S-PAutomotive.com

Author Topic: Removing the Catalyc Converter  (Read 7717 times)

Reply #15January 01, 2011, 11:41:13 pm

maxfax

  • Veteran

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 2126
Re: Removing the Catalyc Converter
« Reply #15 on: January 01, 2011, 11:41:13 pm »
catalytic converters are bad news!!!   >:(

Bingo..   I have yet to find an engine that uses MORE fuel and makes LESS power with the cat removed..  Even with all the advancements of late..   Engine design and management as well as maintenance is the key..   Hence why we have modern engines making more power with better economy while still using a wreched cat..  Take the cats off and much like the antiques out there, more power and better economy instead of wasted heat...

(Flame suite on) The old Honda CVCC engine had no need for a cat till the early 80's..  Even then it still met emission level requirements, but cat converters HAD to be installed anyway as per our friends at the government that know best....

Okay done with the off topic rant..

Reply #16January 02, 2011, 01:27:49 pm

R.O.R-2.0

  • Veteran

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7335
  • Personal Text
    Pacific Northwest - Oregon - USA
Re: Removing the Catalyc Converter
« Reply #16 on: January 02, 2011, 01:27:49 pm »
honda CVCCs had 2 combustion chambers too. the spark plug wasnt actually in the main combustion chamber.

and the carb had 3 barrels. 2 were for running the engine, and the 3rd supplied a very rich mixture to the pre-combustion chamber.

the main mix in the combustion chamber was mixed very lean because of the rich mix in the pre-chamber.
92 Jetta GLI - Black, 1.6D w/ GT2056V turbo..
86 GTI - 4 Door, Med Twilight Gray, Tow Machine..
86 Audi Coupe GT - Tornado Red, All Stock.. WRECKED.
89 Toyota 4Runner - Dark Grey Metallic, LIFTED!

Turbo: exhaust gasses go into the turbocharger and spin it, witchcraft happens and you go faster.

Reply #17January 02, 2011, 03:22:23 pm

maxfax

  • Veteran

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 2126
Re: Removing the Catalyc Converter
« Reply #17 on: January 02, 2011, 03:22:23 pm »
And most impressively, they worked and worked well..  And like anything else that works, and works well it had to be "improved"

Reply #18January 02, 2011, 06:08:23 pm

catlin_cava

  • Veteran

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 1954
Re: Removing the Catalyc Converter
« Reply #18 on: January 02, 2011, 06:08:23 pm »
15,000kms with no cat, car still works good(when it works)  ;D See next post for problems :'(
Catlin

2012 VW Golf 2.5 5speed Deep Black Pearl
1999.5 VW Jetta TDI Bosch .216mm injectors and Malone stage 2, soon 11mm pump and vnt 22(parked for the winter)
2010 VW Golf City 2.0L "Hers"

Reply #19January 03, 2011, 02:04:05 pm

R.O.R-2.0

  • Veteran

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7335
  • Personal Text
    Pacific Northwest - Oregon - USA
Re: Removing the Catalyc Converter
« Reply #19 on: January 03, 2011, 02:04:05 pm »
And most impressively, they worked and worked well..  And like anything else that works, and works well it had to be "improved"

honda actually used that design up untill the current D series engines came out.. even the very first D series engines (were actually still E series, not a true D series)  had the cool head with 2 combustion chambers.. basically when honda went away from carburators, they quit using that rich mix to the pre chamber, and lean to the main chamber.. and just went to EFI, and catalytic converters..

if you are good at tuning gas carbs, you can pass emissions with just really RETARDED timing and a lean idle mix..

345 international went from 1800 CO count, to 90 CO count.. (900 being the legal limit where i had the truck)
92 Jetta GLI - Black, 1.6D w/ GT2056V turbo..
86 GTI - 4 Door, Med Twilight Gray, Tow Machine..
86 Audi Coupe GT - Tornado Red, All Stock.. WRECKED.
89 Toyota 4Runner - Dark Grey Metallic, LIFTED!

Turbo: exhaust gasses go into the turbocharger and spin it, witchcraft happens and you go faster.

 

Fixmyvw.com