EGR delete is it an MOT fail

[sepulchrave]

1 minute ago, Gt4thomas said:

I'm very interested to see if the government/industries can sort out the pollution in our lifetime.

 

An all electric future will be the death of car culture for better or for worse.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't agree about car culture, classic cars will always be popular and electric cars accelerate like crazy, try and keep up with a hard charging Tesla in your VRS.

The problem is road haulage, you won't be able to do anything except city work in an electric LGV, they'll never have enough range.

[Gt4thomas]

We all know teslas are fast but also boring, like formula E. Yawn!.

 

The Volvo self driving trucks look scary and cool at the same time. Just the distance is the problem like you said.

 

[VWD]

On 02/01/2019 at 13:14, sepulchrave said:

As well as being an MOT fail it is lazy and irresponsible to knowingly remove an active emissions control device for no reason since deletion of the EGR system does not improve performance on a diesel engine.

The best solution is always to clean and maintain the EGR system correctly and replace defective parts when necessary.

I had problems with EGR &valve a couple of years ago. I also had emission getting close to limit. I now give car a once weekly blast over 10 miles and I notice that emmisions are going down, and EGR valve- thing of past. So forget clean- just take it out for a good blast and enjoy.

[martinch]

 

On 12/01/2019 at 20:58, sepulchrave said:

The problem is road haulage, you won't be able to do anything except city work in an electric LGV, they'll never have enough range.

The Tesla Semi's supposed to have a 500 miles range (400 mile on 80% charge)..?

 

On 12/01/2019 at 20:23, sepulchrave said:

I've always known that diesels are far more hazardous to people, the idea was to reduce CO2 emissions because for some reason atmospheric CO2 levels are more important than peoples lives.

Pretty-much everything that comes out of the back of a car is harmful, unfortunately.  CO2 isn't absorbed by plants at anywhere near the rate some will claim, and turns into carbonic acid when in contact with water which poses a hazard to marine life, amongst other things.  It's somewhat a question of where you draw the balancing point (and in my opinion, the government got it wrong - yet another instance of the government taking a complex issue and simplifying it to a single-issue problem, to the detriment of pretty-much everyone).

[sepulchrave]

11 minutes ago, martinch said:

The Tesla Semi's supposed to have a 500 miles range (400 mile on 80% charge)..?

 

I'll believe it when I see it, I have literally no idea how you get enough electrons gathered together to charge a battery pack that massive in a reasonable length of time, say 12 hours.

You'll have to park it at a substation and hang it straight off the grid.

Edited 14 January, 2019 by sepulchrave

[Rustynuts]

On 12/01/2019 at 20:51, Gt4thomas said:

I'm very interested to see if the government/industries can sort out the pollution in our lifetime.

 

An all electric future will be the death of car culture for better or for worse.

 

 

 

 

I just hope we don't run out of electricity...

[Boatman1]

On 14/01/2019 at 18:53, Rustynuts said:

I just hope we don't run out of electricity...

No one seems to mention how the vast majority of electricity is produced, China, India and much of USA  is fossil fuel plus the power involved in battery making from mining to manufacture to distribution is huge. The day I take this nonsense seriously is the day they ban all motorsport including the F1 circus.

[sepulchrave]

47 minutes ago, Boatman1 said:

No one seems to mention how the vast majority of electricity is produced, China, India and much of USA  is fossil fuel plus the power involved in battery making from mining to manufacture to distribution is huge. The day I take this nonsense seriously is the day they ban all motorsport including the F1 circus.

 

Actually China and India are building nuclear power stations like mad because they only have coal and over a billion people each who need electricity.

 

Formula E anyone?

[Titanium_Man]

MOT test today with egr deleted and passed no problem 

[sepulchrave]

1 hour ago, jars said:

MOT test today with egr deleted and passed no problem 

 

Ok, I guess we should all delete ours then and wait until somebody tells us they failed instead of reading the rules.

What's your point?

[Titanium_Man]

32 minutes ago, sepulchrave said:

 

Ok, I guess we should all delete ours then and wait until somebody tells us they failed instead of reading the rules.

What's your point?

 

I assume you read the thread title?!? Clearly I’m answering that very question, from my experience. 

 

What’s your point? 

[sepulchrave]

49 minutes ago, jars said:

 

I assume you read the thread title?!? Clearly I’m answering that very question, from my experience. 

 

What’s your point? 

 

My point is that it is a fail, you may have got away with it but that hardly constitutes best advice.

[Titanium_Man]

1 hour ago, sepulchrave said:

 

My point is that it is a fail, you may have got away with it but that hardly constitutes best advice.

 

but it didn't fail  

 

Yes, technically it should have been failed, but the point of my post was to show those that want to remove the EGR that it is possible to pass an MOT.

 

Although I did not give any actual advice in my post, I would consider it to be the "best advice" for someone who wants to remove the EGR and pass an MOT

 

The actual advice I would give to those in my position is to find yourself a friendly MOT tester.

 

[vRSAnt]

You missing the point. MOT can be pass, roadworthiness can be fail.
You could fail to be caught for speeding but that doesn't meant you won't be next time Did you actually point it out or did they just miss it ?

Just also jumping back to discussions on EV, I tend to agree about boringness of them.

Who can get excited about a battery ? Unless of course its a lady with respect to her powered portable "device"

I think I will possibly just lose interest in cars, the noise is part of the emotion they bring , suerly they need to sort something with respect to that to the EV equation and avoid all this driverless control or we might as well all travel by PT.

 

[sepulchrave]

I wouldn't worry about driverless cars, to say it's years away is an understatement, I know guys in the industry and the PR nonsense used to raise funding is what the media are feeding you.

The insurance industry won't touch them, you wanna be an unpaid beta tester dead under a lorry or in prison for killing an invisible cyclist then get a Tesla and engage autopilot.

[onytaner]

On 14/01/2019 at 18:29, martinch said:

 

The Tesla Semi's supposed to have a 500 miles range (400 mile on 80% charge)..?

 

Pretty-much everything that comes out of the back of a car is harmful, unfortunately.  CO2 isn't absorbed by plants at anywhere near the rate some will claim, and turns into carbonic acid when in contact with water which poses a hazard to marine life, amongst other things.  It's somewhat a question of where you draw the balancing point (and in my opinion, the government got it wrong - yet another instance of the government taking a complex issue and simplifying it to a single-issue problem, to the detriment of pretty-much everyone).

There are some truly ill-informed sheep in this chat.

 

1) the emissions caused from mining the rare metals for one Telsa are greater than the emissions created in the production and lifetime usaged (including oil drilling, refining, and transportation) of the average post 2009 petrol vehicle. This is not even considering the emissions created from producing or recharging a Tesla throughout its lifetime. Nor the emissions created to safely dispose of the HIGHLY toxic batteries.

 

This is just the emissions just from mining a small portion of the materials. This is due to 2 reasons:

 

a)95% come from China or other third world countries which don't regulate the mining emissions or have to abide by international eco treaties.

 

b) metals are extremely rare and or hard to mine due to their natural deep and thin layering in the earth's surface.

 

2) Removing an EGR valve over the average 15 year lifespan of a petrol vehicle, equates to 3% of the total emission created by the reduced MPG.

 

So appreciate all your eco warriors who think you're support a just cause, but your on the wrong side of the battle for the time being....you're on corporate government side and regurgitating lies.

 

I'm happy to share all studies which support this. I'm an electrical engineer so it's obviously not in my interest but can't stand the false sense of eco heroism these lies are creating.

 

Don't be sheep and just repeat what you heard on BBC or CNN, be better than that and educate yourselves.

 

 

[Breezy_Pete]

26 minutes ago, onytaner said:

Removing an EGR valve over the average 15 year lifespan of a petrol vehicle

The OPs' car in this thread is a turbodiesel, so the likely impact of EGR delete on real world emissions would be significantly more NOx, marginally less CO2 and probably lower particulates.

What's your stance on NOx and its impact on human health in the immediate term?

 

Interesting and somewhat forceful first post. What vehicle(s) does your family drive?