Actually most stock converters aren't that restrictive. You have to have
some pretty hefty modifications in order for the cat to be a weak point,
like extensive head work.
Ron
00 PB SLT QC 4X2 5.9 46RE 3.92 LSD
For modifications see my DML Profile (URL follows)
http://www.twistedbits.net/WWWProfile/dakota/Kw9pV1EkFeOYY
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net]On Behalf Of TJ Goettner
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 5:54 PM
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
Subject: Re: DML: I'll ask AGAIN
thanks man, i appreciate it!!! the nice thing is about the 92s is they came
with 3 inch all the way back to the muffler... i put on a FM muffler, so all
I need to do is get rid of that darn cat converter... gotta get a hi flow
though cause when im done with the USAF we're (me and wife) going back to
old emmision testing MD.
TJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wisotzkey, Rich" <Rich.Wisotzkey@gd-wts.com>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 9:01 AM
Subject: RE: DML: I'll ask AGAIN
> TJ,
> Just my experience here with my '96. Running the Mopar PCM, I cannot use
> anything less than 92. I tried 89 and it pinged bad. Tried mixing 1/2
tank
> 89 & 92, and it still pinged a little. Wasn't worth trying to mix. I
won't
> use less than 92. I don't want any pinging. Sorry to dampen your
spirits.
>
> I viewed it this way. It like what, 25 cents difference a gallon? (I
> haven't tanked up in a while, the 318 has been apart since the 1st of
> January.) :'B That's roughly $5 more a fill-up. Not a big deal really.
> Say you gas up every two weeks, that's roughly another $130 annually. You
> have to make the justification whether it is worth it or not. Hey, keep
> your foot out of it most of the time and it isn't bad. I average 18-19mpg
> running back and forth to work. This is a 13mi. trip (one way) with a 6-8
> stop average. Good-luck with your dilemma.
> Rich - Ashburn, VA
> PS. Another way to look at it. Put a good flowing cat-back exhaust
system
> on your Dak. I gained 18% increase with mine. That offsets the cost of
> running 92 octane.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ronald Wong [mailto:ron-wong@home.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 11:12 AM
> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> Subject: RE: DML: I'll ask AGAIN
>
>
> The other thing is, just because you can't hear it pinging doesn't mean
that
> it isn't.
>
> Ron
> 00 PB SLT QC 4X2 5.9 46RE 3.92 LSD
> For modifications see my DML Profile (URL follows)
> http://www.twistedbits.net/WWWProfile/dakota/Kw9pV1EkFeOYY
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net]On Behalf Of Bob Tom
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:51 AM
> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> Subject: Re: DML: I'll ask AGAIN
>
>
> At 08:08 AM 3/21/01 -0800, you wrote:
> >OK all, I made a deal with the wife, if I found out that I could run 89
oct
> >in my 92 V8 around town with no pinging, she'd let me spend the money
> >forvthe computer (we just spent 200 at the Gator Nationals this weekend)
> >SO what do you think, can you get by with 89 just around town and highway
> >staying off the throttle with the performance computer?? Granted I would
> >put 93 in it when I take it to the track!!! TJ
>
> It would depend on the internal condition of your engine. Being a '92, I
> would
> imagine that the compression has risen a little over these years so using
> 89 would be questionable.
>
> I use 92 octane with the '96 MP PCM and have never tried 89 in it. My
> engine
> is low mileage for a '97. I did have had one pinging experience (going up
> small
> inclines) with mine but narrowed the cause to a 'suspect' no brand tank
of
> gas.
> Putting in a bottle of octane booster got rid of the pinging.
>
> Bob Tom Burlington, Ont., Canada
> '97 CC Dakota, 5.2L, 4x2, auto., 3.92SG, 4,265 lb (racing weight)
> Dyno: 231.2 rwhp 340.0 lb-ft rwtorque
> PB: 14.737 @ 91.75 9.364 @ 72.95
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:00:20 EDT