View Poll Results: Would you pollute just to go faster?
Yes, screw the air
58
40.56%
thinking about it
23
16.08%
no, it's just wrong
48
33.57%
cars pollute?
14
9.79%
Voters: 143. You may not vote on this poll
cat delete = pollution
Evolving Member
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
From: Cayman Islands/Ft. Lauderdale
Originally Posted by MyCre8n=Evlshn
I don't think that, on the whole, using a "dirtier" high-flow cat is really attrocious. After all, there are all kinds of what I consider to be "idiots" driving around huge trucks for their personal image. Anyone driving a huge SUV or a Ford Excursion or a Hummer as their daily go-get-the-groceries vehicle is simply ignoring everyone else's wellfare wholeheartedly for their own personal "satisfaction". Often I hear "I like to sit up high" "I can't see traffic down low" (meaning what? you can't tailgait as much?) or, the most common, "I feel safer". Well, if some person wants to say "screw anyone else" because they want to hold on to their personal need to dominate the road with massive tons of machinery...because it threatens to crush anyone who would dare to cross their path..then I say screw them. There are a million people doing just that, and their belief of "safety" blatantly ignores all objective data and crash experience. Nontheless, there are always people who will believe whatever they want despite all evidence to the contrary. In fact, most people in this country, in my estimation, have forgone learning entirely and will fight vehemently to hold whatever belief they may have first attached themselves to...regardless of any and all evidence to the contrary. Most have simply decided to close their minds entirely...but I digress.
My point (if I can still find one in this madness somewhere) is that, compared to all the SUVs and blatantly horrible polluters (like weedeaters and other small two-strokes), a high-flow cat seems fairly innocuous...as does the occasional day at the track where one might use a cat-delete pipe. In my opinion, the idea of driving around with no cat all the time (to get the groceries, etc) falls into the same category of "screw everyone...I don't care about anyone else".
So overall, c'mon guys...we've got high-flow cats that really don't limit us much at all when we're just tooling around...and we can still tune to outperform vipers with the cat in place...plus, if we really want to go all out at some time, we can swap out the cat for a test pipe, get our yayas out, and then put the cat back on for the 98% of the time we're really not going to bleed over the 5whp we are losing.
My point (if I can still find one in this madness somewhere) is that, compared to all the SUVs and blatantly horrible polluters (like weedeaters and other small two-strokes), a high-flow cat seems fairly innocuous...as does the occasional day at the track where one might use a cat-delete pipe. In my opinion, the idea of driving around with no cat all the time (to get the groceries, etc) falls into the same category of "screw everyone...I don't care about anyone else".
So overall, c'mon guys...we've got high-flow cats that really don't limit us much at all when we're just tooling around...and we can still tune to outperform vipers with the cat in place...plus, if we really want to go all out at some time, we can swap out the cat for a test pipe, get our yayas out, and then put the cat back on for the 98% of the time we're really not going to bleed over the 5whp we are losing.
Originally Posted by evilution8
screw the cat. at every stop light i see huge tractor trailer putting plumes of black smoke into the air. that happens every 50 ft on the road and people are gonna worry about what my 4 banger puts out??? I dont think so. until those big *** things are regulated and not choking me at every light ill take the 5 WHP.
Originally Posted by bluebanana23
Does it bother you that a lot of ppl are polluting just to squeeze out a few extra ponies? I'm talking about using the cat-delete pipes. I mean we all breathe the air... I just wanted to get ppl's opinion on this. Btw in my turbo-back i'm running a hi-flow cat, and if i'm not passing emissions then i'll stick another one on there rather then bribing the guy.
Evolved Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 574
Likes: 0
From: New Bedford, MA
The problem with all the diesel trucks is the sulfur content in the fuel. The US uses diesel so poor quality, it's almost a joke.
The sulfur content is usually around 50 to 60 times higher than Europe. Europe has an absurdly strict regulation (in effect, or will be in effect soon) of only 5 ppm (parts per million). US diesel fuel requirements are 300 ppm. Samples show that at best, you'll see 250 ppm in American diesel fuel.
Ever wonder why in some states you can't get a diesel car (like the new Mercedes 320CDI)? Because emission regulations in those states won't allow for them. The culprit, sadly, is the poor quality fuel used here. If US diesel regulations were even reasonably more strict (30 - 50 ppm, perhaps), it wouldn't be such a hassle.
-----
What I've always found amusing is cars running on gasoline in the first place. Cars originally (I'm talking the dawn of the 20th century...) ran on much cleaner burning fuels like kerosene. The problem was kerosene was expensive -- it's a fairly refined product, and was already in high demand for other applications. Gasoline was used because it was largely considered a waste product. A refinery by-product, that not many folks used. That's why the stuff was so absurdly cheap as well -- no one really wanted it, nor could they sell if for much anything else.
So yes, your car runs on a waste product. Makes you think, huh?
The sulfur content is usually around 50 to 60 times higher than Europe. Europe has an absurdly strict regulation (in effect, or will be in effect soon) of only 5 ppm (parts per million). US diesel fuel requirements are 300 ppm. Samples show that at best, you'll see 250 ppm in American diesel fuel.
Ever wonder why in some states you can't get a diesel car (like the new Mercedes 320CDI)? Because emission regulations in those states won't allow for them. The culprit, sadly, is the poor quality fuel used here. If US diesel regulations were even reasonably more strict (30 - 50 ppm, perhaps), it wouldn't be such a hassle.
-----
What I've always found amusing is cars running on gasoline in the first place. Cars originally (I'm talking the dawn of the 20th century...) ran on much cleaner burning fuels like kerosene. The problem was kerosene was expensive -- it's a fairly refined product, and was already in high demand for other applications. Gasoline was used because it was largely considered a waste product. A refinery by-product, that not many folks used. That's why the stuff was so absurdly cheap as well -- no one really wanted it, nor could they sell if for much anything else.
So yes, your car runs on a waste product. Makes you think, huh?
Evolving Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
From: Midwest
I agree with alot of what MyCre8n=Evlshn said. Another thing is that alot of my buddies that want these gigantic SUVs and Trucks are small guys, then there is me at 6'6" trying to fit in the smallest, lightest cars I can. Kind of ironic.
Anyways I don't know why anyone would want to drive on public roads with the cat off. I haven't heard an evo in person with the cat off but I've driven a DSM without one. It was friggin OBNOXIOUS on public roads, my god, does everyone have to suffer for being behind your car. Ok well, thats an exaggeration but I think I would be embarrassed, the whole fart can thing really isn't cool. There are much better ways to get attention and a few extra HP.
Anyways I don't know why anyone would want to drive on public roads with the cat off. I haven't heard an evo in person with the cat off but I've driven a DSM without one. It was friggin OBNOXIOUS on public roads, my god, does everyone have to suffer for being behind your car. Ok well, thats an exaggeration but I think I would be embarrassed, the whole fart can thing really isn't cool. There are much better ways to get attention and a few extra HP.
Big fat hairy deal. I have a 67 Camaro that is legally cat-less. That was my daily driver for 2 years. What is the governement going to do about it? Nothing. Why? Because they know that cat converters are worthless when it comes to fighting air pollution. Why are they installed on new cars? Because members of the House of Representatives and the Senate needed to look busy while they collect their checks, so they invented a bill that disguises itself as a environmental safe-guard, but is really just a waste of time and money. So think again, if you really care about the environment get off your high horse and do something constructive.
To everyone who thinks having no cat is no big deal, why don't you stand behind your car while it's running for about 10 minutes. Or ride in someone's car while driving behind your catless car and have all those exhaust fumes enter your cabin while you have your windows up but your vents on and maybe your opinion will change. In the grand scheme of things, cars probably contribute a small portion of the world's pollution. So what? Cats do make a difference to people on the road behind you. So have some god damn consideration for other cars on the road.
Evolved Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 574
Likes: 0
From: New Bedford, MA
The three big emissions that a catalytic converter eliminates are
CO Carbon Monoxide
NO/NO2 Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Hydrocarbons by themselves aren't terrible, but they react with the nitrogen oxides because of all the sunlight. The result is O3, which is ozone. Ground-level ozone just creates smog when there's enough of it.
CO... that's what makes you potentially dizzy and nauseous. Also why if you leave your car running in a closed garage, you're asking for it.
-----
Emissions regulations came into effect because of the effects on large metropolitan areas. It's not terrible in small cities or in rural areas (heck, they don't really notice an impact), but parts of California, as well as numerous hotspots along the east coast and the midwest saw the aftereffects when you're looking at traffic volume multiplied by as much as 1,000.
I work next door to a bank, on the drive-thru side. Occasionally an old Nova will come around to sit in line. As much as I like to hear that V8 burble and pop, we know well enough to ensure the windows are closed when it comes around, especially when the bank is tied up. After about 10 minutes, you really take notice of the CO. Multiply that by 100 or so, except that traffic is also essentially static. There's probably no long-damaging health effects whatsoever, but it still isn't the best for pedestrians and the customers of storefronts.
Those are really the only 3 things that cats take care of. It's what's regulated, at least. Of note, expect within 10 years for cars to have slightly more efficient converters, even if the converter is essentially the same. Cats work best when heated, so expect to see resistance heaters being incorporated into the converters when 42V vehicle electrical systems become more commonplace. The current 12V systems really aren't that efficient. For the record, hybrid vehicles already have these resistance heaters.
-----
EDIT
The reason why cars older than 25 years old (classified as antiques) aren't required to pass emissions, is because it'd be far too expensive. The biggest emission control mechanism is fuel injection, believe it or not. Prevents unspent fuel from ever having to travel through the cat in the first place. Converting carburated cars to fuel injection is simply cost prohibitive.
And yes, they aren't the best to breathe in. I have a 2.5cc nitromethane engine in an RC car. One good deept breath of its exhaust fumes will have you choking pretty badly. Being a 2-stroke and carburated, it tends to run fairly rich (and if un-tuned, pig rich), so breathing that stuff is pretty nasty.
CO Carbon Monoxide
NO/NO2 Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Hydrocarbons by themselves aren't terrible, but they react with the nitrogen oxides because of all the sunlight. The result is O3, which is ozone. Ground-level ozone just creates smog when there's enough of it.
CO... that's what makes you potentially dizzy and nauseous. Also why if you leave your car running in a closed garage, you're asking for it.
-----
Emissions regulations came into effect because of the effects on large metropolitan areas. It's not terrible in small cities or in rural areas (heck, they don't really notice an impact), but parts of California, as well as numerous hotspots along the east coast and the midwest saw the aftereffects when you're looking at traffic volume multiplied by as much as 1,000.
I work next door to a bank, on the drive-thru side. Occasionally an old Nova will come around to sit in line. As much as I like to hear that V8 burble and pop, we know well enough to ensure the windows are closed when it comes around, especially when the bank is tied up. After about 10 minutes, you really take notice of the CO. Multiply that by 100 or so, except that traffic is also essentially static. There's probably no long-damaging health effects whatsoever, but it still isn't the best for pedestrians and the customers of storefronts.
Those are really the only 3 things that cats take care of. It's what's regulated, at least. Of note, expect within 10 years for cars to have slightly more efficient converters, even if the converter is essentially the same. Cats work best when heated, so expect to see resistance heaters being incorporated into the converters when 42V vehicle electrical systems become more commonplace. The current 12V systems really aren't that efficient. For the record, hybrid vehicles already have these resistance heaters.
-----
EDIT
The reason why cars older than 25 years old (classified as antiques) aren't required to pass emissions, is because it'd be far too expensive. The biggest emission control mechanism is fuel injection, believe it or not. Prevents unspent fuel from ever having to travel through the cat in the first place. Converting carburated cars to fuel injection is simply cost prohibitive.
And yes, they aren't the best to breathe in. I have a 2.5cc nitromethane engine in an RC car. One good deept breath of its exhaust fumes will have you choking pretty badly. Being a 2-stroke and carburated, it tends to run fairly rich (and if un-tuned, pig rich), so breathing that stuff is pretty nasty.
Last edited by MisterSpoot; Jul 5, 2004 at 12:18 PM.
Let me say one thing: If you need to remove your catalytic convertor to make HP, your car is a outdated piece of junk.
I can see it if your using your car for NHRA/IDRC racing, but get a grip on the street. I love when people find it impressive when someone makes 900RWHP on a Supra with a T88, C16 RaceGas, and a 5in Straight pipe. That's not impressive. Impressive is a E55 Mercedes that runs 12.0 on pump gas without touching anything.
I can see it if your using your car for NHRA/IDRC racing, but get a grip on the street. I love when people find it impressive when someone makes 900RWHP on a Supra with a T88, C16 RaceGas, and a 5in Straight pipe. That's not impressive. Impressive is a E55 Mercedes that runs 12.0 on pump gas without touching anything.
Newbie
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
hmmm? I passed smog without 2 pre cats and a hollowed out cat (when I moved to CA). I think smog is just another way for the state to take our money. The guy didn't even do anything to my car. He just revved it while in park and charged me $80.
btw, anyone ever failed SMOG?
btw, anyone ever failed SMOG?