felonious shitake

If your looking to upgrade your exhaust why not shell out a little extra and a high flow cat. I increased polution under all conditions idle to redline worth 2-3 hp or even 5? If you run on a track swap it out and back afterwards. Doing 2 or 3 events a year and driving your car daily certainly doesn't qualify as "hey I race it". You give auto enthusiasts a bad name. And certainly have no right to bash suv's or any other gross polluting vehicles,

adrial

Many people with 944/951's have passed emissions without a cat...

food for thought

Thaddeus

Nothing does more for advancing an agenda than expressing it in ungrammatical, fragmented English, I always say...

Thaddeus

Lamah

dont cat's cost almost as much as the rest of the system ? I know stock ones are like 300+

felonious shitake

Good point Thaddeus,
I'm glad you took something away from that, even if it was only to knock my typing. I wrote faster than I thought. A quick reaction, resulted in a poor post.It gets old seeing people willing to shell out 200+ for a test pipe rather than a high flow cat which costs about the same. Want cheap? Run a cat and straight pipe.
I'm well aware that a car can be made to pass smog without many of the emission reducing devices. However I don't know of anywhere that does testing under load. I've hollowed out and tossed aside more cats than I care to admit and all it really gave me was the feeling of "knowing that damn cat wasn't robbing any power"
But they don't really, and unless your making your living with that extra few hp what's the point?

Tabor

[quote]Originally posted by felonious ****ake:
<strong>However I don't know of anywhere that does testing under load.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Portland, OR; parts of California. My car would not pass until I purchased a new CAT. I got an aftermarket unit for less than $150.

Greg Hammond

Maryland tests all passenger vehicles on a treadmill/dyno under load to simulate accelleration and highway speed emissions. While quite a few 944/951 cars will pass emissions revving with no-load, I doubt yours would pass a loaded emissions test.

When the day comes for me to replace my pipe, I'll be going with a high-flow cat. It's not worth the hassle with the state to run with a test-pipe, and the fines for getting caught on public roads w/o a cat are STEEP.

(steep enough to BUY a 951 in some cases)

Greg

Dave

NJ inspects on a dyno too, and visually inspects for all the emission control stuff. Even if you pass smog, you'll fail if the cat (or a fake one) isn't there

Brent 89 - GT

Hey hallucinagenic mushroom,

How many whales will it save to preach to a very small group of people here running without cats? My guess is that you have NO clue, so please stop preaching and go hug a tree or something.

NO CAT

Renntag

[quote]Originally posted by felonious ****ake:
<strong>I'm well aware that a car can be made to pass smog without many of the emission reducing devices. However I don't know of anywhere that does testing under load. I've hollowed out and tossed aside more cats than I care to admit and all it really gave me was the feeling of "knowing that damn cat wasn't robbing any power"
But they don't really, and unless your making your living with that extra few hp what's the point?</strong><hr></blockquote>

OK, my catless car passes emisions test.

In New York State cars are run on a dyno to simulate real world conditions for the emisions test.

The cat does limit power slightly. AND, hollowing out a cat isnt the best way to go. You produce an expansion chamber that also is a hindrance to gas flow.

Manning

Ohio does a rolling emissions test (on a dyno) and at all of the e-check stations I have gone to they visually inspect to make sure the cat is still in place.

bs

****take mushrooms are neither psychoactive nor felonious.

i posted my reply to this in the other cat/no cat thread, but i feel like putting it here, too.

i hate tree huggers and hippies because my taxes pay their welfare and because they are stupid. but unless some pretty hardcore racing is involved (as appears to be your case brent based on your list of mods) i cannot respect anyone's choice to triple their harmful emmissions just for 2% or so more high end power. i mean, do you normally redline at each shift on your way to work? taking out the cat in your commuter vehicle is like putting an underdrive pulley on your water pump.... sure you get a little more power, but is it worth the cost?

Thaddeus

Time to bust out the whup-*** for both sides of the political aisle.

For the reactionaries of the Board:

Writing as a tree-hugger who hands over about 1/3 of his earnings to the government so they can subsidize California, I have to say: . This environmentalist has short hair and drives a Porsche. And I earned it.

For the preachy alternative lifestyle diddley-wahs:

I have a cat on my car, and don't consider it a big moral victory. I never took one off in my life except to replace it, unlike Mr. Shroom. I might take notice if somebody was speaking from a stance of actually making some sacrifices for the environment. Like not having a car at all, using mass transit, etc. etc. Walking the walk is always more admirable than talking the talk.

cheers.

Thaddeus

EDIT: I think that avatar is doing something bad to me...

Renntag

[quote]Originally posted by Thaddeus:
<strong>Time to bust out the whup-*** for both sides of the political aisle.

For the reactionaries of the Board:

Writing as a tree-hugger who hands over about 1/3 of his earnings to the government so they can subsidize California, I have to say: . This environmentalist has short hair and drives a Porsche. And I earned it.

For the preachy alternative lifestyle diddley-wahs:

I have a cat on my car, and don't consider it a big moral victory. I never took one off in my life except to replace it, unlike Mr. Shroom. I might take notice if somebody was speaking from a stance of actually making some sacrifices for the environment. Like not having a car at all, using mass transit, etc. etc. Walking the walk is always more admirable than talking the talk.

cheers.

Thaddeus

EDIT: I think that avatar is doing something bad to me... </strong><hr></blockquote>

Thad, You are the man. Can opened, administered, and case closed. Next please?

I dont feel that the little I drive my car w/o a cat is going to increase the greenhouse effect. I keep my car in a good state of tune, which helps tremendously. As far as the visual inspection goes, well, i know the inspector. He allways seems to have a back ache when I get that particular car inspected, so he cant physically look. How convenient.

bash away.

Robert Lavigne

I think it is a fair statement that each of us (cat or no cat, 3 bar or stock fuel regulator) probably have a car that is much cleaner and in state of repair that 80% of the cars on the road. Yes I have a test pipe (for the track), yes I have a 3bar (for the track), yes I have spent over $25,000 (including a new engine) in repair on my 16 year old car to make sure that the car is safe and doesn't spew black death out of its tailpipe. I would charge anyone with a piece of crap road hazard that just happens to squeak emissions and a safety to say that they have spent as much to protect the safety of fellow drivers and the environment. Compared to other legalized toxics out there, my 86 951 is not even a blip on the environmental collapse.

'86 951 - safety/emission tested passed with flying colours compared to other 1986 cars on the road
'94 TransAm - safety/emission tested passed with flying colours compared to any car on the road