Maxxis Tyres

Decatting / Removing EGR and DPF Filters etc.

User avatar
Apocalypse
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 809
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:40 pm

Decatting / Removing EGR and DPF Filters etc.

#1

Post by Apocalypse »

IT's pretty common practice in SA and many other countries to remove the emissions control devices once faced with a bill to maintain them outside of warranty.

Like most things, peoples ethics and morals go out of the window when it affects their own pocket.

Of course, there is no check on emissions in SA (or even a roadworthy check)

I don't think that anyone can doubt that pollution is a major problem (whether or not you believe in human induced Climate Change) - the fact of the matter is that since installation of pollutant reduction devices such as CATS, DPF and EGR many cities have become far more pleasant to be, 20 years ago people wore face masks in LA and Tokyo , most cities have recorded a reduction in respiratory disease and acid erosion of monuments has all but ceased.


So is it rational or ethical to just dump the system and contribute to world pollution for the sake of a few bucks?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

User avatar
Wave
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times
Posts: 622
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 4:23 am

#2

Post by Wave »

There are various schools of thought on this;

Firstly, when these emission control systems go wrong they are very costly to repair or replace, so on older vehicles (out of warranty )the cheaper option is to remove them, I know that VW DPF's are problematic, many vehicle owners get sick of the headache and get the DPF removed and the DPF "deleted" from the ECU's software, no more errors, no more headaches, similar with catalytic convert, if I recall correctly a Toyota Hilux V6 has 4 catalytic convertors, over time these get blocked and need to be replaced, have you priced replacing these? especially if you require all of them to be replaced...

Secondly is longevity of motor, an EGR loves to leave a soot and carbon build up on all the intake parts that the gasses are recycled through, there are numerous videos and pictures etc with proof of how an EGR can really hinder performance of the engine due to the recycled gasses leaving heavy soot and carbon build ups, often resulting in the EGR system rendering itself useless, or jamming open resulting in power loss and heavy fuel consumption.

Thirdly, more power, anyone who likes to modify a vehicle in order to unlock a few more kilowatts, the catalytic convert steals lots of power, so an easy upgrade is to de-cat the exhaust giving quicker turbo spool up and a few extra ponies.

In a 3rd world country when masses of our population still cook on open fires/flames picking on a small percentage of vehicle owners who "bypass" emissions control systems seems pretty pointless.
Geoff Craig
'24 Mitsu Triton
'08 Toyota Blade Master G
'10 Conqueror Comfort

NEW
Location: Centurion
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 2 times
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 10:49 am

#3

Post by NEW »

Wave wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 12:23 pm

Thirdly, more power, anyone who likes to modify a vehicle in order to unlock a few more kilowatts, the catalytic convert steals lots of power, so an easy upgrade is to de-cat the exhaust giving quicker turbo spool up and a few extra ponies.

That one is taking it a bit too far isn't it?

I am not bunny fondler, but that to me is a bit much. The whataboutism of other peoples "emissions" shouldn't matter....

User avatar
Apocalypse
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 809
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:40 pm

#4

Post by Apocalypse »

Wave wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 12:23 pm
There are various schools of thought on this;

Firstly, when these emission control systems go wrong they are very costly to repair or replace, so on older vehicles (out of warranty )the cheaper option is to remove them, I know that VW DPF's are problematic, many vehicle owners get sick of the headache and get the DPF removed and the DPF "deleted" from the ECU's software, no more errors, no more headaches, similar with catalytic convert, if I recall correctly a Toyota Hilux V6 has 4 catalytic convertors, over time these get blocked and need to be replaced, have you priced replacing these? especially if you require all of them to be replaced...

Secondly is longevity of motor, an EGR loves to leave a soot and carbon build up on all the intake parts that the gasses are recycled through, there are numerous videos and pictures etc with proof of how an EGR can really hinder performance of the engine due to the recycled gasses leaving heavy soot and carbon build ups, often resulting in the EGR system rendering itself useless, or jamming open resulting in power loss and heavy fuel consumption.

Thirdly, more power, anyone who likes to modify a vehicle in order to unlock a few more kilowatts, the catalytic convert steals lots of power, so an easy upgrade is to de-cat the exhaust giving quicker turbo spool up and a few extra ponies.

In a 3rd world country when masses of our population still cook on open fires/flames picking on a small percentage of vehicle owners who "bypass" emissions control systems seems pretty pointless.

i don't agree on the more power part of decatting. every motorsport shop in Europe will tell you they make more power with Cats than without. but yes, it's lot cheaper to ditch them and you can gyppo the engine management to make more power than the stock motor.

DPFs are like any other filter - they fill up with ***poo*** and need replacing. the point is - they remove the harmful emissions. It's also cheaper to ditch the inlet filter than to replace it.... but would you?

EGR - likewise, yes, they bring emissions down and gum up - especially with high sulphur fuels.

yes, it costs money to keep them in working order.



South Africa is currently the 14th highest polluter in the world total emissions (source: https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/s ... f-co2.html) despite having quite a small population.

cooking on open flames is an English thing, whereby they sacrifice pork sausages to a roaring fire. Here in Africa we braai on wood coals.

I can't say what the effect of braais and open fires is on pollution - but apparently it's quite small compared to cement production, Power production and vehicles emissions.

my question remains - is it the right thing to do to contribute by bypassing pollution reduction systems simply because it's cheap and we can get away with it?


irresponsibilitydemotivator.jpg
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

BushWacker
Location: Johannesburg
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 81 times
Posts: 1838
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 6:27 pm

#5

Post by BushWacker »

... theres emissions and theres emissions..
and its a blanket term for the multiple of things involved eg
* Gaseous components , namely the CO2
which surprisingly arouses most of the public angst
* Particulates and
* Toxics etc that are included in the above etc
* green house gases etc
* etc etc ...
* the quanta & proportion of the above emitted

If we concentrate and direct most of our effort on generally reducing the general amount of emissions but removing most particulates and and toxic emissions, in my opinion, we practically achieve a lot ...

... the great battle against CO2 generation and/or isolating and/or sterilizing CO2 etc is , in my opinion, probably largely futile and mis-directed.

... may be the easiest first move for offroaders is to ban any thing over 5pots or 2.5L ... :lol: :lol:
... Famous Fiver VoorLoper ...
... Veni Vidi Vici ...

User avatar
Apocalypse
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 809
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:40 pm

#6

Post by Apocalypse »

BushWacker wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:50 pm
... theres emissions and theres emissions..
and its a blanket term for the multiple of things involved eg
* Gaseous components , namely the CO2
which surprisingly arouses most of the public angst
* Particulates and
* Toxics etc that are included in the above etc
* green house gases etc
* etc etc ...
* the quanta & proportion of the above emitted

If we concentrate and direct most of our effort on generally reducing the general amount of emissions but removing most particulates and and toxic emissions, in my opinion, we practically achieve a lot ...

... the great battle against CO2 generation and/or isolating and/or sterilizing CO2 etc is , in my opinion, probably largely futile and mis-directed.


Well, CO2 is reabsorbed in a healthy ecology.

as an example, the beef industry comes under much fire for CO2 emission. (actually it's cow burps, not cow farts that are the problem)

like all animals, oxygen is converted to CO2 by breathing, which is turned back to Oxygen by plant life.

Humans (And other omnivores and carnivores) can't eat Cellulose structures (grass) but cows (and other ungulates) can and turn it into protein that we can digest.

now, thats great for game and veld reared beef where the ***poo*** lands on the grass, breaks down and provides the nutrients that allow the grsss to grow that feeds them and converts the CO2 - life is happy.

put those same cows in a factory farm, feed them cheap feed, they burp more, plus the piss and shit becomes a swamp that they stand in, and breeds disease and is toxic, emits methane and more CO2 etc.

same for humans actually. Look at waterborne sewerage and the damage it does.



So - yes, agreed, the CO2 isn't the big problem - it's the particulates and other acids emitted.

Exactly what Cats, DPFs and EGRs remove from vehicle emissions.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

Ricof4e
Location: Nambia
Has thanked: 601 times
Been thanked: 237 times
Posts: 1752
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:40 pm

#7

Post by Ricof4e »

Apart from what Apoc has written, I look at it from a different perspective.

1) Don't fix something that ain't broken, IOW - don't fiddle with your car by removing CATS, DPF etc.

2) If you want more power - buy something with more power.

3) Vehicle manufacturers spend millions upon millions on engineers with years upon years of experience. Quinton with his local tune up garage does not know better nor can he out-engineer it.
Ranger Mildtrak
Scorpio Curry Cruiser
A tos-lookin', lunchbox, lipstick and powder puff carryin' home-built trailer

BushWacker
Location: Johannesburg
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 81 times
Posts: 1838
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 6:27 pm

#8

Post by BushWacker »

... but then maybe we need compare ...

emission levels of unregulated 2.5L
vs
emission levels of regulated 3.6L

PS We now know how VW and other major
motor companies engineers really directed
their efforts !!!
... ‘tactical emission control’ :lol:
... Famous Fiver VoorLoper ...
... Veni Vidi Vici ...

User avatar
ThysleRoux
Location: Cape Town
Been thanked: 1 time
Posts: 949
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 7:32 pm

#9

Post by ThysleRoux »

BushWacker wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:00 pm
... but then maybe we need compare ...

emission levels of unregulated 2.5L
vs
emission levels of regulated 3.6L

PS We now know how VW and other major
motor companies engineers really directed
their efforts !!!
... ‘tactical emission control’ :lol:
Let's forget about CO2 for the comparison - I am sure that a pre-emissions controlled (or one where these items have been removed or have become ineffective) 2.5lt [SPIT] Diesel engine emits more particles into the atmosphere at 100 km/h than Thor's 4.7lt V8 does at the same speed. At full throttle, the difference would be even greater.

DISCLAIMER: The above is my personal opinion, strengthened by my dislike of (small) diesel engines and not scientifically proven :mrgreen:
I refuse to be POLITICALLY CORRECT to impress others - Deal with it
FLEX is UNDERRATED :twisted:

BushWacker
Location: Johannesburg
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 81 times
Posts: 1838
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 6:27 pm

#10

Post by BushWacker »

Image
ThysleRoux wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:25 am
BushWacker wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:00 pm
... but then maybe we need compare ...

emission levels of unregulated 2.5L
vs
emission levels of regulated 3.6L

PS We now know how VW and other major
motor companies engineers really directed
their efforts !!!
... ‘tactical emission control’ :lol:
Let's forget about CO2 for the comparison - I am sure that a pre-emissions controlled (or one where these items have been removed or have become ineffective) 2.5lt [SPIT] Diesel engine emits more particles into the atmosphere at 100 km/h than Thor's 4.7lt V8 does at the same speed. At full throttle, the difference would be even greater.

DISCLAIMER: The above is my personal opinion, strengthened by my dislike of (small) diesel engines and not scientifically proven :mrgreen:
... you could be right ! !
... as my suspicion is only intuitive ...
If I was monitoring emission controls, for the manufacturers and/or the state, I would demand accurate mass-balance tests and analysis to reconcile what happens emission-wise between a vehicles intake and output ports...fuel, lubricants, gases , the works,
over full range of op-conditions ...
... Famous Fiver VoorLoper ...
... Veni Vidi Vici ...

User avatar
Apocalypse
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 809
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:40 pm

#11

Post by Apocalypse »

ThysleRoux wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:25 am
BushWacker wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:00 pm
... but then maybe we need compare ...

emission levels of unregulated 2.5L
vs
emission levels of regulated 3.6L

PS We now know how VW and other major
motor companies engineers really directed
their efforts !!!
... ‘tactical emission control’ :lol:
Let's forget about CO2 for the comparison - I am sure that a pre-emissions controlled (or one where these items have been removed or have become ineffective) 2.5lt [SPIT] Diesel engine emits more particles into the atmosphere at 100 km/h than Thor's 4.7lt V8 does at the same speed. At full throttle, the difference would be even greater.

DISCLAIMER: The above is my personal opinion, strengthened by my dislike of (small) diesel engines and not scientifically proven :mrgreen:


Diesel is certainly a far dirtier fuel, especially in small engines that are subject to a lot of idling and acceleration.

As a constant load/rpm motor they are a lot better, but even Ford have recently built a 7,3l 16 V pushrod gas V8 with low down torque for their latest trucks as in real life usage a gas motor is more economical and lower in emissions

Diesel is really only any good in seriously slow speed motors that give it time to burn properly on the piston travel. Ships are pretty much it, and ironically, the carbon particles landing in the ocean aren't horrific to the environment as I understand it.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

User avatar
Apocalypse
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 809
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:40 pm

#12

Post by Apocalypse »

As an aside , there is a bit of an urban legend that diesel has a higher calorific value than petrol.

This is kind of true - but by MASS Diesel and Petrol calorific values are all but identical

but a litre of petrol is only 700g of fuel , and a litre of diesel is around 850g of fuel. (approx and depending on temperature, grade etc)

so, your 10l/100km petrol vehicle is actually only using 7kg / 100km, while it's 'more economical' Diesel sibling using 9l/100km is using 7,65kg/100km
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

User avatar
grips
Location: kathu
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 132 times
Posts: 1168
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 5:08 am

#13

Post by grips »

The motor industry is one of the big culprits in South Africa/ Africa. Many of the local models come with less emission stuff than their European counterparts. Minus DPF and Cats not monitored by ECU. These Cats were only fitted to fool the Bunny Huggers. So no ECU controls to detect blockages or adjust mixtures with sensors on each side. They tell customers to only use 50ppm diesel and lower the reason to protect their unmonitored cats.
You will never find me without Stroh or a 4x4 :D

BushWacker
Location: Johannesburg
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 81 times
Posts: 1838
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 6:27 pm

#14

Post by BushWacker »

... now they going to take away my 500ppm ...
:o :roll: :o :roll: :o :roll: :o
... Famous Fiver VoorLoper ...
... Veni Vidi Vici ...

User avatar
KurtG
Location: London
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 13 times
Posts: 2405
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 12:52 pm

#15

Post by KurtG »

You will always have 2SO
Flex is overrated

Post Reply