1,645.2 miles on one tank: Broke official world record!

[PaleMelanesian]

Originally Posted by Daox

I've heard of car modders getting fined before for removing CATs and stuff. I think all incidents have been from California where I'd guess they're a lot more strict about that kind of stuff than Indiana.

I believe it was Jesse James of Monster Garage who was fined a bunch for all his creations. That was in California, I believe.

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by PaleMelanesian

I believe it was Jesse James of Monster Garage who was fined a bunch for all his creations. That was in California, I believe.

I did here about that. But he had a shop where he was doing lots of motorcycles. I've never heard of them troubling and individual person who did one vehicle.

And yes, there's a big difference between IN and CA. Here in IN we have no inspections whatsoever--emissions or safety. In CA, they actually have roadside checkpoints in some places.

BTW, removing diesel emissions equiptment is extrodinarily common. I put up a poll over at Cumminsforum. Of the several hundered who responded, around 70% had removed. Granted, that's not representative of the general population, but still.

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by sheepdog 44

The most surprising thing to me is just how thorough your records are!

Thanks, I've learned that careful records are indispensible. In the first 40 days I kept my daily log, my FE increased by 40%.

I'm an engineer, so I took a very engineering-type approach to any process you're trying to improve:
1) Quantify the output you care about
2) Identify the inputs that affect the output
3) Collect data to determine how the inputs affect the outputs
4) Modify the inputs to get the outputs you want.

In my case, the inputs were various driving techniues as well as weather and traffic conditions. What I found was that, by keeping track of everything, I'd periodically stuble upon things that would help. I think would incorporate those things into my habits, and before long, I'd do them without thinking. It also allowed me to focus on the things that made the most difference.

BTW, if anyone is interested, PM me and I can email you a copy of my whole log (now at about 1-1/2 years worth of data).

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

That being said it certainly demonstrates the fallacy of emission controls that destroy efficiency.

Emission controls that don't always work properly - that was Dave's original reason to remove them , IIRC.


The latest on DPFs is that they are actually WORSE for pollution than having no DPF at all ...

Last tank, my Hägar was regenerating 1 out of every 4 kilometer (or miles).
DPF removal is the solution, and is being done where tests aren't so strict, but it's also illegal here ...

[Daox]

I know its not apples to apples, but I was just reading an article in an industrial magazine about off road diesel engines and their latest on hitting tier 4 final emissions. Pretty much every maker is claiming better efficiency despite the new emissions equipment. I also find it hard to believe that the equipment just doesn't work. It obviously goes through a lot of testing and it wouldn't pass the emissions tests if it didn't work.

[user removed]

The problem is when manufacturers try to hang a component on an engine to clean up emissions. Eventually they learn to incorporate the operation principles in the desgin of the engine. The first round of emissions controls were pitiful and engine power dropped dramatically. Then they adopted FI and feedback systems and power returned while still being clean. Example is air injection versus DFCO. Power robbing lower compression to reduce NOX versus precise egr flow and much higher compression.

When you have the tail wagging the dog, reguators writing laws that have no basis in cound engineering, then it takes a while for the engineers to catch up with designs that incorporate later generations of systems. The death of the Civic VX was due to small percentages of NOX over the limit. Kill the design, but don't even consider giving it a few years to mature with additional development. No incentive to truly innovate without a balanced approach to emissions.

The end result is efficiency suffers as research continues until the systems become truly integrated. In the mean time economy suffers, but the regulators see the percentage value as success when the real success is lower emissions because of greater efficiency.

regards
Mech

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by Daox

I know its not apples to apples, but I was just reading an article in an industrial magazine about off road diesel engines and their latest on hitting tier 4 final emissions. Pretty much every maker is claiming better efficiency despite the new emissions equipment. I also find it hard to believe that the equipment just doesn't work. It obviously goes through a lot of testing and it wouldn't pass the emissions tests if it didn't work.

As far as the FE goes, it's a tricky comparison to make. Let's way we have 3 scenarios:
1) Older engine, that didn't have to meet strict emissions standards
2) Newer engine, as it comes from the factory, meeting the new standards
3) Newer engine, set up for FE but allowed to exceed the modern strict standards

Now, in many cases, #2 gets equal to slightly better FE than #1. However, this isn't because of the lower emissions per se, but rather because of the additional technology added (i.e., common rail fuel injection, variable geometry turbocharger, etc.). If you just tried to tune #1 to meet the modern standards, the FE would be absolutely horrible. Manufactures didn't add the technology earlier because, while they would have increased the FE of #1, most customers wouldn't be willing to pay for the additional cost. Now #3 gets much better FE than #1, because it has all the additional technology, but not the emissions constraints.


As far as the reliablility goes, I think euromodder might have overstated it a little bit, but he's absolutely correct that when EGR & DPF's first came out there were serious, serious issues with reliablity (mine was the first year). After a few years, the reliablity has come a long way. At least for the typical person. Keep in mind that the systems are designed for "normal" duty cycles. When you start driving efficiently and "non-normal" problems can often arise--most commonly due to the fact that the aftertreatment needs to stay quite hot to be effective, and driving efficiently lowers the amount of heat sent into the exhaust.

It's not really that different than what the gasoline world went through years ago with catalytic converters, electronic fuel injection, etc. Some of the first models had some serious issues, but most were worked through in a few years.

[btracing]

Congratulations on your results!

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by Daox

Pretty much every maker is claiming better efficiency despite the new emissions equipment.

They would have even better efficiency without it.

I also find it hard to believe that the equipment just doesn't work.

There's plenty of evidence though on EU car forums.
Enough to have companies offering DPF removal services !

It obviously goes through a lot of testing and it wouldn't pass the emissions tests if it didn't work.

They don't exactly use X years old cars for the tests.
The cars are new(ish) , especially prepared and checked to make sure everything is working 110% .

The tests are also so short that the DPF equipment doesn't even have to work during the tests - the filtering will obviously work, but the car won't need to regenerate the filter during the tests.

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by Diesel_Dave

As far as the reliablility goes, I think euromodder might have overstated it a little bit, but he's absolutely correct that when EGR & DPF's first came out there were serious, serious issues with reliablity (mine was the first year). After a few years, the reliablity has come a long way.

Yet I still see people pop up in car forums with the same or similar issues that I have - their cars are 5-6 years newer than mine, even with updated engines.

The frequency might be a bit lower - though these newer cars don't yet have as many miles on them - but the issues are still there.


Gotta check out my car tomorrow - there's oil on the crankcase ventilation tube and on the air intake where the vent connects to it.


PSA / FoMoCo still use a plastic rack & pinion on the throttle valves - these simply wear out over time, skip teeth, or simply stop moving at all.

Mazda and Mitsubishi have recently kicked out PSA as their Diesel engine supplier.