catalytic converter

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.

subcom

Member
Posts
25
hi all sorry to be a pain,my freelander 1 failed mot on emission,o2,i had a lamda sensor done and new cat,however my local garage said it still points to the cat,as only had a cheap £75 cat replaced,then i got a quote for £905 from a main landerover deal,does neone know where i can get a mid range cat from so i can get it threw a mot,thanks everyone for your help.
 
Post the emission report maybe able to help point in the right direction even a cheapie new cat will work so more likely be some thing else post the report please
 
With cheap cats you sometimes need to get them really really hot to get them to pass the mot
Make sure engine up to temp then drive the car at high rpm for five to ten minutes and put it straight on
The emissions tester can sometimes get you through but if you could put up the emission results it would help
 
Really ? Which 1.8 FL's have two cats then ?

All dis ignition Freelanders along with all other K Series cars have pre and post cats. The pre cat is built into the exhaust manifold. This was done to make the engine euro 3 compliant iirc. The ECU also monitors the function of the cats using a post cat O2 sensor installed in the exhaust after the second cat.
 
All dis ignition Freelanders along with all other K Series cars have pre and post cats. The pre cat is built into the exhaust manifold. This was done to make the engine euro 3 compliant iirc. The ECU also monitors the function of the cats using a post cat O2 sensor installed in the exhaust after the second cat.

not fitted to the '99 models though ;)
 
My apoloeeges then,for some reason I thought the OP stated his car was the earlier dizzy type motor.
I think LR/Powertrain - or whoever built them realised they needed all the aftertreatment they could muster to get the Co down.I think the valve overlap is too large allowing rather alot of unburnt mixture straight through with no chance of getting burnt... Also a good reason for their poor fuel economy.
 
Yes because the ECU had to monitor the emissions and put the MIL on if they exceeded a preset level. The V6 engine used the Siemens S2000 ECU that already met this requirement.

:cool:

I may just decat mine and only reinstall for the mot as it is getting a bit long in the tooth.

this shouldn't affect the running unduly should it?
 
My apoloeeges then,for some reason I thought the OP stated his car was the earlier dizzy type motor.
I think LR/Powertrain - or whoever built them realised they needed all the aftertreatment they could muster to get the Co down.I think the valve overlap is too large allowing rather alot of unburnt mixture straight through with no chance of getting burnt... Also a good reason for their poor fuel economy.

It's common to have pre and post cats across all makes these days!! The Freelander V6 has 3 cats!! I'm not sure if valve overlap has anything to do with it though as a KV6 has very little overlap. To much unburnt fuel would overheat the cats anyway. I think the emissions requirements are now so strict that 1 cat just doesn't do the trick anymore. Don't even get me started on the famous Green Party own goal!! We've all been paying the penalty ever since they got there own way :(
 
I think it does,if you measure pre cat emissions from say a Gems or Bosch injected rover v8 they are alot lower than a K series,and breeze through a cat test even when well worn.The K series has a large monolith for the gases to pass over for aftertreatment - which is why even new aftermarket cats will fail the cat test - there simply isnt enough of it to do the job.They often only have 1/2 the size brick of the original.
I also think the reason for pre and post cats is that the manufacturers need a belt and braces approach to exhaust treatment because the downstream oxy sensor will follow too closely to the output of the upstream one to satisfy cat performance.(Ie, switching rather than a gradual drift of output)
 
:cool:

I may just decat mine and only reinstall for the mot as it is getting a bit long in the tooth.

this shouldn't affect the running unduly should it?

I run my ZS180 with the second cat removed. Oddly it does pass the Mot emissions test with just the pre-cat installed but it would fail the visual inspection without a post-cat so I have an empty cat case in the system to satisfy the visual inspection.
 
I think it does,if you measure pre cat emissions from say a Gems or Bosch injected rover v8 they are alot lower than a K series,and breeze through a cat test even when well worn.The K series has a large monolith for the gases to pass over for aftertreatment - which is why even new aftermarket cats will fail the cat test - there simply isnt enough of it to do the job.They often only have 1/2 the size brick of the original.
I also think the reason for pre and post cats is that the manufacturers need a belt and braces approach to exhaust treatment because the downstream oxy sensor will follow too closely to the output of the upstream one to satisfy cat performance.(Ie, switching rather than a gradual drift of output)

I get what you are saying about emissions for the Mot but valve overlap has little to do with the requirement for 2 cats. It's to do with the fueling requirement for the cats to work which is where the Green Party own goal comes in!! Here's why. An engine built before cats were required had a much wider mixture ratio to operate in, so at idle the fuel air mixture would be something like 19 to 1 which for the Mot would be good. The same engine at cruising speed the mixture would be something like 21 or even 22 to 1 so it was good for economy. For maximum power to be produced a mixture of 12.5 to 1 would be required. Now an engine that is mandated to have a cat has to burn fuel at the Stoichiometric or chemically correct ratio of 14.7 to 1. This is why they often fail the Mot when things go wrong with the cat. But basically the engine has to burn extra fuel just so the cat can function!!
 
Back
Top