Technical EGR blanking

[QinteQ]

....or your a concerned parent that has an interest in his kids well being, and of others.

If the exhaust meets UK emission standards, is the EGR working or not part of the UK MOT ?

I have a UK plastic photo-driving licence I paid £35 for some years ago. I've only had one pull in my 71 years, that was about 8 years ago, and they would not accept the plastic [ European Issue Requirement ] issue but wanted a proper paper issue UK licence.

My understanding is that the EGR is not part of the VOSA training for the Diesel Smoke Test but is a European non-enforceable legislation to reduce the particulates.

The unfortunate comment by ' conanhoward ' induced no doubt by too much ' liffy water ' was probably intended to be humorous but in these sad days of PC may have been misunderstood.

However if blanking the EGR solves your problem, and evidence supports the fact that for many people it does - go for it.

Any certificate holders in here ? I'd be interested in your UK-MOT comments.

 

[momoe]

The EGR process was introduced to reduce NOx emissions, there is no reduction in particulates, in fact it causes more because it promotes a richer, cooler burn which induces particulates.
The EGR valve only works at part throttle settings, this is when a small amount of fuel is being injected which leads to a lean and therefore hot combustion.
At higher temperatures, typically at the end of the burn, Nitrogen and Oxygen combine to form NOx gases - these are the problem as they cause smog.

The EGR process does reduce NOx emissions at the expense of economy and power, any process which richens the mixture and moves the combution parameters away from the stoichiometric (perfect air/fuel ratio) is going to impact economy and power. Whilst NOx gases aren't environmentally friendly neither is using more fuel than necessary.

NOx emissions are not part of the MOT test at present so it boils down to a matter of preference. each has an environmental impact so there is no win/win solution.

 

[QinteQ]

The EGR process was introduced to reduce NOx emissions, there is no reduction in particulates, in fact it causes more because it promotes a richer, cooler burn which induces particulates.
The EGR valve only works at part throttle settings, this is when a small amount of fuel is being injected which leads to a lean and therefore hot combustion.
At higher temperatures, typically at the end of the burn, Nitrogen and Oxygen combine to form NOx gases - these are the problem as they cause smog.

The EGR process does reduce NOx emissions at the expense of economy and power, any process which richens the mixture and moves the combution parameters away from the stoichiometric (perfect air/fuel ratio) is going to impact economy and power. Whilst NOx gases aren't environmentally friendly neither is using more fuel than necessary.

NOx emissions are not part of the MOT test at present so it boils down to a matter of preference. each has an environmental impact so there is no win/win solution.

Thanks for your input momoe.

 

[T14086]

The EGR process was introduced to reduce NOx emissions, there is no reduction in particulates, in fact it causes more because it promotes a richer, cooler burn which induces particulates.

Hence DPF filters to reduce 90% of these particles (PM10) which IMO are the nastiest of them all once in the respitory system.

 

[momoe]

T14086,
I'm not sure I understand where your position is on the EGR issue.

You appear to be a strong advocate of a working EGR system, i.e. no blanking of the EGR mechanism, however you've also stated that (sic) "your a concerned parent that has an interest in his kids wellbeing" and that soot particles are the nastiest of them all.

Multipla's don't have a DPF filter, therefore the best option for us is to make sure our engines burn as efficiently as possible.
EGR doesn't achieve this, it reduces NOx at the expense of economy, power and particulates.

As stated previously, there is no win/win situation, however more efficient and economic combustion is my preference albeit at the expense of NOx emission is my preferred choice.

 

[T14086]

T14086,
I'm not sure I understand where your position is on the EGR issue

A good moderator generates discussion while keeping his personal views to himself

However if you insist for my own view......both my diesels have fully operating EGR's.

 

[QinteQ]

A good moderator generates discussion while keeping his personal views to himself

However if you insist for my own view......both my diesels have fully operating EGR's.

HiYa T14086

- someone with a broken bugly just wants it fixed as cheap as possible
- - in fact they just want it fixed at all
- a menu of increasingly expensive opinions needs to be worked through to find a fix
- - the EGR blank on that menu of options is a virtually cost free ' bean tin ' DIY fix
- it has a well proven record of increase in efficiency / decrease in costs
- - leading to a corresponding and noticeable increase in MPG

My point in #21, was that it was never ever enacted / made law in the UK, so someone high up took advice and decided that that if you want to make your car inefficient with an EGR feel free its your money. Conversely if you take the EGR out of your car you will never be prosecuted by the state and the state will not impose a [ training / diagnostic ] cost on industry and the general public.

Both of my bugly's have a working EGR, but if I had a problem I could fix FOC with the EGR blank I wouldn't hesitate for a second.

 

[T14086]

Technically (if you think about it) you are altering the emission system and therefore (as when fitting alloy wheels or some other mod) altering the car from it's original purpose and.this invalidates warranty so could altering emission system (blanking off EGR) invidate insurance

Can any insurance people here answer this?

 

[QinteQ]

Technically (if you think about it) you are altering the emission system and therefore (as when fitting alloy wheels or some other mod) altering the car from it's original purpose and.this invalidates warranty so could altering emission system (blanking off EGR) invalidate insurance

Can any insurance people here answer this?

- how would that apply to countries [ in and outside Europe ] where an EGR is not required for example Great Britain ?
- then how would UK insurance companies apply that to vehicles imported into the UK from a non EGR marketplace ?

My point

- it may have implications for warrent [ies]
- how would an insurance company take on a government over a law / requirement that does not exist in the nation state ?
- anyone [ theAA / RAC / motorist lobby ] for example taking a test case against an insurer would be on a 100% winner

 

[momoe]

Technically T14086 is right, a modification is a modification.

As regards alloy wheels, as long as you stay within tyre sizes for the vehicle range it's not normally an issue.
If you go outside of these, they are at liberty to send an engineer to inspect the installation (at your cost).

If you bought a non-EU spec car that didn't have an EGR and were up front with the insurance company as to it's origin, then as long as they insure it and you do not make any modifications to the vehicle you have a legally binding insurance contract.

There were some manufacturers, (VW for certain) who had different power outputs for different markets. So you could buy a 150bhp Passat from the EU, whilst the equivalent UK model offered 130bhp.
My father imported a Renault 25 which was allegedly UK specification, it had a completely different braking system for starters and trim was definitely not UK spec but insurance cost was no different.

T14086, as regards EGR working without the swirl gaskets, technically yes but why then, did Fiat spend time and money developing these gaskets, because it was working or because it was flawed?

 

[T14086]

- how would that apply to countries [ in and outside Europe ] where an EGR is not required for example Great Britain ?

European directive 94/69 states all cars must be fitted with a emission controlling and monitoring device.

If you bought a non-EU spec car that didn't have an EGR.

T14086, as regards EGR working without the swirl gaskets, technically yes but why then, did Fiat spend time and money developing these gaskets, because it was working or because it was flawed?

Cant be many non-euro countries that do not have emission laws?

I dont use the swirl gaskets as they are not for use on doblos, however by agitating the air on intake would give a fuller burn. Would be interesting to see what state the egr and gasket is after a year and if there are less deposits.

 

[QinteQ]

European directive 94/69 states all cars must be fitted with a emission controlling and monitoring device.

Cant be many non-euro countries that do not have emission laws?

I dont use the swirl gaskets as they are not for use on doblos, however by agitating the air on intake would give a fuller burn. Would be interesting to see what state the egr and gasket is after a year and if there are less deposits.

"" Member states shall bring into force the laws regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this directive by 1st June 1998 ""

It was adopted [ agreed by the UK ] and never enacted [ law & regulation ] by the UK. I've never disputed with you that the EU made such a directive indeed I was the first to bring it up in #21 #27 #29]. There is no need for anyone in the UK to have an EGR - its just not a legal requirement - only the standard emissions test applies.

They also had rules on bent bananas and cucumbers, two other rules that were never enacted [ signed off as agreed ] by the UK government.

You seem to be selective in what you are prepared to debate, and a little too evangelical in your pursuit of persuading others to spend on this cloddish and crude design feature :bang:, in general the engineering idea that making an engine run super rich to make it run cool seems a nonsensical, and in the particular, this isn't a water-jacketed Renault DCi, its an old school Fiat lump and a very nice lump at that, most never reach three bars, you never see frequent or even .. .. very infrequent posts in this forum complaining of hot JTD's. In fact you almost never see such posts even in the hottest summer.

£60 for diagnostics and whate£ver cost for a replacement EGR whan its just not required and as stated above is a dispensable / unnecessary requirement .. .. whatever are you thinking T14086

 

[momoe]

Other than Renault DCI's overcooking their turbo's when EGR is blanked, I'm not aware of any other manufacturers having issues. Renault are well known for having some of the cheapest component sourcing in the industry, so it's not surprising that there's less tolerance to anything outside the envelope.

I'm aware that EGR blanking is fairly common on Ford TDCI's, Transits especially seem to benefit from this, but again not aware of any issues.

I suspect we've got EGR's as the EEC accounts for the vast majority of the Multipla's sales, the fact that we've never implemented the NOx legislation could change tomorrow.

 

[QinteQ]

Other than Renault DCI's overcooking their turbo's when EGR is blanked, I'm not aware of any other manufacturers having issues. Renault are well known for having some of the cheapest component sourcing in the industry, so it's not surprising that there's less tolerance to anything outside the envelope.

I'm aware that EGR blanking is fairly common on Ford TDCI's, Transits especially seem to benefit from this, but again not aware of any issues.

I suspect we've got EGR's as the EEC accounts for the vast majority of the Multipla's sales, the fact that we've never implemented the NOx legislation could change tomorrow.

HiYa momoe, yes seems to be EEC only, I mean it exists all over the world as a manufacturing norm, but only the EEC tried [ without success ] to make it mandatory.

The best way to look in the future is to look at history, and yes it could as you say ' change tomorrow ' .. .. but it could have changed every single tomorrow over last 5,110 tomorrows .. .. but never did so it looks like it will never be be implemented for the next 14 years at least

 

[T14086]

I've never disputed with you that the EU made such a directive indeed I was the first to bring it up in #21 #27 #29]. There is no need for anyone in the UK to have an EGR - its just not a legal requirement - only the standard emissions test applies.

Absolutely, I just stated it in general not specifically at yourself. There are many ways to meet emission laws and the EGR is but one way (partial way) of meeting these. Suppose every manufacturer prefers different methods or ones they have a patent for.


You seem to be selective in what you are prepared to debate, and a little too evangelical in your pursuit of persuading others to spend on this cloddish and crude design feature

As said I'm here to mod not to preach, I have opinions which as stated I try to keep to myself. I try not to recommend any 'design features' as its up to the individual to come to a choice. My choice is keeping my EGRs operational.

 

[momoe]

T14086,
noted your comment that Doblo's don't use the swirl gasket mod, do you know the reason for this as I can't figure why one engine installation requires this and one doesn't?

Thanks.

 

[T14086]

T14086,
noted your comment that Doblo's don't use the swirl gasket mod, do you know the reason for this as I can't figure why one engine installation requires this and one doesn't?

Thanks.

The doblo would flip over backwards.

 

[widemouthfrog]

In defence of 'The Mod', as everyone seems to be having at go at him:

I would not say that the JTD is a great engine. I've owned several diesels, normally aspirated and turbocharged, and size for size, the 115 in my car is a very weak performer, epsecially in terms of low rev torque (and I hasten to add it is in good working order and well maintained). It revs sweetly enough, but just doesn't have the stump-pulling urge of some others I've owned or driven. It's also not that well balanced/damped at tickover, in the Multipla at least.

Bearing that in mind, I'm not surprised it's not pushing its thermal operating envelope. If it was, I would class it as a crap engine, rather than merely adequate. I would LOVE to have my old 2.2TDCi lump in the Multi - that would be a pretty impressive Q-car.

I've mentioned the DCi Renaults and their problems and I also know that the TDCi (2.2 Ford at least, again from personal experience) can have temperature problems. Both have torque figures far in excess of that of the Fiat.

So perhaps there's a link. it looks as though Fiat/Vauhall/Saab/every other mob that chose to use this unit made a deliberate decision to keep well within the performance envelope possible from this size of engine. Even the later variants, not fitted to the Multi, aren't exactly stellar (though the last of the Saab ones weren't bad - were they JTD family though?). Failure of the EGR is not catastophic on the JTD, it just leaves you with performance in milk float league. For other makes, it's rather more serious.

You pays your money, you takes your choice.

BTW, is a decat legal?

 

[momoe]

Widemouthfrog,
good point about the JTD being under-developed.
I had 4 turbo-diesels prior to the Multi and the 90bhp XUD Citroen lump was the most similar in characteristics, although the JTD is a later engine.
Maybe the XUD lump was a little advanced in its day, as my first turbo-diesel it surprised me and a lot of my colleagues.

The JTD was developed from 105 to 115 in Multi and that was that, VAG in particular pushed the envelope much further on their 1.9 PD lump and final versions were at 160bhp.

Quite a few companies, Red Dot in particular do very good chipped JTD's with no apparent reliability issues so it's not as if the engine isn't capable.

Would like my Honda 2.2 engine in the Multi but it would very new wine in a very aged bottle, with all that sudden quietness up front I'd be wondering what all the other noises were!

Anyway, despite the mechanicals requiring frequent spanner work, that's not the point with Multipla, it's the package that wins folk over - the sum of the parts is just a little bit more than whole.
I love the car, for something Brava based it's capacity within it's wheelbase is amazing, just a shame it wasn't developed further.

 

[widemouthfrog]

Anyway, despite the mechanicals requiring frequent spanner work, that's not the point with Multipla, it's the package that wins folk over - the sum of the parts is just a little bit more than whole.
I love the car, for something Brava based it's capacity within it's wheelbase is amazing, just a shame it wasn't developed further.

Couldn't agree more. It is a very clever design.

A nine-seat 'Grande Multipla' (keeping the flat floor all the way through and making the nearside front passenger seat removable) would have been superb.