..
..
(the following was posted in another thread as a simple reply,
I felt it needed it's own thread)
...
...
<inline>
..
..
======
======
From: 71swinger400 - view profile
Date: Tues, Feb 28 2006 6:23 pm



I will offer this, I lived in a state where emission tests were
performed annually.
During that time I had the opportunity to have a
vehicle tested with and without the converter in place. On that
particular vehicle emission levels were virtually the same with and
without.

Additionally, My suggestion is only a temporary means to
determine if that is the problem.

Further, a faulty (non-functioning)
converter is not doing mother earth any favors either. The Big 3 have
plenty of other options instead of using a part that is a definite
failure item.

No matter what every converter made will fail because
they are designed that way.

I get steamed that we the public don't see
anything wrong with purchasing something that could be better

but
in order to keep selling cars they are made to only last a certain
length
of time.

I not going to go on I think you get the drift. Oh if or when
the super volcano known as Yellowstone national park blows you will
have a lot more than emissions to worry about.
========
========
Swinger,
well....you should have made a point of telling the OP in the
other thread that it SHOULD be used as a test, if that's what
you intended to convey.
..
no harm, no foul
that's what discussions bring out.
..
any whoooo......
I think you've hit on a good topic for discussion. So let's start
a new war.
..
..
..
I agree with you on the passing of emmisions without a convertor.
I believe any mechanically sound vehical of yester-year can still be
made to pass emmisions without a convertor.