View Single Post
Old 02-09-2016, 09:53 PM   #20
davepl
Registered User
 
davepl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 6,332
Re: Mufflers VS Catalytic converters

Quote:
Originally Posted by 96blazr View Post
Seriously!!?? WTF kinda question is this?? It's a1967, THEY DIDN'T HAVE CATS, NEVER HAD CATS, NEVER USED CATS!! Why would you even think about putting Cats on any vehicle from 1967? Just run your Mufflers, whichever you choose, and be done with it.
I'll answer that, because I contemplated it.

They never had stereo radios either, but people add those.

Old cars smell. They just do. My clothes smell like gas, my hair smells like gas, and my truck doesn't run rich. It's simply because they're inefficient and a lot of unburned fuel comes out at idle.

I don't care about the emissions on a "pleasure" vehicle like this, it's not about that. Just the smell.

You may not care. But some wives and girlfriends do.

My concern was that they're -so- much worse than modern engines (primarily the combustion chamber and cam) that there would be too much extra fuel to burn. My '75 Monte Carlo had cats and a carb, so they did build them that way. And it wasn't a computer-controlled Q-jet either, just your basic 2bbl.
__________________
1970 GMC Sierra Grande Custom Camper - Built, not Bought
1969 Pontiac 2+2 427/390 4-speed Coupe
1969 Pontiac 2+2 427/390 4-speed Convertible
davepl is offline   Reply With Quote