joolsmi16
|
| posted on 29/5/06 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
Cat for BEC
Hi all would the following link be suitable to use with a bec with the usual R1 (cat) can for sva?
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/0-45-UNIVERSAL-CATALYTIC-CONVERTER_W0QQitemZ8070403022QQcategoryZ38786QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Also do mid engine builds have different ride heights to normal "7"s as I notice radicals are lower at the back?
|
|
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 30/5/06 at 07:04 AM |
|
|
this cat has 45mm inlet and outlet pipes. My car has 2" or 50.8mm pipes. It wouldn't fit my car.
|
|
|
joolsmi16
|
| posted on 30/5/06 at 07:58 AM |
|
|
cat for bec
How about this one has larger diameter pipes.
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2-50-UNIVERSAL-CATALYTIC-CONVERTER_W0QQitemZ8069444994QQcategoryZ38786QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Read a thread that a cat for a small CC car will work better.
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 30/5/06 at 10:33 AM |
|
|
A 1 litre bike engine that will rev to 12000 will have a similar peak gas flow to a 2.0 car engine that revs to 6000. That said, the emissions test
is done at 2500 regardless of peak RPM so perhaps a small cat would be better.
A cat will work better or worse depending on how heavily loaded it is with the catalytic metals. cheap cats have less catalyst and so will convert
less polution. Fine if you have a nice cleanly combusting engine but it might not be good enough for a carburetted bike engine.
|
|
|
tks
|
| posted on 30/5/06 at 12:43 PM |
|
|
mhhh
You can twist about that!
Wich of the 2 would have a better air intake eff.
regards,
Tks
[Edited on 30/5/06 by tks]
The above comments are always meant to be from the above persons perspective.
|
|
|
