Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help




Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Diesel Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 09-15-2005, 12:29 AM
Ara T.'s Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 2,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by dunl
No golf tees in the house,no BB's.

Gimme something else to work with, please.
I used toothpicks
__________________
1985 CA 300D Turbo , 213K mi
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 02-17-2012, 02:55 PM
whunter's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Metro Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 17,350
Recycled

for new members
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 02-17-2012, 04:19 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Carlsbad, NM
Posts: 19
EGR's are also meant to help reduce NOx, HC, and CO emissions, by recycling the exhaust gases for another go through. It forces the NOx to separate back into N2 and O2, which allows the O2 to finish reacting with the HC and CO to create CO2. So removing the EGR will get rid of the gunk in the intact manifold, increase part load power, clean up the engine bay, and possibly increase fuel economy, but will also increase emissions.
__________________
1985 300SD "Battleship"
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 02-17-2012, 05:28 PM
whunter's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Metro Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 17,350
Umm

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1fastredsc View Post
EGR's are also meant to help reduce NOx, HC, and CO emissions, by recycling the exhaust gases for another go through. It forces the NOx to separate back into N2 and O2, which allows the O2 to finish reacting with the HC and CO to create CO2. So removing the EGR will get rid of the gunk in the intact manifold, increase part load power, clean up the engine bay, and possibly increase fuel economy, but will also increase emissions.
Disagree:
On the older OM61x and OM60x engines, removing the EGR has minimal or no detectable effect on emissions.

It was installed to make CARB and the EPA think they where concerned about emissions.

If the engine is in good condition it will pass the required testing without any EGR.

.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 02-17-2012, 06:58 PM
compu_85's Avatar
Waiting for his Model 3..
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Springfield VA
Posts: 5,174
I doubt this, NOx is much higher without erg. I know the 84 / 85 617 cars failed emissions testing when the EGR is broken.

I should hook up a test light to the EGR output on my computer... See when it's active.

If not needing EGR is a metric for how good an engine is that means VW trumps MB, VWs didn't get EGR here until 1995

Many modern passenger cars have 2 EGR systems so they can run even mor EGR, and while on boost :crazy:

-J
__________________
1991 350SDL. 230,000 miles (new motor @ 150,000).

2013 Fiat 500E. 20,000 miles, 80 miles at a time.
2012 Passat TDI. 95,000 miles. More space, power, and fuel economy than the Benz
2004 Touareg V10 TDI. 150,000 miles. One of 450.
1999 Jetta TDI. 310,000 miles.
1992 Jetta ECOdiesel. 156,000 miles. 1 of 48. Sold.
1991 Jetta ECOdiesel. 430,000 miles. 1 of 700. Sold to VeeDubTDI, totaled in front of our house
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 02-17-2012, 08:32 PM
whunter's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Metro Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 17,350
What

Quote:
Originally Posted by compu_85 View Post
I doubt this, NOx is much higher without erg. I know the 84 / 85 617 cars failed emissions testing when the EGR is broken.

I should hook up a test light to the EGR output on my computer... See when it's active.

If not needing EGR is a metric for how good an engine is that means VW trumps MB, VWs didn't get EGR here until 1995

Many modern passenger cars have 2 EGR systems so they can run even mor EGR, and while on boost :crazy:

-J
Emission gas readings are irrelevant, the only EPA spec for 1985 and earlier is opacity.

Your vehicles failed opacity??
No state can legally fail these engines for any other reason.

.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 02-17-2012, 11:16 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Carlsbad, NM
Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by whunter View Post
Emission gas readings are irrelevant, the only EPA spec for 1985 and earlier is opacity.

Your vehicles failed opacity??
No state can legally fail these engines for any other reason.

.
Three points whunter:
1) The opacity emissions test will not be a problem for CO or NOx emissions as both gases are relatively transparent. Opacity is mainly a good way to measure the health of a diesel engine in order to get a rough idea of it's health (too much soot or HC are signs of a unhealthy engine, or running way too rich when loaded).
2) The government sets up emission standards for both the engine itself at the design level and out the tailpipe for after purchase validation of a properly operating vehicle.
3) I've ran experiments on diesel generators during my college days. I saw first hand what different loads, EGRs, and biodiesel will do to a diesel engines emissions and efficiency. Just like anything else, it's all a balancing act. Some things, like EGRs, that are meant to reduce emission also reduce the thermodynamic efficiency of the engine which results in less power and worse fuel economy. This is the reason that some diesels can see an increase in fuel economy and power after advancing the injection timing a little past OEM specs (of course not too much).

I'm not suggesting that anyone shouldn't remove their EGRs, quite the contrary, I'm a big fan of it on old diesels especially when you live out in the middle of nowhere like i do and have no mandated emission testing. I like the improved throttle response and fuel economy. I'm just realistic with the consequences as well. By the way, testing has shown that modern vehicles run so damn clean that in some cases the exhaust coming out of those vehicles is cleaner than the air that went in. For that reason, I removed my EGR and balance the air quality by driving in front of a new car when possible .
__________________
1985 300SD "Battleship"
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 02-18-2012, 08:21 AM
daw_two's Avatar
diesel enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Germantown, TN
Posts: 5,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1fastredsc View Post



For that reason, I removed my EGR and balance the air quality by driving in front of a new car when possible .
The issue I seem to have is those new cars won't stay behind me. Am I driving too slow in town? Between each traffic signal, newer cars zoom around me, only to be in front of me at the next traffic light.
__________________
daw_two
Germantown, TN

Links:
Current Car --- 05/2012 1984 300D Light Ivory, Red interior
Cluster Needles Paint
New Old Stock (NOS) parts

Past:
3/2008 1986 300SDL "Coda"
04/2010 1965 190D(c) "Ben"
& many more
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 02-18-2012, 09:00 AM
compu_85's Avatar
Waiting for his Model 3..
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Springfield VA
Posts: 5,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by whunter View Post
Emission gas readings are irrelevant, the only EPA spec for 1985 and earlier is opacity.

Your vehicles failed opacity??
No state can legally fail these engines for any other reason.

.
I suppose that's true, but that's kind of a tricky response... "They can't tell it's broken" vs. "They don't care". It still violates EPA regs. Weather or not NOx is actually bad for the environment is another debatable topic.

Check out this thread:

EPA Test of the Trap Ox on 85 617s

I'd love to get the NOx differences on my car... but when I started testing the EGR I think I misplaced all the vacuum lines for it

I would venture that most 617s running around today have horrible tailpipe emissions compared to when they were new... retarded timing from stretched chains and worn injectors probably make a ton more PM and HC.

-J
__________________
1991 350SDL. 230,000 miles (new motor @ 150,000).

2013 Fiat 500E. 20,000 miles, 80 miles at a time.
2012 Passat TDI. 95,000 miles. More space, power, and fuel economy than the Benz
2004 Touareg V10 TDI. 150,000 miles. One of 450.
1999 Jetta TDI. 310,000 miles.
1992 Jetta ECOdiesel. 156,000 miles. 1 of 48. Sold.
1991 Jetta ECOdiesel. 430,000 miles. 1 of 700. Sold to VeeDubTDI, totaled in front of our house
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2000 CLK 430 with 56000 miles, good idea to buy? bigchingan1 Featured Cars 3 06-17-2004 03:01 PM
Is removing Bush really a good idea? schwarzwagen Off Topic Discussion - Politics and Religion 114 05-29-2004 10:11 PM
JB weld on center muffler... good idea or not? Snibble Tech Help 7 05-25-2004 01:22 PM
topsider, a good idea?? Davidtoo Tech Help 26 11-09-2000 06:33 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page