Removing/gutting cats ticks me off!
#32
For all you "hi-po" guys out there who think you can't make hp through cats: my setup last year made 733rwhp through cats. This year, I expect another 100-150hp, still through cats.
My buddy did lose 26 RWHP by keeping on cats on a 589RWHP (emmisions legal) car through Random Tech cats.. So in those H.P. levels, you are losing some decent H.P. from keeping those converters on it. Not that you should be complainig with those awesome numbers
#35
Originally posted by nateh
Rich,
What cats are you using? Are you running the Random Tech y-pipe with dual cats, or something custom?
Rich,
What cats are you using? Are you running the Random Tech y-pipe with dual cats, or something custom?
Rich Krause
#36
Originally posted by rskrause
The Random Tech dual high-flow. I seriously doubt they are much of a restriction.
Rich Krause
The Random Tech dual high-flow. I seriously doubt they are much of a restriction.
Rich Krause
On a side note, I remember a rag (GM hi-tech maybe?) doing a test on several converter brands. The random tech converters did pick up a few hp over a stock cat, but did a _horrible_ job at reducing emissions compared to the factory units - seems like there is no "have your cake and eat it too" senario with cats.
#37
Go back to the beginning of your cars life. Your cat causes your motor to work a little harder and use a little more gas over its life time. So what happens when the cat clogs up and it screws up your motor and you have to throw it away? It goes to a yard and rusts out and guess what happens then? All those little gases seep right back into the air and guess what else, the water to as rain water goes threw your old cat.
A cat is a band-aid on a bullet wound. Itll fall off and only gets in your way while its there.
Go after the companies not the cars
A cat is a band-aid on a bullet wound. Itll fall off and only gets in your way while its there.
Go after the companies not the cars
#39
I would just like to point out that if you are that concerned about pollution and greenhouse gasses, driving a car that burns as much fuel as ours, is NOT environmentally friendly. Also the cat does not "filter" out any CO2, the main greenhouse gas. CO2 is a product of ideal combustion (hydrocarbon + O2 = H2O + CO2), so removing/gutting your cat has no effect on the CO2 output of your car. I am just trying to saying that is almost ironic for someone driving a V8 to be that concerned about pollution.
#42
So basically going from a stock to high flow cat with only minor mods might net you something like 5 hp? But, it will be harder for you to pass emissions? All that hassle and money doesnt seem worth it to me...if you are only gaining around 5hp.
#44
Having teen agers, I know what guilt expressed as bravado sounds like, and I have heard a lot of it here along with a ton of rationalization. Especailly when the childish insults as in snakeatinZ's post start, I know it's time to take a deep breath and say "they are just kids".
Good luck and happy breathing.
Rich Krause
Good luck and happy breathing.
Rich Krause
#45
I have been looking for a good solution to the performance issue with cats. I honestly believe right now that the Random Tech cat assembly is probably the best. The problem on our cars is packaging. I work with an expert in catalyst design. In talking about my application, he told me it would be possible to design a low restriction catalyst that would meet 2004 SULEV requirements for my car if we could package it. I was ecstatic. It turns out that we need more brick face surface area to even meet OBDII requirements than we can package without adding restriction. In looking at the Random Tech pipe, it's the best compromise out there. It isn't quite as good on pollutants as the OEM cats, but they meet federal requirements for replacements, and they are a lot less restrictive. The big problem is the price. The assembly is way too expensive for many people to afford, especially the stainless piece.
I would be interested in knowing the cell density of the Random Tech catalyst substrates. Anyone know that? I'm assuming about 300, given the low restriction.
I would be interested in knowing the cell density of the Random Tech catalyst substrates. Anyone know that? I'm assuming about 300, given the low restriction.