Posts: 755
Joined: 12/28/2005 From: North Idaho Status: offline
Thx for the only decent replies 67 and Colorado. What a phawking crazy idea; trade a few horses for a cleaner running car. So it isn't practical for my 65 and cats alone won't do much. That's what I was after.
Posts: 755
Joined: 12/28/2005 From: North Idaho Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: jcomp
quote:
ORIGINAL: Soaring
Jim I am still laughing. And I mean hard laughing. That is about the funniest thing I have read on here in many moons. Blows East huh?
I had the unfortunate experience of living in the bowels of Idaho for a few years. East indeed.
I live close to Coeur d'Alene, pretty sweet area. Constantly being named one of the top 10 place to; live, raise a family, retire, vacation, ect. Did it occur to you Idaho might have more than one town? btw I lived in Denver. Nothing to write home about.
< Message edited by Smothers -- 7/30/2007 12:02:50 AM >
It's not always easy to run an older car through a periodic emissions test, assuming that you keep 'normal' plates rather than 'Classic', 'Historic', or some such that might buy you a waiver or exemption. So there might be room for argument that easing that sort of difficulty would be worth it in some cases.
The concept of adding converters to a classic is not in itself a technically bad idea. You'd be entirely free to choose from much more free-flowing designs than the pellet type converters that gave the devices such a bad name back in the 70's and early 80's. But the associated details of getting it/them to physically fit where needed and work reliably without the risk of being killed off on a regular basis does make it a less than attractive mod (probably deal-breaker-level unattractive to all but some few with an oddball combination of die-hard environmental allegiances and classic car interest).
On the other hand, with a restomod build employing EFI and closed loop control, you can get a very good balance of power and emissions performance with relatively little worry.
Either way, some of the losses due to increased backpressure could be recovered via less restrictive mufflers than you might be able (or willing) to tolerate all by themselves.
Norm
< Message edited by Norm Peterson -- 7/30/2007 8:46:58 AM >
There is a quirk in California emissions laws that requires, although I'm not sure of all the ramifications, the newer year date of the car or engine dictates smog requirements. That means that if you have a 65 Mustang and upgrade to a 2007 4.6L engine, you are required to now pass 2007 smog laws. Now that's not the reality of what is the law, but is a sample of what it could have been. Smog testing does not apply to cars over 30 years old in California. The reality is if you have a 1980 Mustang and upgrade to a 2007 4.6L engine, the law does apply with all the trimmings, converter, sensors, etc. They trap you at the testing station so there is no (legal) way out. Another 'quirk' allow the 'ricers' to buy a new rice rocket car, make payments, modify it, add parts, take away parts, race (and whatever else they do with them), not worry for four years and then sell or junk it. The first smog test on a new car in California is when the car is four years old. Jim
Posts: 2051
Joined: 11/9/2006 From: South Shores, CA Status: offline
Jim,
While CA did briefly have a floating 30-year smog test exemption policy, it was not renewed. I believe the cutoff is '75 and older are exempt and '76 and newer still need the checks. BTW, are they running the smog check checkpoints up there like they are in SoCal? They are similar to sobriety checkpoints usually seen at on-ramps.
You are correct on swapping newer motors. Obviously, on an older smog test exempt vehicle it is moot, but changing motors on new cars can be difficult. The engine must be newer than the vehicle, all its emissions equipment must be installed and I believe the vehicle must have a minimum number of miles before it is eligible for the swap. After everything is together you have to take it to the smog police for inspection. If you pass all the visual and physical inspections, you'll get assigned an exemption sticker which is affixed to the firewall. I've had a few friends swap V8s into Jeeps and it was no picnic.
Posts: 3143
Joined: 1/18/2007 From: Las Cruces, NM Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Norm Peterson
Let me play 'Devil's Advocate' for a moment . . .
It's not always easy to run an older car through a periodic emissions test, assuming that you keep 'normal' plates rather than 'Classic', 'Historic', or some such that might buy you a waiver or exemption. So there might be room for argument that easing that sort of difficulty would be worth it in some cases.
The concept of adding converters to a classic is not in itself a technically bad idea. You'd be entirely free to choose from much more free-flowing designs than the pellet type converters that gave the devices such a bad name back in the 70's and early 80's. But the associated details of getting it/them to physically fit where needed and work reliably without the risk of being killed off on a regular basis does make it a less than attractive mod (probably deal-breaker-level unattractive to all but some few with an oddball combination of die-hard environmental allegiances and classic car interest).
On the other hand, with a restomod build employing EFI and closed loop control, you can get a very good balance of power and emissions performance with relatively little worry.
Either way, some of the losses due to increased backpressure could be recovered via less restrictive mufflers than you might be able (or willing) to tolerate all by themselves.
Norm
Or run no mufflers at all, in me experience, cat's alone will reduce the DB level to a bearable level. I tried that on a recent build of my son's C-1500 truck, it was reasonably quiet. I was trying to run the stock fuel injection with a Hilley throttle body upgrade, but alas, the throttle body flooded the engine so bad that upon one startup, (finally), the entire exhaust turned a bright shade of red destroying the cat. We took the cat off, shook it a little, and it sounded like a giant baby rattle.
Now the truck is carbed, HEI, no cat..... the computer is still in the truck but,,, it is unemployed....
_____________________________
66 Coupe I-6 Conversion, 408 Windsor, Tremec TKO 600 Wilwood fronts, SSBC Rears 9" Track Loc.
Posts: 3143
Joined: 1/18/2007 From: Las Cruces, NM Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Smothers
Thx for the only decent replies 67 and Colorado. What a phawking crazy idea; trade a few horses for a cleaner running car. So it isn't practical for my 65 and cats alone won't do much. That's what I was after.
Don't sweat it Smothers, your goal is admirable, but the execution is difficult. I gave the "clean car" effort a shot on my son's truck, it just didn't work out... Flooded engine + Cat = red hot exhaust.... = melted converter. I did this with fuel injection, a carb would give even more oppertunity to "run rich"...
Also consider that the early (carbed) cars with cats, were trading one type of polutants for another,,, When a car with cats runs rich, the cats produce large amounts of sulforous acid in exchange for reduced hydrocarbon emissions, so much that I have heard stories that police officers on traffic detail were actually killed while sitting in one spot for extended periods.
You know the smell, rotten eggs, that you will occasionally smell coming out of the exhaust of a very new car.
Did you ever hear about "acid rain" prior to the advent of catyletic converters?? Coincidence??
I think the newer computer controlled cars hav virturally eliminated this issue, but that just brings us back to where we started...
_____________________________
66 Coupe I-6 Conversion, 408 Windsor, Tremec TKO 600 Wilwood fronts, SSBC Rears 9" Track Loc.
+1 on being completely nuts. Why choke down a perfectly good classic engine just because you may want to save the spotted owls in Oregon.
We already have enough people trying to save the spotted owls up here Glen. My friend kept saying "Hybrid" everytime he saw a Prius this weekend whenever we would go cruising, and let me tell you, I never realized before how many hybrids there really are.
Jeff, I think the rolling 30 year is still in effect, however it don't affect me, so I don't know. There are no smog check points that I know of but I don't commute - retirement has some benefits. There were some type of freeway on-ramp photo spots but they dissapeared. Drive by shootings - I hope? Jim
Posts: 803
Joined: 6/14/2006 From: Fontana, California Status: offline
On the pro side: The Cats will measurably reduce the HC and CO emmissions from your tailpipe(s). There are some pretty good hi-perf Cats on the market also.
On the Con side: They're going to run hot and probably burn themselves out sooner due to the lack of up stream controls (air injection, closed loop ignition, etc...). Also of concern is the placement to your floor pan and again the heat they will put off.
I don't think you;ll see much difference in performance if you use the hi-po parts.
Jim, in Cali if you put a newer engine in a non smog car, by law you ARE supposed to TECHNICALLY have the newer engine's smog controls. If you put a 4.6L out of a 2007 Mustang GT in a 67 Mustang, legally you're supposed to have all the smog equipment of a 2007 Mustang GT, BUT, since you never get inspected, it's a moot point(a non enforcable law really). The way to get around it though, is that since the law requires the smog equipment of a production engine swap(junkyard donor motor) you just get the late model engine block and some parts, but rebuild it with different stuff and it's not a production engine any more, and was therefore not offered in any vehicle with any smog equipment.
In reality you can basically do anything you want within reason to a non smog car and they don't care.
As far as reducing the emissions from our older cars, forget cats and air pump crap, the best and easiest way is to just do an EFI conversion, like Edelbrock's Pro Flo EFI, or another standalone(FAST etc) or a factory type setup. Not that carbs are bad either, but EFI is cleaner for those who care.
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
I think I pretty much said the 'quirk' in the law required the newer smog limits o engine swaps. To tell you the truth, nobody cares. I don't. My cars all conform to the limits of the year of manufacture anyway. When I was required to pass the test, I passed. The cars ran great then and still do. What the 'greenies' are after are the cars from the 80's and early 90's that were the worst at making smog. The state offers a $10,000 pollution credit to major polluters to remove a car from the street and destroy it. It's a government created joke that makes the 'greenies' happy, the crooked politicians in office and gives protection to big business. Nuff said. Jim
Posts: 3143
Joined: 1/18/2007 From: Las Cruces, NM Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: 66GTKFB
I think I pretty much said the 'quirk' in the law required the newer smog limits o engine swaps. To tell you the truth, nobody cares. I don't. My cars all conform to the limits of the year of manufacture anyway. When I was required to pass the test, I passed. The cars ran great then and still do. What the 'greenies' are after are the cars from the 80's and early 90's that were the worst at making smog. The state offers a $10,000 pollution credit to major polluters to remove a car from the street and destroy it. It's a government created joke that makes the 'greenies' happy, the crooked politicians in office and gives protection to big business. Nuff said. Jim
There is no possible way that our elected officials are playing politics with our enviornment!! No way!!!!!!!! they would not do that Jim, it is simply way too important a subject to be playing games with.
Just kidding,,,,, all the way around,,
< Message edited by JMD -- 7/30/2007 3:05:03 PM >
_____________________________
66 Coupe I-6 Conversion, 408 Windsor, Tremec TKO 600 Wilwood fronts, SSBC Rears 9" Track Loc.
I would think that floor pan would get hot enough to fry an egg under the carpet with a catalytic converter under there and not be hooked up to the computer that controls it. I sure wouldn't take that car out in a dry grassy field.
A few quick things to consider regarding emmisions and their impact on the environment:
1. The largest user/consumer of petroleum fuel in the world is the US military... by far. If the US was really serious about curtailing emmisions, the place to start would be with the largest consumer. But they are increasing their consumption, not decreasing it - it is disingenous for our leaders of any stripe to tell us to cut back when they are the largest offenders.
2. Check out this website for a "dust to dust" comparison of recent automobile impacts on the environment and you will think twice before buying the hype about "hybrids" being environmentally friendly - http://www.nvo.com/cnwmr/ In fact, careful reasoning will lead you to realize that restoring and daily driving even less fuel efficient cars is better for the environment than the "dust to dust" production of new fuel efficient cars! In essence, all classic mustang drivers are recycling!!!
3. Greater than 95% of climate scientists think Global warming is real. Many of the other scientists I have heard calling it "bunk" are usually supported financially by think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute.... which is supported by Exxon. When examining the quality of advice, just as in these forums, one must consider the source.
There is some great advice on these forums - lets keep it going.
You third statement is totally incorrect. 'Global Warming' was the 'mantra' of these so-called climate scientists for the past thirty years, right after they predicted 'Global Cooling'. When the truth came out that they in fact were not climatologists but were nothing more than 'concerned' people in the quasi-science world with a political agenda, more published matter has come to light. So the 'kooks', and that's what they are - 'kooks', came up with a new buzz word - climate change. Well they got the name right but the reasons wrong. People - that's you and me, have little to do with 'climate change'. We live around a variable star, a star that has in the past, had changes in it's radiation. Ever wonder why Greenland got it's name? If you want to read some interesting facts, try this for some 'lite' reading - 'Unstoppable Global Warming - every 1500 years' by S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery. Jim
I was looking into putting a V8 in one of my trucks a few years ago and since it is a 91 I fall into the emision garbage. While talking to one of the guys at the emision station he told me that if I put in a V8 and didn't pass that I would have to take it to a mechanic and as long as I spent 150 dollars and made an attempt to pass that they would give me a waiver.
I would think that floor pan would get hot enough to fry an egg under the carpet with a catalytic converter under there and not be hooked up to the computer that controls it. I sure wouldn't take that car out in a dry grassy field.
Not necessarily. The floor in my '79 Malibu has never got worse than slightly warm, regardless of what engine/intake/carburetion/distributor timing&advance was in use at the time. As long as it wasn't running excessively rich for too long. Right now, there's about 2.5: clearance between the upper side cat heat shield and the floor.
But in an early Mustang you'd be in for some floorpan surgery, just as GM had to rework the floorpan on the passenger side for precisely that reason. You'll need about 10" ground clearance to the floor - 1" heat shield to floor, 3.5" overall cat thickness, 5" ground clearance under the cat).
Miscellaneous semi-related ramblings dep't - I don't think I'd drive a car with headers on a dry grassy field either, but anyway . . . and I wish I could find the emissions report from when the '66 last ran through NJ inspection so I'd know how much 'headroom' was left. It wasn't really stock for either the car year, the engine year, any combination of or anything in between, but it passed OK.
Posts: 2051
Joined: 11/9/2006 From: South Shores, CA Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: 66GTKFB
Jeff, I think the rolling 30 year is still in effect, however it don't affect me, so I don't know. There are no smog check points that I know of but I don't commute - retirement has some benefits. There were some type of freeway on-ramp photo spots but they dissapeared. Drive by shootings - I hope? Jim
Unfortunately, the rolling 30 years is kaput per the stroke of Arnie's pen a few years ago. The DMV summarizes everything on their website. http://dmv.ca.gov/vr/smogfaq.htm#BM2535 Two things that really frost my ass are that they don't require smog checks on vehicles for the first six years (makes sense statistically that a new car performs as certified) yet they make you pay a 'smog abatement fee' :cough: pork :cough: and that natural gas passenger vehicles are tested yet hybrids aren't. Perhaps I'm biased, having owned a CNG vehicle, but any vehicle running on natural gas makes a hybrid look like a gross polluter.
I don't know if any of you guys ever brought an out of state vehicle into CA, but they used to charge you a 'smog impact fee' of about $300. They had to eat crow when it was found to be illegal and had to provide refunds, yours truly being one of the recipients.
Just did a search and found the info on the repeal of the smog exemption, California AB 2683, introduced by an assemblywoman from Mountain View, passed by the assembly and signed by Arnie. Not surprisingly, the Sierra Club lists it on their website. http://www.sierraclubcalifornia.org/legislation/index2004.shtml
[edit] If somebody is hellbent on adding cats, be sure to also install the insulated shield between the cat and the floorboard.
< Message edited by gothand -- 7/30/2007 5:49:54 PM >
You third statement is totally incorrect. 'Global Warming' was the 'mantra' of these so-called climate scientists for the past thirty years, right after they predicted 'Global Cooling'. When the truth came out that they in fact were not climatologists but were nothing more than 'concerned' people in the quasi-science world with a political agenda, more published matter has come to light. So the 'kooks', and that's what they are - 'kooks', came up with a new buzz word - climate change. Well they got the name right but the reasons wrong. People - that's you and me, have little to do with 'climate change'. We live around a variable star, a star that has in the past, had changes in it's radiation. Ever wonder why Greenland got it's name? If you want to read some interesting facts, try this for some 'lite' reading - 'Unstoppable Global Warming - every 1500 years' by S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery. Jim
I'm glad I'm not the only average person to understand this. It's also the same reason that Mars is currently experiencing global warming and ice cap melting to the same degree as Earth. I'm pretty sure it's not the HC and CO emissions from the local Martian industrial machine.
On a side note I saw a report on Fox recently, a guy has started a website dealing with the several thousand temperature monitoring stations throughout the US that NOAA uses to record national climate changes, and not only is nearly every station not in compliance with the NOAA placement standards, but nearly all of them have their temperature sensors placed close to some sort of heat producer(tennis court surfaces, a/c vents, inudstrial machninery, exhaust vents, buildings etc etc). His purpose isn't to show there's no global warming, because even he thinks there is, but to show that the temperature changes we're experiencing are actually stated to be higher than they are due to the failure to comply with the NOAA standard for temperature monitering station placement.
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
Printable Version
RE: cats on a classic? - 
Flooded engine + Cat = red hot exhaust.... = melted converter. I did this with fuel injection, a carb would give even more oppertunity to "run rich"... 
