Jump to content
SAU Community

MAGIC Cat vs NEW CATCO Cat

BATMBL

By BATMBL,
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Roy Grand Master

Roy

Posted
Posted
That facts page: I posted a question regarding whether or not his cats will pass the emissions test if put on a brand new car. Hasn't replied yet although he has replied to his other thread.

I dont think any cat guarantees a car will pass emissions. If it were that easy then cars from the factyory would be tuned with lots more power and let the cat sort out the emissions.

As i understand it, the condition of your engine, and its tune play as big a part as to whether or not you run a cat

Andi Experienced

Andi

Posted
Posted
I dont think any cat guarantees a car will pass emissions. If it were that easy then cars from the factyory would be tuned with lots more power and let the cat sort out the emissions.

As i understand it, the condition of your engine, and its tune play as big a part as to whether or not you run a cat

Yes I understand this, which is why I asked in regards to a BRAND NEW car. You'd think that car manufactures would make sure the cars they are selling brand new would comply with emission standards. Thus if the magic cat was truly up to emissions standards then when fitted on a new car it shoudln't have a problem passing right?

noise Mentor

noise

Posted
Posted
Must... not... feed... the... troll.....

You have evidence its just a straight through pipe?  Post it up.  Or is this just going to be like your tirade against import agents?

The evidence is in the HUGE nothing from magic cats, they have not said once in all their ramblings that their cats would pass an australian EPA test.

No one will buy magic cats after its confirmed, its in their interests to show proof of their Cats beting Cats and not straight through pipes.

I love you :D

It would be an identical situation to sell un-complianced cars directly from Japan, telling people that they comply to Japanese laws so are ok for Australian roads. That way you sell them cheaper then everyone else for the same performance.

err lol?

lwells Grand Master

lwells

Posted
Posted
The evidence is in the HUGE nothing from magic cats, they have not said once in all their ramblings that their cats would pass an australian EPA test.  

No one will buy magic cats after its confirmed, its in their interests to show proof of their Cats beting Cats and not straight through pipes.

I love you :D

So in otherwords you have absolutely no evidence one way or other, yet can safetly say all Magic cat owners have been ripped off.

As someonestolecc said, lets wait for the results.

noise Mentor

noise

Posted
Posted
So in otherwords you have absolutely no evidence one way or other, yet can safetly say all Magic cat owners have been ripped off.

As someonestolecc said, lets wait for the results.

Have you read the post from magic cats on nissan forums??

read it then read the edited in last part to my last post.

lwells Grand Master

lwells

Posted
Posted
Have you read the post from magic cats on nissan forums??

read it then read the edited in last part to my last post.

You can try and weasel your way out all you like: fact is you have no evidence for the claims you made.

I'll repost exactly what you said:

How many people have bought cats that are just a fancy straight through pipe?

You got ripped off guys

You quite clearly state that the Magic cat equates to a "fancy straight through pipe", that is, that it does nothing. You can't provide any evidence because you don't have any.

Yes, I have read a number of the posts by Magic Performance on Nissan Silva. Let me quote what they said:

Mark [the technical director] from the EPA rang us back this morning. He confirmed that neither the RTA nor EPA authorises the use of any type or brand of catalytic converter.

It is up to the purchaser and fitter to ensure that the catalytic converter fitted to the car is suitable for the job and that the vehicle will pass an EPA test if required.

This situation is in no way similar to that which you described relating to importing cars.

That there is no definitive document showing compliance with Australian standards is not proof that it does not comply with the standards. . A lack of evidence is not evidence of anything but.... a lack of evidence. Funnily enough, SK is trying to fill this void rather than just making wild claims with no evidence.

browny Proficient

browny

Posted
Posted
The evidence is in the HUGE nothing from magic cats, they have not said once in all their ramblings that their cats would pass an australian EPA test.

Actually I don't know how you could ever sell a generic aftermarket part and guarantee it would meet any test, unless it was over engineered to buggery (=expensive).

If I was selling generic aftermarket parts I certainly wouldn't guarantee any performance aspects of the product in a specific application, especially if it was targetted at modified performance cars which are each going be unique.

Guaranteeing replacement OEM parts is different, because you are designing the product to meet a known application/specification. As long as you are confident the product meets or exceeds the OEM spec then you can make the guarantee.

So I would ask if Magic are selling factory replacement parts or generic parts. If they are selling generic parts I think there's buckleys of them ever guaranteeing anything.

Also, although I like the idea of testing the magic and Catco products side by side, I think we'll need to be very careful interpreting the results. Effectively all we are going to be able to gauge is the relative performance of each product on the test car. I think it would be wrong to try and extrapolate these results to mean that any other car will pass or fail an EPA test. I'd also like to see any tests baselined against a totally stock car with a new OEM cat.

noise Mentor

noise

Posted
Posted

BTW Guys I have a new type of CAT for sale.

Its $200 and has the best flow on the market.

I know it looks like a straight through pipe. but really its a CAT, *points to the writing on the side thats proves it* They were made to air emissions standards in Africa, and since the RTA doesnt have a list of approved CATs, they cant do anything without emmisions test.

pm your interest.

shif_tea Grand Master

shif_tea

Posted
Posted

BTW guys, i've got a skyline for sale that some dude down the street said looks like a honda. I believe him straight away without any verification so i'll sell it to someone cheap.

Some people will believe anything without any proof if its the more interesting way to go.

Shaun Mentor

Shaun

Posted
Posted
Actually I don't know how you could ever sell a generic aftermarket part and guarantee it would meet any test, unless it was over engineered to buggery (=expensive).

If I was selling generic aftermarket parts I certainly wouldn't guarantee any performance aspects of the product in a specific application, especially if it was targetted at modified performance cars which are each going be unique.

Guaranteeing replacement OEM parts is different, because you are designing the product to meet a known application/specification. As long as you are confident the product meets or exceeds the OEM spec then you can make the guarantee.

So I would ask if Magic are selling factory replacement parts or generic parts. If they are selling generic parts I think there's buckleys of them ever guaranteeing anything.

Also, although I like the idea of testing the magic and Catco products side by side, I think we'll need to be very careful interpreting the results. Effectively all we are going to be able to gauge is the relative performance of each product on the test car. I think it would be wrong to try and extrapolate these results to mean that any other car will pass or fail an EPA test. I'd also like to see any tests baselined against a totally stock car with a new OEM cat.

Browny, i think youre spot on there mate. If i were selling performance parts i wouldnt make a statement like that either. There are soooo many variables.

Shaun Mentor

Shaun

Posted
Posted
BTW Guys I have a new type of CAT for sale.

Its $200 and has the best flow on the market.  

I know it looks like a straight through pipe. but really its a CAT, *points to the writing on the side thats proves it* They were made to air emissions standards in Africa, and since the RTA doesnt have a list of approved CATs, they cant do anything without emmisions test.

pm your interest.

Who is this idiot. Youre making a fool of yourself mate! Clearly not very intelligent.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • GTSBoy
      DeAgostini 1/8 scale BNR32 Nissan Skyline GT-R Nismo

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      That's hilariously putrid!
    • GTSBoy
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...