Primary cat deletes - DVSA crackdown?

[Ninja59]

Well that is a real turn up, McGurk's got contacted (without any contact prior) by the DVSA, mainly following a post in December discussing primary cat deletion.

I am sure some have heard about the prosecution late last year for the pop and bang remapper, well the DVSA have prosecuted another this month!

Is this a crack down by the DVSA on all modifications in terms of emissions and exhausts?

Link to the McGurk blog with the update at the bottom: https://mcgurk.com/insights/cat-removal-v12-engine...

Link to the video: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1099728914511068

[Caslad]

I don’t ‘do’ Facebook so haven’t seen the video but this looks like a bit of a non-story to me and possibly a dig at a neighbouring Aston independent.
If your car passes the emissions test at its MOT then it complies with the relevant standards.
As far as McGurks never having seen catalyst ingestion, well I have no reason to doubt their word but I know that they don’t buy older high mileage cars or those with a suspect service history so they aren’t actually dealing with cars which are at particular risk.

[Simpo Two]

Caslad said:

a neighbouring Aston independent

Caslad said:

catalyst ingestion

Ah now I know who you mean. I spent the first few months of Aston ownership fearful that my engine was going to explode thanks to that well-trotted out theme.

[Phil74891]

Quick question - does anyone know exactly (or approximately) how many Aston Martin V12 engines have actually failed due to primary cat ingestion?

[Ninja59]

Phil74891 said:

Quick question - does anyone know exactly (or approximately) how many Aston Martin V12 engines have actually failed due to primary cat ingestion?

All I have heard quoted is a small number, I think getting an exact figure will be impossible if trying to combine AMs internal figures and any external figures.

I think the difference with this is the DVSA getting into contact without prompt and they are clearly continuing to go after businesses which have the potential to do services that may make cars illegal for road use (whether that be for C&U or RTA reasons).

[AdamV12V]

Caslad said:

If your car passes the emissions test at its MOT then it complies with the relevant standards.

This is not correct.

Passing the emissions test is only one of the reauirements. 8.2.1.1 cleary states that the original emissions control
Equipment (including catalytic convertors) must not be missing, modified or defective.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-...

Gov.uk MOT Inspection Manual said:

8.2.1.1. Exhaust emission control equipment
You only need to check components that are visible and identifiable, such as catalytic converters, oxygen sensors, and exhaust gas recirculation valves.

You should reject all vehicles first used on or after 1 September 2002, where original emissions control equipment components are missing, obviously modified or obviously defective.

Vehicles used prior to 1 September 2002 should only be rejected, where a full catalyst test could apply. Use the flowcharts 1, 2 and 3 to decide which emission test is applicable for the vehicle being tested.

In reality most MOT testers would never know, so it would likely pass, but nevertheless removing or tinkering with your cats is an MOT failure.

[CatalystV12V]

I think cat ingestion is pretty rare.. that said , I was at an independent recently who showed me a primary cat that looked like a tea cup… all the catalyst material had been eroded. As a result a full engine rebuild required.

I was told it was extremely rare , something to do with injectors over fueling. Apparently there was no warning.

I don’t think there’s any need to panic, but it obviously does happen…

[CatalystV12V]

Ninja59 said:

I think the difference with this is the DVSA getting into contact without prompt and they are clearly continuing to go after businesses which have the potential to do services that may make cars illegal for road use (whether that be for C&U or RTA reasons).

Exhaust modifications are done all the time… YouTube is full of people doing cat-deletes. There are many businesses offering these services to many makes of car… I think DVSA will have their work cut out..

[Ninja59]

CatalystV12V said:

Exhaust modifications are done all the time… YouTube is full of people doing cat-deletes. There are many businesses offering these services to many makes of car… I think DVSA will have their work cut out..

I think they will be working on the viewpoint of catching enough to make it a problem for those that do and therefore persuade those from doing it instead of using a stick as such.

The fact they have decided to prosecute is a major change though.

[Jon39]

In one of the BR videos, it was stated that none of their V12 customers have ever had cat ingestion.
The only cases have been cars not seen by them before, brought to their workshop with engine damage.

It appears therefore to be an extremely rare event, but theoretically possible, because of the close proximity to the (is it number 3 and corresponding) exhaust ports.

[Caslad]

CatalystV12V said:

Ninja59 said:

I think the difference with this is the DVSA getting into contact without prompt and they are clearly continuing to go after businesses which have the potential to do services that may make cars illegal for road use (whether that be for C&U or RTA reasons).

Exhaust modifications are done all the time… YouTube is full of people doing cat-deletes. There are many businesses offering these services to many makes of car… I think DVSA will have their work cut out..

Quite. There’s a difference between doing cat deletes such as the recent case of the Ford Fiesta in Wakefield which left the car incapable of passing the MOT emissions test and removal of primary cats on a V12 Aston where the secondary cats are retained and the emissions test is still passed.
I note in his latest video McGurk talks about ‘full disclosure’ and telling the buyer of your car that it ‘hasn’t got any catalytic converters’ when in fact the aforementioned V12 Aston does still have the secondary cats and does still pass the emissions test. Maybe a genuine slip of the tongue or maybe a well considered and cynical ploy but I think he’s just as guilty of scaremongering as those whom he criticises over cat ingestion concerns.

[Ninja59]

Caslad said:

Quite. There’s a difference between doing cat deletes such as the recent case of the Ford Fiesta in Wakefield which left the car incapable of passing the MOT emissions test and removal of primary cats on a V12 Aston where the secondary cats are retained and the emissions test is still passed.
I note in his latest video McGurk talks about ‘full disclosure’ and telling the buyer of your car that it ‘hasn’t got any catalytic converters’ when in fact the aforementioned V12 Aston does still have the secondary cats and does still pass the emissions test. Maybe a genuine slip of the tongue or maybe a well considered and cynical ploy but I think he’s just as guilty of scaremongering as those whom he criticises over cat ingestion concerns.

Technically both cars should fail an MOT, there is not degrees of failing it.

The only reason a V12 with primary deletes gets through is lack of knowledge and if known a slightly biased eye or two.

But you are still overlooking the very fact the DVSA with no prompting have elected to layout the legal stand point based on a single video, and given the other independents social media activity it could draw unwanted, at least in their view, attention from that party given their frequent highlight of primary cat deletes on the V12 and other recent videos regarding emissions equipment.

[phumy]

Hopefully this information from McGurk about the DVSA looking into it and setting things straight about the legality of removing the primary cats, irrespective of the emissions being ok due to the secondarys taking care of things, that a certain AM Indie will now stop banging on about removing the primary cats to scare people into spending £thousands in getting them removed. This same Indie also believes that its all legal and above board to remove them, adjust the mapping and maybe even removing the engine management light. I had a bit of a spat with the person in question on one of his YT videos over this very matter but he wouldnt have any of it, he said it was totally legal and theres no problem or issue with removing the primary cats.

I now feel for all the owners who have been suckered into removing them and giving £thousands to this Indie, probably for no reason.

I wonder if we could have a show of hands as to who has removed primary cats and the reason(s) they had it done.

[CatalystV12V]

phumy said:

I wonder if we could have a show of hands as to who has removed primary cats and the reason(s) they had it done.

I’lll start the ball rolling. As part of my ‘Unicorn’ quest I came across a car that had the primaries removed. The reason for this was that the engine breather system ( that takes gases from the crankcase) had stuck open and resulted in oil making its way into the inlet manifold which subsequently failed the cats. It was cheaper to have the cats removed than buy new exhaust manifolds.
This car is still for sale…

[Mushroom12]

phumy said:

Hopefully this information from McGurk about the DVSA looking into it and setting things straight about the legality of removing the primary cats, irrespective of the emissions being ok due to the secondarys taking care of things, that a certain AM Indie will now stop banging on about removing the primary cats to scare people into spending £thousands in getting them removed. This same Indie also believes that its all legal and above board to remove them, adjust the mapping and maybe even removing the engine management light. I had a bit of a spat with the person in question on one of his YT videos over this very matter but he wouldnt have any of it, he said it was totally legal and theres no problem or issue with removing the primary cats.

I now feel for all the owners who have been suckered into removing them and giving £thousands to this Indie, probably for no reason.

I wonder if we could have a show of hands as to who has removed primary cats and the reason(s) they had it done.

I presume you're talking about BR. I watched his vids just after buying my Rapide, and went to see my indy (same guy maintained the car since birth), and he basically said, unless it's misfiring, there's nothing to worry about, and he tests for misfires as part of it's (never missed) annual service.

There are a LOT of Astons though that have been patchy service histories (believe me, I spent years looking for my Aston), and I guess if you're not planning on keeping the car longer, big ticket items such as coil pack and spark replacements, become the next owner's problem.

[Jon39]

Caslad said:

Maybe a genuine slip of the tongue, or maybe a well considered and cynical ploy, but I think he’s just as guilty of ...

Just as if you remember !

Edited by Jon39 on Saturday 13th January 09:27

[CatalystV12V]

Mushroom12 said:

I presume you're talking about BR. I watched his vids just after buying my Rapide, and went to see my indy (same guy maintained the car since birth), and he basically said, unless it's misfiring, there's nothing to worry about, and he tests for misfires as part of it's (never missed) annual service.

There are a LOT of Astons though that have been patchy service histories (believe me, I spent years looking for my Aston), and I guess if you're not planning on keeping the car longer, big ticket items such as coil pack and spark replacements, become the next owner's problem.

This is the approach I’m going to take.. I will be asking my Indy to perform an AMDS check for misfire at each service.. I saw the misfire count on my car both during a stationary load test and during a 20 minute test drive.. AMDS recorded 1s and 2s on most cylinders. This I’m told is normal.
As I said before, you also need to check the breather circuit..
How you test for the over fuelling issue, I have no idea..

One last comment, just because you have a book full of AM dealer stamps is no guarantee that they checked for misfire..

[Jon39]

CatalystV12V said:

.. I saw the misfire count on my car both during a stationary load test and during a 20 minute test drive.. AMDS recorded 1s and 2s on most cylinders. This I’m told is normal.

One last comment, just because you have a book full of AM dealer stamps is no guarantee that they checked for misfire..

Whether it was just a sales push, I don't know, but BR did one video demonstrating how an AMDS check can be carried out, but not thoroughly enough, with the conclusion 'no problems' on a misfiring engine.

[CatalystV12V]

Jon39 said:

CatalystV12V said:

.. I saw the misfire count on my car both during a stationary load test and during a 20 minute test drive.. AMDS recorded 1s and 2s on most cylinders. This I’m told is normal.

One last comment, just because you have a book full of AM dealer stamps is no guarantee that they checked for misfire..

Whether it was just a sales push, I don't know, but BR did one video demonstrating how an AMDS check can be carried out, but not thoroughly enough, with the conclusion 'no problems' on a lmisfiring engine.

Yes I saw that too and it’s an important point. Which is why I had the test done by hunting at various rpms, not just at idle while stationary in the workshop. We then tested in real-time during a spirited test drive on some local dual carriage way..
apparently misfile can be felt too if you accelerate, full throttle, from 47 mph in top gear. As this puts maximum load on the coil packs and any misfire should be felt. If you accelerate smoothly to national speed limit then chances are you’re ok.

This test backed up the view of the previous Indy who had been looking after the car, that it was fine.

[AMV8Stuart]

AdamV12V said:

In reality most MOT testers would never know, so it would likely pass, but nevertheless removing or tinkering with your cats is an MOT failure.

So should we therefore not use main dealers for MOT test if Cats have been changed on the basis that they would notice the mod whereas the local MOT station wouldn't?