240 General: Cat fitment?

[minesa240x3]

Just found this one on ebay.Seller,Parts direct-uk-ltd.Based in leeds total cost £50.81 free p+p.
Item number 200799067147.
Regards Brian.

[Clifford Pope]

On both my J and K reg cars the probe fitted into a boss actually in the front chamber of the cat, just upstream of the matrix.

I have read about the lower pipe location for the probe on some models, and confirmed it when I once bought a genuine Volvo pipe for the car. It had a boss about 9" upstream of where the cat bolts on, obviously a generic pipe covering several models. I had to plug the hole to use it with a cat that also had a hole.

A downpipe for a non-cat model, eg carburettor, is much longer, and reaches all the way back to the first silencer. That presumably is the one to use if removing the cat, with a boss welded on.

Can anyone confirm with authority the statement that a cat is compulsory on a pre-July 92 "if originally fitted"?
When the MOT tester logs on the details of mine it comes up as "non CAT", even though there is one. I asked the tester, and he said he just tests cars according to what it says on his computer. If it says "CAT" he does the cat test, if not, he doesn't. He's not interested in whether it actually has one or not. If it needs one and it's missing, it will fail on emissions. If it doesn't need one, and it's either missing or failed or been rodded-out, then it will pass on the more lenient limits.

AFAIK the requirement has never been to have a cat fitted. The requirement, when applicable, is to pass the harder emission standards. That will usually only be possible with a cat.

As a further observation, the date cut off applies to the ENGINE, not the car, if older. So if the car has a replacement engine that is pre-July 92, and you can prove it, it gets tested at the earlier level.

[tannachyallen]

Originally Posted by Clifford Pope

Can anyone confirm with authority the statement that a cat is compulsory on a pre-July 92 "if originally fitted"?

Yes, any original equipment is supposed to be in place. But mine passed without problem as I don't think there is any data base to check. Your MOT tester should be applying the test according to the year not to whether his computer says cat or no cat. A pre 92 car with a cat should still be tested on the older emissions test regardless.

Dave A.

[Clifford Pope]

[QUOTE=tannachyallen;1322781] A pre 92 car with a cat should still be tested on the older emissions test regardless.



Where is the authority that says that a component that was not originally a requirement to be fitted, and does not have to work if it is fitted, nonetheless does now require to be present?

There is I have been told no requirement to have a working 3rd brake light. It would be ridiculous to say that it is compulsory to have a non-working light rather than no light at all.

I have searched the MOT tester's manual, and the MOTtester forum, but can find no statement on this point. Do you have a link?

[tannachyallen]

[QUOTE=Clifford Pope;1323428I have searched the MOT tester's manual, and the MOTtester forum, but can find no statement on this point. Do you have a link?[/QUOTE]

I don't I'm afraid Clifford, but as you can see from this post of yours earlier this year, I totally agree with you. Changing the proverbial goal posts.......

http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?t=152305

Regards,

Dave A.