1987 Ford Ranger Not Passing Smog. Help!

[Jlittle]

Hey all, new here.

Just got this 87 ford ranger 4x4 2.9 manual. It's not passing smog because the egr valve isn't getting a vacuum.

Had a shop look at it and I've replaced: the egr valve, egr vacuum solenoid, egr pressure sensor, and on the recommended of the Latest shop, the ecu. About 200 in parts.

The valve is still not getting a vacuum. I've verified that there is vacuum getting to the solenoid but that's not switching when it's supposed to.

The smog place is testing the vacuum with the car standing still and just revvig the engine but I've also tested it driving and I'm still not getting a vaccuum to the egr.

Any ideas on what else needs to be done to fix this? I'm totally at a loss. Thanks for the help.

 

[adsm08]

You have replaced everything except the wiring to the vacuum switch. I guess it's time to either look into the wiring, make sure it has been load tested, or GTFO of California.

 

[RonD]

Yes +1

The EGR vacuum solenoid is only activated when engine is under a load, i.e. accelerating or cruising along.
The solenoid can be activated manually with Ground and 12volt wire, it has no polarity, no + or - side.
9volt battery will even work
With everything hooked up and engine idling, manually activate the solenoid, engine should start to stall out as EGR Valve opens when it gets full vacuum.

You can also connect a test light to solenoid wires and then drive it to see if test light comes on, it won't be bright as computer pulses Ground to control how much vacuum goes to EGR Valve, but it will come on if computer is working.
You have to use BOTH wires to test light/volt meter you can't use trucks ground

 

[librum]

GTFO of California.

Not to hijack the thread...

California does not follow the federal antique law guidelines?

That is what I did with a Cherokee that could not pass, had it plated as antique. The anti-smog even when new and perfectly operational could/would not meet the new specifications. Admittedly, I am not in California. State could not touch me.

Also, is there not a rule that says being forced to pay more than a certain percentage of market value, no matter what the age, is unlawfull?

If either so, GTFO is very good advice.

Take care...

 

[Spott]

Also, is there not a rule that says being forced to pay more than a certain percentage of market value, no matter what the age, is unlawfull?

A technicality: no one is forcing him to pay anything, nor are they forcing him to fix the vehicle at all.

They are merely enforcing certain requirements before permitting him to operate it on public roads.

If the expense of the repairs exceeds some reasonable value, in the owners entirely subjective opinion, (regardless of the market value) the owner can certainly choose not to spend money or repair it. The only consequence would be that they can no longer operate the vehicle on the roads.

Someone always has the option to get a more satisfactory vehicle instead. Or to use public transportation, or ride a bicycle. Or even to give up and stay home.

However, you cannot whine and say, "I shouldn't be required to follow the law, just because I think it's too expensive."

 

[gw33gp]

Where does it state the OP is in California. I know California has smog checks but it is not the only state that does it.

California has what is called Historical Vehicle plates. The vehicle must have been manufactured after 1922 and must be at least 25 years old and have historical interest to obtain them. The primary use of the vehicle must be in Historical Parades and Events. 1922 and prior manufactured vehicles can obtain Horseless Carriage plates. This has nothing to do with smog checks. There is a model year cut of date when smog checks are no longer required. I think it is 1975 now.

 

[librum]

However, you cannot whine and say, "I shouldn't be required to follow the law, just because I think it's too expensive."

actually I agree with you, with the observation that you are talking state laws, not federal guidelines, on which those state laws are supposed to be based, as I was. Plus it was some time ago, so I am not sure. So lets not get into a tissing.