edgeoftime
Members
Some one must !! hence DPF'SF6HAD said:
DPF What is it?
- Thread starter humberside
- Start date
freddofrog
won 16.4k on Euro lottery :)
yah that's true, just like nuclear stuff, I mean without all the politicians, we wouldn't have to worry about the bombs and the power stations, that stuff is all the fault of the people in charge of our destinyedgeoftime said:
I was forced into it by the DPF symbol followed by the exclamation symbol.
A bit disappointed it gave me no normal warnings that it needed to be re-gened.
My misses drives it around town 5 days a week so I understand it needed doing, but would have been nice to get the normal symbol advising it needed a blast down the M1!
A bit disappointed it gave me no normal warnings that it needed to be re-gened.
My misses drives it around town 5 days a week so I understand it needed doing, but would have been nice to get the normal symbol advising it needed a blast down the M1!
freddofrog
won 16.4k on Euro lottery :)
^ ECU-regen for a DPF doesn't need a "blast" and doesn't need a motorway.
It needs a constant (ish) 50 mph in a high (ish) gear.
It needs a constant (ish) 50 mph in a high (ish) gear.
shaun75
Members
Any advise a friend of mine with a 58 plate Toyota Avensis diesel has failed its taxi test at 1.53 his first attempt was 1.80, am i right in thinking this must have no DPF ? its either removed or not fitted to this year maybe but thats unlikely ?
He had it terracleaned just the other day so that should have helped clean the fuel system its had all filters & an oil change he gave it a 30 minute high reving warm up before.
My main question his can a car fitted with a DPF fail a smoke test ? As in theory no smoke can get through right ? & if a car can fail what is the best course of action with these modern diesels maybe Fahad can help here would a remap help mate ?
He's also getting 53 MPG excellant, i struggle to get 49/50 with my Accord & thats wth Millers fuel boost cleaner addative every tank full.
He had it terracleaned just the other day so that should have helped clean the fuel system its had all filters & an oil change he gave it a 30 minute high reving warm up before.
My main question his can a car fitted with a DPF fail a smoke test ? As in theory no smoke can get through right ? & if a car can fail what is the best course of action with these modern diesels maybe Fahad can help here would a remap help mate ?
He's also getting 53 MPG excellant, i struggle to get 49/50 with my Accord & thats wth Millers fuel boost cleaner addative every tank full.
Yes a car with a dpf in situ shouldn't really fail the smoke test. And you can't remap the Toyota/Lexus system I'm afraid.
The only solution is a piggyback emulator that needs to be wired in by an auto sparky.
The only solution is a piggyback emulator that needs to be wired in by an auto sparky.
shaun75
Members
Thanks Fahad. So if a DPF is not fitted & as been removed do you refit to pass the test?
As it would have been passing it's test initially there's obviously an issue with the higher smoke reading's but where do you go ? Is it chasing that problem at a big expense or do you refit your DPF? Thing is this lads got days to sort it or he's out of work.
As it would have been passing it's test initially there's obviously an issue with the higher smoke reading's but where do you go ? Is it chasing that problem at a big expense or do you refit your DPF? Thing is this lads got days to sort it or he's out of work.
Removing the dpf alone shouldn't cause it to fail but if someone has accidentally removed the cat also then that will make it smoke. Smoking is normally down to another underlying problem such as an EGR valve or leaking turbo pipe.
I don't touch Toyota's. They made great cars in the 80's and 90's but not anymore
I don't touch Toyota's. They made great cars in the 80's and 90's but not anymore
Carl H
Members
If I go to look at a car with a view to buying it, how can I tell if the DPF is knackered?
You can't really unless the light is on or if the car is exhibiting problems like lack of power etc.
Bad dpf's also make a distinctive smell if you stand behind it and smell with the engine running.
Budget for a replacement or removal, they will all need one at some point.
Bad dpf's also make a distinctive smell if you stand behind it and smell with the engine running.
Budget for a replacement or removal, they will all need one at some point.
Carl H
Members
How much for DPF removal? On premiertuning.com it says from £395
If I took it to a main dealer for a service, would they notice or care that the DPF had been removed?
If I took it to a main dealer for a service, would they notice or care that the DPF had been removed?
Bgw70
Members
So what does DPF stand for and what does it do?
Page one never provided an explanation.
Page one never provided an explanation.
freddofrog
won 16.4k on Euro lottery :)
read #126 to #143 in this thread
link to #126 ---> http://typeaccord.co.uk/forum/topic/1534-dpf-what-is-it/?p=215138
(PS , and there are good scans of the relevant pages from the Accord owners manual, click on those images e.g. #133 )
link to #126 ---> http://typeaccord.co.uk/forum/topic/1534-dpf-what-is-it/?p=215138
(PS , and there are good scans of the relevant pages from the Accord owners manual, click on those images e.g. #133 )
I have a piggyback question.
Why do DPF's seem to be so problematic? I hear so many stories about problems with soot accumulation & burnoff processes and this wearing out filters so they need replacement. Also hear nothing but unhappy noises from owners of cars with urea based NOX reduction.
Perhaps it's just Online Bias Syndrome.. I guess only people who have problems tend to talk about these systems. Stuff that just works people are generally ignorant about.
Thoughts?
Why do DPF's seem to be so problematic? I hear so many stories about problems with soot accumulation & burnoff processes and this wearing out filters so they need replacement. Also hear nothing but unhappy noises from owners of cars with urea based NOX reduction.
Perhaps it's just Online Bias Syndrome.. I guess only people who have problems tend to talk about these systems. Stuff that just works people are generally ignorant about.
Thoughts?
freddofrog
won 16.4k on Euro lottery :)
One way of looking at it, is that the DPF collects the particulates when driving in urban areas, them dumps the particulates out (by burning) when cruising on the motorway. It has to dump them out otherwise the DPF will, like a sieve, just clog up.
But as with battery-powered vehicles, there is a down-side to trying to go "clean" : which is life-time (life-time of the DPF, and life-time of a battery).
AFAIK, a standard DPF doesn't deal with NOx either, not sure about the "blue" (urea) systems.
But as with battery-powered vehicles, there is a down-side to trying to go "clean" : which is life-time (life-time of the DPF, and life-time of a battery).
AFAIK, a standard DPF doesn't deal with NOx either, not sure about the "blue" (urea) systems.
Bgw70
Members
Thank you very much for the information! I never knew Honda built a diesel car, especially the Accord.freddofrog said:
So, the Diesel Particle Filter is located inside the catalytic converter and is just part of the emissions. It sounds like it will fail much easier than a petrol catalyst and should be maintained properly by performing sustained high speed driving above 120kmh for ~15min.
I find it interesting how many diesel auto models are available in the Europe vs. North America. The US government made diesel more expensive than petrol which might be part of the reason. Back in the 1970s and 80s, the US tried to push the diesel autos into the market. Back then diesel was always less expensive than petrol.
Why do you prefer a diesel over petrol and is diesel less expensive than petrol?
What kind of MPH do you achieve with a diesel?
I know I am off topic and in the wrong thread, but I will just use the newbie excuse for asking these questions in this thread.
freddofrog
won 16.4k on Euro lottery :)
My take on it, is that Honda felt the need to provide a diesel in some of their models in order to maintain market share in Europe (as well as the Accord, the engine is available in the Civic)
Unfortunately (I say that based on hindsight), the diesel was being pushed in Europe because of its better mpg compared with petrol. To facilitate this, VED (Vehicle Excise Duty aka yearly car tax) became relative to the CO2 emissions i.e. the lower the CO2, the lower the VED. Small cars with small petrol engines (1.0 litre) compare on CO2 levels, with large cars with large diesel engines. So if one wanted a large car with low VED, one would be inclined to purchase a diesel variant. Plus, because they have turbos, they can be remapped more easily.
However, Japan had decided a long time ago that diesel was bad, so there are hardly any diesel cars in Japan (as in the USA).
To create a diesel engine, the Japanese manufacturers just copy the Germans e.g. the Honda diesel engine is a Honda block/head, cylinders/pistons, and manifolds, but the rest is basically Bosch, including the engine ECU. Indeed, I'm not sure how much of the block/head & cylinders/pistons is not an off-the-shelf design.
If one wants good mpg, a diesel will always beat a petrol hands down, because one of the things that affects the efficiency of any IC engine is compression ratio - the higher the compression ratio, the more efficient the IC engine. You can only take the compression ratio so far on a petrol engine, after which it tends to auto-ignite and effectively becomes a diesel, but since the fuel arrives too soon in the cylinder and the pistons and cylinders are lighter in a petrol engine, it will not last very long during auto-ignition. Also, it is much easier to add a turbo to a diesel and increase efficiency further, this is because the diesel requires no butterfly throttle in the intake i.e. a diesel's inlet is wide open all the time - hence it runs lean, which is actually its achiles heel, because lean-burn is the cause of NOx.
The diesel vs petrol debate on car forums is infamous. Petrol-heads hate diesels. I have never owned a diesel car, my Accord is the CM2 which is 7th gen with a 2.4 petrol engine (I have a few other petrol cars too), but the 2.4 petrol struggles to get over 30 mpg, whereas 30 mpg on the 2.2 diesel would indicate a problem. Whilst I never hated diesels in cars, I am beginning to think that they have just become a German scourge LOL
Regarding the DPF, it's a last-ditch sticking plaster to clean the engine up. But due to the VW scandal (AFAIK it was a Bosch ECU and it always had the code for testing purposes, but VW R&D deliberately kept the code enabled) .... RIP the diesel LOL
Unfortunately (I say that based on hindsight), the diesel was being pushed in Europe because of its better mpg compared with petrol. To facilitate this, VED (Vehicle Excise Duty aka yearly car tax) became relative to the CO2 emissions i.e. the lower the CO2, the lower the VED. Small cars with small petrol engines (1.0 litre) compare on CO2 levels, with large cars with large diesel engines. So if one wanted a large car with low VED, one would be inclined to purchase a diesel variant. Plus, because they have turbos, they can be remapped more easily.
However, Japan had decided a long time ago that diesel was bad, so there are hardly any diesel cars in Japan (as in the USA).
To create a diesel engine, the Japanese manufacturers just copy the Germans e.g. the Honda diesel engine is a Honda block/head, cylinders/pistons, and manifolds, but the rest is basically Bosch, including the engine ECU. Indeed, I'm not sure how much of the block/head & cylinders/pistons is not an off-the-shelf design.
If one wants good mpg, a diesel will always beat a petrol hands down, because one of the things that affects the efficiency of any IC engine is compression ratio - the higher the compression ratio, the more efficient the IC engine. You can only take the compression ratio so far on a petrol engine, after which it tends to auto-ignite and effectively becomes a diesel, but since the fuel arrives too soon in the cylinder and the pistons and cylinders are lighter in a petrol engine, it will not last very long during auto-ignition. Also, it is much easier to add a turbo to a diesel and increase efficiency further, this is because the diesel requires no butterfly throttle in the intake i.e. a diesel's inlet is wide open all the time - hence it runs lean, which is actually its achiles heel, because lean-burn is the cause of NOx.
The diesel vs petrol debate on car forums is infamous. Petrol-heads hate diesels. I have never owned a diesel car, my Accord is the CM2 which is 7th gen with a 2.4 petrol engine (I have a few other petrol cars too), but the 2.4 petrol struggles to get over 30 mpg, whereas 30 mpg on the 2.2 diesel would indicate a problem. Whilst I never hated diesels in cars, I am beginning to think that they have just become a German scourge LOL
Regarding the DPF, it's a last-ditch sticking plaster to clean the engine up. But due to the VW scandal (AFAIK it was a Bosch ECU and it always had the code for testing purposes, but VW R&D deliberately kept the code enabled) .... RIP the diesel LOL
freddofrog
won 16.4k on Euro lottery :)
Under your avatar you have "2006 Tourer", so it doesn't have a DPF, and when Sydney follows the direction that London is going, you won't be able to drive your diesel into Sydney.Richard B said:Driving from my home in Blue Mountains area outside Sydney to Sydney university.. I'm not parting with this diesel any time soon!
I doubt I will see that within the lifetime of this car. Air pollution is not really on the Australian political agenda in a meaningful way. We don't get photochemical smog so people don't see the effect. For new vehicles, Euro 5 applies from 2013, and there aren't enough diesel passenger cars on the road to achieve anything by enforcing Euro 5.
Given the average age of a car here is over ten years, and that most areas in Sydney are full of swinging voters, regulations that discriminate against older cars are politically undesirable. It's a great way for getting nothing done in what is probably an overlooked public health issue, but that's the way thing work here. Given the distances people drive and the amount of solar on roofs, you'd think there would be huge incentives for people to drive electric vehicles too, but there's virtually nothing. Hopefully that will change over the next ten years and if it does, air pollution issues will probably never reach intervention level.
Given the average age of a car here is over ten years, and that most areas in Sydney are full of swinging voters, regulations that discriminate against older cars are politically undesirable. It's a great way for getting nothing done in what is probably an overlooked public health issue, but that's the way thing work here. Given the distances people drive and the amount of solar on roofs, you'd think there would be huge incentives for people to drive electric vehicles too, but there's virtually nothing. Hopefully that will change over the next ten years and if it does, air pollution issues will probably never reach intervention level.
freddofrog
won 16.4k on Euro lottery :)
The demise of the diesel is mainly happening due to NOx. NOx on its own is invisible and although it does contribute towards smog, even where there is no smog, it is the main killer from IC engines. NOx is due to burning a fuel in lean (oxygen rich) conditions, hence the diesel produces a lot of NOx. It is impossible to stop NOx getting into the blood stream, because the particles are so small that not even a face mask will stop it, so living/working in an urban area with diesel-powered vehicles in the streets is a health risk.
As said by Fahad in #174, some cars with a DPF have an additive system fitted that removes most of the NOx from the car's exhaust. But, where it is not fitted, the diesel will always emit NOx. So, your politicians "down under" will get more and more input from the medical community that NOx is killing people, and so the diesel car will get banned from cities (unless it has a DPF with an additive system).
according to wikipedia , the effects of NOx are even worse that I knew https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOx#Environmental_effects <-- in cities it becomes NO2 (nitrogen dioxide)
NO2 is the most toxic of the NOx compounds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_dioxide#Health_effects_of_NO2_exposure
As said by Fahad in #174, some cars with a DPF have an additive system fitted that removes most of the NOx from the car's exhaust. But, where it is not fitted, the diesel will always emit NOx. So, your politicians "down under" will get more and more input from the medical community that NOx is killing people, and so the diesel car will get banned from cities (unless it has a DPF with an additive system).
according to wikipedia , the effects of NOx are even worse that I knew https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOx#Environmental_effects <-- in cities it becomes NO2 (nitrogen dioxide)
NO2 is the most toxic of the NOx compounds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_dioxide#Health_effects_of_NO2_exposure