Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

    Originally posted by Max
    I would agree with all those proposals except for limiting AWD STU cars to a 9" wheel. I don't think running wider wheels when limited to a 245 tire is a huge advantage, but it does help me not to run spacers which just make me nervous, since I am limited on the size of extended studs I can fit on the front of an STI. I run 10" on the front of my STI, mainly because that's the only size with the offset I want.

    It does upset me to read the amount of posts on this site accusing all the turbo cars of cheating. I think most of us who compete at a National level go to very great lengths to make sure our cars are legal.

    Flame away

    -Max Hayter
    #31 STU
    Welcome aboard Max! You have to take our comments with a grain of salt. We've all known each other 15+ years I think. Plus Paul gives STI owners a bad name. The Mad Mapper. Mr. "Oops, I forgot to change it back!" he says at the end of a weekend.

    I wish I had time to take these tortured views on the rules. It is almost August people, who cares?! The MAF thing screwed BMWs, but being a BMW owner, it was maybe FIVE horsepower. Who cares? Width of wheels, who cares? A/C staying? That's a good one IMO. Boost can't be totally regulated so why bother?
    Brian Hanchey
    AST Suspension - USA

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

      Originally posted by hancheyb
      Plus Paul gives STI owners a bad name.
      No argument there!!

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

        Originally posted by Fair!
        They just made 90% of the ST entrants illegal with the catalyst clarification alone!
        There has been no catalyst clarification. STS/STS2 currently run OE or equivalent. STX/STU have an additional allowance for catalytic converters that specifically allows replacing multiples with one. You shouldn't have an OBD-II code for catalyst inefficiency, and you shouldn't have to otherwise defeat it.

        Originally posted by Fair!
        They just removed one of the biggest and most common modifications to most cars, and cut everyone off at the knees. Big difference. This is over-reaching.
        I don't see it. What is your interpretation? Who has to do what, now? How does it affect you? Those are honest questions.

        Originally posted by Fair!
        And there is STILL NO WAY POSSIBLE to police a lot of the things that really matter, like boost compliance or ECM programming parameters, so they are pissing straight into the wind with those pipe dreams. Again. They are clamping down on the visual mods to the extreme, but still have no way of checking "what matters" on some cars.
        Your solution is to open up boost, so what's the difference? I agree that it's an issue, but the sky is not falling.

        Originally posted by Fair!
        Not allowing adequate fender rolling can and does hurt the BMWs - we can't fit a 275mm tire, no way, and a 265 is difficult (it will rub at full droop). I will be protested at Nationals for something lame like fog light delete covers or an undefined "fender contour" and I will probably lose, due to the weenies on the SEB and their interpretation of the rules. WEENIES!!!
        Is there a 275 you'd rather run? I was under the impression that the 265 was the best option and that it would fit. IMHO, it's not worth allowing flared fenders just to suit one car. If it can be done legally, I don't think you'll have a problem if your implementation isn't perfect. Protests aren't very common. In all the events I've attended, I was protested once at a Divisional and have only had a protest in my class once (2002 Pro Finale). Weenie protests are even less common.

        Originally posted by Fair!
        And what would you know about cheap STS builds??? You have more $$ in your shocks than most of the STS guys have in their cars...
        You need to lower your prices. It's still much cheaper than most competitive Solo cars.

        Brian

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

          Originally posted by bfitz
          There has been no catalyst clarification. STS/STS2 currently run OE or equivalent. STX/STU have an additional allowance for catalytic converters that specifically allows replacing multiples with one. You shouldn't have an OBD-II code for catalyst inefficiency, and you shouldn't have to otherwise defeat it.
          Brian - removing 3 cats down to 1 (as per the rules) generates an OBD-II code. Since the clarification now prevents you from having a CEL, or indeed masking the CEL, I would suggest that at least 50% of all STX/STU cars are now illegal. There is no fix other than putting the OEM exhaust systems back on. Is that what you wanted?

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

            No, that was not intended. Where exactly are the cats and 02 sensors? What prevents an aftermarket system from complying with OBD-II tests? Can it be fixed by adding a second cat?

            Brian

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

              Originally posted by bfitz
              No, that was not intended. Where exactly are the cats and 02 sensors? What prevents an aftermarket system from complying with OBD-II tests? Can it be fixed by adding a second cat?

              Brian
              I'll use the Subaru WRX as an example. It comes with 3 cats, one in the uppipe and two in the downpipe/midpipe section. All competitive STX Subarus remove the uppipe (as does everyone who buys a WRX) since it hinders spool up time and has a nasty habit of disintegrating and sending shards of cat into the turbo. The two cats in the downpipe/midpipe are replaced with one high-flo cat.

              Removing the uppipe causes a CEL in all cases. This has traditionally been turned off by the use of a resistor or engine management. Since those last two have now been "clarified", no STX Subaru is now legal unless they put their OEM uppipe back in. Replacing the downpipe/midpipe cats may or may not lead to a CEL depending on brand of exhaust.

              Now, for other cars in STX/STU, their particular choice of aftermarket downpipe may cause a CEL or it may not. For those that do, they need to find a new exhaust system two months before Nationals, maybe get retuned to get rid of CEL deletes and hope that a CEL does not appear.

              This clarification will kill the STX/STU class, not help it.
              Last edited by Max; 07-25-2007, 12:34 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

                For the WRX, where are the O2 sensors in relation to the cats?

                Here's a guess that is surely wrong, but please correct it for me.

                Motor --> Cat1 --> Turbo --> O2 --> Cat2 --> O2 --> Cat3

                Brian

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

                  I believe it is more like this, although I don't remember exactly if the last O2 is after Cat3 or before....

                  Motor---> Cat1--->O2---->Turbo--->Cat2--->O2---->Cat3

                  The first O2 is actually a EGT (Exhaust Gas Temp.) sensor. Remove Cat1, and it throws a PO420 CEL (Exhaust Gas Temp out of range).

                  For 2006+, Subaru actually removed this cat.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

                    PO420 = Catalyst System Efficiency Below Threshold


                    http://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_cod...old-bank-1.php
                    '11 Mustang GT / '95 Frankenpreza

                    "A turbo: exhaust gasses go into the turbocharger and spin it, witchcraft happens and you go faster."
                    - Dr. Clarkson

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

                      My diagram is correct... see here for a prettier pic.

                      http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...hreadid=447182

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

                        From reading that, it appears that the STI should be fine as long as the single cat is prior to the last O2 sensor. Do some exhausts put it after the last O2 sensor? Or, why do some cause CEL's and others don't?

                        For the WRX, it appears that the EGT is directly checking functionality of the up-pipe cat. That's a tough one, but if that's the case, I think there should be a cat there. Is it not possible to fit some sort of high-flow cat there? I've never seen one, so excuse my ignorance.

                        Brian

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

                          Originally posted by bfitz
                          From reading that, it appears that the STI should be fine as long as the single cat is prior to the last O2 sensor. Do some exhausts put it after the last O2 sensor? Or, why do some cause CEL's and others don't?

                          For the WRX, it appears that the EGT is directly checking functionality of the up-pipe cat. That's a tough one, but if that's the case, I think there should be a cat there. Is it not possible to fit some sort of high-flow cat there? I've never seen one, so excuse my ignorance.

                          Brian
                          My STI appears to be fine, so that's good. My exhaust has the cat before the O2 (only one on an STI).

                          There are no aftermarket high-flo uppipe cats. It is fairly small (slightly curved) pipe that the aftermarket as had a lot of trouble getting it to fit right (not leak). Simply cutting the ends off and welding in a high-flo is probably not going to work since it will not seal correctly since the overall dimiensions must remain exact.

                          I'm sure one could be manufactured, but given the tiny market, who would sink money into that venture?!! The aftermarket buying public don't want any cat in there.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

                            That is an interesting issue for WRX owners. That sucks.

                            The M3's stock cats were going bad when I owned it. It would throw an inefficiency code every few 100s of miles and I would just reset it. I reset it and got it inspected no problem. So does that make it legal? It passed and could potentially have been reset right before an event and stayed "legal" for a few weeks.
                            Brian Hanchey
                            AST Suspension - USA

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

                              Originally posted by hancheyb
                              The M3's stock cats were going bad when I owned it. It would throw an inefficiency code every few 100s of miles and I would just reset it. I reset it and got it inspected no problem. So does that make it legal? It passed and could potentially have been reset right before an event and stayed "legal" for a few weeks.
                              According to Doug Gill, your cats must be a in a "ready" status. After a reset (or your battery goes flat), it takes a few days of driving around to get into a ready status.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Letter Campaign to SEB, BOD against ST Take Backs!

                                Originally posted by Max
                                According to Doug Gill, your cats must be a in a "ready" status. After a reset (or your battery goes flat), it takes a few days of driving around to get into a ready status.
                                Good point, not just for SCCA, but in general. Friend had just reset his battery and he failed emissions because his cats were not in a ready state (ie. don't do it to clear your CEL, etc and think you can pass a TX State Emissions Test, even if you are OBD-II - your cats won't send the Ready signal)

                                Off Topic Tidbit:
                                Also, it's no state law to have working windows - so if you have non-legal tint, you can roll down your window and pull the fuse - and say, nope, my windows don't work. Easier done on a car where the windows go all the way down (2 doors) than most 4 doors. On my Honda, I pulled the manual windows handles off so they couldn't roll them up and they didn't try rolling them up.
                                Toth: "I would sue Duck, but I don't know what I would do with 3 pennies and a hoopty GTO."
                                Me: "I never finish anyth..."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X