hacker-pschorr

Jack, mine does smell like an old school bus - I still have the CATS installed.

Jack '84 928s

well i dont know what to tell you then lol.

Nicole

You are not really meeting the requirements, you are just passing a lax test. But you are atill creating 20 times the amount of toxic fumes than the same car with a cat. Passing a lax test is one thing, being as clean as your car could and should be, is another story.

We've had people post test results with and without cat here, and you can search the archives for some of the differences.

Sadly, it has become a sport to circumvent emissions laws that were deisgined to make life better for all of us. The result of this sport will ony be stricter requirements and more elaborate, more expensive tests. We'll all suffer in the end.

jayc67

Well I am not certain I am circumventing any laws if I still pass the emissions test. And there are year specific tests as well. I had (until yesterday) a 1968 Camaro with a big block Chevy engine. This thing had NO emissions equipment, and made a horrible mess of the environment. Because of the laws here in Texas, the car only had to meet the emissions requirements in place when it was built, which was 1968. So if my NSX meets the requirements of today, which are certainly more strict thatn those in 1968, you are telling me that driving the 1968 polluter is fine because it meets the letter of the law, but driving the 1995 NSX is a crime since it has no cats, even though it will meet the 2004 clean air standards?

Something wrong with all that methinks....

jserio

Jay, I don't think that is what Nicole is meaning. Her bottom line is the environment which I tend to agree with her. In California we can literally see our air just a few miles in the distance. Man that is bad. Jay, if your car meets the specs then your righteous in my book. Meeting the specs is important. Now as far as those smog burners of yesteryear go. I am sure the government has taken those into consideration. For instance, Just how many 68 Camaros are left? I'm sure a lot but I am also sure that there is not a significant amount as well for cars like it. It seems the government is slowly adjusting the environment control system because as time passes the older cars become less and less. Where in 85' there were lots of cars from 75' with lighter emission controls. Now 95 there are lots of cars from 85 still left meeting having to meet 85 emissions. Not a tremenous amount of 75' cars left. A lot but insignificant amount. Now 05' and cars of 95' meeting emissions from 95 and not so many 85' now. It is a long term solution. Pretty soon were going to be totally electric and have to pay a fee for fossil fuel burning cars saying if they are still available. So as long as people are meeting the requirements set for their car then so be it. The few that get around the system well they are only a few.

I could be wrong in my example above but it sure seems to make sense. Sorry for going on a rant.

jserio

Oh and BTW Jay the 68 Camaro, NICE.

jayc67

I won't argue the fact that the environment is a total mess, that's a given

Just that the regulations seem to be arbitrarily handed out. Here in Texas, if you are low income and have a junky polluter, it's OK because you can't afford to fix the emissions. So now it's up to someone else to decide if you can afford to make cleaner air or not. Touchy subject for us


Are we off topic enough yet?

Steve J.

What's wrong with stripping off the added emissions devices and restoring my '78 euro to stock configuration? Weren't the Germans environmentally conscious enough in '78 to build a relatively clean burning engine? Clean enough for Germany? I don't think the air pump makes the engine burn cleaner - it just dilutes the exhaust with air to fool the sniffer.

hacker-pschorr

I'll repeat my point from before because I can.

Take care of the big offenders before worrying about the sports cars that are driven .000000001% of the time when compared to the rest of the vehicles on the planet.

You could clean up one factory in Green Bay that in return would polute less than every 928 ever made running at the same time super rich with no CATS.

Yes I know we should all do our part......I own 6 cars (the US car is not listed) The 928 is lucky to be driven 3k a year right now. I'm doing my part by driving my Caddy or Audi more than my soon-to-be-CATless 928.

Yes, I said Caddy. I have a 1991 Eldorado with 220,000 miles on it. It's gets 28mpg on the highway and will still burn the tires in 1st gear. Damn thing is in better shape than my 928.

mpesik

: So my car will be faster?

Styln928

Side tracking a bit here. If removing the cats on an S4 with RMB, how loud will it be?

Jack '84 928s

It wont be super loud if you have a muffler. The rmb is no muffler right? If it is and the s4 has a resonater it might not be that loud. Mine isnt loud, untill i push the gas all the way down. If i get on it, it will set off car alarms. Hrm need to figure out a way to record a sound file..

Normy

Well, my '85 has the Ott X pipe and the Borla system that 928 International sells, and this set up is LOUD AND RASPY! It'll raise the hairs on the back of your neck at 6000 rpm...but really, it's a bit much. The removal of the cats made a big difference in sound level....

N!

Jack '84 928s

Mine isnt raspy at all but the flowmaster isnt a straigh through design either. I bet borla probably would be some as its a straight through design

Jim_H

Replacing cats with an Ott X Pipe will be the best upgrade for the $ you will do. If everyone knew what the XPipe did for their car everyone would have one.
S4 with X Pipe and RMB not too loud
GT with X Pipe and RMB too loud.