The 6.7 Powerstroke thread involving deleting emissions controls got me thinking. Realizing that there were (are?) problems with the Powerstroke that are mitigated by removing certain items, and that it's technically illegal, what's the consensus? I removed the catalytic converter from my MG for safety, and unhooked the smog pump belt. Seems the cats are known to get blazing hot, and since it's directly below the carb, they have been known to start fires. I still have it, so it would it would be easy to put it back and put the belt back on the air pump. It's older than 25 years so it's exempt from emission testing. Thank goodness for that; I can't imagine them trying to run the tiny car on the treadmill. If it failed, I don't think I could convince them that there aren't any MG dealers around and I have the special tool for adjusting the carb as well as the factory service manual if they would let me tweak it while they are testing.
Thoughts on emissions controls
- Thread starter Dave Sherman
- Start date
- Status
Back in the 70's there was so much smog here that I could not see the mountains. Today I can.We need emission controls but they need to be correctly designed. Not an afterthought like so many seem to be.
It seems they have a pretty good understanding with gasoline engines, but it seems like a Frankenstein with diesels.
I'm not one for disabling emission controls both for the planet, and as someone with lung problems.
It's generally not necessary outside of performance applications where you might need to for racing at a track for example.
That said I know the emission system woes you are talking about in particular and while I would advise you not to do anything illegal I understand your frustration.
If you ever need help setting the Carb on your MG I'm pretty familiar with carbs from British makes.
I can set them almost dead on by ear like my dad taught me, and it seems I have a knack for carbs in general because the 5 gas analyzer my dad owns will usually confirm it.
Good luck.
It's generally not necessary outside of performance applications where you might need to for racing at a track for example.
That said I know the emission system woes you are talking about in particular and while I would advise you not to do anything illegal I understand your frustration.
If you ever need help setting the Carb on your MG I'm pretty familiar with carbs from British makes.
I can set them almost dead on by ear like my dad taught me, and it seems I have a knack for carbs in general because the 5 gas analyzer my dad owns will usually confirm it.
Good luck.
Last edited:
Diesels are a different story because they have obviously been a victim of too many environmental regulations. Light duty diesel trucks should not have the same emissions requirements as OTR trucks. Powerstrokes basically have to have their emissions heavily modified or removed to make them reliable according to my research.
Cars are a different story, especially old ones. Anything with pellet type cats and smog pumps will immediately get those deleted and there is no way I am replacing a cat on a car that is emission exempt. For a new car it depends on the mods, but once you start moving beyond bolt ons on a turbo car you might as well get the emissions deleted.
No more emissions in Ontario, baby! Cut your exhaust off past the upstream and run it!
Cars are a different story, especially old ones. Anything with pellet type cats and smog pumps will immediately get those deleted and there is no way I am replacing a cat on a car that is emission exempt. For a new car it depends on the mods, but once you start moving beyond bolt ons on a turbo car you might as well get the emissions deleted.
No more emissions in Ontario, baby! Cut your exhaust off past the upstream and run it!
Is anyone aware of any study which addresses whether the creation of DEF actually made a positive impact once the production & distribution chain of the DEF itself is factored in?
First just like "kinda of pregnant" there's no such thing as "technically illegal". It IS illegal regardless of whether or not the "on road" vehicle is subjected to state inspections. There's no federal law requiring that states emissions test "on road" vehicles but many states/metro areas can't meet their AQ metrics without it. It's just a fact.
IMO the reason why people have problems with their HD diesel trucks has more to do with their actual vs intended use. I suspect the vehicles which are used as intended (heavy towing/hauling) have less problems than those diesels which are used to buy groceries , take their kids to school and make an occasional run to Home Depot.
My own personal opinion is that I have zero issues with someone removing their emissions equipment on dedicated "off road" vehicles. I do have a problem with vendors who knowingly sell emissions defeat devices or parts with emissions components removed to customers who have no intentions of converting their vehicle into an "off road" vehicle.
IMO the reason why people have problems with their HD diesel trucks has more to do with their actual vs intended use. I suspect the vehicles which are used as intended (heavy towing/hauling) have less problems than those diesels which are used to buy groceries , take their kids to school and make an occasional run to Home Depot.
My own personal opinion is that I have zero issues with someone removing their emissions equipment on dedicated "off road" vehicles. I do have a problem with vendors who knowingly sell emissions defeat devices or parts with emissions components removed to customers who have no intentions of converting their vehicle into an "off road" vehicle.
A factor now, IMO, is that we've had such good air for so long that large numbers of people today have either forgotten how bad it could get, or are simply too young to have experienced it first-hand. Chris mentioned the "invisible mountains" in California in the 70s. I think CA had it worst back then, both because of the natural circumstances (weather, geography, etc.) and from the building population density. I remember parking lots in New England on super cold winter days. Especially situations like my high school where a bunch of kids would all be firing up their old, carbureted monsters at about the same time. It was like an outside gas chamber. The fuel in air from over-rich, over-choked engines was awful. I wondered on occasion whether a well-timed match strike might set the whole place off. Add to that most of the cars were old and smelly anyway. As I get older, it has been coming back to me that I had forgotten the strong smell of a carbureted car starting (assuming it decides to start...) on a cold morning. We don't think about that any more.
I'm no big government, emissions police fan, but I do realize there are reasons why we do these things today, and why are cars have the equipment they do. Good reasons.
I'm no big government, emissions police fan, but I do realize there are reasons why we do these things today, and why are cars have the equipment they do. Good reasons.
Originally Posted by thastinger
Is anyone aware of any study which addresses whether the creation of DEF actually made a positive impact once the production & distribution chain of the DEF itself is factored in?
Urea is used for many other applications other than automotive emissions systems. It's created by combining the waste of gas carbon dioxide with ammonia. Ammonia has a multitude of uses as well. In fact the demand curve for Ammonia has not risen with the
introduction of DEF. When DEF is used in diesels the exhaust stream out the tail pipe is primarily comprised of nitrogen gas, water, co2 with some micro soot particles from DPF burn off. It really doesn't get any cleaner than that.
It's exponentially better than the NOx laden plume of soot (aka Rollin Coal).
Is anyone aware of any study which addresses whether the creation of DEF actually made a positive impact once the production & distribution chain of the DEF itself is factored in?
Urea is used for many other applications other than automotive emissions systems. It's created by combining the waste of gas carbon dioxide with ammonia. Ammonia has a multitude of uses as well. In fact the demand curve for Ammonia has not risen with the
introduction of DEF. When DEF is used in diesels the exhaust stream out the tail pipe is primarily comprised of nitrogen gas, water, co2 with some micro soot particles from DPF burn off. It really doesn't get any cleaner than that.
It's exponentially better than the NOx laden plume of soot (aka Rollin Coal).
Last edited:
Originally Posted by ekpolk
A factor now, IMO, is that we've had such good air for so long that large numbers of people today have either forgotten how bad it could get, or are simply too young to have experienced it first-hand. Chris mentioned the "invisible mountains" in California in the 70s. I think CA had it worst back then, both because of the natural circumstances (weather, geography, etc.) and from the building population density. I remember parking lots in New England on super cold winter days. Especially situations like my high school where a bunch of kids would all be firing up their old, carbureted monsters at about the same time. It was like an outside gas chamber. The fuel in air from over-rich, over-choked engines was awful. I wondered on occasion whether a well-timed match strike might set the whole place off. Add to that most of the cars were old and smelly anyway. As I get older, it has been coming back to me that I had forgotten the strong smell of a carbureted car starting (assuming it decides to start...) on a cold morning. We don't think about that any more.
I'm no big government, emissions police fan, but I do realize there are reasons why we do these things today, and why are cars have the equipment they do. Good reasons.
On the bright side today a young american only has to look at Beijing to get an idea of what it was like 30-40 years ago.
A factor now, IMO, is that we've had such good air for so long that large numbers of people today have either forgotten how bad it could get, or are simply too young to have experienced it first-hand. Chris mentioned the "invisible mountains" in California in the 70s. I think CA had it worst back then, both because of the natural circumstances (weather, geography, etc.) and from the building population density. I remember parking lots in New England on super cold winter days. Especially situations like my high school where a bunch of kids would all be firing up their old, carbureted monsters at about the same time. It was like an outside gas chamber. The fuel in air from over-rich, over-choked engines was awful. I wondered on occasion whether a well-timed match strike might set the whole place off. Add to that most of the cars were old and smelly anyway. As I get older, it has been coming back to me that I had forgotten the strong smell of a carbureted car starting (assuming it decides to start...) on a cold morning. We don't think about that any more.
I'm no big government, emissions police fan, but I do realize there are reasons why we do these things today, and why are cars have the equipment they do. Good reasons.
On the bright side today a young american only has to look at Beijing to get an idea of what it was like 30-40 years ago.
I have never owned a diesel, and haven't driven one since a couple year side-track in my military career, serving in a motor transport unit (early 90s). Anyway, I see these jugs of DEF in Walmart and the auto parts places, but I have no real idea of how long the stuff lasts and how often users have to buy it. Can anyone help "calibrate my understanding?" I understand, obviously, that different size vehicles and engines will vary, but I have no concept at all of how often people buy those jugs. Thanks in advance.
Originally Posted by ekpolk
I have never owned a diesel, and haven't driven one since a couple year side-track in my military career, serving in a motor transport unit (early 90s). Anyway, I see these jugs of DEF in Walmart and the auto parts places, but I have no real idea of how long the stuff lasts and how often users have to buy it. Can anyone help "calibrate my understanding?" I understand, obviously, that different size vehicles and engines will vary, but I have no concept at all of how often people buy those jugs. Thanks in advance.
"Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) consumption is measured as a ratio of diesel fuel use, normally termed the "dosing rate" or "treat rate". Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles have a dosing rate of 2-3%. This means that if your truck has a fuel efficiency of six miles per gallon and a dosing rate of 3% it will use approximately 1 gallon of DEF every 200 miles."
https://www.discoverdef.com/def-overview/faq/#consume
I have never owned a diesel, and haven't driven one since a couple year side-track in my military career, serving in a motor transport unit (early 90s). Anyway, I see these jugs of DEF in Walmart and the auto parts places, but I have no real idea of how long the stuff lasts and how often users have to buy it. Can anyone help "calibrate my understanding?" I understand, obviously, that different size vehicles and engines will vary, but I have no concept at all of how often people buy those jugs. Thanks in advance.
"Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) consumption is measured as a ratio of diesel fuel use, normally termed the "dosing rate" or "treat rate". Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles have a dosing rate of 2-3%. This means that if your truck has a fuel efficiency of six miles per gallon and a dosing rate of 3% it will use approximately 1 gallon of DEF every 200 miles."
https://www.discoverdef.com/def-overview/faq/#consume
In the USA, emission requirements are federally mandated through the CFR's (code of federal regulations) via the authority of the so-called "commerce clause". In simplest terms, the feds can regulate manufacturers. However, the US Constitution has no provision for regulation of individual (and private) possessions, not involved in commerce.
However, in recent years, the CFR has been revised to regulate private individuals and emission controls. So far, nobody has been federally charged with personal alteration of his private possession. BUT, there have been plenty of commercial operations and associated individuals charged in emission control alteration/deletion.
However, in recent years, the CFR has been revised to regulate private individuals and emission controls. So far, nobody has been federally charged with personal alteration of his private possession. BUT, there have been plenty of commercial operations and associated individuals charged in emission control alteration/deletion.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
. . .
"Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) consumption is measured as a ratio of diesel fuel use, normally termed the "dosing rate" or "treat rate". Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles have a dosing rate of 2-3%. This means that if your truck has a fuel efficiency of six miles per gallon and a dosing rate of 3% it will use approximately 1 gallon of DEF every 200 miles."
https://www.discoverdef.com/def-overview/faq/#consume
Thank you for that.
. . .
"Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) consumption is measured as a ratio of diesel fuel use, normally termed the "dosing rate" or "treat rate". Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles have a dosing rate of 2-3%. This means that if your truck has a fuel efficiency of six miles per gallon and a dosing rate of 3% it will use approximately 1 gallon of DEF every 200 miles."
https://www.discoverdef.com/def-overview/faq/#consume
Thank you for that.
The Feds have been coming after the aftermarket diesel tuner manufacturer sector, hard! People that just remove emissions equipment without the tunes are gaining nothing and risking premature failure in today's diesels. I especially like the dual 6" exhaust raising from some slack jawed yokel's truck bed. Makes me laugh.
Carbs and cats didn't mix real well. Even when they did they didn't necessarily live long together. I'm not sure I'd be bothered much by disabling on an ancient vehicle; the air is so much cleaner now. And I doubt you're daily driving it.
It's a real shame that diesels have had such problems cleaning up their exhaust--I sometimes think we've gone too far, taken all the low hanging fruit and now are looking for extremely small gains, at high cost (and high incentive to remove). Today it seems like there's no good reason to remove emissions controls from gassers, but on a number of diesels it's just the opposite.
Oh well. I'm guessing this is a teething problem. High quality emissions controls didn't just happen overnight on gassers.
It's a real shame that diesels have had such problems cleaning up their exhaust--I sometimes think we've gone too far, taken all the low hanging fruit and now are looking for extremely small gains, at high cost (and high incentive to remove). Today it seems like there's no good reason to remove emissions controls from gassers, but on a number of diesels it's just the opposite.
Oh well. I'm guessing this is a teething problem. High quality emissions controls didn't just happen overnight on gassers.
Originally Posted by sloinker
The Feds have been coming after the aftermarket diesel tuner manufacturer sector, hard! People that just remove emissions equipment without the tunes are gaining nothing and risking premature failure in today's diesels. I especially like the dual 6" exhaust raising from some slack jawed yokel's truck bed. Makes me laugh.
They got in hot water when they made an announcement which reiterated the laws revolving around the removal of emissions equipment on "On road" vehicles. The "weekend racer" crowd was having a meltdown in fear that the EPA would be looking for catless downpipes on their daily driven WRX/M3/911.
The Feds have been coming after the aftermarket diesel tuner manufacturer sector, hard! People that just remove emissions equipment without the tunes are gaining nothing and risking premature failure in today's diesels. I especially like the dual 6" exhaust raising from some slack jawed yokel's truck bed. Makes me laugh.
They got in hot water when they made an announcement which reiterated the laws revolving around the removal of emissions equipment on "On road" vehicles. The "weekend racer" crowd was having a meltdown in fear that the EPA would be looking for catless downpipes on their daily driven WRX/M3/911.
Originally Posted by sloinker
The Feds have been coming after the aftermarket diesel tuner manufacturer sector, hard! People that just remove emissions equipment without the tunes are gaining nothing and risking premature failure in today's diesels. I especially like the dual 6" exhaust raising from some slack jawed yokel's truck bed. Makes me laugh.
I love those, why in the world would you cut a hole in the bed of your truck? Giant stacks and a coal rolling tune lol.
The Feds have been coming after the aftermarket diesel tuner manufacturer sector, hard! People that just remove emissions equipment without the tunes are gaining nothing and risking premature failure in today's diesels. I especially like the dual 6" exhaust raising from some slack jawed yokel's truck bed. Makes me laugh.
I love those, why in the world would you cut a hole in the bed of your truck? Giant stacks and a coal rolling tune lol.
Originally Posted by maxdustington
Giant stacks and a coal rolling tune lol.
Around here you add LED headlamp bulbs from Autozone to complete the trifecta.
Giant stacks and a coal rolling tune lol.
Around here you add LED headlamp bulbs from Autozone to complete the trifecta.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
Hey if my heads, Cam, high flow cats 11 second ws6 can pass Wa state emissions so should everyone else!!
- Status
