Fake O2 Sensors
Anybody on here installed a fake O2 sensor and gutted out the cats yet? Been waiting to come across dummy sensors, but havn't found anything still. Did this on my last Ram and it worked awesome... gained 1 1/2-2mpg plus and little quicker throttle response it seemed. Anybody know where I can get dummy sensors?
...And yes, I know it's illegal. And yes, I know it's not being "green"... Al Gore can pucker up :-P
...And yes, I know it's illegal. And yes, I know it's not being "green"... Al Gore can pucker up :-P
I haven't seen sims (simulators) in a few years now, but last I did they were getting stupid expensive, like over $100 a piece.
Why don't you just use non-foulers at all of $5 at any auto parts store?
Why don't you just use non-foulers at all of $5 at any auto parts store?
Yeah... thought about it... still ain't really sold on the idea. Never talked to anyone who's done it that way.
I'd bet if you ran a poll on the forum you'd get at least 6 guys running non-foulers to every one running a sim. I think that's why the sims kinda disappeared over the last five years or so. Somebody figured out the $5 non-fouler trick and people stopped paying $100 for an O2 simulator.
I dunno why either, cause cats today ain't like the cats of the 70s & 80s, they are actually not restrictive at all. I still run mine and that's with long tube headers. I had them off for a while and put them back on. I felt like I was losing low end with them off...
I've done this on my old 2nd Gen Ram, and have done it for a few guys with 3rd Gens as well as a couple Chevy trucks. Simple to do and only seen it not work once and then it just took some steel wool stuffed in the non-fouler for that one to work as well.
I have a DIY for installing non-foulers that's in the 3rd Gen FAQ section...
I have a DIY for installing non-foulers that's in the 3rd Gen FAQ section...
+1. After the 2nd generation of Rams, the converters from the factory are basically as high-flow as you can get, and the trucks are designed to run with them.
But if you insist...
http://www.thefastman.com/02Simms.asp
$75 for one, $125 for two.
But if you insist...
http://www.thefastman.com/02Simms.asp
$75 for one, $125 for two.
Trending Topics
Anybody tried this in the 4th gens yet? hell for 5 bucks and a 1-2 mpg gain? i have never heard of this before so just curious if there is any power loss or anything from leaning out the fuel or does the truck still perform the same?
Well, what he is saying is he got the fuel economy boost from deleting the cats, the sims or non-foulers have nothing to do with it, they simply fool the downstream O2 sensors into thinking a cat is still there and performing within range, thus no CEL is generated.
I don't really buy into any real MPG or HP gains by just omitting the cats, not today's cats and not on a Hemi. When this engine was introduced, the engineers realized this engine design (Polyspheric heads - only the vintage Hemi engines had true Hemispheric heads) was all about breathing and they utilized what would be considered high flow cats in the stock configuration.
Now I had a 5.9 V8 in my 1998 2nd Gen, basically a 1960's LA360 engine and I went true dual with it, except for a simple "H" pipe I welded in and it DID benefit both in the fuel economy and the high end HP departments by omitting the cats.
What I found when I put my long tube headers in my current truck was that there was a small, but perceptible loss of low end torque, but the truck did have significant mid & high HP gains from the headers, though, I don't think the deletion of the cats had anything to do with the gains.
What happened was a torque increase right along with the HP increase, but the headers and no cats "moved" the torque curve up a good bit in the RPM band. So even though the truck technically had more torque, it had LESS torque in the extreme low RPM range, which is basically where you want it.
I cut the cats back in, although a good 14" behind the stock position due to the length of the headers (had to extend O2 wires as well) and at least by "Butt Dyno" I felt I got a bit of that low end torque back. Of course it wasn't long after that I did 4.56 gears, which really helped the old low speed grunt a good bit...
I don't really buy into any real MPG or HP gains by just omitting the cats, not today's cats and not on a Hemi. When this engine was introduced, the engineers realized this engine design (Polyspheric heads - only the vintage Hemi engines had true Hemispheric heads) was all about breathing and they utilized what would be considered high flow cats in the stock configuration.
Now I had a 5.9 V8 in my 1998 2nd Gen, basically a 1960's LA360 engine and I went true dual with it, except for a simple "H" pipe I welded in and it DID benefit both in the fuel economy and the high end HP departments by omitting the cats.
What I found when I put my long tube headers in my current truck was that there was a small, but perceptible loss of low end torque, but the truck did have significant mid & high HP gains from the headers, though, I don't think the deletion of the cats had anything to do with the gains.
What happened was a torque increase right along with the HP increase, but the headers and no cats "moved" the torque curve up a good bit in the RPM band. So even though the truck technically had more torque, it had LESS torque in the extreme low RPM range, which is basically where you want it.
I cut the cats back in, although a good 14" behind the stock position due to the length of the headers (had to extend O2 wires as well) and at least by "Butt Dyno" I felt I got a bit of that low end torque back. Of course it wasn't long after that I did 4.56 gears, which really helped the old low speed grunt a good bit...
Last edited by HammerZ71; Jul 21, 2011 at 08:53 PM.
Yup, I gutted the cat and added the O2 sim to my '01 5.9 Magnum too... and it worked well... but like you said, the 5.9 was kind of an old school engine.



