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 ShopForum > Technical Information and Support > Diesel Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 10-14-2008, 08:43 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForcedInduction View Post
Not really. Mercedes was the first manufacturer in the world to introduce particulate filter systems for cars, in 1985 (Known as the TrapOx). They abandoned them in 1987 because the technology to control the regeneration cycle wasn't available.
I don't think those old trap oxidizers were known as particulate filters. They're mainly oxidizers, i.e. catalysts but they don't really trap soot. If they did, those cars that had them could never produce a smoke screen and we all know they can.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-14-2008, 08:50 PM
ForcedInduction
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by DieselAddict View Post
I don't think those old trap oxidizers were known as particulate filters.
Thats exactly what they are. It traps the soot then oxidizes it by burning it during regeneration.

Quote:
If they did, those cars that had them could never produce a smoke screen and we all know they can.
Thats because nobody ever replaces them and I'd bet almost every single one has failed. Some new 2008/9 trucks that have come through the shop at Swift have a failed particulate filter. Its easy to tell since the exhaust pipe will have black soot coating the inside instead of a white light chalk-like coating. It costs $8,000 every time they have to replace one. Yes, I have driven one with a straight pipe (Filters removed for transport between shops) and its a night/day difference in performance when compared to a truck with a properly working particulate filter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DieselAddict View Post
Overall they're still a good idea, no doubt.
To feel good, yes. Just like with new cars though, nobody ever takes into account the emissions released and resources consumed producing, maintaining/repairing/replacing and recycling the filters since they DO have a limited lifespan. Also, the extra fuel consumed from the filter restriction and regeneration cycle does not help manufacturers meet fuel economy standards.

Last edited by ForcedInduction; 10-14-2008 at 08:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-14-2008, 09:02 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
Well again, it's a compromise. I've read the new Jetta TDI has a particulate filter that's good for 120K miles, yet the mileage is as good as before and power is up thanks to better injection technology.

As to those old trap oxidizers, even if they were also particulate traps, like you say they were discontinued in 1987, so for a long time diesel cars did have EGR's but no particulate traps like I was saying.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-14-2008, 09:09 PM
ForcedInduction
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
But they aren't "just now starting to show up". Mercedes has been using them for the last 9 years in europe.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-14-2008, 09:11 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForcedInduction View Post
But they aren't "just now starting to show up". Mercedes has been using them for the last 9 years in europe.
Yes, I meant here in the US. Europeans have had ULSD for much longer.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-14-2008, 09:13 PM
Hatterasguy's Avatar
Zero
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Milford, CT
Posts: 19,267
Mercedes has used them since 1985 when forced to, and they have sucked since than.
__________________
2017 Chevy Silverado 1500 LTZ
Mercedes??

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
-Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-14-2008, 09:31 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatterasguy View Post
Mercedes has used them since 1985 when forced to, and they have sucked since than.
Mercedes wasn't explicitly forced to use them. They just chose to use them at the time to meet the increasingly more strict emission standards. Fortunately they later figured out a better way to meet emissions by redesigning the combustion chamber for the OM602, and the subsequent engines kept getting cleaner from there on without the use of particulate filters until just now when the technology is much more mature.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-14-2008, 09:41 PM
Hatterasguy's Avatar
Zero
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Milford, CT
Posts: 19,267
Well if they wanted to sell diesels in CA they had to use them to 87. These days they just tell CA to go F themselves.

In the US they didn't really replace them with anything, not quite sure how they got around that.
__________________
2017 Chevy Silverado 1500 LTZ
Mercedes??

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
-Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-14-2008, 09:47 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatterasguy View Post
Well if they wanted to sell diesels in CA they had to use them to 87. These days they just tell CA to go F themselves.

In the US they didn't really replace them with anything, not quite sure how they got around that.
Telling CA to go F themselves is essentially ****** themselves as CA is a big market and it's being courted again now that the technology has caught up with their requirements.

Like I was saying, better combustion chambers was the main improvement that MB made early on. The 4-valve design of the OM606 and onward helped as well, then common-rail injection came along and that helped even more.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-15-2008, 11:48 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
One other thing I wanted to mention is that the EPA pollution scale that we were talking about is the latest one for new cars and most cars from the 90's, gas or diesel, would score 0 on it. In fact even the seemingly dirty 1/10 score that for example the 2005 CDI got is no dirtier than that of a 2001 gas Camry or Audi which got the same score. Because of the late introduction of ULSD, diesels were a few years behind gassers on the EPA pollution scale but they have since caught up, and they still enjoy lower greenhouse gas emissions and better fuel economy as they always have.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-16-2008, 05:54 PM
bgkast's Avatar
Rollin' on 16s
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Vancouver WA
Posts: 6,528
I think all car manufactures should tell CA to go F them selves. Imagine how fast Joe public would voice their displeasure to their representatives and get them to change the law when they could not buy a new car.
__________________
1979 240D- 316K miles - VGT Turbo, Intercooler, Stick Shift, Many Other Mods - Daily Driver

1982 300SD - 232K miles - Wife's Daily Driver

1986 560SL - Wife's red speed machine
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-16-2008, 06:21 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by bgkast View Post
I think all car manufactures should tell CA to go F them selves. Imagine how fast Joe public would voice their displeasure to their representatives and get them to change the law when they could not buy a new car.
It's not just CA but half of the East Coast as well. As to ****** themselves, it won't work. The EPA and CARB only mandate what is possible to achieve and I believe it's negotiated with the auto industry. I have no problem with them requiring cleaner emissions. What they should have done is require ULSD sooner so that diesels didn't have to lag behind as much. I'd like them to do one more thing: raise the minimum cetane & lubricity requirements. It'd be nice if I didn't have to additize the cat pee that they sell at the pumps.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

Last edited by DieselAddict; 10-16-2008 at 06:30 PM.
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




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2011 Pelican Parts - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page