Sounds like a fair plan to me! I can't wait to try the "test" pipes on the Tubi exhaust I just bought for my '89 TR! If Clintie gets his panties in such a wad over a few cars with test pipes, I'd HATE to see what he'd do if he saw some of my smoke belching military vehicles! There is nothing quite like 7 liters of straight 8 Rolls Royce spewing smoke and belching flame to the tune of 2.5 MPG except perhaps the thunder of 14.5 liters of supercharged flat 6 Continental mustering less than 0.8 MPG. I LOVE CHEAP GASOLINE! If marshmellow-boy thinks this side of the pond is polluted he should go drive a bit in Western Europe! We don't know what pollution is here . . .
512tr..aren't we all pimps? ;-) Buttuz-wipe: I was not aware of that. You know it is rude of you to "out" your lover without permission. Mark, I agree with you totally. But again, I didn't write these laws. Only telling folks about them. AR, again, I didn't write these laws. Obviously,our government considers it more than a minor offense. Perhaps you shoul dexpress your views with your own Greens party? Rayman, you are why lions eat their young. I sure hope you don't get lung cancer for your selfish attitude. Guess what, smoky? Other people DO have kids...kids who breathe. Caruso, that attorney ain't gonna get you off. Sorry. You may avoid jail, but you'll be forever a convicted felon. I'm sure your parents & your children & grandchildren will be SO proud! Stalwart, you are correct---military vehicles, city buses, and construction equipment pollute FAR more. And western Yurrip is heavily polluted (due mostly to diesel...because gasoline is so heavily taxed). So? Again, read my lips: I did not make these laws. Congress did. Until they chenge them, you can attacke the messenger (me) all you want, but it won't change anything.
Oh, oh I just did something worse, just pulled the tag off my pillow!!! I think I hear sirens, must go now and hide!!!! (hope I spelled all these words okay??)
To try to return this semi-ruined thread to a technical level appropriate for a technical Q&A section, the evolution of catalytic converters is actually interesting. Seventies' Ferrari catalytic converters are quite restrictive, but the newer ones that came out in the late 80s are really minimally restrictive. Another option is the Hyper-flow cat, a newer technology even higher-flow cat offered by board sponsors (http://www.sodacoms.com/HyperFlow/HF.htm). With the newer technologies, there is not much performance reason (besides weight) to remove. They do tend to muffle the sound. Strangely enough, I've seen a 308 exhaust system without mufflers, just using cats and tips. If legal in your area, other cat replacement options for early cars include the Stebro 'Euro-resonator', a resonated replacement. Actually any good muffler shop can make one of these. The padding takes some of the harshness out of the sound of a straight pipe. Hope this helps a little. best rt Hyper-flow cat pic:
Time for my two cents..... with no personal attacks .... Anyone who owns a Ferrari (as I do) stands on pretty thin ice complaining, discussing or defending the issues discussed in this thread. We are all are part of the problem .... As a rule we are selfish to a greater degree than most for wanting what we do and actually having the means to get it ..... and we are all far from being poster boys for the "clean up the environment" crowd. My stock 550 get's on average 10 mpg ... most SUV's get better mileage ...... and I drive mine very hard at times as I'm sure all Ferrari owners do .... if they don't ... one wonders why they own a Ferrari except maybe for the ovious .... status (which opens a whole new issue) .... I drive faster than the speed limit on most outings .... sometimes double or triple the limit .... I drive fast and dangerously in the mountains which endangers myself and possibly others .... and I waste ridiculous sums of money maintaining my car as I'm sure everyone here does .... so ... how do any of us rate a soapbox? I know my sins ...... none of which helps the environment. If we didn't all have these traits .... we wouldn't be here and we'd no doubt be driving a Prius with a bike rack on the back. As for me, I'm glad I can own a Ferrari ... I love this car..... I love driving hard and fast, I love my red paint job, and I make no excuses for owning it regardless of the ovious excesses and waste that ownership represents .... I say ... let the guy driving the Prius cast the first stone ......... he's the only guy with a legitimate complaint .... the rest of us should be happy and thankful to be in the postion we're in ...... Let's get back to Technical issues........ that's what I like about this forum.
You made a good point but your original delivery made you come off as a self righteous scold. Email is tricky that way. If you made your point in a persuasive fashion and avoided alienating the people you are trying to convince I think you would you serve your cause more effectively. Just 2 cents, no offense meant PB
Well, but you basically approved that someone who is running his car w/o cats should serve jailtime. Is this really your opinion or was this just a bullet that went astray in the heat of the battle ... ? Besides, I am pretty much in line with what our Green Party thinks about vehicle emissions (the only point I don´t approve is their stance towards speed limits ) As Pierre put it: A more moderate attitude would help the cause. I am also wondering about the bullsh*t which is presented by a minority of the participants in this thread but I simply switch to "ignore" mode when reading such displays of lack of intelligence.
Pierre, very good point. I appreciate constructive feedback--no offense taken! I will rethink my delivery. My original point, which was in the context of this Tech forum, was that removing cats was mechanically unnecessary...and that it also had other consequences. Perhaps I should have just stated that. Speedball, good points. Again, my point was to illustrate some of the consequences of what seemed to me to be purposeful efforts to further degrade the air. AR, no, I really have no opinion on the penalties, especially in light of how many truly HUGE environmental crimes go unpunished here. So I would say it was a "stray bullet"...
My car passes emissions, without cats, although it is now exempt. Most Ferraris see both road and track use, here in Texas, so we try to keep it legal. Nice avatar Speedball. You gonna be there Friday MMan? We're going to the Armadillo after! I lost my oil filler cap last night, I'm REALLY poluttin' this morning! On the plus side, all the mosquitos on my street are dead now. Never holler at your kids and work on your car while running late at the same time!
A recent study identified gas spills during fueling, lawn mowers, and 2 cycle back pack blowers as a significant offender in releasing Hydrocarbons in to the environment. Perhaps you should go on a crusade to teach the general public, proper fueling techniques, and brow beat an Immigrant Worker (ie, Gardener) who doesn't speak english in to submission. The rest won't stand for such abuse.
Dear Ferraristi, I don't have the cats on my 91 TR. I have them removed because of the "blocked cats fire" problem of the Testarossa series. I would prefer the cats on the car because (to please maranelloman ) I wouldn't have to had to rebalance and retune the engine. Also if it doesn't make a difference ( I swear it did on my TR) why bother.
If you remove the cats on 328s, TRs, early 348s(?), monidals, and 308s (etc etc), you will NOT be subject to the "slowdown light leading to a cat-related fire." (If you want more details, ask, but I am sure you know what I am talking about.) Thus, it is SAFER WITHOUT THE CATS ON OLDER CARS. All the best Dave, Omar
I worked in the late 80's and 90's on blending various additives to reduce emissions on pre-cat and early cat equipped cars. We found that after 30 - 50,000 miles the smog out the tailpipe was MORE because the cats were not doing there job. in the early days they were putting oxygen pumps on the engines to pump fresh air into the exhaust system to make sure the car would pass EPA standards. Problem is the standards have not been changed to reflect the newer technology or driving styles of our more crowed cities. We made a product that would take the worst gas in the world, Mexican, and using a Mexico taxi as a test car, we created a product that reduced the pollution to ZERO on all counts. We also did the same for diesel engines. This was tested in 5 countries and also by Exxon. Exxon tried to reverse engineer it but we knew they were going to do that so we made a fail safe into the formula. I can not disclose what we did as I am still under a nondiscloseure agreement. It sure made the race car go faster. This additive was designed for carb equipped cars. We did a few tests in the FI cars but at that time the compression ratio was too low. Our product loved compression, at least 10:1 or higher. My whole point in this is that most cats do not help emissions after a certain mileage is met. Yes I will remove cats, take them to a lathe and if possible bore out the guts, place them back on the car. We provided a service for certain government agencies so that their cars would preform better. Deal was this, I will make your police cars more responsive but anyone in our company does not get speeding tickets. To prove to them that I wasn't kidding I did a small adjustment on the chase car and reduced it to 80 mph. They were back in my shop in less than 1 hour. I smiled and said, "See that red car outside, it NEVER gets pulled over, and if it does I will adjust your chase car to only 50 mph, deal?" They laughed and we had a agreement. This worked until they changed the captain 3 years later. We all enjoyed our sunday drives. Secret to good mileage and high performance, high compression, small engines, high revs, well that sums up all Ferrari engines.
All the talk no the threads has me a little concerned about my own 87 328. I've had mine for less than 30 days and seem to notice a small pin point of light in the center of the slow down light. (possible reflection ?) I notice however my battery light during first few seconds after start up lights up brightly. Maybe a little paranoid, but I'm thinking the slow down light should light should be as bright as other warning lights? Can anyone shed any light? (pun intended).;
On startup my battery light is on and my slow down is off. If something happens, that light will be as bright at your battery light on start up. Just make sure to turn off and stop your car ASAP when/if this happens. Your point of light is prob a reflection, try and shade the area with your hand from light and to be certain. Also, sorry for spelling in earlier post, yes I cannot spell.
Dave Bell -- The flavor of your question makes me think that the self-test for your slow down lights is not working correctly (should be very clear the difference between "on" and "off"). If you just turn the key "on" (and do not start the engine) the slow down warning lights should come on for a second or two and then go out -- do yours?
Omar -- If the slow down warning lights never illuminate during the engine starting process then you do have a problem, but they're only on for a second or two so by about the time you disengage the starter they are usually already off (i.e., they should be "off" once the engine is running).
This is amazing. You guys do not seem to realise that a catalytic converter does wear out and needs to be replaced, NOT just removed. As F40Lover's posts clearly says, catalytic converters eventually clog and need replacing NOT removal. Thus if you are seeing any performance increase it is because your old cats were blocked. Thus with new ones you will get similar HP increase as with straight pipes. There is NO justification for removing cats. Cats are a primitive attempt by the motoring industry in trying to do something right. Removing them proves nothing other than you do not care about your fellow man, and fellow car enthusiasts (ie. the more cars can be blamed for pollution the quicker they will be outlawed ... thus keep them clean!). In closing I cannot believe all the rubbish on this post and the fact that Ferrari owners do not know that cats need to be replaced as they get old. They most definitely do not last for ever ... and they are expensive to replace. Cars with clogged cats are very, very bad on the environment ... Pete
Pete, on older Ferraris, if your cats are clogged or not, the fact is that they ARE hotter then the rest of your exhaust system. Thus if you have a cylinder slow down, you WILL have a fire by igniting the unburnt fuel when it hits the cat. Intially this will warm the cat up more, until poof, ferrari christmas tree. End of story, period. Leaving it on is UNSAFE on older Ferraris. As you say, cats are indeed a primitive attempt by the motoring industry in trying to do something right... and older ones (ie late 70s and 80s) are the worse offenders.
Auraraptor, Surely this is more likely with clogged cats, and thus if they were replaced as recommended the fire in the exhaust would be as normal for unburnt fuel (?) Plus please explain to me how a fire inside an exhaust (just like racing cars) catches the rest of the car on fire. Surely the fire would not be hot enough to melt the exhaust pipe!! ... or does it melt plastic too close to the cat? One of the reasons why a fire extinguisher should be mandatory equipment in a Ferrari Pete
"Plus please explain to me how a fire inside an exhaust (just like racing cars) catches the rest of the car on fire." -- radiant heat transfer from the outside casing of the cat ignites the nearby coachwork/components/whatever when the cat is glowing "red hot". But a (partially) "clogged" cat causing a fire would be rare IMO -- it's either your fuel system goes wacky and adds excess fuel that burns in your (working) cat ('til it overheats), or part of the ignition quits and all the fuel from the non-function cylinders is burned in the (working) cat causing it to overheat.
