DPF removal

[Redboy]

This might be another long-term nail in the coffin for diesel, remains to be seen if the upgraded MOT in May 18 can actually detect the removal. Perhaps petrol engine second-hand values will hold up a bit better now. 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41761864

[Bertie90]

I wonder how far they will go with this.  I never been a fan of DPF removal.

Edited 30 October, 2017 by john999boy
Thread merger

[Titanium_Man]

Can a continued failure of a DPF only be the responsibility of the manufacture and not down to the type of usage of the vehicle by the owner, as one of the people quoted in that report suggest?

 

I know someone who works at Motibility who has to deal with a lot of failed DPF complaints that appear, through their questioning, to be down to the short journeys and low mileage of the vehicle?

 

 

Edited 30 October, 2017 by jars

[rum4mo]

You know, even coming from a petrol waster, I can see your point!  This harks back to too many people only seeing the excellent MPG that a Diesel engine can give, then using them for maybe a couple of 4 mile journeys a day!   A tricky one, a product is brought to market that can be economic to run wrt fuel usage but not so handy for short journeys only. The users must bear some of the responsibility for how their chosen method of transport is now been viewed from an environmental impact point of view?

 

Edit:- actually another piece of enlightenment from BBC News today is, if you are a non smoker and stroke a pussy that lives in a smoker's house, you will increase your chances of ending up with cig smoke related problems - that BBC News stuff is amazing???  I'm guessing stroking a dog or parrot is okay though, or maybe they are saving that news for another day.

Edited 30 October, 2017 by rum4mo

[Titanium_Man]

 

 

[@Lee]

1 hour ago, rum4mo said:

You know, even coming from a petrol waster, I can see your point!  This harks back to too many people only seeing the excellent MPG that a Diesel engine can give, then using them for maybe a couple of 4 mile journeys a day!   A tricky one, a product is brought to market that can be economic to run wrt fuel usage but not so handy for short journeys only. The users must bear some of the responsibility for how their chosen method of transport is now been viewed from an environmental impact point of view?

 

 

How much responsibility lies with sales staff selling the wrong type of engine to the wrong type of customer.
Older couple go in having read the Daily Mail's stories about excellent fuel consumption and think 'Right, we'll get a diesel'.
Staff don't bother to ask anything about their usage. i.e. is it a weekly trip to the shop and once a month for a blue rinse or are you going to clog up the roads at 40 towing your 
Sprite Alpine...............
When I went and got my MkII Fabia 1.6TDi from Skoda there was never any mention from the sales gimp about what sort of mileage I did.

[Titanium_Man]

From the conversations I have had, I agree. The dealers don’t care as they will be paid for the work regardless of who’s to blame or who’s paying. 

[rum4mo]

Buyers need to start accepting some of the responsibility for their actions, this "not my fault" has gone too far in my eyes.  A smart and honest buyer will ask the questions, a typical clown will know they know everything so deflect any compatibility questions being aired.

[@Lee]

1 hour ago, rum4mo said:

Buyers need to start accepting some of the responsibility for their actions, this "not my fault" has gone too far in my eyes.  A smart and honest buyer will ask the questions, a typical clown will know they know everything so deflect any compatibility questions being aired.

While 'Caveat Emptor' should apply, there should also be some responsibility from sales staff to tailor sales to customers.

[GenePoolReject]

As a salesman I can say we are asked to inform people of the issues of buying diesels to do inappropriate journeys in. Although we certainly won’t refuse to sell a car to a customer even if it’s a bad choice. That being said, even when advised not to do something for their own benefit most customer can’t look past the short term draw of cheap road tax and high mpg. Things are changing slowly though, with all the scaremongering people are questioning the viability of diesels more.

[chimaera]

On 29/10/2017 at 12:30, Redboy said:

This might be another long-term nail in the coffin for diesel, remains to be seen if the upgraded MOT in May 18 can actually detect the removal. Perhaps petrol engine second-hand values will hold up a bit better now. 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41761864

 

My guess is through EOBD readiness. If the DPF is removed and mapped out, I don't think it's possible for the readiness bit to be set on startup. A code reader can detect this easily. Couple that with a visual for unusual weld marks and it should be straightforward.

 

Petrol owners have little room to gloat either. Particulate filters are on the way for direct injection petrol cars from Euro 6c.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, rum4mo said:

Buyers need to start accepting some of the responsibility for their actions, this "not my fault" has gone too far in my eyes.  A smart and honest buyer will ask the questions, a typical clown will know they know everything so deflect any compatibility questions being aired.

When I bought my car in 2010 I hadn't even heard of a DPF. None of the reviews of diesel vehicles in the motoring press mentioned DPF's. When I mentioned to the Sales guy I was looking to buy my first ever diesel, he just said it made more sense to buy the diesel over the petrol variant as I would get better fuel economy and lower VED. 

 

If I had been made aware of the potential issues with DPF's, and would the type of journeys I would undertake be suitable for a vehicle fitted with a DPF I would have stuck with petrol. 

[Bertie90]

so reading all your posts, not knowing that your car had a DPF or not being advised on how to drive it, would this make you eligible or give you a good excuse to go and tinker with the vehicle and remove the DPF polluting a lot more more than you already are and making the car not road legal?

 

Some remove it because it gives a bit more power (but then again buy a more powerful car or a petrol one), some because it's expensive to replace. Wouldn't you just get rid of the car a buy a petrol? Why going through all the hassle and point fingers saying "it's not my fault, i didn't know therefore  I had to do it"? 

[Aspman]

I think there are a mixture of circumstances.

 

I know many people that have have described going to a dealer to buy a diesel for the mpg and planning on using it for short journeys only.

Some have been merrily sold that diesel without any issues being mentioned (I also know people were sold a petrol 4x4 and were told "yeah of course it'll get the paper figure of Xmpg", salesman tried to tell me my 335d would do 60+ [does 42 but I knew]).

 

I know some people that were strongly warned not to buy a diesel by salesmen because they would have problems and bought one anyway. And a few that took the advice.

 

It's a mixed bag.

 

I'll feel sorry for the folks that are going to get caught out in the the second hand market. Buy a car only to find it's missing the DPF and worth lots less or nothing.

[Bertie90]

1 hour ago, Aspman said:

I think there are a mixture of circumstances.

 

I know many people that have have described going to a dealer to buy a diesel for the mpg and planning on using it for short journeys only.

Some have been merrily sold that diesel without any issues being mentioned (I also know people were sold a petrol 4x4 and were told "yeah of course it'll get the paper figure of Xmpg", salesman tried to tell me my 335d would do 60+ [does 42 but I knew]).

 

I know some people that were strongly warned not to buy a diesel by salesmen because they would have problems and bought one anyway. And a few that took the advice.

 

It's a mixed bag.

 

I'll feel sorry for the folks that are going to get caught out in the the second hand market. Buy a car only to find it's missing the DPF and worth lots less or nothing.

 

then again, would you still go ahead and buy a second hand car that smokes like a chimney? It very hard not to notice all the black smoke coming out, DPF expert or not.

[mac11irl]

1 hour ago, Bertie90 said:

 

then again, would you still go ahead and buy a second hand car that smokes like a chimney? It very hard not to notice all the black smoke coming out, DPF expert or not.

 

 

My old mk1 octy diesel didnt smoke at all. And there was no dpf in that old work horse.. spotting the lack of a dpf by smoke is harder than youd think..

[Bertie90]

20 minutes ago, mac11irl said:

 

 

My old mk1 octy diesel didnt smoke at all. And there was no dpf in that old work horse.. spotting the lack of a dpf by smoke is harder than youd think..

 

i only saw a new BMW 3 series with removed dpf that didn't smoke. My mate has got a vrs mk1 with no dpf and boy let me tell you that thing leave clouds behind.  Chances are on your octavia it never had a dpf as it was never designed with one and they had other methods to catch the soot. 

 

if the car had on and it was removed, you will know. 

[mac11irl]

It never had one.. 

Worth noting though that its easy make a diesel smoke like a chimney if you want.

Agri-spec if you want to google it.. a heavy remap will generally cause its own greenhouse effect.. doesnt need dpf removal foe that to happen

[chimaera]

A lot of older diesels won't smoke that much if they are kept in good order because they're not being stressed much. Diesels only really start to smoke when the fuel/air ratio approaches stoichiometric, either by increasing fuel a lot or by restricting air flow. An aggressive remap will certainly leave a car smoking under load.

 

Newer engines are being pushed a lot harder in terms of specific output and are more likely to smoke without a DPF fitted.

 

All this said, a DPF equipped car in good condition should emit no smoke as the DPF should be trapping all of it. If a car is specified with a DPF and is emitting measurable amounts of smoke, it's a sign that the DPF may no longer be present.

[Aspman]

3 hours ago, Bertie90 said:

 

then again, would you still go ahead and buy a second hand car that smokes like a chimney? It very hard not to notice all the black smoke coming out, DPF expert or not.

 

Lots and lots of people just wouldn't do what maybe you think is basic checking. They buy a car like they buy a washing machine.

[Bertie90]

23 minutes ago, Aspman said:

 

Lots and lots of people just wouldn't do what maybe you think is basic checking. They buy a car like they buy a washing machine.

 

true, but that's why they need to make MOT checks a bit better. The "i didn't know" excuse is not a valid excuse. Also people that did it deliberately will use the same excuse "oh i bought it like this, i didn't know".

[BJM]

4 hours ago, Bertie90 said:

 

My mate has got a vrs mk1 with no dpf and boy let me tell you that thing leave clouds behind.

 

I'd suggest you get your mate to get his car looked at asap

AFAIK (and I had one) the Mk 1 vRS was only ever fitted with a 1.8 turbo PETROL engine

[Bertie90]

22 minutes ago, BJM said:

 

I'd suggest you get your mate to get his car looked at asap

AFAIK (and I had one) the Mk 1 vRS was only ever fitted with a 1.8 turbo PETROL engine

 

ahhh what? loool funny guy

[mac11irl]

1 hour ago, BJM said:

 

I'd suggest you get your mate to get his car looked at asap

AFAIK (and I had one) the Mk 1 vRS was only ever fitted with a 1.8 turbo PETROL engine

Ill play assumption game - he meant a Furby.

In your defence, i assumed for a second he was on about an Octy also

[BJM]

1 minute ago, mac11irl said:

Ill play assumption game - he meant a Furby.

In your defence, i assumed for a second he was on about an Octy also

 

Of course, I forgot that Skoda once made a Diesel powered roller skate.

They did of course only make one model that could bear the vRS badge with dignity.