[ale] [Slightly-OT] OBD-II in vehicles (Was: Re: Android Tablets)

[Michael B. Trausch]

(Yes, I changed the subject line.  We're not even close to talking about
Android Tablets on this subthread!)

On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 11:09 -0400, Lightner, Jeff wrote:
> A year or so ago my 2002 Chrysler's check engine light came on and not
> wanting to go to the dealer I went to a nearby Sears repair and they
> wouldn't even look at it.   They said they'd gotten burned on checking
> engine lights for Chrysler's in the past.
> 
> By the way you can't pass emission inspection if your check engine
> light is on regardless of whether your actual emissions are an issue
> or not.

For that matter (this of course only applies to 1996 and newer vehicles,
just as the CHECK ENGINE light only applies to 1996 and newer vehicles),
if the MIL (Malfunction Indicator Light, a.k.a. CHECK ENGINE or SERVICE
ENGINE SOON or the pretty little engine icon or whatever) is burned out,
you will fail emissions.  Part of the test with OBD-II cars is that the
test tries to turn on the MIL, and if it cannot do so, you fail without
even going any further in the test, even if your car would otherwise
pass emissions (e.g., OBD-II reports no trouble codes, reports full
readiness, and all data is within the appropriate specs).

This is been a source of annoyance for me---I very much wish that you
could opt to shove the sensor up the car's ass even on 1996 and newer
cars, because the computer really doesn't know everything.  Don't get me
wrong, I *love* technology.  But I still vehemently believe that it
doesn't have any place in cars.  I've seen cars where the computer
reports everything is quite alright, but when you go down the road
you're throwing tons of pollution in the form of smoke in the air.  On
the other hand, I've seen cars that the computer reported trouble on for
a non-emissions related issue and they would then fail the test because
OBD-II says "Not Ready" or says that there are stored codes.  That's
absolutely ridiculous!

At least twice, on both sides of the coin, that's been my car.  There
was a problem with the old engine that was in my Saturn that was dying,
and it was throwing TONS of crap into the air, but because they didn't
give it the "drive" test that they give to pre-OBD-II vehicles and the
computer said that all was good, my car passed---even though it really
should NOT have passed.  And there have been times where it SHOULD have
passed, but it didn't, and I had to do the hokey pokey thrice in
opposite directions each time to get the car to finally pass, without
making any repairs at all (or just having made repairs to it).

Yet another field where technology isn't really helping as much as it
could, I think.  For these reasons and more, I can't honestly recommend
that anyone get a car that supports OBD-II in California.  The couple of
people that I know out that way have told me that CA law actually
requires that the cars transmit their OBD-II status while driving, and
that there are little roadside sensors that collect the data.
Essentially, emissions testing happens all the time that you're driving,
and if you fail you get a certain time window in order to fix it.  How
insane.  I'm all for cleaner air, and I'm all for technology to help
achieve that goal, but I know that there are times when I can barely
afford to buy the parts to fix my car myself, let alone pay a mechanic
to do it---having a time constraint of "RIGHT FSCKING NOW" would be
unreasonable.

	--- Mike