Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'After Hours Lounge (Off Topic)' started by Matthew_V, May 8, 2003.
hey matthew -
at least you got out of the dangerous part of town in one piece.
1. i've push started several vehicles before. i've never known it to cause any damage, but i can't say for sure.
2. i'm not sure what the official rules are, but i always have both cars off when first attaching the cables. then i start the (obviously) good car first and have them slightly rev their engine while i try to start the dead car. someone told me that helps keep the good car from getting excessively drained. no clue on the heater thing - i always have all accessories off too.
3. i really like die-hards. they're the only batteries i've ever used and i've never had a single problem. they seem to go for several years. i highly recommend them.
installing a new battery is very very easy. you just have to be mindful of what you are doing, but it shouldn't take you more than 30 minutes tops!
Let me address these one by one and briefly:
1) "Damaging the cat converter". Good riddance. It is a pollution control device and won't affect the driveability of your car. If it fell off it would likely be a good thing. many people remove them on purpose. The chance of it being damaged on a push start are fairly low anyway. Considering your circumstances you did the right thing. NEVER TRY TO PUSH START AN AUTOMATIC SHIFT!!!! Only do it if you know how to also.
2) The reason you want both cars off during a jump is to avoid sparks when connecting the cables. This can ignight gases (hydrogen I believe) in the battery and cause it to explode. Though rare, it does occur. The explosion is fairly violent and sprays acid EVERYWHERE. Don't ask how I know this - just call me lucky.
3) The heater thing. Hmm, that's new. The fan motor is fairly resilient, more so than your other electronics. I suppose it could act as a rough surge suppressor. I'm not familiar enough to comment more. Yes, other things should be off. Sometimes a jump start will require you to 'rev' the engine a bit to get a few more amps ofer to the dead battery. Letting it sit and charge helps too.
4) I've had good luck with die-hards. Have them test your old battery first to make sure this is really your problem. It may be more serious - like the alternator, or less serious, like a corroded terminal.
Sears Gold Die Hard South batteries are very good but on the expensive side. $80 at Sears and $75 at NTB (which Sears owns).
If we acknowledge that clean air is a good thing, a catalytic converter is a good thing.
I'm old enough to remember what smog-controlled cars ran like before cats, and believe me cats are preferable.
As for the "uselessness" of emmission controls and "you're better off without them" attitude, cars today perform better, get better fuel economy, and have fewer driveability problems and much lower maintenance requirements than the old pre-smog regulation cars did largely due to the need for "useless" emmission controls.
The average sedan sold in 1965 (last pre-emmission year in California) had a 300 cu.in. or larger V-8 engine, did 0-60 in roughly 10 seconds, got 14mpg city and 16-18 highway if you were lucky. It had ingition points that needed replacement and fussy adjustment every 10-15k miles. Sparkplugs lasted the same amount of time. The carburetor would need rebuilding at 40k miles. A valve job was usually needed at 60-80k miles. If you wanted a car that would get 30 mpg on the highway you had to buy a VW beetle--0-60 in 23 seconds.
Largely due to the need to meet emmissions standards, today's average sedan still does 0-60 in 10 seconds or less, but gets 20+ mpg in the city and over 30 on the highway. It's sparkplugs are good for 100k miles, it has no ignition points and it's fuel injection system requires no maintenance. The hardenned valve seats made necessary by unleaded gas mean valve jobs are pretty much a thing of the past.
Does anyone think that if there were no need to meet emmission controls mfgs would ever have come up with the engine management systems of today?
I'll grant that the first 10 years or so of emmission controls (smog pumps, primitive EGR systems, "lean-burn carburetors) were pretty detrimental to performance and economy, but by the mid-80s when efi started to become the norm they have really led to more benefit to the average driver than harm.
We can readily buy high performance cars now that do 0-60 in less than 6 seconds, catalytic converters and all.
Oh yeah, it's a good thing all right.....right up to the time it fails, starts screwing up the performance, and needs replacing. The cats failed on my truck. I asked how much to replace them. The answer? $466 bucks Canadian just for the cats alone. Buh-bye says I. I don't want to pollute, but I'm not about to be gouged by a bunch of sons of bitches who think they can charge like wounded bulls because they know the cat is a 'required' piece of equipment. Pollution control equipment should be the cheapest part of an exhaust system to replace....not one of the most expensive.
I'm not really sure this is the place. Lets just say that every time we mandate fossil fuels become more efficient (higher MPG) we make it that much more difficult for a cleaner fuel to compete economically and practically.
also, re: battery in the trunk of you Z28 - what trunk? That little space in the back? I thought that was for a spare pair of shoes
Sorry, not much in my post will help your Z's smokeing habit. Unless you drive downhill alot.
q]Why? They contain a significant bit of rare-earth elements that act as the catalyst.[/q]
If you consider something that is approx. a teaspoon or less significant, and worth paying hundreds of dollars for, then all power to you. Millions upon millions of catalytic converters are made every year, so economies of scale would kick in.....regardless of the rare earth elements used. If the elements are so valuable, why is there no concerted effort to recycle cat. converters? Obviously because there is not enough rare material used in each converter to warrant recovery. The question again rises. Why is an item that is required to protect the air we breathe so expensive to replace? It should be one of the least expensive items to fix. The only answer I can come up with, is that companies have turned these items into price gouging profit centres because they know that it is mandatory to have this equipment on the vehicle.