in there the kit is 49 stage legal since all they care about is the day you go to inspection it passes. California doesn't give a crap if the kit actually passes inspection they just want the 10s of thousands of dollars they get from the approval process. CARB is idiotic and its purpose is not to actually improve air quality when it comes to vehicles unfortunately so trying to make it sound like just becus someone can buy a kit in texas and take it into California and use it puts them on the same level as forcing readiness tests is moronic. The kit would pass the tests if they felt like wasting the money I am 99% sure of that and they are my competition. It's stupid to support CARB in anyway, especially if you like the environment.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> You don't need to force readiness to get rid of a testpipe cel. We don't.



You don't even need to disable the rear 02 sensor to do it.. you certainly don't need to force readiness.

Hell I've seen cars with no cat still pass readiness because the rear 02 was enabled and the tests weren't shut off completely. Right conditions it's possible.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Exactly. Thank you Chris. It's just so silly how much misinformation goes around these message boards, like this statement below.



speed51133! said:


> SO, take you overpriced exhaust and 17 thousand dollar supercharger kit, and beat it.


$17,000? What you smoking? The kit retails for $18,999.00 :laugh:


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

i'll admit im not a tuner and dont know a whole lot about how the stock ecu works.

but, the fact is when you buy a car, its yours, and so is the ecu. i can reprogram it to do anything. i can have it calculate the quickest route to smuggle cocaine accross the mexican border, after finding out the best way to smuggle it on a passanger airline. it doesnt matter that it doesnt have any other valid purpose. the fact is im not going to drive it on the public road. its for my off road use only.

yes, i can force it to pass rediness, and whatever the hell else i want it to do as well. im not breaking the law, until i actually KNOWINGLY go to an emissions center and try to fool them with it. id have to look up the exact statutes we are talking about but i would be willing to be you need to NOT ONLY actually violate the law, but also have the intent.

bottom line, i can sell it for off road use, that is my intent. i am not responsible for what you do with it. You could kill someone by hot rodding around town, you could bang them in the head with the APR cat back, you can do anything, thats YOUR problem, not the seller's.

i mean both sides can be argued. you can argue that the seller should know that people will use it for illegal use, but I would imagine you can think up a reason to have readiness forced that is legit.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

speed51133! said:


> i'll admit im not a tuner and dont know a whole lot about how the stock ecu works.
> 
> but, the fact is when you buy a car, its yours, and so is the ecu. i can reprogram it to do anything. i can have it calculate the quickest route to smuggle cocaine accross the mexican border, after finding out the best way to smuggle it on a passanger airline. it doesnt matter that it doesnt have any other valid purpose. the fact is im not going to drive it on the public road. its for my off road use only.
> 
> ...



LOL. Both sides can be argued. lol.......

What's your argument and reason for forcing it? Because you can and it's your car? Good argument. If I ever commit a crime, I really REALLY hope you're the lawyer on the other side. :laugh:


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

speed51133! said:


> but, the fact is when you buy a car, its yours, and so is the ecu. i can reprogram it to do anything. i can have it calculate the quickest route to smuggle cocaine accross the mexican border, after finding out the best way to smuggle it on a passanger airline. it doesnt matter that it doesnt have any other valid purpose. the fact is im not going to drive it on the public road. its for my off road use only.


Since your example was idiotic so will be mine.

You go to best buy and buy a computer, with that computer you write software to break into some government database, you never do it but can/do they confiscate that computer and throw you in jail just for writing it even if you swear you never were going to use it?

YES!!!

Do they arrest terrorists just for plotting acts? YES!!, you don't have to do something they can arrest you if they think you are going to. In this case they can arrest/fine you for having software meant to trick federal emissions standards, that includes you having it in your car and the company writing it.



> yes, i can force it to pass rediness, and whatever the hell else i want it to do as well. im not breaking the law, until i actually KNOWINGLY go to an emissions center and try to fool them with it. id have to look up the exact statutes we are talking about but i would be willing to be you need to NOT ONLY actually violate the law, but also have the intent.


See above, are you a terrorist just for drawing up the plans for a bomb and where you would place it or are you not until you knowingly build the bomb and place it in a car in front of a cafe?



> bottom line, i can sell it for off road use, that is my intent. i am not responsible for what you do with it. You could kill someone by hot rodding around town, you could bang them in the head with the APR cat back, you can do anything, thats YOUR problem, not the seller's.


Can you be arrested for growing pot in your backyard if your intent was only to sell it to someone with a prescription?

YES

As for killing someone, tuning a car is a bit of a stretch but yes you can be held responsible for selling someone. You own a bar, you can be charged if you let someone drink to much and then leave to drive home. You just sold them beer for off-road use only, but you can be charged for selling it..

You ARE responsible for things you sell and how they are used, sorry you don't want to hear that. 




> i mean both sides can be argued. you can argue that the seller should know that people will use it for illegal use, but I would imagine you can think up a reason to have readiness forced that is legit.



WHAT REASONS!!!!!! 

There is one reason for readiness and that is to verify that all systems are working. What is one possible reason you'd want to falsify the output of a test to show its always working other then trying to get through inspection.

You claim there is a reason WHAT IS IT??

List one valid reason and you have a point but you can't so don't bother.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

Actually wait I'm confused... why are we even having to defend ourselves on this. The ENTIRE point of this thread is that you can't force readiness and pass inspection.

So the few saying why don't Revo, APR, GIAC and others do this.. What the heck are you even asking for? Setting all readiness tests to pass doesn't even work anymore, not only is it illegal but you can't pass inspection with it.. What is the point?

Why are you fighting for something you can't use?

Snap-on COULD make a 13.678mm wrench, sure it wouldn't even be illegal, but what the heck are they going to do making a tool that can't be used??


----------



## sledge0001 (Oct 7, 2007)

Chris and Arin the simple fact is that people want these options. Both of your companies have chosen to ignore the fact that people want to delete the EVAP system and Force readiness... I see no reason to have an extra 5 feet of vac/boost hoses and check valves. I do use my car on the street and use it on the strip as well and I HATE C.E.L.'s... 

Let's face the fact that both of your companies have chosen not to offer these options have truly hurt your business and in some minds your reputation. 

I specifically did not choose Revo or APR for this very reason. In my opinion this is why I made the right choice when selecting the Eurodyne Maestro system. I can remove the EVAP stuff force readiness IF I CHOOSE. Put it back in if I need and reflash my car and my ECU never has to leave the car... It seems that both APR and Revo have lost touch with what the PEOPLE WANT and people like myself that are enthusiasts want these options whether your companies agree with them or not.. 


Let's face it guys these Stage 2+ tunes (APR, UNI, Eurodyne, Neuspeed and Revo)are not meant for street driving if they were you would ALL have CARB#'s for them.. (Actually Neuspeed is the only chip tuner that I am aware of that actually has a CARB# for their K03 tune). So the comment about legalities are nothing more than B.S. and fluff... These tunes are made for off road use... With that being said both APR and Revo should listen to the voice of the people and ADAPT! Offer the functionality that people want or continue to lose business to your competitors. It really is that simple.

I do give credit to UNI and Eurodyne for figuring this out. They heard what people wanted and developed accordingly...


----------



## north (Sep 22, 2010)

Just gonna throw this out there....APR and REVO *AGREE!!* Ahha. Anyway I can't believe I just read all 5 pages  It was worth it on page 5 though.


----------



## north (Sep 22, 2010)

sledge0001 said:


> Let's face the fact that both of your companies have chosen not to offer these options have truly hurt your business and in some minds your reputation.
> 
> I specifically did not choose Revo or APR for this very reason. In my opinion this is why I made the right choice when selecting the Eurodyne Maestro system. I can remove the EVAP stuff force readiness IF I CHOOSE. Put it back in if I need and reflash my car and my ECU never has to leave the car... It seems that both APR and Revo have lost touch with what the PEOPLE WANT and people like myself that are enthusiasts want these options whether your companies agree with them or not..


What are you smoking... You can do the same with Revo's Select Plus (correct me if im wrong chris). It's called program switching. Also, APR can go back to a stock tune at any time.... err am I understanding your accusations right?


----------



## sledge0001 (Oct 7, 2007)

Not smoking anything...

I am talking about the coding out of specific systems at a moments notice. I am not aware that APR or Revo offer this functionality...


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

I'm outta here... you guys are idiots. You can quote me on that and throw it in all of your sigs.


----------



## Malant (Aug 30, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> I'm outta here... you guys are idiots. You can quote me on that and throw it in all of your sigs.


:thumbup::thumbup:

Arin & Chris are right.... Sledge, you obviously do not have enough knowledge on the subject to put up a legit argument. Just stop mang.:banghead:


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

[email protected] said:


> Since your example was idiotic so will be mine.
> 
> You go to best buy and buy a computer, with that computer you write software to break into some government database, you never do it but can/do they confiscate that computer and throw you in jail just for writing it even if you swear you never were going to use it?
> 
> ...


you are comparing totally irrelevant things. Strict liability crimes are crimes that it doesnt matter what your intent is, and what you wanted to happen, if you do it your busted. Posession of pot is a crime. Growing pot is a crime. It doesnt matter why you did it. COMPUTER PROGRAMMING IS NOT A STRICT LIABILITY CRIME. I would have to argure that terrorism IS a strict liability crime. 

You are comparing apples to oranges man. Unless there is a law stating it is ILLEGAL to write software that can be used to fool emissions testing, then GO SCREW YOURSELF. I am done here too, and you can put that in your gay ass sig. For real....you have no idea what your talking about.


----------



## Cryser (Sep 9, 2009)

There is actually 2 possible reason to force readiness check to pass, and 1 is not even a good one but I will state it. The 1 legal reason to force a readiness check to pass is to limit the number of monitors the ECU has open at a time, when you fail a readiness check you ecu knows and throws up a monitor. The second is most likely the reason these checks are auto passed. The 2 readiness checks that are being forced are also linked to 2 CELS, SAI improper flow and EVAP improper flow, when these 2 readiness checks are failed for 2 consecutive run cycles then the CEL is illuminated. I know this is how the SAI code works so the same can be assumed for the EVAP. If you have a track car and you have removed these systems for whatever reason you would indeed need these readiness check to be auto pass or else the CEL would be on constantly. The rear oxygen sensor code(P0420) does NOT need any readiness checks to be passed and therefor can be written with the need for them to be auto passed.

Speed you need to hit the books again, you indeed can be charged with a crime if you produce something that is meant to defraud a state or federal inspection the laws are quite different for companies then they are for individuals. A company can't just put "For off road use only" on anything they feel like to get around this, the loophole I described above is what is most likely the saving graces of the tuners that do infact offer these deletes(that and I highly down CARB is going to be hunting them do anytime soon)

It should be noted that technically everyone in California with a chip in their car(expect people with neuspeed because I believe their chips are actually CARB legal and come with a sticker) is breaking the law, Changing the boost levels, fuel and timing maps on a car also effects it's emissions, and in California it is against the law to do ANYTHING to your car that effects the emissions. The reason everyone in california with a chipped car isn't getting fined to hell and back is it's impossible to test for, smog dyno's can't and never will be set up to measure power(too much cost among other things) that is really the ONLY way you can detect a chip in someones car. As long as a chip isn't gross polluting at the test levels, which it never will because that would be bad for power production as well, it will never be detected. But just because everyone and their mothers can get away with it doesn't mean it's not illegal.

The fact of the matter is this, these 2 readiness check are being passed for the sole purpose keeping the SAI and Evap improper flow CEL from showing up for OFFROAD race vehicles so they can still retain the use of their CEL for major problems. They are not being offered so that you can clean up your engine bay and remove emissions equipment in emission controlled states and still pass inspection. Big turbo set ups can still run with these systems in place, so the tuners that offer these types of "deletes" probably have much more important things to do with their time then help people to get pass emissions illegal so I doubt they will be focusing on this "problem" anytime soon.

I personally hope they do because I know I have removed my Combi valve because I hate that stupid thing and it makes finding leaks and fixing stuff MUCH easier but I still have it in the bottom of my toolbox with my stock air box so i can just as easily take off my block off plate, reinstall it for an hour and pass inspection when I need to.


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

Cryser said:


> Speed you need to hit the books again, you indeed can be charged with a crime if you produce something that is meant to defraud a state or federal inspection the laws are quite different for companies then they are for individuals. A company can't just put "For off road use only" on anything they feel like to get around this, the loophole I described above is what is most likely the saving graces of the tuners that do infact offer these deletes(that and I highly down CARB is going to be hunting them do anytime soon)


Im not so sure about that, IF it is meant to defraud a state or federal inspection, maybe so, but that would mean the company made it with the intent of defrauding the government. It is quite easy to argue that is not your intent at all. It is so easy to come up with a reason why you would want to do something other than to defraud. I would have had to consult with someone that actually knows more about writing code for these ecu's but the reason you listed would be good enough for a legitimate argument at least.

it would depend on which statute your actually being prosecuted on, and how it is written. maybe there is case law out there already on this?


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

speed51133! said:


> you are comparing totally irrelevant things. Strict liability crimes are crimes that it doesnt matter what your intent is, and what you wanted to happen, if you do it your busted. Posession of pot is a crime. Growing pot is a crime. It doesnt matter why you did it. COMPUTER PROGRAMMING IS NOT A STRICT LIABILITY CRIME. I would have to argure that terrorism IS a strict liability crime.
> 
> You are comparing apples to oranges man. Unless there is a law stating it is ILLEGAL to write software that can be used to fool emissions testing, then GO SCREW YOURSELF. I am done here too, and you can put that in your gay ass sig. For real....you have no idea what your talking about.


Wow really go srew yourself? You can't figure out how to build a car the right way and you want others to risk their lively hood because your irresponsible and you tell me to go screw myself?

Wow.. that gets your argument across great..


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

Cryser said:


> There is actually 2 possible reason to force readiness check to pass, and 1 is not even a good one but I will state it. The 1 legal reason to force a readiness check to pass is to limit the number of monitors the ECU has open at a time, when you fail a readiness check you ecu knows and throws up a monitor. The second is most likely the reason these checks are auto passed. The 2 readiness checks that are being forced are also linked to 2 CELS, SAI improper flow and EVAP improper flow, when these 2 readiness checks are failed for 2 consecutive run cycles then the CEL is illuminated. I know this is how the SAI code works so the same can be assumed for the EVAP. If you have a track car and you have removed these systems for whatever reason you would indeed need these readiness check to be auto pass or else the CEL would be on constantly. The rear oxygen sensor code(P0420) does NOT need any readiness checks to be passed and therefor can be written with the need for them to be auto passed.




Neither of those reasons are valid for forcing readiness to pass.

Yes tests being run and tests failing will cause in some cases trouble codes to be stored, some trouble codes after a certain number of failures will illuminate the check engine light.

But you are mistaking tests, running, failing, passing and what actually causes the light to come on and again the need for readiness to pass. 

-A test can fail and not illuminate a light.

For example tests will stop running and show not passed, not run whatever if coolant temp is too high, cat temps go too high, a misfire was detected while it was running the test. All reasons for a test not to pass but will not throw a code. Read the requirements and procedures in the VW repair manuals regarding running those tests and you will see a bunch of operating windows and conditions that must be met. 

-A test can pass one day, not pass the next day, test remains showing passed and still throw a code and illuminate a light.

For example you have a high flow cat in a larger diameter pipe and software with P0420 code still functional enabled. You drive around town winding the car out, short distances up to speed quick, mountain runs etc, basically no high speed lots of load, little airflow under the car. Even with NO cat in some cases this car will actually run readiness, pass readiness and display no code for cat efficiency lower then expected. You later have a 20 mile drive on the highway you are doing 70, lots of airflow, low load cat is cool from the larger diameter pipes and low egts, test runs again remains passed but throws the P0420 code for cat efficiency lower then expected. Runs test again on your return trim and a light illuminates. You check readiness and it shows passed. Passed tests do not unpass even if a code is thrown. In a test based 100% on readiness and ignores any codes like some states this car would pass, clearing codes would then reset readiness to all not run/passed.


-A test fails, code is thrown, light is illuminated. 

For this example we'll go with the SAI. Test runs on a functioning car turning pump on, regulating control valve for vacuum to kombi valve, 02 sensors detect change in airflow knows system is working and passes. You rip everything out test runs it fails since there is no increased airflow. Code sets for incorrect or no flow, readiness goes to failed / not passed, light comes on. Test keeps trying you fail.

Now the key here is whether you pass or fail the tests keep running over and over and over again a few times a day, everyday or every few days depending on the system. So it doesn't matter if you force all the tests to pass if the items aren't there and the tests can't run to recheck you will get a malfunction indicator lamp on. The light has absolutely nothing to do with the status of the tests.

If your concern is the light being on and the tests running then you can do several things, you can disable, eliminate do whatever to the individual codes that set or you can disable the tests and they will never run and therefore possibly not even throw codes depending on the system. In both those cases the tests will show failed/not run and you can still have no MIL if that is what you are saying is bothering you. On no scenario does force all tests to always pass stop the tests from running or eliminate any lights from being illuminated.

So scenarios:

All systems installed and pass, tests pass tests keep retesting all good, no codes no MIL

Systems modified but may still pass, tests pass, codes thrown and MIL on

Systems modified but may still pass, tests pass, codes themselves disabled, no MIL

Systems modified or removed, tests don't pass, codes not disabled, no pass MIL on

Systems modified tests set to not run, codes not disabled, no pass possible MIL on

Systems modified tests run codes disabled, tests may pass, no MIL

Systems modified, tests forced to pass, tests still run codes still thrown MIL on

Systems modified, tests forced to pass, tests/circuits rigged, codes disabled, no MIL



So now as you can see many situations where you can have no MIL and tests not forced to pas, you can even have a situation where tests are forced to pass and you still have a MIL, forcing tests to pass does nothing in and of it self to prevent a MIL. 

You can argue that disabling tests/codes etc is meant to trick emissions testing but in many cases those will cause you to fail, like the test not running. In those cases for off road use only and for the purpose of not having an annoying MIL on a race car is a legit use. But you can clearly see that even with tests forced to pass you can still have a MIL for the tests that are forced to pass unless you do other things, those same things can be done to prevent a MIL and still allow tests to properly run and not pass or pass on their own. There is NOTHING that simply forcing all readiness tests to pass does to prevent the display of a MIL, so there is NO valid reason to force readiness to pas even for an off-road application and its ONLY purpose would be to fraudulently pass an emissions test, you only need that for use on the road.


----------



## sledge0001 (Oct 7, 2007)

Malant said:


> :thumbup::thumbup:
> 
> Arin & Chris are right.... Sledge, you obviously do not have enough knowledge on the subject to put up a legit argument. Just stop mang.:banghead:


Ummm having the abitlity to code out vs. turning on and off certain EVAP / Emissions systems and have the option to force readiness if I choose is not a legitimate argument??? 

Have you read the last 5 pages?? 

Arin: Sig changed at your request :thumbup:


----------



## Cryser (Sep 9, 2009)

I see what your saying chris, I was always under the impression the tests for those codes and the codes themselves were linked. I wasn't aware that you can just program out the code completely as it never existed.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Cryser said:


> I see what your saying chris, I was always under the impression the tests for those codes and the codes themselves were linked. I wasn't aware that you can just program out the code completely as it never existed.


Yes sir! :thumbup:


----------



## .:RyouExperienced (Sep 19, 2005)

I had to chime in and say that I passed Los Angeles SMOG with a UNI BT tune (SAI delete file). Just had to _convince_ the guy to overlook visual.

Big ups to UNI for not giving a sh!t and helping those out in need. To the American vendors: it makes perfect sense why you wouldn't force readiness for the legal ramifications. Good luck holding on to the BT market though.


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

.:RyouExperienced said:


> I had to chime in and say that I passed Los Angeles SMOG with a UNI BT tune (SAI delete file). Just had to _convince_ the guy to overlook visual.
> 
> Big ups to UNI for not giving a sh!t and helping those out in need. To the American vendors: it makes perfect sense why you wouldn't force readiness for the legal ramifications. Good luck holding on to the BT market though.



Cali smog tests at this time don't do the readiness clear and recheck yet like some north east states are doing. It's coming though so while you passed this year you may not next year. Florida (no emissions) and the north east (strict if not stricter then cali when it comes to actual test procedures) are the two most densely populated areas for VW/Audi, South Florida is the highest volume region for VW followed by NY/NJ/CT tri-state area. I would have to look up the last stats I was shown for specifics but just look at the dealer locators on any chip tuners site and you'll see where the bulk of their dealers are, cali is look fast the northeast (and florida) are go fast. 

A year ago in NJ there wouldn't even have been any convincing since the visual does not include anything but a cat in regards to emissions equipment. Once the electronic portion of the test changes nothing much you can do about that. 

There is a place for everyone in this market with slightly varying products, we chose to keep ours emissions legal as we see no need to rip out emissions equipment that has no negative affect on performance. Are there people who wish that we removed it, of course we instruct them there are vendors such as Unitronic or TAPP or others that will supply what they want, we don't have GT30 tuning, 630+ tuning, mafless tuning either but we sell our stage 3 hand over fist everyday all day. We don't have a problem selling it due to not getting rid of emissions equipment and we are glad to share the market with companies who do offer it.


----------



## 01gtiaww (Jan 31, 2006)

So here is something that I found while reading up on NYS emissions. Thought I would share.

"The Department proposes, under subparagraphs 217-6.3(a)(1)(vi) and 217-6.3(a)(2)(vi), an additional NYVIP criterion that would fail vehicles tampered with by the installation of aftermarket parts as prohibited by 6 NYCRR Part 218-7. Upon evaluation of completed NYVIP OBD II inspections, the Department identified inspections where vehicles have been modified by aftermarket software to disable previously "supported" OBD II monitors. Vehicles that fail for this criterion would need to be repaired to conform to the manufacturer's original OBD II software. The Department cannot estimate the number of affected vehicles at this time."


----------



## theswoleguy (Jan 25, 2006)

oh wow really, lol this sucks, as a software developer nd seeing how the cars have to do drive cycles, i dont see it being overly complicated to code in a delayed forced pass, two key cycles or some ****.

APR has the CC ****, they dont force readiness though they just dont have the test run at all and it stays in a failed/incomplete status in vag. Most states allow you to have one readiness not set, if you look at the sheet itll say readiness values 00000 (all pass or set) and with apr itll say something like 00001. id have to find my old sheet to scan in to show you what i mean, even keith said it just stays in a state of not complete, thus is why you can never force readiness on cat test with apr, the test will NEVER run.


----------



## oleg_8831 (Feb 12, 2006)

*1*

I cant pass with revo bt, can any1 suggest something?


----------



## NFrazier (Jul 22, 2006)

The only reason to delete emissions is to trick the inspection stations into passing you.

If you are using it for OFFROAD use, you don't need an inspection sticker.

Speed, I REALLY hope that you are not a lawyer. As someone in law school, you're arguments are off based, and your interpretation of the law is lackluster. Maybe you should go back to school or take part in some continuing education. I really hope your clients don't pay you and that your state bar association sees this thread.


----------

