Landshandy

Landshandy

Active Member
Hello,

I'm going to have a tinker this weekend and remove the EGR for my money pit and was wondering if anyone knew how much impact it had on the performance and how many extra horses I will get for Bhp?
 
it's not so much about power gain though if your's was dirty enough you might feel some improvement, it's more about letting clean and colder air into the inlet which is healthy for the engine cos the combustion will be better... if you do the job and want a clean start you should flush the intercooler too but more important is to clean the inlet manifold with petrol or something cos it's full of muck then clean the MAP sensor too... remove the EGR modulator too or if you dont want that at least unplug it and insulate the connector as to not touch earth cos it puts unnecessary load on that circuit and can affect MAF readings and the wastegate modulator's activity
 
I have found it makes sod all difference to performance. Nor did the replacement centre pipe though it makes it sound loads better. The remap on the other hand.....
 
Mine is de AGR and without Cat.
A good improvement was to clean the system. As I`m a lacy bugger I used Protec Triple X and the Adapter.
 
digby said:
Should seriouoly increase NOx emissions too .................
Click to expand...
No it's not, only a PERFECTLY working clean EGR would reduce the NO3 emmision with a neglectable percent but IMO there is not such thing on a 11 - 16 year old car... an old EGR system which is partially clogged will increase noxes cos the management will compensate the lack of dense, oxigen rich air with fuel and there will be black smoke and increased EGT...removing it it's a win-win situation for both the engine and environment believe me especially that you can't find NEW spare parts for it as they became obsolete so even if you are from greanpeace you'll not be able to restore it to original capabilities... but even if you could you should do it after a year or two again

all the de-EGR'd D2's i've seen have passed the MOT nox test within the accepted limits without any probs
 
Last edited:
sierrafery said:
it's not so much about power gain though if your's was dirty enough you might feel some improvement, it's more about letting clean and colder air into the inlet which is healthy for the engine cos the combustion will be better... if you do the job and want a clean start you should flush the intercooler too but more important is to clean the inlet manifold with petrol or something cos it's full of muck then clean the MAP sensor too... remove the EGR modulator too or if you dont want that at least unplug it and insulate the connector as to not touch earth cos it puts unnecessary load on that circuit and can affect MAF readings and the wastegate modulator's activity
Click to expand...
Is cleaning the inter cooler a simple affair?
 
sierrafery said:
No it's not, only a PERFECTLY working clean EGR would reduce the NO3 emmision with a neglectable percent but IMO there is not such thing on a 11 - 16 year old car... an old EGR system which is partially clogged will increase noxes cos the management will compensate the lack of dense, oxigen rich air with fuel and there will be black smoke and increased EGT...removing it it's a win-win situation for both the engine and environment believe me especially that you can't find NEW spare parts for it as they became obsolete so even if you are from greanpeace you'll not be able to restore it to original capabilities... but even if you could you should do it after a year or two again

all the de-EGR'd D2's i've seen have passed the MOT nox test within the accepted limits without any probs
Click to expand...

What a load of bollocks.
 
then better explain why with scientific arguments please... what i said is based on measurements not presumptions, though i presume you both know what the IAT's effect is on EGT and fueling and how much the IAT is increased by EGR existence,(especially if it's a non cooled one)...why do you think that Eu3 modell has a cooled EGR to have better emmissions than the non-cooled Eu2 though... and even though it happens to have worst emmision value on real measurement?
 
Last edited:
sierrafery said:
then better explain why with scientific arguments please... what i said is based on measurements not presumptions, though i presume you both know what the IAT's effect is on EGT and fueling and how much the IAT is increased by EGR existence,(especially if it's a non cooled one)...why do you think that Eu3 modell has a cooled EGR to have better emmissions than the non-cooled Eu2 though... and even though it happens to have worst emmision value on real measurement?
Click to expand...

I still say it was a load of bollocks, know what you are on about before spouting. There is NO Nox test on the UK MOT. And the fuelling is NOT adjusted for air content. Exhaust gas ingested into the engine COOLS combustion by reducing the amount of excess oxygenated air. That is how Nox is reduced. Think you had better do a bit more Googling.
 
Landshandy said:
Is cleaning the inter cooler a simple affair?
Click to expand...
Cleaning the inter cooler is not too bad, but fasteners can be a bit corroded due to its position getting all the salt and **** coming up off the road.
No doubt it's a good idea, but it is upstream of the EGR so what is in there will be oil from the crankcase breather, not the muck from the exhaust.
 
o_O
wammers said:
I still say it was a load of bollocks, know what you are on about before spouting. There is NO Nox test on the UK MOT. And the fuelling is NOT adjusted for air content. Exhaust gas ingested into the engine COOLS combustion by reducing the amount of excess oxygenated air. That is how Nox is reduced. Think you had better do a bit more Googling.
Click to expand...
i dont take it personal cos sarcasm is often constructive if we all learn something from a friendly(or unfriendly) polemic... i dont contradict the way how EGR reduced NOx emmisions i'm saying that A NOT PERFECTLY WORKING ONE IS WORST THAN NONE, too much exhaust gas + less oxygenated air = higher IAT = more unburnt fuel, black smoke, higher EGT,....stuck open EGR valve = less direct boost at the same MAF = more injected fuel = higher EGT + black smoke, and so on... so do you say that higher IAT and lower boost resulted from stuck opened or old and clogged EGR is good for the combustion? ... then why is the engine producing black smoke when ever the air flow is restricted ? or will you pass MOT in the unlikely scenario that there will be loads of black smoke with a low NO3 level? ... the gist of my theory was that bypassing the EGR on a more than 10 years old engine(unless it's restored to it's new condition which is not very common) is a win-win situation for the engine and environment too and i sustain that ... i took many and various readings with tester, EGT gauge and coolant gauge fitted in all kind of scenarios and i know what i've seen with my own eyes... , but i'll keep googlin no worries though the next quote is from RAVE not google the same bollox i was trying to explain in my own words(better read again my post which you attacked first):
Recirculating too much exhaust gas can result in higher emissions of soot, HC and CO due to insufficient air. The recirculated exhaust gas must be limited so that there is sufficient oxygen available for combustion of the injected fuel in the combustion chamber, to do this the Engine Control Module (ECM) is used to control the precise quantity of exhaust gas to be recirculated in accordance with the prevailing operating conditions. Influencing factors include: lthe mass of air flow detected by the mass air flow sensor lthe ambient air pressure, determined by the ambient air pressure sensor which is used to initiate adjustments to reduce the amount of smoke produced at high altitudes. . Other factors which are taken into consideration by the engine management system for determining the optimum operating condition include: lManifold inlet air temperature lCoolant temperature lEngine speed lFuel delivered
Click to expand...

btw do you still have the EGR on your's? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I'll concentrate the whole ''epistle'' from above in a short statement: A NOT PERFECTY WORKING EGR OR A NOT PERFECTLY WORKING ENGINE MANAGEMENT WITH EGR IS WORST THAN NO EGR... that was the gist of my post which was considered ''load of boll*x'' not how the EGR reduces emmisions... a poll about how many of the members here have failed MOT on emmision test without EGR would be relevant
 
Last edited:
sierrafery said:
a poll about how many of the members here have failed MOT on emission test without EGR would be relevant
Click to expand...
Would the new government pollution control test yardstick be...... is it dirtier or cleaner than a VW Golf Diesel ??????
 
sierrafery said:
o_O
i dont take it personal cos sarcasm is often constructive if we all learn something from a friendly(or unfriendly) polemic... i dont contradict the way how EGR reduced NOx emmisions i'm saying that A NOT PERFECTLY WORKING ONE IS WORST THAN NONE, too much exhaust gas + less oxygenated air = higher IAT = more unburnt fuel, black smoke, higher EGT,....stuck open EGR valve = less direct boost at the same MAF = more injected fuel = higher EGT + black smoke, and so on... so do you say that higher IAT and lower boost resulted from stuck opened or old and clogged EGR is good for the combustion? ... then why is the engine producing black smoke when ever the air flow is restricted ? or will you pass MOT in the unlikely scenario that there will be loads of black smoke with a low NO3 level? ... the gist of my theory was that bypassing the EGR on a more than 10 years old engine(unless it's restored to it's new condition which is not very common) is a win-win situation for the engine and environment too and i sustain that ... i took many and various readings with tester, EGT gauge and coolant gauge fitted in all kind of scenarios and i know what i've seen with my own eyes... , but i'll keep googlin no worries though the next quote is from RAVE not google the same bollox i was trying to explain in my own words(better read again my post which you attacked first):

btw do you still have the EGR on your's? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
sierrafery said:
I'll concentrate the whole ''epistle'' from above in a short statement: A NOT PERFECTY WORKING EGR OR A NOT PERFECTLY WORKING ENGINE MANAGEMENT WITH EGR IS WORST THAN NO EGR... that was the gist of my post which was considered ''load of boll*x'' not how the EGR reduces emmisions... a poll about how many of the members here have failed MOT on emmision test without EGR would be relevant
Click to expand...

It was a load of off bollocks, think you need to first Google how a diesel engine works before you start spouting about more fuel introduced. No more fuel is introduced than that required for the RPM/power requested, it is lack of combustible air available for that RPM/power request that causes smoke, if the EGR is sticking open. Or being applied at the wrong time by a faulty system. There is NO Nox test on the diesel MOT only a smoke test. The MAF sensor on a diesel has nothing to do with fuelling, it is for EGR control. It tells the ECU how much exhaust gas is being ingested when EGR is active, nothing more. Any older diesel with the EGR disabled will pass the MOT test without any issue because the emission reduced by the EGR is NOT tested for. What i will agree with is the benefit of disabling EGR on older engines were it can be done.
 
I dont have to google that cos i've read all 1672 pages of RAVE at least twice, i was in the same error like you based only on RAVE's description of MAF that it's ONLY for EGR then after a hard study and tests i realised that RAVE in this particular case is wrong, it's mainly for EGR but it has effect in the fueling calculations even if it's not stated, that's proved if you unplug a 100% well working MAF on a de-EGR'd Td5 that the fuel consumption will increase, we are not speaking here of "a diesel" in general but this topic is about Td5 which's engine management makes the main fueling calculations based on MAP/IAT readings(see RAVE not google) and MAP/IAT input to ECM has nothing to do with the CKP input(rpm) cos if at the same rpm the MAP/IAT (and MAF which is not mentioned in RAVE), have different readings from one case to another there will be different fueling implemented by the addaptive strategy which compares live data with mapped information stored in ECM memory, i think you confused the Td5 with a 300tdi though... what i said i tested on motorway and at the same rpm and throttle input i've got different EGT and ECT with MAF unplugged and MAF connected(no EGR)... so your statement: "The MAF sensor on a diesel has nothing to do with fuelling, it is for EGR control. It tells the ECU how much exhaust gas is being ingested when EGR is active, nothing more" ...the "nothing more" is boll*x when it's about Td5 ... i've learned that the hard way after i sustained exactly what you said and proved wrong ... though we can keep the discussion in a more friendly manner too by not using that b****x word so much cos as we see everybody, even so experienced men like you can be wrong from time to time.

i'm an engineer at basiscs so i hope i can understand how an engine management works if it's well explained
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Discovery 4 (2016) gives error code P045B-77 EGR “B” - does EGR valve need to be replaced?
Replies
0
Views
911
ahannula
A
Jasonmichael
Toying with the idea of buying a Discovery 4.....
Replies
6
Views
631
biketeacherdave
biketeacherdave
P7XES
Disco 3 oil pump cover
Replies
5
Views
578
Rangieman123
Rangieman123
J
D1 300TDi - remove ABS thoughts?
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Jayridium
J
onza120
Freelander 1 TD4 Auto EGR without EGR Cooler
Replies
2
Views
897
onza120
onza120