http://www.easterncatalytic.com/
approved in 48 countries
as sold by racepages.com
note in the above regs it applies to professional installers,nothing prevents you from installing cats,and most custom muffler shops will install the cats.
diy on benzworld.org w210 diy section.
ohlord
call them for obd2 california cats if you happen to live there.
and for you performance addicts
http://www.easterncatalytic.com/prod...erformance.php

 

Hi Bluesilver,

This thread has suddenly become VERY interesting.

Your reference document is indeed very interesting but somehow something doesn't appear quite right and maybe any lawers on the site might like to expamd.

Firstly, the notion that catalysts must last for 8 years (required by federal lawas in your article) is in conflict with (car or catalyst) manufacturers warranties currently in place, at least in the UK.

If indeed there is a requirement on the cat or car manufacturer for the cat (or should I say emmissions system) to last 8 years X miles then any failed component should be replaced by the original supplier. If so then I and other individuals who have had to "replace" a catalyst would be quite happy because the parts would have been replaced for "free" under the terms of whatever warranty exists to cover the legal requirement.

Just as an example my 00 R170 M112 required a new cat at less than 80k miles and 8 years and MBUK flatly refused IN WRITING (after extensive correspondence) to change the system. In fact at the time my vehicle was purchased the warranty was 1 year (YES one year+ limited mileage) with a potential extension into year two under the terms of goodwill. This has subsequently been increased to 3 years.
MB specifically make the point that they have no liability outside the terms of the warranty.

The exhaust and emmissions system on the UK R170 M112 is in fact the same spec as the USA and specifically Californian spec vehicles. i.e. the most stringent in the world. This situation presumably arises as a consequence of reducing the potential number of engine varieties required on a low volume model so there is an implied expectation that the exhaust system should last 8 years X miles.

.................

Next. IMHO it is not realistic to expect that the performance of a cat system will be as effective at 80k miles as it was when new, so it implies that there must be different permitted levels for in service vehicles vs new vehicles. This is certainly the case in the UK and the In Service level can easily be achieved without the secondary cat (on a full Californian spec vehicle).

My w220 M112 only has Euro emmissions equipment (no secondary O2 sensor) yet delivers similar HC, NOX levels to the R170 with the secondary cat removed which also failed at similar mileage/age and in the same way (Rattle)

So surely the important fact is that systems must meet a STANDARD once in service and your article does not refer to what these levels are. I wonder why there is no cross reference?

I fully agree that if a car doesn't the required emmissions STANDARD then EPA / Clean Air Act have reason to remove the vehicle from the road.

This raises a further concern. Why is it necessary for every vehicle to be submitted to an ANNUAL smog/emmission test if indeed the manufacturer has warranted that the system will be good for 8 years? Surely only a sampling regime would be required. In the UK it covers ALL vehicle once 3 years old.

.................

Finally, if indeed the manufacturer does have to warrant the system for 8 years why do OE replacement parts have such a "rip off" price set against them and surely a class act or similiar would have by now been brought against at least MB, if not all manufacturers.. Something isn't adding up here.

..................

So do the manufacturers just have to warrant that the catalyst has the CAPABILITY to last 8 years but that the system can fail in a multiplicity of MECHANICAL (vs CHEMICAL) ways that these mechanical failures do not have to be warranted.
MB have put in writing that they do not warrant against sudden cat chilling caused by water spray (heavy water on the highway) and of course exclude wading etc. Grounding or rear end (;ight) accident damage also negates warranty and of course these sort of exclusions make it impossible to determine that a rattling cat was caused by a design deficiency vs a "customer" induced scenario. water spray on the motorway voids the warranty...IN WRITING..I ask you.

...............

I'll be interested in any further posts on this matter but i the mean time it would appear that remioving or replacing any cat is not a good idea even if the car still meets whatever test requirements exist.

Stuart.

 

Hi Bluesilver.

So you are a lawyer!

Some installations require more than one cat and/or O2 sensor to control the exhaust emmission within the pertaining standard.

My w220 M112 has two cats but only one O2 sensor per bank with no secondary air injection. Euro emmission spec.
My R170 M112 has two cats and two O2 sensors per bank plus secondary air injection. Californian emmissions spec.

Both vehicles of course meet Euro spec and the Californian spec engine is fitted in the low volume R170 V6 to reduce engine variant complexity issues i manufacturing.

I can assure you that removing the brick from the second cat has not caused any problem with the O2 sensor since the O2 semsors are fitted up stream and down stream of the upstream (exhaust manifold precat) Cat 1. The exhaust gas coming out of Cat2 is not sampled except during a roadside/annual sniff test.

A relationship does exist between the O2 level on sensor 1 vs sensor 2 BUT I do not believe it to be a simple 12% reduction. I actually believe it to be a "Plausibility" check. i.e. sensor 2 can't have a reading Higher than sensor 1 and of course the obverse of this.

Just for interest it is impossible to determine from my installation that the brick has been removed. The trilobe cannister is Mig welded and the can was opened along this weld. After the operation the Mig welding was replaced and it would need a forensic examination to determine the "dual" welding process.

I have some phots of how and why cats fail due to Rattle which i will share if you PM me and give me your real email. Incidentally I still can't attach photos to this site despite resizing etc. Since the brick begins to disintegrate due to bouncing around I have one example which would have completely broken up and disappeared down the exhaust tailpipe which is what gave me the idea.

I suspect the "authorities" are trying to clamp down on kids who basically just remove the whole cat system (and possible replace it just for the annual test) BUT my position is that the car MEETS the required "IN Service" emmissions standard and i will never ever have to worry about rattling cats again!

We should not forget that the cats are there to clean up the exhaust when the engine management system has been unable to control matters adequately. Engine control is now so good that the cats are only really required during warm up and extreme TRANSIENT conditions.

Stuart.

 

Stu, stateside for the first few years in most states there is no smog test on new cars less then a few years old,after that if the car fails the test for cats,or the cats fail within the 8 year and under 80000 mile limit the dealer is required to replace the failed cat free of charge to whomever owns the car.They will test and only r/r the failed cat not all cats on the car.
ohlord

 

Ohlord.

For clarity/understanding.

You are saying that in the USA cars older than X years need to be smog tested annually (i.e. as in UK/Europe where X is 3 years) and if ANYTHING causes the vehicle to FAIL the smog test the manufacturer has to pay for Parts and Labour (up to 80k miles/8 years). Surely this isn't realistic!

So what happens when the catalyst rattles yet still meets the smog test?

Since I have demonstrated that having NO brick in the secondary cat still meets at least the Euro emmission In Service standard (and I suspect the USA standard with the possible exception of California) it looks like manufacturers are able to charge CUSTOMERS should a problem be experienced with cat or exhaust system necessitating its change.

If the cat is poisioned by bad fuel or silicon contamination etc who pays?

Since the cat will no longer work as it is required to under your rules the manufacturer has to pay. Surely this isn't correct.

Recently bad fuel got into circulation in the UK and tens of thousands of cars suffered from damaged cats and O2 sensors. The supermarkets seem to have ended paying the bill (after lots of hassle for the customer) since the bad fuel was distributed by the supermarkets. however if the contamination had been at a specific garage etc then the chances of having got that garage to payup would have been much more difficult. the difficulty would have been proving that they were at fault and not the car/cat etc.

If your assertion is correct (I don't doubt that it is) and assuming that only a low percentage of cars will remain on the road after 8 years, I wouldn't have though demand for after market cats was very high, if any.

Still don't really understand the mechanics of all of this.

Stuart.

 

Snanceki, ohlord,
Good Morning.

In the US, some states test every year after the third year, and can become exempt later if it becomes a collector's item or antique 10-25 years.The only circumstance that I am aware of in the US, where the mfr is NOT responsible for theCAT before 80K is if it is damaged delerately, or in an auto accident. Many people where I live have a car with over 80k miles, and they are expected to keep the vehicle compliant. I imagine many choose the aftermarket CATSfor a cheaper price when the car is older. I believe the CAT is evaluatedprimarily on the ability to convert oxides. I don't know if they are replaced under warranty for rattling, but I'm sure it could be argued.

The question no one asked is, "where does mccbushell live?" The two sections I posted apply to the US only. The first is a US FederalLaw, and the second one regarding repair is a US EPA regulation. The severe nature of the laws is in response to national and global outcry regarding exhaust gasses produced in the US, and also consumer protection. I do not know if the UK has a similar statutory "implied warranty law". It is reasonable that national dealership warranties reflect thenational lawin the nation which they resisde, since it is the national laws that set the emmisions requirements not the manufacturer.But you certainly have a good point; the converters are most likely the same, so why arethe warrantiesnot the similar, and why do people in the UK have to pay for an early CAT failure? Please check with your local attorney.
Also the section specifically lists "major components" which are covered under the warranty. Anything NOT listed, willlikely have to be replaced at owner's cost.

Stuart, thanks for helping me find the problem with my CLK last time. It was driving me crazy, and you named the problem on the first try.

Blue

 

"where does mccbushell live/"

Tuckahoe, NY.

Stuart

 

Hi Guys, thank you all for you comments. This turned into a bit of a disaster. I arranged for my local repair shop to obtain a couple of DEC direct fit replacements but when they arrived they found they did not fit. Turns out that DEC had the same part listed for 2 WD and 4Matic. DEC finally admitted they do not make a version for the 2002 4Matic yet .. presumably because few have done more than 80k miles so need a cheap after market replacement. The repair shop were unable to find any manufacturer that made an aftermarket direct fit replacement so in the end I had them fit original MB parts. The car is still under the extended warranty so could not take any risks with welding on a universal.

Mark.