Big diesel barge modifications. Remap plus DPF / EGR delete.

[Grindle]

We got a dirt-cheap 2009 Citroen C6 recently which has just gone over 70,000 miles, an immaculate car. It's got the smaller twin turbo V6 diesel, the 2.7, as fitted to Jaguars, Range Rovers, Peugeots, etc.
Whilst it is in for a small job the garage which i know well is doing the above, a mild remap plus EGR delete and DPR removal.
Other than mabye being a bit naughty on emissions, is there a downside? Only to me 45 more bhp and a lot less breathing clutter sounds win win win to me? Cheers kindly for any thoughts.

[Mr2Mike]

The minor downside that it won't pass an MOT if the deletedremoved DPF is noticed.

[Gilhooligan]

You will look like a tool every time you boot it with all the reek coming out the exhaust.

[anonymous-user]

Personally if I had a choice of my car putting out fewer carcinogens if I left a filter in, or more carcinogens if I took a filter out, I'd leave the filter in.

[anonymous-user]

Please don't make an already polluting diesel worse (and yes, I have one).

[spookly]

I agree. Removing the emissions gubbins is a bit of a bell end move. If you want a faster car then buy one, don't make us all breathe your carcinogenic soot so you can have an extra 45bhp you'll rarely use.

[HedgeyGedgey]

Let's be honest, 1 car with the dpf removed isn't going to make naff all difference to all the global warming stuff

[njw1]

HedgeyGedgey said:

Let's be honest, 1 car with the dpf removed isn't going to make naff all difference to all the global warming stuff

The most sensible post so far! I thought this was an enthusiasts forum? Someone mentions getting a little bit more oomph from their car and everyone goes all Greenpeace and says 'ooh, you can't do that'. From experience I've found diesels with dpf deletes produce no more smoke than dpf equipped cars and deleting/blanking the egr will actually allow the engine to run cleaner meaning less soot being chucked out of the back. A diesel car will only smoke badly if it has a fault, the servicing has been neglected or if it has been badly remapped.

[anonymous-user]

HedgeyGedgey said:

Let's be honest, 1 car with the dpf removed isn't going to make naff all difference to all the global warming stuff

You're right, because a dpf has nothing to do with improving CO2 emissions, in fact it actually makes them slightly worse.

If you don't know what a DPF does maybe you should find out before commenting?

As for the subsequent post, just because it's not visible doesn't mean it's not there.

The "only one car" argument is spurious, because while yes "only one car" doesn't make a huge difference, the lack of understanding of what a DPF actually does and "one car doesn't make much difference" has lead to thousands of the damn things being gutted and that does make a difference.

[daemon]

Mr2Mike said:

The minor downside that it won't pass an MOT if the deletedremoved DPF is noticed.

If you get a blind monkey with an angle grinder to remove it, then yes it will be noticed, however anyone with even half a brain doing it will do so in a way that its removal cant be noticed.

[Riley Blue]

daemon said:

Mr2Mike said:

The minor downside that it won't pass an MOT if the deletedremoved DPF is noticed.

If you get a blind monkey with an angle grinder to remove it, then yes it will be noticed, however anyone with even half a brain doing it will do so in a way that its removal cant be noticed.

Over a thousand caught apparently and more stringent checks to be introduced:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/1...

http://garagewire.co.uk/news/mot-changes-to-be-int...

[Barchettaman]

Grindle said:

Whilst it is in for a small job the garage which i know well is doing the above, a mild remap plus EGR delete and DPR removal.
Other than maybe being a bit naughty on emissions, is there a downside? Only to me 45 more bhp and a lot less breathing clutter sounds win win win to me? Cheers kindly for any thoughts.

A downside? Well, it´s immoral, illegal and antisocial, plus as an undeclared modification it could invalidate your insurance.

Your call.

[daemon]

Riley Blue said:

daemon said:

Mr2Mike said:

The minor downside that it won't pass an MOT if the deletedremoved DPF is noticed.

If you get a blind monkey with an angle grinder to remove it, then yes it will be noticed, however anyone with even half a brain doing it will do so in a way that its removal cant be noticed.

Over a thousand caught apparently and more stringent checks to be introduced:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/1...

http://garagewire.co.uk/news/mot-changes-to-be-int...

Misinformation at best. Apart from anything the garagewire headline "MOT changes to be introduced in May 2017 following DPF investigation" was never set to happen, even when this (non) story was published in 2016

The directive is an EU directive dating from 2014, with the necessary changes made to local legislations made in May 2017 to allow the directive to be implemented. The implementation date "might" be 2018 and theres no actual information yet on what they're going to actually check for MOT. Changes that are likely to be on the back of it are - first MOT pushed out to 4 years, and an improved minimum standard of training for MOT testers. We may well see further enhanced checks too.

https://mattersoftesting.blog.gov.uk/how-the-eu-ro...

For the big headline "1,000 drivers caught" I would say all of those 1,000 odd were one by a blind monkey (or maybe several blind monkeys across the country) with a hacksaw who simply removed the dpf box OR didnt put out the associated light. If its done "right", its visually undetectable.

I'm not condoning DPF removal (i've never done it on any diesel car i've owed) but lets not repeat associated half truths and non stories.

Edited by daemon on Friday 23 June 09:14

[Mr2Mike]

HedgeyGedgey said:

Let's be honest, 1 car with the dpf removed isn't going to make naff all difference to all the global warming stuff

Only one car with a DPF removed? A surprisingly low number Presumably the double negative was not intentional.

Also DPF's are not in place to help with global warming, it's to reduce the emission of particulates that are proven to be injurious to health.

daemon said:

If its done "right", its visually undetectable.

Apart from the presence of black smoke whenever you floor it...

[Glasgowrob]

putting the DPF argument to one side, you'll notice some difference if its mapped correctly.

any other plans on the cards?

[Grindle]

njw1 said:

HedgeyGedgey said:

Let's be honest, 1 car with the dpf removed isn't going to make naff all difference to all the global warming stuff

The most sensible post so far! I thought this was an enthusiasts forum? Someone mentions getting a little bit more oomph from their car and everyone goes all Greenpeace and says 'ooh, you can't do that'. From experience I've found diesels with dpf deletes produce no more smoke than dpf equipped cars and deleting/blanking the egr will actually allow the engine to run cleaner meaning less soot being chucked out of the back. A diesel car will only smoke badly if it has a fault, the servicing has been neglected or if it has been badly remapped.

The most sensible answers by far. My Golf R has a 376 bhp remap and a Miltek exhaust plus de-cat so despite not being DERV-driven i doubt it's too great for the environment. Yes i agree, a car enthusiasts' forum isn't the first place to expect to see people worrying about emissions either. A freight train passes our village twice a day and the smoke that thing puts out and the smell would cover 50 Ferrari 458s i would think and they are anything but clean. So no downsides really and the DPF will look like it's still there so MOT will be fine. Looking forward to next week.

[daemon]

Mr2Mike said:

Apart from the presence of black smoke whenever you floor it...

No. It wont. I've seen / driven cars with the DPF removed and it wont blow black smoke.

Blowing black smoke suggests injector problems / overfuelling.

[Grindle]

Glasgowrob said:

putting the DPF argument to one side, you'll notice some difference if its mapped correctly.

any other plans on the cards?

Not with this car. I would not spend money modifying a car like this which is a workhorse mainly. Any extra cheap ooomph is useful though when you have 1900 kgs to move, hence the breathing mods. If i want some sporty fun i get the tuned Golf R out! :-)

[Grindle]

daemon said:

Mr2Mike said:

Apart from the presence of black smoke whenever you floor it...

No. It wont. I've seen / driven cars with the DPF removed and it wont blow black smoke.

Blowing black smoke suggests injector problems / overfuelling.

+1

[Welshbeef]

Grindle said:

The most sensible answers by far. My Golf R has a 376 bhp remap and a Miltek exhaust plus de-cat so despite not being DERV-driven i doubt it's too great for the environment. Yes i agree, a car enthusiasts' forum isn't the first place to expect to see people worrying about emissions either. A freight train passes our village twice a day and the smoke that thing puts out and the smell would cover 50 Ferrari 458s i would think and they are anything but clean. So no downsides really and the DPF will look like it's still there so MOT will be fine. Looking forward to next week.

You do know that If you do remove the DPF and don't declare it (which you cannot as you'd be telling your insurer car isn't roadworthy/illegal) utterly invalidated your insurance.

Are you suffering a brain fart in making that judgement call or do you play fast and loose with everything?