Originally posted by E.Furgal: ...and if you read what I posted on converter material erosion after 250k.. it answer the converter dieing part.. that test was done by the E.P.A. by the way..
I still don't have any clue whether you still think catalytic converters can die from causes other than upstream problems. Just answer the question clearly please.
quote
Originally posted by E.Furgal: the fiero, I also addressed in a post, saying that the obI narrow band o2 feed back does a good job but isn't perfect.. now go into the ecu tune and clean up the factory tune and put your nose to the tail pipe.. the fiero ecu is lazy on correction, hightec at the time, but painfully slow . the oem idle tune isn't a lot to be desired, and can be cleaned up a ton..
That's all great info but I still don't know what you mean by "cleaning up the tune". I'd like to try that if you'd explain how to do that. Nor do I get the sense that I've changed your mind about whether the catalytic converter has an impact on exhaust odour. Can you clearly re-state what your belief is in that regard now that you have the benefit of my example to consider?
quote
Originally posted by E.Furgal: if you read my post that said a correctly tuned and running engine. you'd have never posted about some restored to stock pre 75 cars..
If you weren't so naïve, you would have seen that as bait to get you to acknowledge my post. Which you did, and then deliberately ignored my other more pertinent points, which I expected you to do as well. For a guy who only days ago endlessly railed against me as a "self-expert" with a wrong assumption about tires, you sure don't seem to apply your own standards of accuracy to your own posts.
(edit for spelling)
[This message has been edited by Bloozberry (edited 07-17-2014).]
If you weren't so naïve, you would have seen that as bait to get you to acknowledge my post. Which you did, and then deliberately ignored my other more pertinent points, which I expected you to do as well. For a guy who only days ago endlessly railed against me as a "self-expert" with a wrong assumption about tires, you sure don't seem to apply your own standards of accuracy to your own posts.
(edit for spelling)
stop being a troll every thing you asked was already pointed to in other post.. now your just being a d__k
Originally posted by E.Furgal: stop being a troll every thing you asked was already pointed to in other post.. now your just being a d__k
Uh... no. I'm holding your feet to the fire you so anxiously lit in the tire flat spotting thread ( www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/000550.html ) regarding your own desire to rid the "idiotnet" from "self-experts". This is TD&Q after all. Surely you wouldn't want to be accused of promulgating misinformation.
Tearing another page from your book of tricks, I'll return the favour you offered me recently and post your latest private message to me.
quote
Originally posted by E.Furgal: Again.. prove I'm wrong.. oh that right you can't as the epa did the test and after 250k they lost almost nothing.. you're like a little baby.. go away.. 123 was right. there are 2 types of engineers one that is never wrong and won't stop.. YOU are that type.
The hypocrisy is thick.
(edit: better word choice.)
[This message has been edited by Bloozberry (edited 07-17-2014).]
..."But the simple question is it really necessary?"....
My take is that if your engine is not in all that great shape, you will need the CAT to pass emissions. So, its necessary in this case. If your engine is in good shape and runs well, then you probably don't need the CAT to pass emission standards because your engine systems are doing a good job. That makes it unnecessary. Your test will tell you how your engine is doing with or without a CAT.
Having said that, many states require you to have a CAT present in the exhaust system in order to pass emissions and register your car. So, in once sense, it is necessary in those states. What you do with the guts is up to you if you are meeting emissions standards. Who cares if your CAT doesn't work if you are meeting emissions standards. The standard is meeting the emissions standards with your engine.
Having done a number of engine swaps, I have found that the newer engines run much cleaner than the old 2.8's those of us originally ran in our cars. The Northstar runs incredibly clean and doesn't need a CAT and has two extra cylinders! The 3800SC motor didn't need a CAT either because it ran so clean. However, I have to have a CAT present in the exhaust system or I can't pass my states emissions test. So, whether it is hollowed out or not, It is still necessary.
My take is that if your engine is not in all that great shape, you will need the CAT to pass emissions. So, its necessary in this case. If your engine is in good shape and runs well, then you probably don't need the CAT to pass emission standards because your engine systems are doing a good job. That makes it unnecessary. Your test will tell you how your engine is doing with or without a CAT.
Having said that, many states require you to have a CAT present in the exhaust system in order to pass emissions and register your car. So, in once sense, it is necessary in those states. What you do with the guts is up to you if you are meeting emissions standards. Who cares if your CAT doesn't work if you are meeting emissions standards. The standard is meeting the emissions standards with your engine.
Having done a number of engine swaps, I have found that the newer engines run much cleaner than the old 2.8's those of us originally ran in our cars. The Northstar runs incredibly clean and doesn't need a CAT and has two extra cylinders! The 3800SC motor didn't need a CAT either because it ran so clean. However, I have to have a CAT present in the exhaust system or I can't pass my states emissions test. So, whether it is hollowed out or not, It is still necessary.
Now you just made the best reply to his Question he had asked...
I have no dog in this fight and will offer my experience.
I remove my cat on my stock 2.8 (which ran well with only 28k) and placed a straight pipe in there. Yes, the car was louder, significantly after 3k rpms. Nothing that would get you in trouble, but it was louder. In fact my other Fiero, when they replaced the cat was also louder.
Also, I noticed the bumper was getting blacker. I think some others mentioned this. So there was a unburnt something (fuel) there.
When I went turbo I never bothered with a cat, and since I drove under 5k a year, and I still do, I never worried about emissions.
Personally, I think emissions are useless. Today's cars are more sophisticated, and burn cleaner. The 2.8 was basically 70's technology (even wih the electronic fuel injection).
My 3.8 SC runs without a cat and runs great. It's got a grumble to it, but nothing bothersome. I am sure it would pass emission even without the cat.
Emissions like many governemnt bureaus generates money and employs people that are invested in keeping their positions and jobs regardless of whether they are neede or not. Today, you have to take a day off work (at least here in PA) to get your car inspected. They make the whole process so painful. For us average citizens it places us at the mercy of some mechanics who are not so ethical. With all the sensors on the engines in todays cars, they are self-aware and can easily monitor themselves. And Yes, most driver's listen to their cars, and want a well running machine, simply because they not only want good gas mileage, but want to do right by themselves.
Years ago, just for giggles since I was in Cincy for a big car show, I took my 1960 Lincoln 430ci, 2bbl by an emissions test station. (Cincy requires it if your registered in that county, no worry if it did flunk since I lived in Cols). It passed with flying colors. 5800 pnds, 2 bbl carb, point ignition, no cat, dual exhaust, reg fuel.
Now you just made the best reply to his Question he had asked...
