[DML] Re: Misleading advice...
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DML] Re: Misleading advice...

Getting back to the post that started this thread (before you all derailed it):

No one can deny that a gigantic muffler across the back of the car precludes using a socket wrench to turn the engine during valve adjustments. There are ways around that (including pushing your car all over the garage), but I think substituting dual mufflers mounted somewhere else is a better long term solution, not just for access but also to avoid heat damage to the engine and fascia.

And yes, I think proper dual exhaust is an "upgrade."

Bill Robertson

--- In dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Marc Levy <malevy_nj@...> wrote:
> I was thinking the same thing.  I have worked on a number of early 1980's cars, with carburetors AND catalytic converters.  Those cars also had a massive web of vacuum lines, and wires (O2 sensors that would adjust the carburetor), and most that I can think of also had air pumps to keep the Catalytic converters working properly.
> Once again, when you own a car you are free to do with it as you wish (even if the law says otherwise)-  but is it irresponsible to be advising others that these modifications are somehow an "upgrade". 
> --- On Sat, 2/25/12, Harold <hmcelraft@...> wrote:
> > From: Harold <hmcelraft@...>
> > Subject: [DML] Re: Advantages of Spec .01 Exhaust
> > To: dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Date: Saturday, February 25, 2012, 6:03 PM
> > "Don't let your personal biases
> > obscure facts."
> > 
> > You're kidding around! â?" Right?
> >  
> > 80's engines with carburetors had all sorts of timing
> > anomalies and usually an exhaust gas recirculation valve not
> > to mention a complex fuel metering system in the carbs. You
> > cannot possibly expect an engine developed with fuel
> > injection to meet California emission standards to even come
> > close to those standards again when you toss all the fuel
> > components away and do a Rube Goldberg carburetor install. 
> > 
> > It is interesting, a novelty for discussion and may even
> > work well enough to drive around. But don't try to claim it
> > is even close to meeting the design and emission
> > requirements at the original date or now. I doubt if it is
> > even possible if money were no object.
> > 
> > All you have done with your carburetor and exhaust is to
> > step backward technologically and dirty the air.
> > Congratulations!
> > 
> > Harold McElraft - 3354
> > 
> >


To address comments privately to the moderating team, please address:

For more info on the list, tech articles, cars for sale see www.dmcnews.com

To search the archives or view files, log in at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnewsYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Home Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN

Copyright 2006 ProjectVixen.com.  All rights reserved.

Opinions expressed in posts reflect the views of their respective authors.
DMCForum Mailing List Archive  DMCNews Mailing List Archive  DMC-UK Mailing List Archive