Special Stage Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
I am not here anymore
Joined
·
2,798 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I brought this topic up in the Rally America forum.

What is the opinion of the H class competitors on whether catalytic converters are required?

alan
 

·
R2- 50...WAIT! Make a left!
Joined
·
258 Posts
Alan, I wouldn't have any issues w/ you not running the cat...

...but I'm one of those 'long, enduring projects' guys...& I'm likely not to see you unless you bring it to the mid-west...
 

·
400 flat to crest
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Alan the rule is being defended on unsupportable grounds, it is absurd and nobody if GpH or Gp2 would care if you had a cat or an element in a cat shell.

Absurd rule to even think about requiring a cat an a car that never had one ftted.



John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

janvanvurpa (at) f4 (dot) ca

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat!
Vive Le Groupe F!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
It has nothing to do with the class, but the age of the vehicle and what was fitted as OE at the time in the US.

When were cats required in the US - 74?

I've never had any problems with my car going through tech with no cat.

The addition of 10.1 H (c) in the 2005 rules covers it.
 

·
400 flat to crest
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
>It has nothing to do with the class, but the age of the
>vehicle and what was fitted as OE at the time in the US.
Only California model cars were required to have cats in 1980 although some importers, SAAB for example sold the same spec in all western states.
Cars were require to me a NOX requirement, and the solution had been to lower compression ratio since NOX goes up as a function of combustion chamber tempurature, and that goes up with compression ratio.
AS O2 sensors became available, compression ratios started to climb because the cat Catalyses the NOX, so the comp could be raised while meeting the NOX level.
All of it stupid as the cat will only work within a very narrow range of CO2/CO and HC
>
>When were cats required in the US - 74?

No
>
>I've never had any problems with my car going through tech
>with no cat.
>
>The addition of 10.1 H (c) in the 2005 rules covers it.





John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

janvanvurpa (at) f4 (dot) ca

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat!
Vive Le Groupe F!
 

·
I am not here anymore
Joined
·
2,798 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
>It has nothing to do with the class, but the age of the
>vehicle and what was fitted as OE at the time in the US.
>
>When were cats required in the US - 74?
>
>I've never had any problems with my car going through tech
>with no cat.
>
>The addition of 10.1 H (c) in the 2005 rules covers it.

The thing is that I don't think cats were every explicitly required. It is just that the emissions limits kept getting raised to the point that some device on the exhaust was necessary. I think cats became ubiquitous (as opposed to that ceramic thing that BMW used) and that brought the price down and that made cats more ubiquitous.

As I noted in the RA thread, the Honda CVCC, through head design, was able to get emissions down below the limits without a cat until something like 1982.

The new rally car that I am talking about buying/builting (but probably never will because some other bright shiny object will attract my attention before I can) is a 1979-1980 Talbot Sunbeam Lotus. It was never sold with a cat in any market. However, none of the current cat exemption rules cover it.

BTW, John, check out the new H class rules. H class is no longer associated with G2 or G5. It is strictly a competitor enforced class. By the rules, the scrutineers can only check for safety equipment, not class requirements. (Since the cat requirement is in Article 10, the class rules, and not Article 6, the scrutineering requirements, I think that means that only a fellow H class competitor can give one grief over not having a cat.)

H class is also now explicitly for cars 25 years and older. I am a little worried about H class once the fast Quattros and Group B cars meet into the age requirement.

alan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
244 Posts
>
>I brought this topic up in the Rally America forum.
>
>What is the opinion of the H class competitors on whether
>catalytic converters are required?
>
>alan
>
>


We had this problem at Maine Summer Rally in 2003. We run a 1976 Saab 99 2 door non turbo 8v in G2. At tech they almost didnt pass us because we didnt have a cat. We pointed out that the 1976 Saab 99's never came with cats, neither did any model prior to 76. The 77,78,79's also didnt have cats. In 78 they were an option on the turbos, and they might have been required in california. However, the guy at tech says "OOOOHHH NO, I know that cats have been required in the USA since 1974" Unfortunately the emmisions sticker on the car is long gone, but after 20 minutes of debate he let us go and told us to have a cat at the next event...or proof that we didnt need one. I believe that in 1974 the EPA said that car companies would have to start equipping their cars with cats...however there was a grace period. Much like OBDII. The govt said in 1994 that all cars would have to have it by 1996. thats why you dont find many 94 and 95 equipped cars with obdII. in any event I figure that if the car wasnt equipped with a cat from the factory you shouldnt have to run one.

Seth S
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
>>

>We had this problem at Maine Summer Rally in 2003. We run a
>1976 Saab 99 2 door non turbo 8v in G2. At tech they almost
>didnt pass us because we didnt have a cat. We pointed out
>that the 1976 Saab 99's never came with cats, neither did any
>model prior to 76. The 77,78,79's also didnt have cats. In 78
>they were an option on the turbos, and they might have been
>required in california. However, the guy at tech says
>"OOOOHHH NO, I know that cats have been required in the USA
>since 1974" Unfortunately the emmisions sticker on the car is
>long gone, but after 20 minutes of debate he let us go and
>told us to have a cat at the next event...or proof that we
>didnt need one. I believe that in 1974 the EPA said that car

A shop manual or parts catalog would solve this one. Alan's problem is pretty unique (non-American car).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
244 Posts
>>>
>
>>We had this problem at Maine Summer Rally in 2003. We run a
>>1976 Saab 99 2 door non turbo 8v in G2. At tech they almost
>>didnt pass us because we didnt have a cat. We pointed out
>>that the 1976 Saab 99's never came with cats, neither did
>any
>>model prior to 76. The 77,78,79's also didnt have cats. In
>78
>>they were an option on the turbos, and they might have been
>>required in california. However, the guy at tech says
>>"OOOOHHH NO, I know that cats have been required in the USA
>>since 1974" Unfortunately the emmisions sticker on the car
>is
>>long gone, but after 20 minutes of debate he let us go and
>>told us to have a cat at the next event...or proof that we
>>didnt need one. I believe that in 1974 the EPA said that
>car
>
>A shop manual or parts catalog would solve this one. Alan's
>problem is pretty unique (non-American car).

We had the factory shop manual from that year and it said nothing about the car being equipped with a cat. These guys wanted written proof from someone.

Seth S
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
4,075 Posts
>>
>>A shop manual or parts catalog would solve this one. Alan's
>>problem is pretty unique (non-American car).
>
>We had the factory shop manual from that year and it said
>nothing about the car being equipped with a cat. These guys
>wanted written proof from someone.
>
>Seth S
>
>
I'll give a letter in writing about that since I owned a Saab or 3 of that vintage.:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
Cats weren't required on Porsche 911's in the US until 1980 - they first showed up on the '80 911SC - this is well documented. The 1974 Capri did not have a cat. The notion that all US cars had to have cats since 1974 is wrong.
 

·
400 flat to crest
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
The catalytic converter requirement is all related to NOX, which is the central kernal that the visual element of smog builds upon.
Nitrous Oxide emmisions go up with combustion chamber tempurature, which goes up as a function of compression ratio.
The inital rules where easy enough in 1971: everybody started by lowering compression ratios to around 8:1 and retarding timing.
Most cars were doing that and of course the motors sucked big time.
The Europeans sold here all started with fuel injection, first with VW Variant, or Squareback, and with Volvos 140 "E" series and Saab with the 99E around '71.
They all first did the Injection (all used Bosch D Jetronic all electric Map sensing system) on California or West Coast (for logistical reasons) cars first.

As the rules ratcheted up as the 70s went, US manufactured cars continued with leaky drooling crappy carbs and were compelled at some point to start using the then dreaded junk crap "2 way bed (or pellet) catalyst" which were toal junk and strangled performance and clogged so bad that you had to floor the cars to go at all (thereby adding tons of pollutants to the air).

They were not REQUIRED TO HAVE CATALYSTS, they were required to meet the NOX emmisions requirement.

As the 70s continued the NOX levels were reduced and California, with the extra-legal CARB rules was a step or so ahead so they got cats on injected SAABs anyway by 1979, and 2-3 years later in the "49 States version". It was the deveoplment of the Bosch Lambda Sond 02 sensor which allowed the use of the now normal "3 way cats".
I have no idea when US and Japanses cars got three way cats since they only work in a very narrow range of CO/CO2/NOX.

Perhaps sanity might prevail at some point and the "play to the galleries" rule of the cat on cars never equipped or modded to the point the cat won't function might be turned back over to the Feds and the States, rather than sanction bodies taking the onerous duty onto themselves.




John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

janvanvurpa (at) f4 (dot) ca

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat!
Vive Le Groupe F!
 

·
Trogdor
Joined
·
915 Posts
Lots of cars did not have cats after 1975 (the first year they were used - NOT 1974).

Lots of VW Rabbits up to '80 or so, any Mazda rotaries '80 and earlier, the aforementioned Hondas, the SAABs. Heck, many Chryslers from that era didn't have one.

I would think that a parts diagram of the exhaust system *should* be sufficient, if it is obvious that there is no catalyst in the system. Not all cars got fancy stickers that said "NON CATALYST", and the converter's use was not so widespread for imported makes that they would go out of their way to specifically write down "We do not use catalytic converters in our cars."

Hmm. Would factory documentation allowing the use of leaded fuel be proof-by-inference? Leaded fuel kills converters, and cars with converters are (have always been) required to have special filler necks that do not accept leaded fuel nozzles. No manufacturer would ever have permitted leaded fuel to be used in a car equipped with a converter.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top