No it won't.
Why are DI cars dirty?
- Thread starter Fabulous50s
- Start date
BMW never had a head exchange program.Coming from an owner of mostly German and Italian cars.
Valve deposits on GDI only systems are an issue on all brands of vehicles across the board. VW, BWM, Subaru, etc...they all have issues with it. Some are better than others, but I know a VW tech at a dealer who knows it's an issue. BMW used to have a head exchange program for the issue. Toyota and Ford have hybrid systems in a lot of their vehicles which use port injection to solely keep the valves clean.
I'm hoping there's more reasons than the bean counters as to why other manufacturers don't use a hybrid system.
I have a Subaru and valve deposits are also an issue.
The first gen TGDI engine (N54) had deposit problems and BMW recommended walnut blasting every 40k miles or so but BMW fixed it on the successor (N55) around 2010.
Audi/VW 3.0-liter V-6 and 5.2-liter V-10
Ford 3.5L EcoBoost and V6 engines
Lexus 2GR-FSE engines
Subaru 2.0-liter I4
Toyota D4-S 3.5-liter V6 and 5.0-liter V-8 engines
My GDI engine doesn't seem to smoke on startup. I'll have to stick my finger up the tailpipe to see how sooty it is there. Maybe more soot under some conditions is offset by all-over less soot and fewer emissions due to increased fuel economy over a comparable PFI engine?
I swore I remembered reading about it awhile ago and remembered being on a website where it talked about such a program and the details of it. I can't seem to find it now though. Who knows. Maybe it was a dream.
Why don't diesels build up carbon like the gas engines do?
Hmm, why do older Diesel engines without catalytic converters and particle filters smoke?
Seems like the negatives of DI outweigh the positives.
greenerideal.com
"Results of the study showed that today’s direct injection engines emit as much as 1,000 times more harmful particles than port fuel injection engines, which is a quite surprising finding. Furthermore, researchers found that GDI engines emit up to 10 times more particles than modern diesel engines."
Environmental Impact Of Direct Injection Engines
While gasoline direct injection engines are known for improving a car’s fuel efficiency, low emission levels in certain situations, and providing enhanced performances, there are a couple of …
greenerideal.com
"Results of the study showed that today’s direct injection engines emit as much as 1,000 times more harmful particles than port fuel injection engines, which is a quite surprising finding. Furthermore, researchers found that GDI engines emit up to 10 times more particles than modern diesel engines."
The higher particle number is most likely due to smaller particle size Smaller particles are more dangerous because they can penetrate deeper and permanently into the respiratory system.Seems like the negatives of DI outweigh the positives.
Environmental Impact Of Direct Injection Engines
While gasoline direct injection engines are known for improving a car’s fuel efficiency, low emission levels in certain situations, and providing enhanced performances, there are a couple of …
"Results of the study showed that today’s direct injection engines emit as much as 1,000 times more harmful particles than port fuel injection engines, which is a quite surprising finding. Furthermore, researchers found that GDI engines emit up to 10 times more particles than modern diesel engines."
DI gas engine soot particles are more dangerous than diesel soot particles because they are smaller and hang in the air for much longer, instead of falling to the ground.
Of course we all know that diesel engines are bad mostly because of soot, but it seems the same sentiment somehow doesn’t apply to gas DI engines. “Out of sight out of mind” seems to fit in this case.
Strangely EPA doesn’t seem to be concerned with DI gas engines producing soot, whereas they were obsessed with diesel soot to the point of doing human tests on homeless and children without fully disclosing what these test were to the subjects. Hmm…
Of course we all know that diesel engines are bad mostly because of soot, but it seems the same sentiment somehow doesn’t apply to gas DI engines. “Out of sight out of mind” seems to fit in this case.
Strangely EPA doesn’t seem to be concerned with DI gas engines producing soot, whereas they were obsessed with diesel soot to the point of doing human tests on homeless and children without fully disclosing what these test were to the subjects. Hmm…
Last edited:
Seems like the negatives of DI outweigh the positives.
Environmental Impact Of Direct Injection Engines
While gasoline direct injection engines are known for improving a car’s fuel efficiency, low emission levels in certain situations, and providing enhanced performances, there are a couple of …
"Results of the study showed that today’s direct injection engines emit as much as 1,000 times more harmful particles than port fuel injection engines, which is a quite surprising finding. Furthermore, researchers found that GDI engines emit up to 10 times more particles than modern diesel engines."
GWF Hegel would refer to this as "the cunning of reason." We have environmentalists that have forced the hand of automakers in a way in which they are compelled to use GDI engines in hopes of keeping up with the ever-increasing environmentalist regulations only to realize that the end results may be making problems worse instead of better.
They do and it has been worse but I don't know about now. . I'm talking about light passenger diesels and some early VW, BMW, Powerstroke. Some VW intakes would become completely blocked by soot.
That's a 2013 study and sparked the GPF requirement. In addition at the time emissions systems were designed to take care of the additional NOX using a three-way catalyst (TWC). The higher NOX was due to the engine operating at lean burn for better efficiency. Higher combustion temps create more NOX. This has always been an issue with diesel engines. EGR was the first attempt to reduce it. Then EGR + SCR (urea).Seems like the negatives of DI outweigh the positives.
Environmental Impact Of Direct Injection Engines
While gasoline direct injection engines are known for improving a car’s fuel efficiency, low emission levels in certain situations, and providing enhanced performances, there are a couple of …
"Results of the study showed that today’s direct injection engines emit as much as 1,000 times more harmful particles than port fuel injection engines, which is a quite surprising finding. Furthermore, researchers found that GDI engines emit up to 10 times more particles than modern diesel engines."
No it's not worse. It's better overall.
None of the diesels I'm familiar with do. My f250 has been running since 1987. Otr trucks go million+ miles.
particle profile is such that it will easier get into bloodstream
My Wife's Subaru Outback tailpipe is sparkly clean, also the beast gets over 34MPG average !
My little Ford TP is sooty and gets 25 MPG ave in the summer.
Both cars have (very) high compression, high specific out put D.I. engines
Maybe I'll take some comparative TP photos when I head out for a grocery run at Noon.
... just BC we like to look at pictures
My little Ford TP is sooty and gets 25 MPG ave in the summer.
Both cars have (very) high compression, high specific out put D.I. engines
Maybe I'll take some comparative TP photos when I head out for a grocery run at Noon.
... just BC we like to look at pictures
It became a big issue with the new emissions requirements around 2008. OTR trucks run full power all the time so they don't normally have a problem. Powerstroke from around that time had big EGR plugging problems. The BMW M57 suffered from intake deposits but that issue was generally limited to the 3-series sedan because it only had a high pressure EGR whereas the X5 had high and low pressure EGR. VW Tdi's we're clean but we all know that's because the EGR wasn't being used.
I would not be surprised if the majority of EGRs on light duty diesel cars/trucks have been bypassed in some way. Seems SOP for those owners.
2015 Accord 2.4DI, I installed a air/oil separator in the pcv system- every oil change I dump the can- 1/2 cup a year and the crap that comes out with the water is impressive.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2022
- Messages
- 671
And my early 80s VW with SOHC, mechanical CIS injection would get over 40mpg.... what gets that now? A hybrid?
Smaller, forced induction engines are inherently less efficient when they are making power.
Full size American FWD cars of the 90s would routinely get 30mpg with loafing V6s. Took my grandmothers 1992 Mercury sable with the head gasket blowing 3.8 on several road trips in the early 2000s and got 30+ mpg, GM 3800 equipped Bonniville would do the same.
Older diesels don't carbon up valves because they had open crancase vents and had no EGR. Pretty much just fresh air to the engine.
Smaller, forced induction engines are inherently less efficient when they are making power.
Full size American FWD cars of the 90s would routinely get 30mpg with loafing V6s. Took my grandmothers 1992 Mercury sable with the head gasket blowing 3.8 on several road trips in the early 2000s and got 30+ mpg, GM 3800 equipped Bonniville would do the same.
Older diesels don't carbon up valves because they had open crancase vents and had no EGR. Pretty much just fresh air to the engine.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yup, the EGR on a diesel really packs the EGR cooler and the intake ports. My buddy deleted the EGR on his 6.0L PSD and it had a dramatic impact on both fuel economy and intake cleanliness.
