autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: STS Rules Question

To: <knuckledragger@kcweb.net>
Subject: Re: STS Rules Question
From: "Kevin Stevens" <Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 00:56:50 -0800 (PST)
> ==================================
> Well, technically, maybe.
>
> Consider this.  All OE catalytic converters and related emissions
> equipment (EGR parts, smog pumps, etc.) on cars produced in the last
> 10-12 years (can't say for sure about cars older than 1990) have a
> "hidden", mandatory 8/80 warranty from the manufacturer as required by
> the Federal Government. What that means is that even though your car
> only came with a 3/36 powertrain warranty the manufacturer must honor
> warranty claims on emissions equipment for the 8/80 time period.  They
> sure don't like to make a big deal about this though and sure don't go
> to great lengths to explain it to the customer.

My Chevy dealer initially resisted replacing my '94 Camaro's blown-out cat
because it still (barely) passed smog.

> It is also technically illegal to replace a properly functioning
> catalytic converter prior to that 80K mile mark and I can't say for sure
> about one with more than 80K miles on it.
>  But, when one must replace a
> "malfunctioning" converter, one is allowed by the Solo2 rules to use an
> equivalent aftermarket part to the OE part.  This is done to save costs
> to the competitor and is a good rule.

Only after 5yr/50K miles, prior to that it must be OEM per 13.10.E (2002
rules).

> Now, my question is, exactly where is the line between an OE-type
> converter and a "high performance" converter?  Please find me the exact
> flow specs for an OE-equivalent converter for my Car X.  I will assume
> there is, somewhere, a range of flow specs that my car's converter needs
> to adhere to.  And how far beyond those specs, assuming you can actually
> find them, can a converter go before it gets called "high performance"?

13.10.E says "same size", and it says per section 13 "should not be
construed as an allowance to replace components with those *which could be
considered* a 'higher performance' alternative" (emphasis mine).

> Can you see where I'm going with this?  "Sure, I replaced my converter
> with a 'high performance' (making the little quotation marks in the air
> with my fingers) Brand Y catalytic converter, Mister Protest Filing Man.
>  Now you just have to prove that my part is illegal."

If it isn't the same size, or advertises itself as a "high-flow" or
"high-performance" cat, or has had holes drilled in it; it's likely to be
a short protest proceeding.

> I honestly don't know a lot about converters so that is partially my
> motivation for asking.  Hell, for all I know there might actually be a
> book full of flow charts for OE converters out there somewhere.  And
> this book might actually spell out the proper procedure for determining
> a converter's flow capabilities complete with spelling out the
> parameters for the flow testing equipment and the methods for
> calibrating said equipment.  I kind of doubt it though.

It's not required to demonstrate the replacement has greater flow.  It's
simply required to demonstrate that it could be considered a 'higher
performance' alternative.  Even if the flow was less, it could be so
considered; back-pressure is not always a bad thing.

KeS

///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or try
///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
///  Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>