U.K MOT To Fail DPF Removal !

Quote

"A spokesman from the Department for Transport told us that anyone that has had the filter removed, will now have to a new one put back on their car in order to pass their next MOT test.

Read more: http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-news/84818/mot-test-fail-dpf-removal#ixzz2mglslEh6" End quote.

Rumours are the NCT will check for this soon ? probably soon after the U.K start checking !

This could cause serious headaches for buyers of 2nd hand diesels in the not so distant future and land people with unexpected expensive repairs !

Another reason to buy a Prius and electric cars ! :pac:

bear1

I always thought though that when you have the DPF removed then the ECU is re-programmed to make the removal more effective so as not to affect the emissions of the car?
If it's done properly then I would have thought the emissions stay the same

bear1

Wasn't it an EU directive? But you hear of horror stories about the DPF, especially when it regenerates on the motorway for instance.
My car doesn't have one so I don't really care

cabb8ge

OSI wrote: »

Why would manufacturers go the effort and cost of designing and fitting DPF's if it could all be handled by some joe with a laptop?

Why is catalytic converter on diesel so?

listermint

Seems fair to me.

DPF has an important environmental and health function in a vehicle. Why should it be allowed to be removed. If you have gone to the trouble of buying a diesel you should deal with its ancillary costs

bear1

For me it would just seem unfair if the new owner didn't know it had been removed and would then have to fork out quite a lot to have it reinstated.

pred racer

There are 2 ways to do a dpf removal, A. Remove completely and replace with a straight pipe and blank the egr.
B. just remove the core of the dpf but leave everything esle in place.

With option B there is no way to know the Dpf core has been removed, the egr is still in place. So unless you fail a smoke test (which a modern diesel wont unless something else is wrong) happy days.

dr.fuzzenstein

This will indeed suck if you buy a second hand diesel and find out you have to spend hundreds on it.
In future one of the pitfalls of second hand cars will be unauthorised mods that will land the buyer in hot water come NCT time, be it exhaust, suspension, mapping, wheels, air filters, etc...
This will add to the used car buyers mantra: Never Buy Modified! Upon the smallest hint of messing with the car by spanner monkeys, RUN!!!
In Germany the whole affair is handled in an intelligent manner, you may bolt bits to your car that have TÜV approval, otherwise you are looking at hefty fines and a massive heap of trouble should you be involved in an accident, because unsafe mods could be seen as contributory factors.
That way you can buy modified without worries, there will be paperwork to back it up and the car won't be impounded and crushed by the Polizei.
It's of course not the way these things are handled in Ireland.
First, ignore the problem. The whinge if everyone takes the piss. Then ban everything altogether and only allow branded OEM bits to be fitted to any car. Which will also make parts illegal that are identical, but aren't sold through the main dealer and don't have a stamp on them. Bemoan the "completely unexpected" implosion of the car parts industry. Blame the boy racers.
The only tools at the disposal of the Irish government are the tax-hammer and the ban-hammer. Other than that, there is no intelligent thought.

Anan1

bear1 wrote: »

For me it would just seem unfair if the new owner didn't know it had been removed and would then have to fork out quite a lot to have it reinstated.

People buy cars with deliberately hidden defects all the time - it isn't fair, but it's something that buyers need to watch out for.

cabb8ge

OSI wrote: »

A DPF just removes the particulates/soot. A Cat on a Diesel converts the Carbon Monoxide and Hydrocarbons into CO2 and Water. Again a catalytic converter is damn expensive, you can see later models of the same missing certain parts of trim to save cents per car. Why would they fit a catalytic converter that can cost hundreds if they didn't have to?

Yes but take Cat off, remove inards of it and put back on and no one in NCT/MOT notice at test time on diesel.

Do same with DPF and have ECU adjust and MOT/NCT no issue.

bear1

bear1 wrote: »

For me it would just seem unfair if the new owner didn't know it had been removed and would then have to fork out quite a lot to have it reinstated.

This is why I posted this, not to have a go at diesel, but to make people aware that if they buy a car that had a factory fitted DPF and the NCT checks for it then you'll have to replace it, it's as simple as that, that could be over 1,000 bill.

So people need to start thinking when they remove the filter, do they really think it's wise ? and would they sell it on and not inform the next buyer ? That would be very dishonest.

keithclancy

AFAIK its a European Regulation with everything after 2009 having to meet Euro 5 Emission standards.

Euro 4 did not have this requirement.

listermint

bear1 wrote: »

For me it would just seem unfair if the new owner didn't know it had been removed and would then have to fork out quite a lot to have it reinstated.

Par of the course with car purchasing, any car purchase comes with pitfalls and checks need to be carried out thoroughly.

discombobulate

Can a DPF be idetified without having to put the car on a ramp?

keithclancy

discombobulate wrote: »

Can a DPF be idetified without having to put the car on a ramp?

Depends of what the thing that replaces it looks like.

Would be possible to hollow one out and just put a straight through pipe.

MuppetCheck

Sometime when they are being cut out internally and remapped the dpf light wont show on the instrument cluster at start up. That's a tell tale sign, but whether the tester will be aware or care is another thing.

ION08

OSI wrote: »

Why would manufacturers go the effort and cost of designing and fitting DPF's if it could all be handled by some joe with a laptop?

Don't be undermining Joe Power's work. He's the best in the business

dr.fuzzenstein

keithclancy wrote: »

Depends of what the thing that replaces it looks like.

Would be possible to hollow one out and just put a straight through pipe.

Only one way to find out...

Marcusm

bear1 wrote: »

I always thought though that when you have the DPF removed then the ECU is re-programmed to make the removal more effective so as not to affect the emissions of the car?
If it's done properly then I would have thought the emissions stay the same

How is a computer going to remove particles of soot from exhaust gasses. Personally, I think the removal of mandatory equipment from a motor vehicle should be criminalised. If you don't want or need to have a dpf, buy a petrol car or an older diesel. No one would condone the removal of airbags, seat belts etc. just because any harm arises to a third party, should we be so blasé. The dpf is unrelated to emissions such as co2 ad disputed arguments about climate change, it's about reducing the evel of soot particles in the air and avoiding increases in asthma and other respiratory diseases.

HandsomeDan

Marcusm wrote: »

How is a computer going to remove particles of soot from exhaust gasses.

Cause someone down the pub told him it could.

DPF are important. The city would be unlivable without them.

pred racer

pred racer wrote: »

There are 2 ways to do a dpf removal, A. Remove completely and replace with a straight pipe and blank the egr.
B. just remove the core of the dpf but leave everything esle in place.

With option B there is no way to know the Dpf core has been removed, the egr is still in place. So unless you fail a smoke test (which a modern diesel wont unless something else is wrong) happy days.

keithclancy wrote: »

Depends of what the thing that replaces it looks like.

Would be possible to hollow one out and just put a straight through pipe.

Yes its possible but both require the car to be programmed not to look at various pressure sensors, not to open the egr and not to trigger the regen cycle.

If option B above is chosen there is no way to know the core has been removed without removing the Dpf and looking into it or having a Joe Power with you to read the ECU.

On the enviromental side, all the dpf does (or is supposed to do) is remove soot from towns, the soot is still generated, stored in the Dpf, then incinerated when you are on the open road. It still ends up in the atmosphere only in a different form.

You should smell my yoke when its doing a regen, it smells like there is a burning tyre being dragged behind the car:)

HandsomeDan

pred racer wrote: »

On the enviromental side, all the dpf does (or is supposed to do) is remove soot from towns, the soot is still generated, stored in the Dpf, then incinerated when you are on the open road. It still ends up in the atmosphere only in a different form.

Yes, a different, non-breathable, far less hazardous form.

pred racer

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Yes, a different, non-breathable, far less hazardous form.

Sorry, I wasnt saying it was a bad thing, just explaining how it works, some people seem to think its a magic box that changes black smoke into baby seal tears.

A regen on my car can take up to 20 mins, so unless Im on the motorway normally at least a part of it is done going through a town and like I said it really stinks.

bear1

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Cause someone down the pub told him it could.

DPF are important. The city would be unlivable without them.

Yeah sure :rolleyes:
When you remove the DPF, you can't just leave it like that. The EML light would be on and I believe the car would go into Limp mode as the ECU sees that this feature is missing.
To do the job 100% you would want to blank off the EGR and also "re-program" the ECU so that no warning lights come on.
Of course I'm not saying I'm right or wrong, I'm merely going with what I read on forums and the like.
They do make the air cleaner for us to breathe but it has made diesel cars less reliable.
Because of the DPF, you can't really use the car on short journeys as it clogs up the filter too quickly whereas a car from the early 00's wouldnt as it doesn't have one.

Marcusm

bear1 wrote: »

Yeah sure :rolleyes:
When you remove the DPF, you can't just leave it like that. The EML light would be on and I believe the car would go into Limp mode as the ECU sees that this feature is missing.
To do the job 100% you would want to blank off the EGR and also "re-program" the ECU so that no warning lights come on.
Of course I'm not saying I'm right or wrong, I'm merely going with what I read on forums and the like.
They do make the air cleaner for us to breathe but it has made diesel cars less reliable.
Because of the DPF, you can't really use the car on short journeys as it clogs up the filter too quickly whereas a car from the early 00's wouldnt as it doesn't have one.

Use of the car outside the recommended manner is what makes them unreliable.

bear1

So in essence it makes older cars more reliable.
To be fair, outside the recommended manner means that the car can ideally only be used on long journeys.
It's tricky as it's a step back in the reliability issue but a step forward in the cleaner environment part.
If I was to buy a brand new car then I'd wait for the warranty to run out (which I believe doesn't cover the DPF) and I'd have it removed and done properly. Reports of smoother engines and increased MPG is a good selling point.
If the NCT started to check them then I'd leave it on.

listermint

bear1 wrote: »

So in essence it makes older cars more reliable.
To be fair, outside the recommended manner means that the car can ideally only be used on long journeys.
It's tricky as it's a step back in the reliability issue but a step forward in the cleaner environment part.
If I was to buy a brand new car then I'd wait for the warranty to run out (which I believe doesn't cover the DPF) and I'd have it removed and done properly. Reports of smoother engines and increased MPG is a good selling point.
If the NCT started to check them then I'd leave it on.

Which is exactly the reason i hope they make mandatory testing in NCT. Typical Bandit country in Ireland so it is with everyone only concerned for themselves.

Manufacturers dont put them in for the crack. As already stated on this thread they perform a very important function.

Del2005

bear1 wrote: »

Yeah sure :rolleyes:
When you remove the DPF, you can't just leave it like that. The EML light would be on and I believe the car would go into Limp mode as the ECU sees that this feature is missing.
To do the job 100% you would want to blank off the EGR and also "re-program" the ECU so that no warning lights come on.
Of course I'm not saying I'm right or wrong, I'm merely going with what I read on forums and the like.
They do make the air cleaner for us to breathe but it has made diesel cars less reliable.
Because of the DPF, you can't really use the car on short journeys as it clogs up the filter too quickly whereas a car from the early 00's wouldnt as it doesn't have one.

Silly CO2 taxes made people buy the wrong type of car. Diesels are reliable if driven correctly but most owners only care about the savings on tax, not just in Ireland, not the maintenance of the complex systems required to make a filthy exhaust emission somewhat better for people breathing them in.

Don't worry the next round of Euro emission limits have killed the diesel fad, there's no way to make diesels meet then and be affordable, so we'll be back to proper fuel in new cars soon.

bear1

The manufacturers didn't decide to do it, it was forced upon them when the Euro 5 law came out.
What's so bad about a smoother engine and better MPG?

listermint

bear1 wrote: »

The manufacturers didn't decide to do it, it was forced upon them when the Euro 5 law came out.
What's so bad about a smoother engine and better MPG?

Em pumping out all your dirt from the exhaust into the vehicle behind you and the pedestrians all around you.

If that has to be spelt out then i have to wonder...

bear1

The law came into effect around 2009/2010 - so by your logic every car before that without a DPF (as it wasn't obligatory) was spewing out dirt at everyone?
And what do you have to wonder? I don't have a DPF so it doesn't apply to me.

listermint

bear1 wrote: »

The law came into effect around 2009/2010 - so by your logic every car before that without a DPF (as it wasn't obligatory) was spewing out dirt at everyone?
And what do you have to wonder? I don't have a DPF so it doesn't apply to me.

Well yes.

Did you know that people used to think the world was flat and smoking was good for you when pregnant ?

Chimaera

The elephant in the room is that direct injection petrol engines are actually far worse for particulate emissions than diesels.

They produce more finer particles than DI diesel which are far more harmful to respiratory health than diesel particulates.

Some discussions turned up on this from a quick search:
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=354005
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/11/tuv-nord-testing-firm-direct-injected-gasoline-engines-emit-more-particulates-than-diesels/

In a few years' time, petrol engines are going to be getting particulate filters too.

It's an annoying catch 22 with particulate filters on diesel cars:
On one hand they capture particulate emissions which is potentially a good thing. On the other, they significantly impact on fuel economy and therefore CO2 emissions. Plus all the expensive maintenance costs that go with them.

We could reduce particulate emissions by raising compression ratio and increasing combustion temperature, but that drives up NOx emissions which the rules don't allow. Ironically, there's evidence that increased NOx emissions are linked to smog reduction in urban areas!

One great way to improve things would be to improve fuel quality. Even just ensuring that all diesel sold here is properly compliant with EN 590 would probably bring a huge improvement in emissions and reliability for diesel owners. Again the drive to spend as little as possible on everything motoring related kicks in and makes room in the market for those selling South Armagh blend, or even just water down things a little.

And of course, a lot of people don't maintain their vehicle properly, and there's a significant enough cohort of incompetent/lazy mechanics out there who add to the maintenance problem.

Marcusm

bear1 wrote: »

The law came into effect around 2009/2010 - so by your logic every car before that without a DPF (as it wasn't obligatory) was spewing out dirt at everyone?
And what do you have to wonder? I don't have a DPF so it doesn't apply to me.

They were spewing out particulates causing serious health damage. In 2001, Germany estimated that 14,400 German deaths per year were attributable to Diesel engine particulates. Ireland has 1/20th the population but more land area so let's attribute 500 deaths (ignoring greater Irish dependence on road transport). That's a lit of people per year, certainly a multiple of the number the RSA worries about.

Improvements in motor vehicle standards are rarely retrospective - plenty of cars without rear seat belts, a smaller number without mirrors - but it's not permitted to remove the equipment. I have no sympathy for anyone who has interfered with the DPF and is now looking at a costly bill. Eventually, enforcement would catch up.

ofcork

So why are ncts not testing to euro 5 emission levels which will be euro 6 next year by the way.

Days 298

Marcusm wrote: »

How is a computer going to remove particles of soot from exhaust gasses. Personally, I think the removal of mandatory equipment from a motor vehicle should be criminalised. If you don't want or need to have a dpf, buy a petrol car or an older diesel. No one would condone the removal of airbags, seat belts etc. just because any harm arises to a third party, should we be so blasé. The dpf is unrelated to emissions such as co2 ad disputed arguments about climate change, it's about reducing the evel of soot particles in the air and avoiding increases in asthma and other respiratory diseases.

That escalulated quickly!


I'm currently considering removing my dpf..... I'm a criminal mastermind.

Marcusm

Days 298 wrote: »

That escalulated quickly!


I'm currently considering removing my dpf..... I'm a criminal mastermind.

Not quite; it would be an effective means of ensuring that mechanics did not encourage or engage in the practice. Think of it in terms of consumer protection - the average buyer would be unable to establish if the car had been modded in this manner and may have little recourse for a very expensive rectification. Discouraging the practice at source both maintains the health protection and tries to avoid consumer issues arising.

The saddest thing about all this is that we don't even need diesel, we could use LPG, You won't need a DPF and it's cleaner than petrol.

Chimaera

ofcork wrote: »

So why are ncts not testing to euro 5 emission levels which will be euro 6 next year by the way.

Your vehicle is tested against the specification it was designed to. So if it was designed to meet Euro 4 then it gets tested to that standard.

carzony

Not good news atall. I know 2 lads who have had the dpf removed from their 2008 focus's

dr.fuzzenstein

Deleted User wrote: »

The saddest thing about all this is that we don't even need diesel, we could use LPG, You won't need a DPF and it's cleaner than petrol.

Well, there's trucks, buses, trains, boats, diggers, tractors, generators, industrial machinery and then there's cars.
Even if you did get rid of cars (which won't happen), I don't think the Queen Mary 2 will run on LPG any time soon...

Oh, and there's heating systems...
I'd say diesel cars are a tiny fraction of diesel users and I'm not getting out of my oilburner any time soon.

Mc Love

keithclancy wrote: »

AFAIK its a European Regulation with everything after 2009 having to meet Euro 5 Emission standards.

Euro 4 did not have this requirement.

So does the above mean, if my car was built before 2009 it wouldnt need the DPF if the NCT started checking for them?

ION08 wrote: »

Don't be undermining Joe Power's work. He's the best in the business

Have been thinking about heading to Joe and getting the dpf removed and re-mapped, has anyone that has been to him got him to remove the core and leave the dpf in the engine so that if its the case the NCT do start checking then they wont notice that the core is missing?

bear1

listermint wrote: »

Well yes.

Did you know that people used to think the world was flat and smoking was good for you when pregnant ?

Do you need to be condescending?

galwaytt

listermint wrote: »

Manufacturers dont put them in for the crack. As already stated on this thread they perform a very important function.

They put them because they're forced to. The soot doesn't magically go away. It's still produced still burnt just a nimby trick really at huge expense - both financial and technical.

It's like AdBlue for commercials - now you've a whole extra "fuel" system purely to fudge emissions tests. More complexity, more cost, more weight. Counter productive.

MB has already stated they don't think they'll be making diesel passenger cars in 10 years due to regulations and the limits of what can be done with it.

galwaytt

listermint wrote: »

Em pumping out all your dirt from the exhaust into the vehicle behind you and the pedestrians all around you.

If that has to be spelt out then i have to wonder...

Wonder away. .. it's not sequestered harmlessly somewhere magically and fed to children later as Jelly Tots. ..... it's burned at 800 degrees or something up the motorway. .... beside the fields with cows in it. ..or crops. ... where your food comes from. ... this is all just nimbyism really. .

bucketybuck

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Well, there's trucks, buses, trains, boats, diggers, tractors, generators, industrial machinery

The issue of Euro 5/6 legislation is a massive issue within the truck industry, I was at a presentation a few weeks ago showing how each truck manufacturer plans to handle euro6 on their new ranges and its quite an eye opener. The costs involved for the manufacturer and then the end user are going to be massive.

But on the flipside, I also saw the figures for the effects that this legislation has had since 2001, and the decrease in actual pollutants from large vehicles is staggering, the EGR/Adblue/DPF/Cat converter systems really have made a massive difference.

By the way, after reading the thread, I suspect most people who posted here don't actually know how the regeneration of a Cat or DPF filter actually works and what it actually does. Nimbyism? :rolleyes:

dr.fuzzenstein

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Well, there's trucks, buses, trains, boats, diggers, tractors, generators, industrial machinery and then there's cars.
Even if you did get rid of cars (which won't happen), I don't think the Queen Mary 2 will run on LPG any time soon...

Oh, and there's heating systems...
I'd say diesel cars are a tiny fraction of diesel users and I'm not getting out of my oilburner any time soon.

Eah, I wasn't referring to commercial use, as the NCT (as per this discussion) is for private individuals , but hey you opened the door !

I would imaging the greatest driver for diesel in HGV's was cost, due to economy and also mpg not just because of torque.

Economics was the main driver for diesel but diesel is more expensive now than gas, by a significant margin.

There is a company called BNSF If I remember correctly, going to convert their trains to gas which will save them over diesel, and will emit far less toxic emissions.

I can imaging the same could be done for trucks, Ships I'm not so sure about, their engines are mental big.

Generators don't need to be diesel either.

Just look at the price of LPG for instance compared to diesel and you'll clearly see that even a mpg reduction in going to gas would still save a lot of money.

bear1

bucketybuck wrote: »

The issue of Euro 5/6 legislation is a massive issue within the truck industry, I was at a presentation a few weeks ago showing how each truck manufacturer plans to handle euro6 on their new ranges and its quite an eye opener. The costs involved for the manufacturer and then the end user are going to be massive.

But on the flipside, I also saw the figures for the effects that this legislation has had since 2001, and the decrease in actual pollutants from large vehicles is staggering, the EGR/Adblue/DPF/Cat converter systems really have made a massive difference.

By the way, after reading the thread, I suspect most people who posted here don't actually know how the regeneration of a Cat or DPF filter actually works and what it actually does. Nimbyism? :rolleyes:

Well it's quite obvious what it does.
The exhaust fumes pass through the filter of the DPF and the "soot" is trapped there.
The exhaust needs to reach a certain temperature for the soot to then be oxidised which referred to as passive regeneration.
Re-gens are when you are driving along and the car will suddenly lose power and get worse fuel consumption as the process mentioned above happens. Usually lasts about 10 mins to complete.
Am I one if the people you are referring to that hasn't a clue about DPF's?

HandsomeDan

galwaytt wrote: »

Wonder away. .. it's not sequestered harmlessly somewhere magically and fed to children later as Jelly Tots. ..... it's burned at 800 degrees or something up the motorway. .... beside the fields with cows in it. ..or crops. ... where your food comes from. ... this is all just nimbyism really. .

Dumbest post I've read in a while.

MuppetCheck

bear1 wrote: »

Well it's quite obvious what it does.
The exhaust fumes pass through the filter of the DPF and the "soot" is trapped there.
The exhaust needs to reach a certain temperature for the soot to then be oxidised which referred to as passive regeneration.
Re-gens are when you are driving along and the car will suddenly lose power and get worse fuel consumption as the process mentioned above happens. Usually lasts about 10 mins to complete.
Am I one if the people you are referring to that hasn't a clue about DPF's?

You do appear not to fully understand the process. Any dpf equipped diesel I've had never lost power during a regen. If you're on the move you won't notice bar the slightly increased fuel consumption. At idle it will be a couple of hundred revs higher than normal and often items such as heated windows and mirrors will come on to increase load if required.

bear1

MuppetCheck wrote: »

You do appear not to fully understand the process. Any dpf equipped diesel I've had never lost power during a regen. If you're on the move you won't notice bar the slightly increased fuel consumption. At idle it will be a couple of hundred revs higher than normal and often items such as heated windows and mirrors will come on to increase load if required.

You're right, the performance from what I can read shows no difference. There have been cases however of people losing performance or unable to accelerate when it's happening.