I admit it--I've deleted my emissions equiptment

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by ron

did you ever have it tested afterwords to see how your doing with emissions. in cal. you have to reinstall every 2 yrs

No, in Indiana there are no inspections of any kind (emissions or safety), however, I did everything in a way that it could be put back on (even though the DPF is clogged).

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by euromodder

With all the after-treatment stuff gone, why not go with Biodiesel or a high BD blend ?

It'll make less soot.
It'll make "sizeable", flocking soot, not the < 2,5 µm microscopic soot that eventually DPFs produce and that goes even deeper in everyone's lungs.

Some reports state that with rapeseed esters, NOx goes down rather than up. Dunno if you can get RME or REE biodiesels locally ?

Another way to clean up your emissions is CNG blending.
Wether you can recoup the cost for that installation depends on how many miles you expect to run this truck - and wether you can get CNG locally.

I don't have a good source for either biodiesel or CNG. CNG would take quite a bit of modification. I actually know quite a bit about this engine and biodiesel. I spent four years testing biodiesel in a 6.7L Cummins (with EGR). I does cut the soot enormously (90%+), however, the NOx increases are quite sizable (30-40% in some cases). RME is more prevalant in Europe--over here SME (soy) is more popular. The feedstock doesn't have much of an effect on NOx. It's more dependent on the engine. EGR engines typically have a much higher % increase in NOx from biodiesel. If you're interested I can send you my thesis--it's probably good for insomnia as well

I have thought about making my own biodiesel but, quite frankly, with only going through about 1 tank a month and not being able to use the bio in winter, it'd be quite a bit of hassle for not a lot of savings. That, and taking up space in my garage. At some point I thought about setting up a biodiesel "co-op" where several people would share a commons processor, but I've never gotten around to it.

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by jakobnev

Have you put any thought into developing a DPF that regenerates with power from a wall-socket?

(Who knows, maybe i could be as simple as a hole in the tube where a hot air gun fits.)

It takes an enormous amout of heat to get the reaction started--like a sustained 500+ deg F for several minutes. You basically have to ignite carbon. You're not gonna get that from a wall outlet.

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by vskid3

I would be willing to bet that Dave's truck ends up putting out less emissions than stock. He doesn't have to waste fuel clearing out any filters and he probably drives a lot more sensibly than the average person with a diesel truck.

CO2 emissions are definitely way reduced. NOx and PM are almost definitely still higher, because the 2007 to 2007.5 change was an order of magnitude decrease in NOx and PM standards.

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by euromodder

Do I have to say it again ?

DIESELS ARE NOT THE SOLUTION

CLEAN DIESELS ARE DIRTY MARKETING

Stay away from modern diesels.

Suprising as it may sound, I'm actually not as hard on "clean diesels" as you might think. The newer ones are much more reliable than when they first came out. I recently read an article in Light & Medium Duty Truck magazine where they did a study of truck fleet reliablity. 2007 MY trucks (first year in the US) were far worse than 2006 and previous, however, by 2010 most of the manufacturers had worked out enough of the issues to statistically bring the reliablility back to pre-2007 levels. Also, the overall FC is not a large hit because of all the other bells and wistles that have been added (VG turbos, common rail fuel injection, etc.).

So, in the end, we got vehicles that are much cleaner and have about the same reliablility and fuel economy, however they do cost a lot more. Also, "deleting" is very prevalent. I put up a poll over at cumminsforum.com. 200+ people responded and 60-70% had removed the emissions equitment--even in areas with inspections. I'm not necessarily saying that's representative of the general truck-driving population, but you still have to wonder.

[lowglider]

NOx gets reduced to N2 naturally, it just needs a little time.

Soot can be reduced without DPF, just needs more boost (more air) or less fuel in the mixture. Since you have an ECM Eco tune, it should smoke less.

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by lowglider

NOx gets reduced to N2 naturally, it just needs a little time.

Soot can be reduced without DPF, just needs more boost (more air) or less fuel in the mixture. Since you have an ECM Eco tune, it should smoke less.

I'm not really an expert on the emissions after they leave the tailpipe, but I assume it doesn't just harmlessly turn into N2 or it wouldn't be regulated. NOx is a big factor in smog generation. Not that there's any smog issues in rural Indiana.

Smoke generally does go down with more air, and an eco-tune will decrease the engine-out soot, but not the tailpipe out soot. More air can lower soot by say 2-3 times but the DPF takes out 10+ times the soot. If it were just a matter of more air, the manufacturers wouldn't have put them on. Look at Euro 5 vs Euro 6 engines. The Euro 5 PM standards were low, but still high enough that some manufacturers could get by without a DPF. Euro 6 PM standards, however, are so low that a DPF is mandatory for all practiacal purposes.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by euromodder

Stay away from modern diesels.

I took my old diesel and made it run cleaner.
Not sure if it makes more or less NOx with water injection as opposed to the restricted sluge filled intake sucking down EGR while blowing tons of soot out the exhaust and consuming/leaking a quart of oil every 1000 miles.
Now I get nearly no smoke.

[2000neon]

I'm going to be honest, your truck is still way better for the environment than my el camino!

[slowmover]

I'd say most owners aren't very interested, in a way. Circa 1968 and for the next ten years with lousy performance and lessened fuel economy there were a great number of people with mechanical aptitude and skills to slightly re-tune the gas cars and those early emissions controls. Today, the sophistication level is different, (not necessarily less) but I'd wager there are fewer with the interest .

The oil field boom down here sees more diesel pickemups than one can shake a stick at . . . and I'd doubt there is much desire for deletions (until warranty miles are gone). With the second or third owner it may make more sense.

I read recently (here?) that the exhaust/aftertreatment on a new Dodge Cummins is worth as much, retail, as an entire Hemi replacement longblock plus 545RE transmission, or, about $15k. I tend to agree (versus the magazine cheerleading) with the idea floating around that perhaps by MY2016 we'll see the real bugs worked out, overall. Dodge going to DEF in MY2013 (even though the Cab & Chassis has had it for several years) may mean more teething problems. But the Ford and Chevy DEF pickups are at least seeing better mpg than they were from 2006 forward.

Now, to just get them back to early HPCR or LB-7 mpg numbers!! IMO, the stupid horsepower wars are a real part of the problem with 1T pickup mpg numbers. One will note that the 4500/5500 series medium duty trucks are running more sane power numbers.

The biggest question is whether the days of 350k B50 life are gone (for the CTD) and whether any of them are genuinely 250k engines any more . . direct injection/turbocharged gasoline is (will) make real inroads in light duty trucks, even at the heavier end of the spectrum.

Reliability is the real issue. DD's truck is, in my mind, a bit like an experimental aircraft: modified to achieve an end somewhat outside the norm, thus no type certification. If reliability is improved, (nay, maintained) then the experiment is a success. Components can always be re-fitted at the proper time, after all. And after market suppliers like EFI LIVE may make tuning some of these choked down trucks a more likely proposition in the best interest of family economy (fuel burn) while keeping emissions low overall (with some exceptions as noted).

.