CX-5 Turbo - Remove Catalytic Convertor

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow. So many people butt-hurt about removing a bit of restrictive pipe from an exhaust system...

I don't live in the USA guys. The country my CX-5 resides in has some of the most polluted places in the World when they burn the fields each year. Nobody cares here.
You should have stated up front that in your country it is legal to remove a catalytic converter. Or is it? What country? You didn't say why either. Somebody may want to vet your request before giving advice. Make it a good story. Of course it is a global issue regardless of the the local laws, so there's that.
 
You should have stated up front that in your country it is legal to remove a catalytic converter. Or is it? What country? You didn't say why either. Somebody may want to vet your request before giving advice. Make it a good story. Of course it is a global issue regardless of the the local laws, so there's that.
Why does he have to state that up front? Just because you might be very Americentric doesn’t mean everyone has to cater to your desire for everything to be centered around the U.S. point of view, regulations, etc. This isn’t mazdasusa.com
 
I didn’t specify one specific type of testing... Again, not tested well enough.
I appreciate the insights from your experience and kudos to you for pointing out the chink in my thought process. To a user, nothing matters but the final experience, not how it's made, eh?

With auto brake and lane keep, I'm curious how VW programmed their systems. Perhaps for lane keep, it measures the rate of change of the steering wheel, so when it's above a certain threshold, it doesn't provide the steering assist? As for the auto brake, I couldn't find much info regarding sensor methodology and testing for these. To me, most engineering problems are compromises for a purpose. I cannot confirm it, but perhaps VW chose to forego a bit of peripheral braking for the evasion scenario you mentioned?

Also curious about how the better OEMs handled auto dimming for dash illumination when it bounces back and forth, ie driving under a slatted bridge. It might be just interval threshold-based like I mentioned before. I can't think of another solution without it becoming complex.

For the remote start, how are other manufacturers' handling better? Sincerely curious. I only have experience with older aftermarket add-ons.

For the wireless AndroidAuto/Carplay. I agree that the hardware is already there. It even has the BT connection. I guess their infotainment software budget is quite restricted? It seems they can just modify off-the-shelf libraries for a BT hookup. As you know, they are a small manufacturer. I don't blame them for trying to move upmarket - higher margin/lower volume. As for the touchscreen... yeah, I think Mazda's current marketing position is quite arrogant (strategically?) about dictating what is right for the driver. Perhaps it's a marketing justification for cost reduction? I don't think it's testing inadequacy though.
 
Why does he have to state that up front? Just because you might be very Americentric doesn’t mean everyone has to cater to your desire for everything to be centered around the U.S. point of view, regulations, etc. This isn’t mazdasusa.com

Well said sir. :)
 
I appreciate the insights from your experience and kudos to you for pointing out the chink in my thought process. To a user, nothing matters but the final experience, not how it's made, eh?

With auto brake and lane keep, I'm curious how VW programmed their systems. Perhaps for lane keep, it measures the rate of change of the steering wheel, so when it's above a certain threshold, it doesn't provide the steering assist? As for the auto brake, I couldn't find much info regarding sensor methodology and testing for these. To me, most engineering problems are compromises for a purpose. I cannot confirm it, but perhaps VW chose to forego a bit of peripheral braking for the evasion scenario you mentioned?

Also curious about how the better OEMs handled auto dimming for dash illumination when it bounces back and forth, ie driving under a slatted bridge. It might be just interval threshold-based like I mentioned before. I can't think of another solution without it becoming complex.

For the remote start, how are other manufacturers' handling better? Sincerely curious. I only have experience with older aftermarket add-ons.

For the wireless AndroidAuto/Carplay. I agree that the hardware is already there. It even has the BT connection. I guess their infotainment software budget is quite restricted? It seems they can just modify off-the-shelf libraries for a BT hookup. As you know, they are a small manufacturer. I don't blame them for trying to move upmarket - higher margin/lower volume. As for the touchscreen... yeah, I think Mazda's current marketing position is quite arrogant (strategically?) about dictating what is right for the driver. Perhaps it's a marketing justification for cost reduction? I don't think it's testing inadequacy though.
I do appreciate that there needs to be testing all along the development process. I just find Mazda compared to all the other brands I’ve driven seems to have a lot more of these, what I will call small flaws that could have been improved/resolved with better testing of the final integrated product.

I’m sure there is a lot of logic involved in the driver assist systems. I consider myself to be extremely attentive when driving (watching the road ahead, checking mirrors frequently, being prepared for the worst any surrounding driver might do next, no calls, texting or loud music) and would prefer simply not having these systems. So, I think these systems should only step in for clear cut avoidance of a crash, and not seem to be designed around the idea that it’s ok to not pay attention because now the car can save your ass.

On remote start, what seems to be the generally accepted best practice is that you need to enter with the key fob, step on the brake and press the start button. The vehicle is then operating in the same condition as if you had not remote started, and it never shuts off during the process. Having it shut off if you open the door which already requires to fob to unlock is a solution in search of a safety problem. My point is that as a car manufacturer offering remote start, Mazda should be testing and evaluating other implementations in the market so theirs is not significantly less user friendly.

On Wireless CarPlay, yes Mazda is smaller than the industry leaders but it’s not like they are a low volume manufacturer. They have already developed wireless CarPlay integration for the last gen system. It can’t be that expensive to implement in the new system. My feeling is that if they did sufficient user experience testing, they’d never allow these decisions to get to production. I think they believe they don’t need that testing because they know what people want better than the people do themselves.
 
I rented a 2014 Corvette, not too long ago. The original owner had removed the cats before the current owner bought the car. I'm not sure how it was smog-checked before the sale. But without the cats I could not leave off the targa top. At a stop light my eyes would tear up. Sometimes I am driving behind an old MG and have to get away from the car, as it too would cause me to gag on the fumes.
Cats are absolutely necessary and should never be removed.
 
I rented a 2014 Corvette, not too long ago. The original owner had removed the cats before the current owner bought the car. I'm not sure how it was smog-checked before the sale. But without the cats I could not leave off the targa top. At a stop light my eyes would tear up. Sometimes I am driving behind an old MG and have to get away from the car, as it too would cause me to gag on the fumes.
Cats are absolutely necessary and should never be removed.

I had a Ferrari 458 spider with the cats removed, I loved the smell with the top down, and it was worth it for the noise it made. That NA V8 screamed.
 
Why does he have to state that up front? Just because you might be very Americentric doesn’t mean everyone has to cater to your desire for everything to be centered around the U.S. point of view, regulations, etc. This isn’t mazdasusa.com
See the above post. As I expected.

Yeah, this isn't mazdausa.com, it is a Canadian web site run out of Toronto I believe. That country also requires CCs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow. So many people butt-hurt about removing a bit of restrictive pipe from an exhaust system...

I don't live in the USA guys. The country my CX-5 resides in has some of the most polluted places in the World when they burn the fields each year. Nobody cares here.
It’s not a bit of restrictive pipe, it’s a device for improving air quality the world over. Your country burning fields isn’t an excuse, it’s to help every country including yours to have better health and a better future. Many countries are burning out of control every summer. It’s for you as well as everybody else but you’ve already said that the sound and a few more HP is more important so you’re going to press on and do it anyway.
 
With a 1990 amendment to the Clean Air Act, it is a federal offense to remove a catalytic converter from a vehicle manufactured with such. That applies to off-road driving as well. While one may replace it with pipes for some added HP on a track-only car, it is still illegal. I believe the current fine is up to $10,000. One can get into the weeds here:

[
WOW if only this was true and if it is true then it's not being enforced. If it was there would be more of an effort to find the cat thieves or go after the salvage yards that buy the cats.
The thieves are removing the CC from a vehicle manufactured with such.
 
See the above post. As I expected.

Yeah, this isn't mazdausa.com, it is a Canadian web site run out of Toronto I believe. That country also requires CCs.
It’s a website. It’s for the whole world to see and use, it doesn’t matter where it’s hosted.
 
It’s a website. It’s for the whole world to see and use, it doesn’t matter where it’s hosted.
I guess you missed the point. Overly subtle perhaps.

My final assessment is the former Ferrari owner was yanking your chain. He knew how he was going to get it done, clearly had no intention of a DIY since he could not locate the CC on a bet. That's if the whole thing wasn't a fabrication in the first place.

Yeah, I'm judgmental on this matter. In my opinion a catalytic converter should not be removed no matter where you live or what the law happens to be or how it is enforced. Somebody else burning fields isn't a justification.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[*]Taller than necessary steering column shroud that blocks portion of lower gauge display (where headlight indicator is) from driver view for over 50% of adjustment range.
So as not to be presumptuous, can I assume you mean 50% of the tilt range?

If so, and as a matter of curiosity with no intent to be judgmental, what with telescoping and power seat adjustments, what's wrong with using the other 50%?

I'm curious because I find a good combination easier in this vehicle than any previous in my recollection, including my three most recent vehicles, two Toyotas and a Honda.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
WOW if only this was true and if it is true then it's not being enforced. If it was there would be more of an effort to find the cat thieves or go after the salvage yards that buy the cats.
The thieves are removing the CC from a vehicle manufactured with such.
Here in Canada there has been a rampant increase in CC thefts during COVID, especially on trucks, motor homes and SUV's. A few trades businesses have reported repeated thefts of CC's from their work trucks even after they replaced the stolen ones. I bet these folks wish they could just replace their stolen CC with a straight pipe!!
 
…Your country burning fields isn’t an excuse, it’s to help every country including yours to have better health and a better future…
It’s pointless to argue with him, he doesn’t care. And that’s fine, there are plenty of Americans and Canadians who remove their cats - that’s why there is such a big market in “test pipes”.
 
It’s pointless to argue with him, he doesn’t care. And that’s fine, there are plenty of Americans and Canadians who remove their cats - that’s why there is such a big market in “test pipes”.

Exactly. I'm subscribing from this forum. Get me out of here... lol.
 
I’m sure there is a lot of logic involved in the driver assist systems. I consider myself to be extremely attentive when driving (watching the road ahead, checking mirrors frequently, being prepared for the worst any surrounding driver might do next, no calls, texting or loud music) and would prefer simply not having these systems. So, I think these systems should only step in for clear cut avoidance of a crash, and not seem to be designed around the idea that it’s ok to not pay attention because now the car can save your ass.
You should consider the benefit to you of conservative systems regardless of your acutely attentive driving. What about the other folks around you on the road?

People are going to drive distracted. There's no way to stop it. So, it might be best to consider that more conservative systems reduce the chance of a distracted driver whacking you. Hopefully they have their systems turned on. You can turn yours off at the minor expense of a little orange icon being displayed. Seems like a reasonable trade-off to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back