Driving without Catalytic Converter (Illegal)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:


Quote:


motorcyclists have known for years huh. hahaha
tell that to any harley guy. seems harley owners love running with no backpressure.

also alot of the sportbike guys install straight through mufflers, etc.

fact is that most fuel injection systems can handle + or - 16% fuel increase or decrease. they HAVE to because of hot or cold days, differing elevations, gradually plugging up air filters.
etc.

its only old fashoned carburettor engines that are effected by changes in the exhaust.




pat2.gif


Incorrect. Apparently, you don't actually know "any Harley guy" with straight pipes. Most of these bikes' fuel systems are adjusted to the degree that there are different fuel maps designed for the particular Brand and Model of exhaust installed.

Obviously, you aren't familiar with performace work on motorcycles. The people that run straight pipes also tweak their fuel ratios, whether by changing jets on carbs, or adding fuel injector devices such as Techlusion, Cobra, which can only enrichen fuel mixtures, as well as others that can have custom maps downloaded from a Personal Computer. If they don't make these air/fuel adjustments, they end up with bikes performing worse than stock, and it also often ends up burning too lean...which is too hot...which burns holes in pistons. You can't tell by the sound what Motorcyclists are doing to their fuel mixtures when they change back-pressure in their exhausts (unless you hear the tell-tale exhaust popping on deceleration, which is from a too-lean condition, except for some of the engines that have a fresh-air induction system into the exhaust flow...such as the Reed-valve system on Kawasaki's).

Let me assure you there is more to it than just putting on straight pipes.

Yes, most ECU's can compensate a certain percentage from normal...but, when you add an additional abnormal variable to the situation as you decrease exhaust backpressure...whether the ECU can make adjustments for that PLUS the other variables that it needs to make, is unknown until you try it, and measure the results.

If you don't believe me, why don't you ask someone that works on them for a living? I've only personally tweaked about 15 myself. How many have you done, and how long did they last after your personal work on them?




lisaten guy, ive owned enough dirtbikes and motorcycles and been around them long enough in my life to know that most people DO NOT mess with the computer or jettings when they change an exhaust. you think the dealer adjusted the computer on my fathers 2002 harley when he brought it in to get straight pipes put on? answer is NO. i watched them put the pipes on myself. nothing except the exhaust was touched.

you think my cat elimination pipe for my 2005 bmw boxer cup sport bike came with some way to change the fueling ? answer is NO!
how about the pipe for my pops 95 bmw r1100r? no again!

did the instructions for either of these bikes mention anything about fuel adjustment? nope.

fact is that fuel injection is normally good enough to compensate for exhaust changes. n

now you can spout off about me obvoiusly not knowing this and obviously not knowing that and whatever else you feel you need to belittle me about, but i have just given a few real world examples of aftermarket exhausts which has no means to change the fueling of the engine. infact air to fuel ratio isnt even mentioned in the instruction manualss.

when i typed easlier that only carburettor engines are effected by straight pipes and other exhaust changes, i meant only NEGATIVELY effected. because basic carbs have no way to automatically compensate like fuel injection does.
 
Three words: Dyno, Lambda Ratio. IF you know not what occured on the Dyno after your changes, with a Lambda Ratio being monitored, you don't actually know what the changes did to your engine. Do so at your own risk, but, you are "flying blind" if you choose to do so.

My point in "spouting off" is that internet non-science is bad enough without people advising it's simply OK to make changes like this without chance of repercussion. I personally don't care if any individual wishes to screw up their engine...but, on a site that I thought is supposedly set up to bring at least a modicum of science to the discussion, I thought it appropriate to refute your statement that you can make these changes with impudence. It is false...engines are damaged by making changes (even just to the exhaust) without appropriate monitoring of the effects of the changes. Sorry if you didn't like the way I refused to let your inaccuracies slide unchallenged. In true scientific discussions, challenges are encouraged adn welcomed, because Learning occurs. Obviously, this is not a scientific discussion, because I'm not learning anything from your comments, and, apparently, you aren't learing anything from mine. I hope someone else learned something.
 
I think it also depends on the fuel injection system's method of measuring how much air is entering the engine.

A fuel injection system that measures intake manifold pressure (via a map sensor, known as a speed-density system) uses lookup tables to determine how much air is entering the engine. These tables are a three dimensional table containing the engine speed, MAP reading, and intake air volume. These tables can be thrown off by changes to the engine. The most common example is a different camshaft, but I suspect exhaust system changes could do it too. The system can compensate to some degree using input from the oxygen sensor, however. But once that's exceeded, then yes, the engine can run lean (and will probably throw a lean code).

A fuel injection system that uses a MAF sensor or a VAF sensor or some other sensor that directly measures the amount of air entering the engine won't have these problems when modifications are made that improve the engine's volumetric efficiency.

At least as long as the sensor's range isn't maxed out by the modifications, anyway. (A MAF or a VAF does have a limit to how high it can read).


And that's why owners of 87-88 Ford Mustang 5.0s like to upgrade to the MAF system from the speed-density system before making any modifications that will change how the engine breathes. That modification entails a different computer, a couple of wiring changes, and a MAF sensor.
 
Yes, the Ford MAF system of that vintage was amazing. You could tame up to 7 liters of motor mashing and make it streetable. The thing tuned itself in real time.

..but more back on topic ..

Exhaust mods offer marginal gains ..even in relatively potent packages. Borla's own site used to display a dyno graph (assumed to be the best that they found in testing) that showed all of about 7hp in a 5.0 Mustang with one of their catback systems. The stock curve was about the same until the extreme upper rpm band.

Do any of you need to tune a daily driver to the upper extreme?? If not, then don't bother. Convert your pickup to duals if you like the sound. My buddy makes good money doing this mod with his pipe bending machine. If you're doing it to hear the sound ..then I really doubt that you're going to see a nickel of added economy ..nor do I see it really giving anything in the power end of it as you use it.

Now if you were talking a 1973 Fury III Super Commando 440 with factory duals vs one with single exhaust ...that's a horse of a different color. The stealth of the single exhaust took its toll on the performance end.


The cat shouldn't add or detract from fuel economy unless its plugged. Replace it with a new one if you're in doubt.

Barbra Streisand will sing for you.
 
The exhaust can make a significant difference, and a catalytic converter is simply not conducive to smooth flow. Extremely turbulent flow of the exhaust gas is a functional requirement of a cat. There is an exhaust system from Corksport available for the Mazda3 which replaces the 2.1" system from the header back, including the cat, muffler, and resonator, with a 2.4" system that has only a resonator and straight-through muffler. It increases peak power by 10 whp, with maximum gain of 12 whp at 5800 rpm and an average of 7.5 whp from 4000 rpm to 6500 rpm. This is a car that puts out under 140 whp. There are likely no gains, and possibly even losses, under 4000 rpm due to the increased pipe diameter. Regardless, I've never seen gains like that just from going cat-back on an exhaust. They do include the disclaimer: "Removing OEM catalysts is not legal and thus this system is sold for race use."

Corksport Dyno Graph
 
Quote:



Do you think it's none of your concern because it doesn't matter what one person does?

Or that pollution is a non-issue?

Or that ubiquitous problems are too big to correct, so...it's easier to not care?

Just curious...I realize living in Kansastan can encourage isolationalism...I drive through the area more than I like to...it's desolate in many ways...not all of the desolation refers to the landscape.[formatted for convenience]




I'll go with number one and number three. Since politiks are prohibited on BITOG (and understandably so), I'll simply add that I don't cotton to being told what I may or may not do with my own piece of pipe. Nor am I impressed with a whole string of posts declaring that the sky is going to fall (mechanically or environmentally) when some beurocratic decree has been defied. I've seen the results countless times- no Big Brother comes knocking on the door, and in the VAST majority of cases, the engine runs fine- often better.

BTW- I'm not from Kansastan (got here in a roundabout way from back east). I have lots of kin in your area, though.
 
Last edited:
Quote:


There's usually some other issue with the engine to cause it (oil consumption, running rich, chronic misfire)... but converters do plug up on occasion. It's NOT a rare occurance.




As just a dumb 'ole hillbilly from Slick willie's home state, after 30 years in the exhaust business I'll have to insist that it IS pretty rare in this area. Used to be really common (before many here were born) when LEADED fuel was still available. Everyone swedged their fuel filler neck out untill the larger leaded fuel nozle would go in and proceded to poison their converter. (leaded was cheaper,$.38 instead of $.35 per gallon) EVERYONE in the exhaust business at the time simply torched them off and installed pipe, any who didn't couldn't stay in business because of customer wrath.

Now, 94to 06 Dodge pu's, Jeep Wranglers,and an occasional GM are nearly the only defective cats I see. In these it's caused from the strata cracking and a piece getting turned sideways effectively blocking exhaust flow.

In case of original post, I'd bet my arse against 9 little green walnuts cat isn't the problem.

Bob
 
Quote:


Quote:



Do you think it's none of your concern because it doesn't matter what one person does?

Or that pollution is a non-issue?

Or that ubiquitous problems are too big to correct, so...it's easier to not care?

Just curious...I realize living in Kansastan can encourage isolationalism...I drive through the area more than I like to...it's desolate in many ways...not all of the desolation refers to the landscape.[formatted for convenience]




I'll go with number one and number three. Since politiks are prohibited on BITOG (and understandably so), I'll simply add that I don't cotton to being told what I may or may not do with my own piece of pipe. Nor am I impressed with a whole string of posts declaring that the sky is going to fall (mechanically or environmentally) when some beurocratic decree has been defied. I've seen the results countless times- no Big Brother comes knocking on the door, and in the VAST majority of cases, the engine runs fine- often better.

BTW- I'm not from Kansastan (got here in a roundabout way from back east). I have lots of kin in your area, though.



What comes out of that "piece of pipe" affects other people, whether you are willing to admit that or not. To cut off the piece of that pipe that reduces emissions is irresponsible. Nobody said big brother would come knocking on the door. Odds are you will never get caught. But, that doesn't mean that cutting off your cats is a smart or okay thing to do. Besides, in anything other than a TRUE high performance car, race vehicle, etc...I just see no point to it at all. I don't get why people do it.
 
Thanks for the brow-beating. I've been adequately shamed now.

I'll tell you why people do it- two reasons. The most common is that people think that removing the thing will yield them 10 more horsepower. In this case I agree that it's not worth the effort. The other reason is that when the cat is plugged (as happens on occasion)... hollowing it out fixes the problem. It's cheaper and quicker than going and buying a new one. Pretty simple.
 
Cat deterioration leading to plugging could be uncommon, but it did happen to my buddy's '88 Dodge Ram and also my ex-girlfriend's '92 Miata.
 
No... never happens. That was just your imagination. Know why? Because something that somebody read somewhere says otherwise!
 
When decreasing exhaust restrictions from stock, the loss of power at lower rpm's occurred on every one of the 15 units I've seen on the dyno. Most also had decreased power all the way to redline, a few did better in the upper rpm ranges. The Lambda ratio was "off" on every one...showing too lean running conditions. Whether that would be severe enough to cause damage would take time to tell, and would partly depend upon user conditions. All were correctable with relatively simple fuel injector add-ons, the more complicated but more accurate-across-the-rpm-range custom mapping available by PC, or, the not-so-simple-to-me jet/needle changes in the carb'ed examples.

I've only seen 15 done though, so, it's not the complete story...
 
Quote:


However, you drive a '90 Civic, which is a very popular vehicle to modify among some crowds. If removing the cat caused performance PROBLEMS, then this would be well-known. I seriously doubt that this would cause you a problem.




Correct, this is the consensus at the honda civic/rice rocket forums.

Quote:


There's usually some other issue with the engine to cause it (oil consumption, running rich, chronic misfire)... but converters do plug up on occasion.

I'm not convinced at all that the catylitic converter is this guy's problem...




Correct again. I do burn oil and maybe i'm running rich also. (i just replaced the O2 sensor with a Denso and am anxious to see if that improves fuel efficiency) So the clogged cat is more a symptom than it is the root problem.

And until i get a replacement engine or rebuild i'm likely to continue burning oil. And after a while I may have this issue all over again. (thicker oil, PCV valve, ARX. yes i've already done all that)

(The O2 sensor did have black soot on it.)

Quote:


In case of original post, I'd bet my arse against 9 little green walnuts cat isn't the problem.




Well you would know better than me.
smile.gif
Thanks for your input, Bob.
 
No, I didn't touch the cat.

The only thing i did different is replace the O2 sensor (as they instructed me to on honda-tech).

The honda stealership quoted me 198 dollars for the sensor. I ordered a Denso instead for 28.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom