threelander321
Active Member
biggest co ever this Emissions malarky
Elv73
Member
I think the kicker here is the wording - OBVIOUSLY modified. Im sure there are plenty of MOT testers out there that wouldn't notice if a bypass is fitted with the vacuum hose connected to the little stub instead of an actual EGR valve?
Different if there's nothing at all fitted and just a blanking plate with a space where it used to be. (ive still got the EGR valve off mine in the garage anyway just in case)
threelander321
Active Member
con
threelander321
Active Member
Would you get away with just the blanking plate ???
Elv73
Member
I wouldnt have thought so as its then pretty obvious that the EGR has been removed?
threelander321
Active Member
i thought the egr stayed in place with the blanking plate.it does on a FL2 anyhow
kernowsvenski
Well-Known Member
Given how easy it is to access the EGR on the TD4 you could easily put it back on just for the test.
Elv73
Member
Thats my plan. As you say its only a 15 min job to swap them so its exactly what I plan to do come mot time if it becomes an issue.
Elv73
Member
In that case itd probably be fine.
I was thinking along the lines of the blanks that I had fitted on my old Pajero which removed the EGR all together.
rob_bell
Well-Known Member
Removed the EGR on the M47R in our ZTT years ago. Whether it fails on that MoT point is likely to be dependent on how familiar the MoT inspector is with your car, and how observant he/she is.
They are really on a mission to kill off older diesels aren't they. That annoys me immensely as surely there is more CO2 in the manufacture of new cars than emitted from the tail pipe in a vehicle's lifetime?
As I live within the confines of the North Circular Road, the London Mayor is threatening to make me pay to use ALL my cars 365 days a year/ 24 hours a day.... Grrrrr!
They are really on a mission to kill off older diesels aren't they. That annoys me immensely as surely there is more CO2 in the manufacture of new cars than emitted from the tail pipe in a vehicle's lifetime?
As I live within the confines of the North Circular Road, the London Mayor is threatening to make me pay to use ALL my cars 365 days a year/ 24 hours a day.... Grrrrr!
GrumpyGel
Well-Known Member
I was chatting to my neighbour the other day and I said to him that the most environmentally friendly cars around are the likes of ours - my 20 year old diesel Freelander and his 20 year old diesel Land Cruiser - both of them pretty reliable needing few new parts to be manufactured. Their only environmental impact is what comes out the exhaust.Removed the EGR on the M47R in our ZTT years ago. Whether it fails on that MoT point is likely to be dependent on how familiar the MoT inspector is with your car, and how observant he/she is.
They are really on a mission to kill off older diesels aren't they. That annoys me immensely as surely there is more CO2 in the manufacture of new cars than emitted from the tail pipe in a vehicle's lifetime?
As I live within the confines of the North Circular Road, the London Mayor is threatening to make me pay to use ALL my cars 365 days a year/ 24 hours a day.... Grrrrr!
How much impact is there in the manufacture of a new car? If that car is electric, how much impact does making its batteries have and how much impact will there have been in 20 years time when by then it will have needed 2 sets of replacement batteries and 2 sets 'disposed of'? It is people buying these vehicles that should be paying a humongous great big environmental levy on their cars.
We should be encouraged to keep our environmentally friendly cars on the road with zero road tax and tax free fuel!
rob_bell
Well-Known Member
If I can wait long enough, they'll become "Historic" classics and be tax-free! But by then though, fossil fuels may have gone the way of the dinosaurs and be extinct...
100% agree with the environmental argument above. Electric cars are particularly polluting to make and with the precious metals, their extraction/ transportation, come with a massive carbon footprint! Cars of the 1990s and early 2000s are simple and robust enough to maintained at home. Later cars become a lot more complex and interconnected with ever increasing encryption - I am sure you'll be able to home maintain these in time, but they'll pose plenty of extra challenges in the face of an industry that doesn't want you to keep a vehicle beyond its intended life-cycle.
100% agree with the environmental argument above. Electric cars are particularly polluting to make and with the precious metals, their extraction/ transportation, come with a massive carbon footprint! Cars of the 1990s and early 2000s are simple and robust enough to maintained at home. Later cars become a lot more complex and interconnected with ever increasing encryption - I am sure you'll be able to home maintain these in time, but they'll pose plenty of extra challenges in the face of an industry that doesn't want you to keep a vehicle beyond its intended life-cycle.
Nodge68
Well-Known Member
I agree with Rob and GG, so do many others. The figures have been done, and it's quite eye opening.
Seen this? It's an interesting read, and backs up your idea.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/11187483/New-or-old-which-is-greener.html
Seen this? It's an interesting read, and backs up your idea.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/11187483/New-or-old-which-is-greener.html
kernowsvenski
Well-Known Member
All well known stuff. It's clear that to keep the environmental impact of a vehicle to a minimum the whole life should be factored in, including manufacture and disposal. Keeping a car going as long as possible results in the lowest contribution to pollutants overall. It annoyed me when the last scrapage scheme came in a few years ago. Airfields filled with perfectly serviceable cars waiting to be crushed. Some as young as six years old. Environmentalism was a token gesture, and completely went out of the window when they economy went downhill.
andyfreelandy
Well-Known Member
My TD4 passed its MOT today. Had a chat with the nice guy at Halfrauds - he pointed me to the on line MOT manual (draft) for May 2018.
Wrt emissions it says:
Test Procedure (post 1980 vehicles) 1. Before starting the test, ascertain the maximum smoke level limit for the vehicle and enter the required details into the diesel smoke meter. This will be: a. for vehicles first used before 1 July 2008 not more than the level specified on the manufacture’s plate, or where no value displayed: for a non-turbocharged engine not more than 2.5m-1 for a turbocharged engine not more than 3.0m-1 b. for vehicles first used on or after 1 July 2008 not more than the level specified on the manufacture’s plate, or 1.5m-1 where no value displayed c. for vehicles first used on or after 1 January 2014 not more than the level specified on the manufacture’s plate, or 0.7m-1 where no value displayed.
So no change for pre-2008 - all Freelander 1's that I can see.
As Nodge has highlighted you may be in trouble for modifying emissions control systems though.........
Wrt emissions it says:
Test Procedure (post 1980 vehicles) 1. Before starting the test, ascertain the maximum smoke level limit for the vehicle and enter the required details into the diesel smoke meter. This will be: a. for vehicles first used before 1 July 2008 not more than the level specified on the manufacture’s plate, or where no value displayed: for a non-turbocharged engine not more than 2.5m-1 for a turbocharged engine not more than 3.0m-1 b. for vehicles first used on or after 1 July 2008 not more than the level specified on the manufacture’s plate, or 1.5m-1 where no value displayed c. for vehicles first used on or after 1 January 2014 not more than the level specified on the manufacture’s plate, or 0.7m-1 where no value displayed.
So no change for pre-2008 - all Freelander 1's that I can see.
As Nodge has highlighted you may be in trouble for modifying emissions control systems though.........
What is the level specified on the manufacturers plate for the TD4 auto or doesn't one exist And it's 3.0 then?
Mine took 4 times to pass at the last MOT and if I understood was 1.08, the first reading was 2.56. Is there a difference with German AU, which is called Trübungswert (turbidity value?) 1/m?
Mine took 4 times to pass at the last MOT and if I understood was 1.08, the first reading was 2.56. Is there a difference with German AU, which is called Trübungswert (turbidity value?) 1/m?
Last edited:
Skinny Mike
Well-Known Member
Not sure on the numbers, but mines never failed a smoke test, 2002 TD4 auto, synergy 2a chip with egr bypass.
Make sure your inlet manifold is clean and if you have one clean the egr valve. Get it up to temp before going to the m.o.t center, I give mine a blast down the M1 for a couple of junctions.
If there's no oil in the inlet side, it can't smoke, unless you have a duff injector.
Mike
Thanks, Mike. Hope I won't have that trouble in the future anymore. In March I installed a stick in the engine bay, which increases the efficiency of the fuel burning and reduces smoke emissions. Not sure how it would work w/o EGR, but with it works.
Matthias
Matthias
Last edited:
