Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 22:32:21 -0600
Reply-To: OlRivrRat <OlRivrRat@COMCAST.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: OlRivrRat <OlRivrRat@COMCAST.NET>
Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
In-Reply-To: <4f67d9dd.8211440a.4068.018b@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Jeff
My "$100 Cat" (which actually only cost me $87.95 back in '07) is
5yrs old & has 62000mis on it
( 2yrs8mos/26Kmis+H2OBxr & 2yrs4mos/36Kmis+EJ25 ) & according to a
recent smog test & my EJ25
ECU, it is doing a darn fine job. So it would seem to me that an
"ABSURD" might be in order in regards
to feelings about your need to spend $500 on a OE Cat. Here again is
the link to the one I use & highly
recommend.
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/MPE-22918/
ORR ~ DeanB
On 19 Mar , 2012, at 7:14 PM, Jeff Schwaia wrote:
> A $100 cat is effective for less than 2 years and is nowhere near as
> efficient as an OE cat.
>
> If you really want to do it right, buy a cat that meets OE specs...
> about
> $500.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On
> Behalf Of
> den jolliffe
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 5:46 PM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>
> Aren't we talking about a $100 part that helps emissions and the air
> we all
> breath. Say it lasts as long as the original or less (20
> years)...that's $5
> a year...less than a pack of smokes or a gallon of gas A YEAR.
>
> It's a no brainer for me...NAPA has them.
>
> Dennis2
>
>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Dave Mcneely <mcneely4@COX.NET>
>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 6:38:50 PM
>> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>
>> David, that is true. Some folks try to do something about, others
>> rail
> that it is too much to bear to clean up the act.
>>
>> It is true that transportation is the single largest polluter,
>> however, and
> the only way to control that is to make sure that each vehicle
> complies with
> standard.
>>
>> We all pay, but then we all should.
>>
>> mcneely
>>
>> ---- David M <covrambles@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>>> Meanwhile US industry pumps out millions of tons of pollutants
>>> every year
> while us poor suckers pay over $1000 to get thru the emissions test
> (happened to me twice).
>>> If you look at the statistics you will be shocked at what goes
>>> into the
> air every year.
>>>
>>> -David, 1987 Wolfsburg
>>>
>>> --- On Sun, 3/18/12, Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM>
>>> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Date: Sunday, March 18, 2012, 6:14 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> Luckily for many the federal government relies on the states for
>>> enforcement. However the general requirements start at the federal
>>> level (EPA),especially for the design, maintenance, and operation of
>>> motor vehicles. Disabling or removing parts of the emission control
>>> system are federal violations. Engine upgrades are also regulated
>>> with the major requirements being that the replacement be same year
>>> or later and all of the emissions equipment that goes with that
>>> engine goes with it. This can include all the controls, exhaust
>>> after
>>> treatment, and fuel tank vapor recovery systems and maybe even the
>>> transmission/drivelien. All the state emissions programs require
>>> that
>>> all the original equipment is there. Keep in mind that depending on
>>> use, (load, time under load, accelerating curves, etc.), a more
>>> efficient engine may not mean a cleaner engine. Some states actually
>>> operate these programs as private shops can both look the other way
>>> or take advantage and abuse customers. As for just relying on
>>> tailpipe tests, they are just too limited in scope and function.
>>> They
>>> can only look at percentages or parts per million (ppm), not actual
>>> pollutants per mile especially under different conditions. Again
>>> they are
> designed to identify "gross" polluters, not certify your vehicle works
> perfectly.
>>>
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On
>>> Behalf Of Scott Daniel - Turbovans
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 3:27 PM
>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Subject: Re: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>>
>>> what does that mean 'move issue up to the Fed level ' ?
>>> there are no Fed smog stations.
>>> I'm sure there is conflict between state's rights to set there own
>>> emissions requirements and what the Feds want.
>>>
>>> I think it's interesting that where smog is not an issue locally ..
>>> say where ocean air blows emissions inland ..
>>> ( not talking about Ca. )
>>> there can be no local smog checks at all, yet the cars are still
>>> emitting, it's just blowing somewhere else.
>>>
>>> fortunately for many of us smogs checks are not required.
>>> I would be in favor of basic tail pipe checks..
>>>
>>> and an example of how silly the whole thing is ..
>>> in Ca ...
>>> officially, they will not allow people to put newer more fuel
>>> efficient, less polluting engines into their older vans.
>>> Pretty stupid.
>>> They could/should PAY people for putting in a late model less
>>> polluting and more fuel efficient engine into our old beaties.
>>> But then anyway ...'logical/practical' and 'government' have never
>>> been known to coincide. Durn shame.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/18/2012 9:36 AM, Dennis Haynes wrote:
>>>> It will run just fine with the guts removed. There may be a very
>>>> slight performance penalty as the gasses bounce around in the
>>>> hollow cat. Not having a local emissions testing/enforcement
>>>> program just moves the issue up to the federal level.
>>>>
>>>> Dennis
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On
>>>> Behalf Of marc rose
>>>> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 11:54 AM
>>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>>> Subject: Catalytic Converter???? Anyone go without it???
>>>>
>>>> I went to change out my worn out and rusted muffler on my 90 Carat
> "Rosie"
>>>> yesterday and noticed that the converter was all busted up and the
>>>> ceramic is all but gone. I live in an area that has no enforced
>>>> emission tests or anything like that. My question is can i can
>>>> safely run without the convertor. I was going to just bust out the
>>>> rest of the ceramic and reinstall but was not sure how it would
>>>> affect the overall operation of the engine.
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts??
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Marc
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> David McNeely
>>
>>
>>
| 
