Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 39

Thread: Meeting ADR26

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    513

    Default Meeting ADR26

    I finally payed my house off last year and now I'm rolling in money. LOL, well not quite, but it's finally time to get stuck into an unfinished project. The project in question was manufactured between the dates of 1 January 1972 and 1 July 1976, meaning:


    ".... must comply with Australian Design Rule (ADR) 26, including:

    • Vehicles must be fitted with an operational positive crankcase ventilation valve (PCV).
    • The exhaust system must not emit more than 4.5% carbon monoxide at engine idle speed."



    Here in South Australia the rules have recently been modified. In the past, if you put a modern engine into an old vehicle, you were basically not allowed to modify said engine in any serious way as the conversion had to comply with the emissions ADRs for the year of manufacture of the engine, not the car it was being put into.

    This is not the case any longer. The engine is question is an LS1 and I am free to modify it in any way I want and it will pass inspection so long as the above stated requirements are met. 4.5% carbon monoxide at idle is fairly high relative to current standards, I am told, but my dyno tuner is sure that practically any cam with a real nice choppy idle won't pass.

    I want to get the most I can out of the engine, so I guess I am looking to gain some perspective on camshaft selection from anyone who has experience building an LS engine for an old car conversion to comply with ADR26.

    I could specify in my statement of requirements the camshaft as used in the 300kW Callaway C4B (LS1 - HSV) engine, which Camtech list in their catalogue. If this could meet early 2000s emission standards, then it could be argued that ADR26 shouldn't present an issue. But this cam isn't particularly hot, though probably still a fair bit better than the stock LS1 cam.

    I'm a going to specify a carburetor-style intake manifold. Either a dual quad or a single - haven't made my mind up yet. Holly do a really nice dual-quad dual-plane the poos all over the Victor Junior. I kind of have a thing for carburetors too for that old school feel, but I guess, especially if I go for a bit of an aggressive camshaft, my chances of complying with ARD26 will be much better with EFI. A carburetor-style EFI throttle plate or two will still give that old school look, I suppose.

    I have heard that when the LS went from cathedral-port heads to square-port heads the camshaft essentially remained unchanged and all of the additional power made was courtesy of the better flowing heads and intake. Is this true? Suppose that I am stuck with a cam as mild, for example, as the Callaway one. Would there be much to gain by throwing big bucks into the cathedral-port heads?

    Would massive head and intake work negatively effect idle carbon monoxide emissions or will I be safe so long as my cam is sufficiently mild?

    Cheers.
    Last edited by yellavk; 10-01-2018 at 08:43 PM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    513

    Default

    Furthermore....... was there any other factory/OEM variant of the LS1 that ran a camshaft more aggressive than as used in the C4B engine?

  3. #3
    Do you ever leave? paulzig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    15,129

    Default

    Run the Calloway cam it will go to 6000+RPM you see a duration number like 213/223 and think its small remember to take into account the lobe area these cams have in comparison to an old hydraulic/solid flat tappet.

    These things dont need large duration to make them RPM. Give the stock heads a mild port, bowl job, short turn and give the seats nice fresh cuts making the heads more efficient will not increase emissions it will help...

    The stock intake should be fine for between 450-500HP and I wouldnt stuff around with the dual plane crap. Personally I'd want to kill the bottom end and have more power past 4000RPM so I would go with the single plane victor and EFI but its up to you.

  4. #4
    Do you ever leave?
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    5,192

    Default

    It can't be that hard can it to make a PCV work and tune the car's idle mix so that the CO is less than 4.5% can it?

    Can you "deem" compliance by fitting a carby off a 350ci engine from a HQ 350?

  5. #5
    Do you ever leave? paulzig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    15,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HK1837 View Post

    Can you "deem" compliance by fitting a carby off a 350ci engine from a HQ 350?
    Why would you though, the EFI is good...

  6. #6
    been here .......too long Smitty2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    bayside Melbourne
    Posts
    9,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HK1837 View Post
    It can't be that hard can it to make a PCV work ...............

    all LSx engines have a PCV set up ex factory... just use that
    __________________________________
    ONE OF THE Aussie V8 MODERATOR/ADMIN TEAM
    Never late in an AussieV8!
    Club circuit racing...the best fun you can have with your pants on

  7. #7
    Do you ever leave?
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    5,192

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulzig View Post
    Why would you though, the EFI is good...
    Agree, but rather than trying to pass tests with a modified EFI setup, would it be possible to deem compliance? Same way you’d do it with say a 307 SBC in an LH Torana, ie use an LH 308 carb and have a working canister plus whatever else the LH 308 had originally. Point was is an LS is pretty close to 350ci, could you do it with a HQ 350 Quadrajet and whatever other stuff a 1972 HQ 350 had (PCV etc)? Just a thought.

  8. #8
    Do you ever leave? paulzig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    15,129

    Default

    Keep the EFI system stock save for the tune, if all they are after is 4.5% CO emissions at idle you can easily tune for that with the fuel injection... HSV did it with that cam and made 300kw.

  9. #9
    casual poster
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    lurking in the shadows
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Lean idle and lots of timing and a high idle rpm, let it idle hot too. Its all about burning the fuel and having left over oxygen in the exhaust stream.

    No limit specified for NOx means you can get away with it.

    Or fit high flow cats, since cell count won't matter
    Last edited by guy incognito; 10-01-2018 at 11:28 PM.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    513

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulzig View Post
    Run the Calloway cam it will go to 6000+RPM you see a duration number like 213/223 and think its small remember to take into account the lobe area these cams have in comparison to an old hydraulic/solid flat tappet.

    These things dont need large duration to make them RPM. Give the stock heads a mild port, bowl job, short turn and give the seats nice fresh cuts making the heads more efficient will not increase emissions it will help...

    The stock intake should be fine for between 450-500HP and I wouldnt stuff around with the dual plane crap. Personally I'd want to kill the bottom end and have more power past 4000RPM so I would go with the single plane victor and EFI but its up to you.

    What were the cams specs for that Torana you did? From all of the relevant comparison tests I have read, the Victor Jr just isn't that great a manifold. It generally doesn't make much more if any peak hp than the better quality high-rise dual planes and looses out everywhere else. Look at this comparison here with the Holley dual quad: 5.3L LS Small Block Build - Twice As Nice - Part 5 - Super Chevy Magazine
    I reckon you need to flog that Victor intake off on ebay and just man-up, break out of this denial of yours and bolt a decent dual-plane onto that Torana.

    That comparison in on a ~530 hp engine though; I won't be getting up that high if I'm limited to the Callaway camshaft. I guess the 300kW HSV probably still had a fairly restrictive exhaust; it also would have been given a tune to comply with much more stringent emission standards, rather that just a 4.5% CO at idle. A bog stock later LS1 with the 241 heads and borrowed LS6 intake will make a well proven 300kW with a MAF-less tune, extractors and free-flowing exhaust. Add the Callaway cam and and some head work and a better intake and I'm guessing maybe a healthy 450+ hp?

    I definitely don't want to run the ugly stock intake, air box plumbing all all that crap. I'm quite sure that I won't be required to run catalytic converters as they are not dictated by ADR26.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    513

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HK1837 View Post
    Agree, but rather than trying to pass tests with a modified EFI setup, would it be possible to deem compliance? Same way you’d do it with say a 307 SBC in an LH Torana, ie use an LH 308 carb and have a working canister plus whatever else the LH 308 had originally. Point was is an LS is pretty close to 350ci, could you do it with a HQ 350 Quadrajet and whatever other stuff a 1972 HQ 350 had (PCV etc)? Just a thought.

    Hmm, Meh. Once I've worked out what I want and what sounds reasonable I will just have to submit my "Application to Modify a Motor Vehicle" and see what specific "Statement of Requirements" the RTA comes back with. I could explain that the Callaway cam met year 2000 emissions standards in a production LS1. I suppose that it could be reasonably assumed that even with a non-standard, but properly tuned aftermarket EFI induction, the engine fitted with said camshaft should easily meet the ancient and much more lax ADR26 standard. Will they just presume in good faith that the engine will be properly tuned and therefore not bother to demand an actual emissions test? I don't know.

  12. #12
    Do you ever leave?
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    South West W.A.
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yellavk View Post
    I will just have to submit my "Application to Modify a Motor Vehicle" and see what specific "Statement of Requirements" the RTA comes back with.
    im sorry yellavk i just don't see it. i think you are mistaken if you think the government are going to let you run a ls in a q era car without the requirement to run to the specs of the ls motor which includes the emissions to the engine which include efi and cats

    don't get me wrong i would love to see it and am quite ready to take it back if you can swing it

    i am pretty sure the sentence i cut out of your reply will state the requirement for engineering and to meet the emissions of the year of the engine and they may even require you to prove the mods you want to do meet those standards with an expensive emissions test

  13. #13
    Do you ever leave? paulzig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    15,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yellavk View Post
    What were the cams specs for that Torana you did? From all of the relevant comparison tests I have read, the Victor Jr just isn't that great a manifold. It generally doesn't make much more if any peak hp than the better quality high-rise dual planes and looses out everywhere else. Look at this comparison here with the Holley dual quad: 5.3L LS Small Block Build - Twice As Nice - Part 5 - Super Chevy Magazine
    I reckon you need to flog that Victor intake off on ebay and just man-up, break out of this denial of yours and bolt a decent dual-plane onto that Torana.

    That comparison in on a ~530 hp engine though; I won't be getting up that high if I'm limited to the Callaway camshaft. I guess the 300kW HSV probably still had a fairly restrictive exhaust; it also would have been given a tune to comply with much more stringent emission standards, rather that just a 4.5% CO at idle. A bog stock later LS1 with the 241 heads and borrowed LS6 intake will make a well proven 300kW with a MAF-less tune, extractors and free-flowing exhaust. Add the Callaway cam and and some head work and a better intake and I'm guessing maybe a healthy 450+ hp?

    I definitely don't want to run the ugly stock intake, air box plumbing all all that crap. I'm quite sure that I won't be required to run catalytic converters as they are not dictated by ADR26.
    The Torana had 226/244 cam 114LSA .600 odd lift... I have a Super Victor on that not a Jr., the dual plane would kill that engine over 4000RPM so thats a big no. I thought I was manned up putting the victor on there and making better power past 4000RPM instead of that TQ down low crap the dual plane mob keep carrying on about.

    300kw is already 400HP so you dont have to run cats, you can run a twin 2.5 - 3" exhaust system, touch up the heads a bit, Run a super victor and a 4150 throttle body you'll be 450HP+ definitely, the super victor will rev up really quick, and will make it seem like you have a bigger cam than what you do. If you are restricted on cam open up the induction system to let it breathe.

    If you are pulling the engine apart you could also skim the block and heads to get a touch more compression, it all adds up.

    If you want something special on there look at the Holley Hi-Ram it will provide the bottom end and top WIN/WIN. They also make an adapter to put that top on to the dual quad thing but that it sort of ruins the great thing about a tunnel ram which is line of sight from plenum to valve.


  14. #14
    casual poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Western QLD
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Passing thought, how can they expect an engine to meet a particular standard or measurement point when the fuel that was being used at the time for the ADR26 standard is no longer available, surely the test results are no longer a valid measurement.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    513

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hq2door View Post
    im sorry yellavk i just don't see it. i think you are mistaken if you think the government are going to let you run a ls in a q era car without the requirement to run to the specs of the ls motor which includes the emissions to the engine which include efi and cats

    don't get me wrong i would love to see it and am quite ready to take it back if you can swing it

    i am pretty sure the sentence i cut out of your reply will state the requirement for engineering and to meet the emissions of the year of the engine and they may even require you to prove the mods you want to do meet those standards with an expensive emissions test

    Yes, I know that that was the actual case since the year dot, but I have it on pretty good authority (the tuner/modified vehicle builder who has worked in conjunction with the engineering firm allegedly largely instrumental in having these rules changed) that the rules/laws have recently changed and a quick browse of the government website seems to bear this out (though much is not said/written explicitly).

    One actual nice thing in this state is that our authority doesn't mandate that engine cubic capacity rule based on vehicle mass. Here is goes by engine torque and the vehicles chassis/body torsional rigidity. Basically there is not limit to engine capacity so long as the engineer is satisfied that the torsional rigidity is sufficiently strong (and may dictate that modification such as bracing be made to that effect).

    I'm a bit flat out the next few days, but I will compose and send off an email to the RTA detailing and requesting clarification on all the raised points pertaining to fitting a modified LS1 to my vehicle (ie with the Callaway cam, aftermarket intake/ECU/EFI and cat-free exhaust). I usually get a pretty decent reply within a week of sending off and email. I'll post the response here when I get it.
    Last edited by yellavk; 11-01-2018 at 03:43 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Hoon law meeting ?
    By 55DART406 in forum Members Lounge
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 20-06-2013, 07:07 PM
  2. Lakeside Historics meeting OCT 18th
    By kiwisteves68 in forum Queensland
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 14-10-2009, 10:52 AM
  3. Lakeside historic meeting last Sunday
    By kiwisteves68 in forum Members Lounge
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 21-09-2009, 11:47 PM
  4. Secret Meeting About Drag Racers
    By chevman in forum Members Lounge
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 18-09-2009, 05:08 PM
  5. meeting time for live chat
    By evil_ss in forum Members Lounge
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-01-2005, 05:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •