So you have just paid to have your DPF removed....

[XJ Flyer]

dav123a said:

XJ Flyer said:

leafspring said:

XJ Flyer said:

That seems to suggest that any car made since 1959 will automatically fail the MOT if it doesn't meet the required standards such as catalytic converters etc etc etc let alone post 1959 cars which have been subject to major tuning modificatios from standard spec as they were when new.Which,in that case would mean the death of the classic car enthusiast market and the tuning modifications industry.

Without wanting to blunder into the (already covered elsewhere) MOT exemption debate...

that is an issue for concern that will rear it's head in the future

It's probably best in that case to make the control freaks say exactly what their future intentions are now so that everyone knows exactly where they stand and can then hold them to account by way of an electoral mandate first before they can put their plans into action.If they manage to push such a policy through then it seems obvious that most post 1959 classic and/or modified cars will be limited to being trailered to off road events with all the implications of that regarding available track time,space and cost limitations.Although it's my bet that the control freaks wouldn't just stop at road use in that case.

Is there any evidence of anything pointing towards this ? It's seems tin foil hatter stuff so far.

The example and precedent set by the enforced re fit or scrapping of cars that have had DPF's removed aftermarket,at least seems to prove that all types of aftermarket modifications are under a similar type of threat,depending on the ministers responsible just giving VOSA the go ahead on and arbitrary summary basis as in this case.

[technoluddite]

dav123a said:

Is there any evidence of anything pointing towards this ? It's seems tin foil hatter stuff so far.

It always seems like tinfoil nutter stuff at the begining, but

Rich_W said:

... Technically a car with DPF removed is now operating outside the Type Approval the manufacturer originally got for the car. So technically, and I appreciate this is virtually unenforceable, The car is not legal for use. Who knows where that may end up if insurance companies get wind of it ...

A whole raft of modifications will technically take a car outside type approval: Aftermarket wheels, non-standard exhaust, lowered suspension, engine swaps, hell even a remap would theoretically be enough. If the MOT becomes a conformity test rather than a basic safety\emissions test we're all going to be a lot worse off.

There are signs that this is the way it's going: the recent change meaning that a car built with a catalytic converter must have it present /even/ if it can pass the appropriate emissions test without it, being a case in point.

[XJ Flyer]

technoluddite said:

dav123a said:

Is there any evidence of anything pointing towards this ? It's seems tin foil hatter stuff so far.

It always seems like tinfoil nutter stuff at the begining, but

Rich_W said:

... Technically a car with DPF removed is now operating outside the Type Approval the manufacturer originally got for the car. So technically, and I appreciate this is virtually unenforceable, The car is not legal for use. Who knows where that may end up if insurance companies get wind of it ...

A whole raft of modifications will technically take a car outside type approval: Aftermarket wheels, non-standard exhaust, lowered suspension, engine swaps, hell even a remap would theoretically be enough. If the MOT becomes a conformity test rather than a basic safety\emissions test we're all going to be a lot worse off.

There are signs that this is the way it's going: the recent change meaning that a car built with a catalytic converter must have it present /even/ if it can pass the appropriate emissions test without it, being a case in point.

^ This.

People seem to be blindly allowing precedents to be set while calling tin foil hatters in the case of anyone who's got the sense to see and realise all the implications.

[Tophatron]

technoluddite said:

A whole raft of modifications will technically take a car outside type approval: Aftermarket wheels, non-standard exhaust, lowered suspension, engine swaps, hell even a remap would theoretically be enough. If the MOT becomes a conformity test rather than a basic safety\emissions test we're all going to be a lot worse off.

There are signs that this is the way it's going: the recent change meaning that a car built with a catalytic converter must have it present /even/ if it can pass the appropriate emissions test without it, being a case in point.

Is this not how it already works in some European countries? I'm sure places like Germany are very strict with type approval on things like aftermarket modifications, and in some countries (maybe France?) you rarely get cars with modified engines.

Personally, I think it's just going to put cars off the road sooner than they need to be.

[Lowtimer]

technoluddite said:

There are signs that this is the way it's going: the recent change meaning that a car built with a catalytic converter must have it present /even/ if it can pass the appropriate emissions test without it, being a case in point.

That's not quite true though.

The recent change means that a car built with a cat must have it present if it was required to have it when it was built. If it was built with a cat before cats were mandatory - and lots were, Audis and Porsches pring to mind - it doesn't have to have one now.

[hman]

so when were dpf's made mandatory?

[Drive Blind]

hman said:

so when were dpf's made mandatory?

there is nothing that says DPF's are mandatory.

DPF's are the solution manufacturers came up with to pass the euro 5 emission standards that were introduced in 2008(ish)

Euro 6 is next year I believe so god knows what they will come up with next...

[mudster]

hman said:

so when were dpf's made mandatory?

According to the AA, they became mandatory in 2009 (effectively as the way to meet Euro V)

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/fuels-and-env...

[technoluddite]

Lowtimer said:

That's not quite true though.

The recent change means that a car built with a cat must have it present if it was required to have it when it was built. If it was built with a cat before cats were mandatory - and lots were, Audis and Porsches pring to mind - it doesn't have to have one now.

Agreed, but provided the car passes the appropriate emissions test for it's year of manufacture what difference does it make whether the cat is still there or not?

More pressingly, how will I be able prove that my car came from the factory without a cat?

Edit: I now see the distinction you're making, that is slightly different to what I had understood. But I don't think changes the underlying point I was making.

Edited by technoluddite on Sunday 15th December 19:30

[Lowtimer]

I don't believe they are actually mandatory as such: it's just that no-one knows how to make a diesel car attain Euro 5 emission standards for particulates without one.

Euro 6 compliance becomes mandatory for anything sold new after 1 Jan 2015. The main focus for improvement in Euro 6 is NOx.

Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 15th December 19:40

[Lowtimer]

technoluddite said:

Agreed, but provided the car passes the appropriate emissions test for it's year of manufacture what difference does it make whether the cat is still there or not?

More pressingly, how will I be able prove that my car came from the factory without a cat?

Edit: I now see the distinction you're making, that is slightly different to what I had understood. But I don't think changes the underlying point I was making.

Edited by technoluddite on Sunday 15th December 19:30

Possibly. But it does mean you can still decat your 1989 or 1990 Audi or Porsche.

[technoluddite]

Out of interest, do you know when catalytic converters became mandatory?

[XJ Flyer]

technoluddite said:

Out of interest, do you know when catalytic converters became mandatory?

Early 1990's from memory.

[jagracer]

Mr2Mike said:

They aren't great for doing lots of short trips, but then again why on earth would you buy a diesel to do that?

In the case of our two Clios, 65mpg against 41mpg for the petrol. In my wife's case that's a saving of over £800 per year, she's had the car about 6 years now and It's only just started causing me issues with it clogging up the inlet pipe and egr valve, luckily there's no dpf on it.

[Drive Blind]

i always wonder how could an engine could be without cats, egr's and dpf's and all the other emissions guff.

Obviously good for me as a petrolhead maybe not so good for the squirrels or the polar bears,

[Lowtimer]

technoluddite said:

Out of interest, do you know when catalytic converters became mandatory?

1993

[Drive Blind]

technoluddite said:

Out of interest, do you know when catalytic converters became mandatory?

1992 iirc

[Lowtimer]

Drive Blind said:

i always wonder how could an engine could be without cats, egr's and dpf's and all the other emissions guff.

Obviously good for me as a petrolhead maybe not so good for the squirrels or the polar bears,

The issue driving the air quality stuff is not squirrels or polar bears: it is premature human deaths in urban environments.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs313/en...

That is why we got rid of lead in petrol, and why they are trying to reduce particulates and NOx now.

Edited to say that you can always find something new in the Construction and Use regs.

"No wheeled vehicle first used after 15th January 1931 shall be equipped with any closet or urinal which can discharge directly on to a road."

Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 15th December 19:47

[Drive Blind]

Lowtimer said:

The issue driving the air quality stuff is not squirrels or polar bears: it is premature human deaths in urban environments.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs313/en...

most of our city centres are overcrowded anyways...

[technoluddite]

I know the emissions tests changed for anything registered after 1st August 1993, but I'm fairly certain that the law didn't mandate a cat be fitted, only that it was very difficult to pass the new test without one. But that's not quite the same thing as 'required'.

Anyway don't mean to drag this thread any further off topic, I'll start a new one....