Are straight pipe gains worth the pollution?

 

If your n/a NO. If you have turbo...ooooh yes.

 

I agree..If you're N/A, there's no reason to do it.. But for a turbo car, there's a whole other story.

I would put a midpipe on my RX-7 in an instant.. Run it rich and spit 2 foot flames out the tailpipe.

 

I think another question is " Is it worth if if you get caught!!"

 

NOD NOD NOD Especially with the DAMN CHP they suck.

 

So since I have a N/A car then why does running an open header drop my et by .6 seconds? I wouldn't drive on the street like that, but I ran 12.9 all motor, then I ran 13.5 with a Greddy SP exhaust and a gutted cat. Even on a N/A car it can bring gains.

 

No cop is smart enough to look to see if your cat is missing. You could just tell them that it is performance, very small - looks like a regular piping. Hehe. If a cop of course hears you, and wants to go by the book, he/she will right a ticket. I've gotten one, a $71 exhaust ticket. I am actually paying it off today.

 

You're exhaust piping may be too small which is a reason that you are having this problem...for race applications, no cat, street =cat...in California it is a $3000 Federal Fine....

 

Ouch!!! 3 grand? There goes the turbo money if you get caught.

 

It brings high end gains (hence your 1/4 mile time). But you'll lose low end torque with the loss of backpressure. Smaller exhaust piping can help with this.

 

I'm a bit confused. I don't think it's specifically backpressure that you want, but rather that you want to keep the flow of exhaust moving smoothly for scavenging effects. A test-pipe that is the same diameter as the rest of your exhaust system (given that it's the proper diameter) should succeed in both removing backpressure and keeping flow of exhaust smooth.

Someone please school me... I had an awful time in my fluid dynamics class...

 

Not for the street. Unless you're pushing 250+whp you won't see a a significant gain (to offset the loss of low-end) compared to a straight through (Random-tech) cat.

 

nope.
not worth it.
I even have one.
they are CHEAPER than a real catalytic converter though.

 

You're right, but people like to think backpressure is a good thing.

 

hehe my friend has a setup where muffler is only held on by wingnuts, when he gets to the track he straight pipes, then reinstalls for the ride home.
takes like 2 minuets its cool as hell

 

I don't care about the muffler being on there, it is nothing but a track car anyway with some occasional street raping in there. I put i on the track two nights so far. I don't care if it has an exhaust or not, hell I drove it all over town with open header and slicks on the front.

Ok. I have just read what I typed and realized I have no idea what I just said.

 

pore saps in Cali., you guys should move out here to KEEEENtucky, we don't even have to have an exhaust if we don't want it. ha ha, joking. You guys act like it is the end of the world if you get caught out in California. Is it that bad?
In Kentucky you don't even have to have a cat, so many big as ford trucks with straight pipes and cherrybombs. Almost every F-body out here have straight threw exhaust with flowmasters.

Me, I just have a high flow cat with 2 1/4" exhaust.

But yeah it is bad for the OZONE


[Modified by ShaggenWaggon, 3:27 PM 9/29/2001]

 

Heh.. if you have no cat and get caught anywhere you get a fine, you're just probably 1000x more likely to in California. Hence the "Federal fine". It would be a state fine if it was only in California.

 

Id say No, its very tempting if u r turbo though.. But then im a hypocrite, cause im gonna run a flex pipe.. no cats.. also i wont be caught dead littering, i just think its wrong to dirty up the enviorment but like i said im a hypocrite and im gonna run a test pipe and dirty the air.. oh well ****

 

how's the beach out there in ky?

 

same as it is in Ohio...

 

27156. (a) No person shall operate or leave standing upon any
highway any motor vehicle which is a gross polluter, as defined in
Section 39032.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(b) No person shall operate or leave standing upon any highway any
motor vehicle which is required to be equipped with a motor vehicle
pollution control device under Part 5 (commencing with Section 43000)
of Division 26 of the Health and Safety Code or any other certified
motor vehicle pollution control device required by any other state
law or any rule or regulation adopted pursuant to that law, or
required to be equipped with a motor vehicle pollution control device
pursuant to the National Emission Standards Act (42 U.S.C. Secs.
1857f-1 to 1857f-7, inclusive) and the standards and regulations
adopted pursuant to that federal act, unless the motor vehicle is
equipped with the required motor vehicle pollution control device
which is correctly installed and in operating condition. No person
shall disconnect, modify, or alter any such required device.
(c) No person shall install, sell, offer for sale, or advertise
any device, apparatus, or mechanism intended for use with, or as a
part of, any required motor vehicle pollution control device or
system which alters or modifies the original design or performance of
any such motor vehicle pollution control device or system.
(d) If the court finds that a person has willfully violated this
section, the court shall impose the maximum fine that may be imposed
in the case, and no part of the fine may be suspended.
(e) "Willfully," as used in this section, has the same meaning as
the meaning of that word prescribed in Section 7 of the Penal Code.
(f) No person shall operate a vehicle after notice by a traffic
officer that the vehicle is not equipped with the required certified
motor vehicle pollution control device correctly installed in
operating condition, except as may be necessary to return the vehicle
to the residence or place of business of the owner or driver or to a
garage, until the vehicle has been properly equipped with such adevice.
(g) The notice to appear issued or complaint filed for a violation
of this section shall require that the person to whom the notice to
appear is issued or against whom the complaint is filed produce proof
of correction pursuant to Section 40150 or proof of exemption
pursuant to Section 4000.1 or 4000.2.
(h) This section shall not apply to an alteration, modification,
or modifying device, apparatus, or mechanism found by resolution of
the State Air Resources Board to do either of the following:
(1) Not to reduce the effectiveness of any required motor vehicle
pollution control device.
(2) To result in emissions from any such modified or altered
vehicle which are at levels which comply with existing state or
federal standards for that model year of the vehicle being modifiedor converted.
(i) This section applies to motor vehicles of the United States or
its agencies, to the extent authorized by federal law.

 

From http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/aed/comp/jcomp/j11.html :

Question 2.
Can I remove a converter from a vehicle that is used only for "off-road" driving?
Answer 2.
No. The tampering prohibition discussed in Answer 1 applies to this situation as well. The federal tampering prohibition pertains to "motor vehicles," which are defined by section 216(2) of the Act as "any self-propelled vehicle designed for transporting persons or property on a street or highway. A light-duty vehicle manufacturer certifies en engine-chassis configuration as meeting the applicable emissions standards for motor vehicles manufactured in a given model year, and it is not legal for anyone to "de-certify" a motor vehicle for "off-road" use.

 

Doesn't that make it a "gross poluter" though ?