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.

[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.

[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

[Grindle]

Welshbeef said:

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?

Like others have said it's a good modification to make and will not result in more smoke since the engine is in excellent always-serviced condition. I have had many of my cars modified over the years so am i and the thousands of other Pistonheads members who get a remap or DPF delete, whatever, (PH=Speed matters) ALL suffering a brain fart then? Further, is every remapping and tuning company worthy of jailing because they are making cars 'illegal' and uninsured knowing most customers will not tell their insurers? To answer you it's not crazy getting a car remapped or deleting an EGR. It's called getting your car to perform better and i agree with the fella further back on the thread that says that those going all Greenpeace should find a more boring car site, maybe one for cars under 60 bhp or something that do 90 mpg.

[Grindle]

daemon said:

Welshbeef said:

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?

In theory, possibly, but in reality no insurance company is going to "utterly invalidate your insurance" for removing a DPF. Apart from anything, how would they ever know?

In fact - they cant anyway. They can refuse to pay out on a modded car, however they cant invalidate the third party part of your insurance.

Lets keep a sense of perspective and a sense of reality.

+1, more like +10

[Grindle]

njw1 said:

TurboHatchback said:

boz1 said:

Barchettaman said:

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

Your call.

QFT

Exactly. Anyone removing their DPF should have their car taken off them and crushed IMO, a truly wkerish thing to do.

Feckin 'ell! The guy's considering removing his DPF, not driving down the street mowing down small children, puppies and kittens!

It makes you wonder if some of these clowns are on the right forum doesn't it! LMFAO.

[Grindle]

daemon said:

Welshbeef said:

njw1 said:

Feckin 'ell! The guy's considering removing his DPF, not driving down the street mowing down small children, puppies and kittens!

You say that

Or you could say OP on a public forum which Pistonheads Ltd would have to disclose his IP to old bill stating he is going to break the law and that's ok then I'm afraid you are way off the mark.

FFS get over yourself.

Edited by daemon on Friday 23 June 22:26

Welshbeef, are you for real or a total pussy?

[Grindle]

daemon said:

The Spruce goose said:

i think with all the information about diesels removing something that reduces soot is morally wrong, ok you get a few more hp but you can get more hp with it in place. they do a job they are made for it is stupid to remove it.

But modifying petrol cars to burn even more fossil fuels is ok is it?

Decat pipes were / are a popular tuning mod for example, as well as the sheer effect of pumping more fossil fuels in to an engine.

Precisely Daemon, i can totally 'get' someone who is a committed 'Green' and is completely consistent about it. But the vast majority of people knocking diesels and/or diesel re-maps or egr/dpf deletes are what i call selectively Green. I know a fella who will not go near a diesel due to pollution levels yet he drives happily his 2011 Subaru running around 600 bhp and essentially a straight through exhaust. CAI, etc. How Green or clean will that be i wonder?

[Grindle]

Welshbeef you're probably a luvverly feller, but get yerself a nice unmodified Hyundai I10 and remember to leave your cocoa powder and slippers just inside the front door, dear chap. Seriously though, i have spoken to the owner of a Peugeot 407 today with the same engine and he has had the very same 3 mods done. He finds the car much livelier at any rpm especially at higher rpm, it is doing more mpg and there is very slightly more smoke but the difference is barely anything. Turbo lag is also reduced which is very useful. 208 bhp to 246 bhp is useful if not record-breaking. Just right i would say.

Edited by Grindle on Sunday 25th June 07:41

[Grindle]

bearman68 said:

And it's worth repeating again (and again and again), that there is no current evidence to show that diesel exhaust pollution is harmful,causing cancer, killing everyone to death, etc etc etc. Ad infinitum.
The report that people usually link was shown to have fatally flawed statistics, and repeat observations over a 10 year period have shown no conclusive evidence of cancer or early death from vehicle movement, leave alone diesel fumes.
(10 year period of observation of segregated classes of people living next to a busy (>10k cars per day) road. Suggestion in the report is dust from vehicle tyres is as likely to be causing problems as diesel engine fumes). But hey, let's not let the statistics get in the way of a good rant.

(And while we are on the subject of ranting, wouldn't it be easier and more effective to tackle the bd bus fumes first. They are belching monsters compared to a normal car)

Well said. There was an article in a broadsheet not so long ago that said speed humps and traffic lights not being tripped at many locations together increase pollution on our roads by around 12%. That to me would be an area to look at first.

[Grindle]

I think the odd thing is that on a forum like PH where 'speed matters' has always been the message from the site owners, we now see so many people throwing the toys when someone wants to make their car more powerful or even more efficient. I read on several threads last week people wanting to improve the power of their cars and people told them ''to just get a faster car''. That seems a common reply. But it's the most stupid comment you can make. My brother has a BMW M4 which he got at a very good price as it's cosmetically imperfect. He is looking at the tuning options and he was told to get a faster car instead also. So with the 3 or so thousand pounds he has to spend what could he get, buying and selling in the same low mileage (23,000) condition, that's faster but will also take the kids on holiday and happily do the weekly shop? What's going to be faster but still fit in his garage and be quite cheap to run? All the re-mapping and other types of tuning companies would be out of business overnight if everyone simply got a faster car instead of a £350 remap, or sports exhaust or whatever. Modifying cars is part of the fun, surely? Or has everyone taken a sensible (boring) pill? Welshbeef, try living a little, you may like it. :-)