Instant MPG readout lagging is one
and cooling fan running at full pelt, with farting noise when turned of
General Would you swap?
- Thread starter IJK
- Start date
Currently reading:
General Would you swap?
Instant MPG readout lagging is one
and cooling fan running at full pelt, with farting noise when turned of
A somewhat rapid increase in real time fuel consumption.
Personally never really notice that on mine, just the lagging on over run.
Slightly more noise if idling, like the engine is racing, and a burning smell. And yes, it would help enormously if a coloured light came on to indicate when regen was happening.
Funnily enough, only about 2 days ago we parked on the drive and I though I could smell burning. Prompted me to check the oil there and then. That's the 1st time ever I've had that.
I've not noticed the ic display, but then I usually have it on either average mpg or oil temp.
Every day's a school day!!
I've not noticed the ic display, but then I usually have it on either average mpg or oil temp.
Every day's a school day!!
Thought I'd stick my two-penneth in. For those that are in some doubt as to the situation regarding DPF's, please take the time to look at the following links all freely found on't interweb:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/diesel-particulate-filters-guidance-note
http://www.ictworkshopsolutions.com/2013/11/dpf-removers-face-legal-issues/
http://www.entrans.co.uk/farcical enforcement of emission regulations.html
Thankyou, the first link completely sums up my feelings on the removal of dpf's
Thought I'd stick my two-penneth in. For those that are in some doubt as to the situation regarding DPF's, please take the time to look at the following links all freely found on't interweb:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/diesel-particulate-filters-guidance-note
http://www.ictworkshopsolutions.com/2013/11/dpf-removers-face-legal-issues/
http://www.entrans.co.uk/farcical enforcement of emission regulations.html
Music to my ears
Yep, and would-be DPF removers should note in particular:
From February 2014 the inspection of the exhaust system carried out during the MoT test will include a check for the presence of a DPF. A missing DPF, where one was fitted when the vehicle was built, will result in an MoT failure.
and
It is an offence under the Road vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations (Regulation 61a(3)) to use a vehicle which has been modified in such a way that it no longer complies with the air pollutant emissions standards it was designed to meet. Removal of a DPF will almost invariably contravene these requirements, making the vehicle illegal for road use. The potential penalties for failing to comply with Regulation 61a are fines of up to £1,000 for a car or £2,500 for a light goods vehicle.
A quick google search suggests the current consensus of informed opinion is that diesel particulates from vehicle exhaust are responsible for around 6% of all lung cancer deaths in the developed world. IMO the real villains are those in the motor trade who advertise and offer DPF removal services, and serious penalties are needed to deter and if necessary remove such folk from the party.
Last edited:
The devil, as always, is in the detail -
From February 2014 the inspection of the exhaust system carried out during the
MoT test will include a check for the presence of a DPF. A missing DPF, where one
was fitted when the vehicle was built, will result in an MoT failure.
It sounds very much to me like just a visual check. From what I've read on the web, the bar stewards who are removing DPFs gut the thing and refit the empty shell.
Maybe a similar operation on such persons' gonads is in order...??
BJM
From February 2014 the inspection of the exhaust system carried out during the
MoT test will include a check for the presence of a DPF. A missing DPF, where one
was fitted when the vehicle was built, will result in an MoT failure.
It sounds very much to me like just a visual check. From what I've read on the web, the bar stewards who are removing DPFs gut the thing and refit the empty shell.
Maybe a similar operation on such persons' gonads is in order...??
BJM
It will be so easy to catch these morons though. Hi, I'd like to get my dpf removed, can you do it? Yes! You're nicked.
I frequent a forum for Vw transporter vans, and in there the attitude is totally different.
Plenty of people wanting dpf delete, and plenty of 'tuners' offering the service.
No-one gives a stuff. There was also someone the other day who has fitted all terrain tyres.
225/75/16. Standard is 205/65/16. He was giving advise to others that as long as you stay within 10% of stock diameter you will be fine. I questioned insurance indemnity doing this kind of thing but it falls on deaf ears. They fit all sorts of things. Banded steels! I reckon an insurance co would have a fit if you told them 'yeah, they're wheels cut in half then welded back together wider'
On saying that though, there are plenty on there insured with Brentacre insurance who allow unlimited mods.
Plenty of people wanting dpf delete, and plenty of 'tuners' offering the service.
No-one gives a stuff. There was also someone the other day who has fitted all terrain tyres.
225/75/16. Standard is 205/65/16. He was giving advise to others that as long as you stay within 10% of stock diameter you will be fine. I questioned insurance indemnity doing this kind of thing but it falls on deaf ears. They fit all sorts of things. Banded steels! I reckon an insurance co would have a fit if you told them 'yeah, they're wheels cut in half then welded back together wider'
On saying that though, there are plenty on there insured with Brentacre insurance who allow unlimited mods.
Last edited:
Am I right in saying there are plenty of diesels driving around legally with no dpf's as it was not a requirement at time of manufacture? Should the owners be taken out and shot?
They generally have grandfather rights (vehicles are, by and large, not required to exceed the standards which applied at the time of manufacture), although there are additional requirements in Greater London which are seeing many older commercial vehicles off the road.
Improving the health of the nation and taking action to mitigate the known causes of premature death does, sadly, have a cost attached. The additional expense of properly maintaining a modern diesel engined vehicle is one example of such a cost and may be a game-changer as far as the economics of small diesel city cars are concerned.
I don't think an argument based on the premise that something is acceptable today just because it was accepted in the past is in any way sustainable, any more than finding examples of others behaving in a particular way can be used as a justification for condoning that behaviour.
Last edited:
Agreed and I'm all on for the benefits, is the bloke who removes a dpf more guilty then the guy legitimately driving without one though? I guess so.
Why? The vehicles they are driving are being driven legally (assuming the vehicle is roadworthy in every other way). The vehicle was manufactured without a DPF, the law has changed and now more recent diesel engines do require them.
At the end of the day that is what happens in society, things/laws change whether we like them or not whether the changes are from our own Government or those laws forced upon us by our membership of the EU. Can't see the Government forcing those owners without DPF's to retro-fit them.
But let's get back to the facts. DPF's are apparently a legal requirement on vehicles that leave the factory with them fitted since whatever date the law makers decided. Removing them apparently makes the vehicle unroadworthy and therefore those that have removed them, are quite possibly driving with invalid insurance. It is highly likely that if an owner has removed the DPF and then told his/her insurance company they had removed it, the insurer would refuse to insure the vehicle. So the challenge is there, perhaps someone could on the offchance, phone one of the major players in the car insurance market and ask that question and get the answer in writing!
If the insurance/accident investigation assessors do their jobs properly, they will crawl over every car that has been involved in an accident with a very fine tooth comb and find those 'modded' vehicles and refuse to pay out the owner for any damages to their vehicles. Harsh, yes, but the only way to start enforcing the law properly.
I was just asking the question as sometimes folk can be a bit rightous and 'holier then thou' when it comes to these things important and all as it is.
It's valid to question anyone taking a 'holier than thou' position.
If you spend a little time researching current thinking regarding diesel particulates & health, you might be surprised at the strength of the evidence and the scale of the problem - I certainly have been. IMO this is a more serious issue than many folks realise.
I too am sceptical about some of the 'green' policies that have appeared recently, but this one at least appears to be well-founded.
yeh you will get people who get up on their soap box about this (just because they can) but yet smoke 20 fags a day and never move off the sofa!
Why should that matter, at least these people have the choice to abuse themselves, i don't get the choice of whether to breathe diesel particulates in. I've never smoked, not had a drink in 8 years, not that it matters tbh.
True enough
