Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Okay about 2 months ago I had got the dodgy exhaust system one of the previous owners put on ripped off and redone.

2.5inch, high flow cat, 1 resonator. But I left the cannon on it because I couldn't afford anything more at the time...

Obviously the thing to too f**king loud, I didn't really care and got used to it. Clearly the cops didn't.

Today I got pulled over, yada yada, $88 fine and EPA will send you a letter in a month.

The plan now is to rip the cannon off and throw on a twin tip muffler. The question is, will this pass through EPA? (Provided it is under 90db).

Thanks in advanced.

EPA emissions? that is the letter in the mail one? they dont look for noise just the emissions the car emits defect for exhaust noise and having to go get a check to make sure its 90db is the one you should hope it is? should be easy to pass if it dosent you need another muffler or resnator in it

90db isnt very loud at all, one resonator and a twin tip muffler is wat i run and i dont think mine would be under 90.

best bet would have it tested somewhere... judt dont know were ud dtsrt

  • 3 weeks later...

"... the vehicle bearing Registration Number XXXXXX is excessively noisy and therefore likely to be exceeding the legal noise levels for the vehicle..."

"The noise test and anti-tampering inspection must be undertaken by an EPA approved Mechanic by the compliance due date which is Wednesday, 23 May 2012"

"- the engine test speed for your vehicle is 4800 rpm and the legal noise level for your vehicle is 90 dB(A)."

Again, I have a stock standard RB25DE with a K&N high flow panel filter, and a 2.5" exhaust system with a high-flow cat and 1 resonator + cannon (Will replace shitty cannon with twin tip muffler, hoping for less than 90 dB), stock extractors.

Will that pass the test? I'm just curious about the 'anti-tampering' part of it. Is a high-flow cat considered to be 'tampered' with?

Thanks.

would put money on you not passing with your current set up, my guess would be 97-98 decibels.

if you could get away with the plate that would work (again asking as they didn't see it. perhaps place behind the cat flange with 5 1cm holes drilled in it and only make the plate 1-2 mm thick)

*not sure on how many holes lol

Been there done that when I was on my Ps lol..

Best thing to do is borrow a standard exhaust from someone on the forums (heck im sure someone will lend you it for a day in exchange for a case of beers).

- Take off current loud exhaust

- Put on standard exhaust

- Go to EPA

- Pass inspection

- Put back old exhaust on and return borrowed exhaust

Your looking at about $50 for a case (depending on what your buddy prefers :P), $60 from memory to take the test and the $20 or odd you will be spending driving to pick up the exhaust and drop it back off.. Still adds up alot cheaper than paying a couple hundred and getting a whole new exhaust fabricated

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...